Puppet animation credits - clarification

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • Answered
  • (Edited)
Hi.

I came across with a stop motion puppet animation film from the 1980s, where one (credited) person is the maker of the actual puppets (not a "puppeteer" etc, though) used in the film. She's also credited making the props related to puppets in the story (other person is credited as Art Director). This is non-English production so the literal translation from her credits is simply "puppets".

Now when I go to Art Department (note that this person wasn't involved in the actual animation process - she only made the puppets/props), I have several options that basically mean the same* - or similar at least - thing:

- 100 x puppet and prop fabrication/design
- 344 x puppet builder
- 79 x puppet construction
- 378 x puppet designer
- 100 x puppet fabrication
- 1,209 x puppet fabricator
- 905 x puppet maker
- 513 x puppets
- 1,242 x puppets and sets made by
- 314 x puppets by
- 69 x puppets designer & maker

So, since the original term is simply "puppets", should I use that - or choose e.g. "puppet fabrication" which has over 1000 entries?

Also, she is credited literally as "puppets and props", so "puppets and sets made by" is pretty close (also over 1200 entries). But I thought that (e.g.) "puppets" AND "props" are two separate occupations in IMDb (you can't merge them into one)?

Thanks.

(* Well, obviously "designer" and "maker" can be two different things and two different people, but I'm sure you'll get the point.)
Photo of Eboy

Eboy

  • 1514 Posts
  • 1880 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12506 Posts
  • 9207 Reply Likes
Hi Eboy -

These scenarios are a little tricky, I have reached out to our editors for further clarification on how we prefer to handle these type of credit listings, as soon as I have a response I will let you know the details here.
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12506 Posts
  • 9207 Reply Likes
Hi Eboy -

I'm just following up here to confirm that this credit should be submitted based on the English translation of what is on-screen.

So if she is credited literally as 'puppets and props', we would prefer listing two credits, one as "(puppets)" and one as "(props)".
It would also be acceptable, but not ideal, to submit as "(puppets/props)" or "(puppets and props)".

I hope this helps!
Photo of Eboy

Eboy

  • 1514 Posts
  • 1880 Reply Likes
Additional question related to the subject:

I now came across with a 3D computer animation series from the mid-90s (visual style is a bit like the first Toy Story or some early computer animations) where the early facial motion capture technology has been used. The person (also voice actor for the character) performing the facial motion capture is credited (translated to English) as a "puppeteer". He doesn't do any body movements in this series, only facial expressions (which are then "joined together" to correspond the character's expressions modeled into the computer beforehand).

The problem is that the term "puppeteer" is slightly misleading (or is it...) term alone, since basically this series is about a motion capture (and before you ask, I have seen the making of featurette of this series which explain the process at the time). A bit like this info from Wiki:

"The data recorded by the cameras is then digitized and converted into a three-dimensional computer model of the subject."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_facial_animation )

Is "motion capture puppeteer" the correct occupation? And if so, does it belong to the "visual effects" section where the system wants it with the message: "Accept move to the 'Visual Effects' section (3 similar credits)"?

Or should it be something like "computer puppeteer"?

Or perhaps simply "puppeteer" (to Misc Crew?)

( One article from 1998 related to the technology - different company and series, though:
https://www.awn.com/mag/issue2.11/2.11pages/2.11kenyonmedialab.html )

Thanks.