Carolyn Giardina writing at the Hollywood Reporter

“John Seale, the Mad Max: Fury Road cinematographer (who won an Oscar for The English Patient) isn't convinced. "I don't think we need another category," he says. "I think cinematography should encompass the entire filmmaking process, from negative to post, as a single unit." On Fury Road, he says: "We did a lot of effects in camera. The end result was a lovely combination of live action to post action."

Roger Deakins, who received his 13th nomination this year for Sicario and who has served as visual consultant on such animated movies as How to Train Your Dragon, raises an interesting question: Why don't animated movies qualify for the cinematography prize? "There's some animation that isn't that far from some supposed live-action cinematography," he says. "Where do you put the line? And does it really matter? The Academy Awards is a celebration of film and film craft. We should look at it as a celebration of film and filmmaking.

Maybe we should have two categories for Visual effects. One for shows whose effects where done in the USA, and another category for effects done out of the country. Maybe we should have a category "Biggest Box Office". Here's the thing thou. I doubt the academy wants to get that granular with the categories. Was a camera used yes or no. They do not want water down the Oscar.

I love that Mr. Deakins also serves as a visual consultant on animated feature films. He learns so much from that experience about how a camera behaves in a computer. Working with a good animation sup must be so fun for him. He can place a camera anywhere but he chooses to be more careful. Just because a computer is involved doesn't mean it's easy or right.

To end this with visual effects in mind, in a year when there was Star Wars and Jurassic World. Ex Machina takes the Oscar. Nobody in visual effects saw that coming or asking for a separate category.

I will leave you with this