Allow me to step away from general analysis this week and make a few observations on the current, often underappreciated, experience that is the race for the craft awards. Perhaps there are considerable ways of improving it.

We all see the stars hitting the talk shows. The trades are brimming with ads. The DGA nominees are all giving their spiel in high profile fashion. The acting and writing nominees are visible all around Hollywood. One would be hard-pressed to say the nominees aren’t receiving ample media and industry coverage – unless, of course, you are a nominee in a crafts category.

As usual, these men and women are taking an incredibly (back back back) backseat in media coverage and even industry coverage. Sure, they turn out in support for their films at this party/gathering or that, but you won’t find much in the way of campaign concentration. This process not only ghettoizes their categories in the eyes of the public, but it is also is a disservice to the integrity of awards process in these categories.

Notice, for example, Entertainment Weekly sarcastically asking Ellen DeGeneres “who will win the all-important Sound Editing category,” tossing the notion away like a joke (remember Jon Stewart’s parody of Wylie Statement and the very same category last year). To me, this is, in fact, one of the more interesting races of the evening (more on that in two weeks).

I’m certainly not denying that a film could not work without writers (whose work serves as a film’s template), actors (who can single handedly make or break said template) and especially directors (who can single handedly make or break the achievements of every other artist in the film). But given that the crafts artists form such a substantial block of the AMPAS membership, their absence in the realm of any significant coverage attention remains rather alarming. Such is and has been the (hopefully achieved) purpose of “Tech Support” this year at In Contention.

It might be worth keeping in mind the possibility that this lack of coverage ultimately encourages tech sweepers and group thinking across the board when ballots are considered by the membership. Just consider, for a moment, that of the 60 crafts awards given out this decade by AMPAS, 90% of them were for films with at least four total nominations, 37 of these going to Best Picture nominees. Does this really seem all that reasonable?

There are no easy solutions to the issue. After all, no matter how integral Thelma Schoonmaker was to the success of “The Departed,” she was not the one putting butts in seats. Ditto, say, Christopher Boyes and George Watters II, sound editors of “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest.” But that does not mean one cannot try to rectify the rather disconcerting lack of appreciation seen during this time of year.

The Academy itself certainly affords no favors. Consider Kevin O’Connell, gaining some fame for his rather infamous record of 19 nominations without a win (combining with partner Greg P. Russell for a staggering 0-30 record). Oprah Winfrey may bring O’Connell onto her show and speak of his un-Oscared status with a brief video package, but the average voter still may not know where to tick off their mark on the ballot, which merely says “Apocalypto” under the category placement of Best Sound Mixing.

While their branch peers undoubtedly know which film O’Connell and Russell are aboard, it is questionable that their fellows in the other branches do. And really, how much work would it take to place the names of craftsmen and craftswomen beside their film’s name on the ballot? It seems borderline disrespectful to exclude such information.

Also, unlike categories such as Best Foreign-Language Film and the short films, there is no way to ensure that the voters have actually seen all the nominated contenders. It seems common courtesy to watch all the nominated films in a category before voting in it. Should it not be necessary to ensure this happens in all categories? Food for thought.

Some studios and individuals have already made efforts to heighten awareness and recognition for the tech categories. Here and there a studio brings these artists to the forefront at this event or that, but it doesn’t seem too common. Every one of the artists I’ve spoken to for this column has obviously been pleased about talking to me regarding their roles in creating their films. Surely I’m not the only person out there pleased to talk to them.

Paramount Vantage, for instance, has highlighted their craftsmen and craftswomen with their website, vantageguilds.com. They also got Gustavo Santaolalla’s “Babel” score and Melissa Etheridge’s song “I Need to Wake Up” from “An Inconvenient Truth” out there to the industry early and furiously, seemingly sparing no expense. Lo and behold, Etheridge received a nomination for a documentary in a non-documentary category while Santaolalla got a second straight nomination for a minimalist and experimental score, the sort the music branch tends to shy away from. In other words, Vantage has seen their efforts pay off. Why don’t more studios follow suit?

“Dreamgirls” highlighted technical artists in the film’s closing credits, showing us stages in their individual work. This was a beautiful way to end the film. I am not suggesting every film needs to be a walking, talking “for your consideration” ad, but seeing more films tastefully celebrating both their casts and their crews would not only be nice in and of itself, but it would also draw more attention to both the crafts work and the individuals behind them.

I personally find it a nice touch that for the past three years, the composers and cinematographers have been onscreen like the actors and directors as the envelope is opened. This not only makes them visible to the public and their peers, but it also places their achievements on a seemingly greater level of appreciation. I understand this is a problem in the categories where multiple individuals share a nomination, but surely, at the very least, this could be done for the costume designers, where the nomination almost invariably is awarded to a single individual.

Then there is the issue of “For Your Consideration” ads in the trades. Advertising cinematographic achievements in American Cinematographer may be very effective as far as the race for nominations is concerned, but how do we expect this to work when it comes to the race for the wins? Some studios have stepped up to bat for their craftsmen and women but many don’t. That is a problem.

I could really go on and on. And again, this is an issue lacking an easy solution. I have no delusions that even if my aforementioned ideas were adopted there would not be an obvious double standard between the crafts categories and the so-called “big eight.” And I don’t even propose to suggest that directors, writers and actors should not be at the forefront of Oscar night. But as it is, the difference is simply too great and the appreciation feels almost secondary. Adapting some measures, none of them very challenging, might have some effect on this, if just in the smallest of ways. Even that would be worth it.