Dakimbrell

Actually, any ranking would be by the individual entrant. It would be a personal choice same as in other groups. There may need to be a provision for those that need to be move to a high skill level, but like winning in the shallows. Why? If the choice is a personal one, why would you resent others who whish to play in deeper water. The real problem will be those who think they are grand masters when they are actually dilettantes. Those will be the types the most resentful. I have always said the OOB stuff is outmoded and should be eliminated. This would absorb some of the cost, if any. OOB would no longer be needed because there would be a place for those to enter without having to swim with the big fish. While I agree with the basic premise, I have found in application it doesn't hurt to remind people to do things. Like making sure the breaker is tagged out before working on a system. Some people always need that reminder. If putting up a sign at a show, or a paragraph in the newsletter, helps reduce the unhappiness of those that enter the contest, it is a cost effective why to go. Dak

Absolutely true, but there is a difference between putting something in the rules which a large number of people NEVER read and say posting a sign at the registration desk telling people to note out of the ordinary stuff, or the judges may consider it a mistake. This needs to be a deliberate public campaign within IPMS, not just a note in the rules.That is my point. This all depends on your point of view. I have always viewed such things as part of craftmanship because we....IPMS.... are predominately historical in our subject matter. Even the Sci-Fi types will have fits if you mix Star Trek and Star Wars. If you are going to allow anything anywhere, then why consider "craftmanship" at all. Go ahead, let the builder do crude, hand painted markings....maybe the ground crew was in a hurry and didn't have time to do it properly; maybe the stencils were blown up in an air raid. Maybe some other pilots painted a finger print on the canopy as a joke and the builder is just duplicating that effect. What if an extraneous decal got place in an odd spot.....like a RAF tail flash slipping to the horizontal stabilizer? Is that something to give the benefit of the doubt? I have a picture of a real drop tank with the FWD arrow pointing to the rear. If I saw this on a model, as a judge, I would like to know if this was deliberate or not. A good friend of mine recently put some fuel tanks on his Mig-21 backwards. He did a smash up job and they looked very nice. Do we just ignore things like that? Many things are to strange to be believed, but nothing is too strange to have happened. It is not just quality of the application of parts and markings, but getting them in the right place going the right direction, which is good craftmanship. Sure, I want to know what was scratch or modified, but I have found many seem to believe giving a rivet by bolt account of the construction is helpful, which I don't find the least bit helpful. If someone is doing a Type 21 Zero in Defense of the Luftwaffe markings, I'd like to know the origin of the markings. Particularly, if it is up against a perfect Fw-190D in the same markings. It could be done within the current system; there is no reason to go to a GSB system to address skill level. Dak

I have participated in three types of judging methods in the past two weeks. In one, Oklahoma's SoonerCon, I was also a judge. One thing I noted as a judge was the reticence of many entrants to fill out any notes on their model, even when the model exhibits out of the ordinary features like duel national markings. This always puts the judges in a difficult position....if the model is well done, but grossly incorrect in a big way.....the judges must decide how that effects craftsmanship. If they ignore the faux pas, then many will think the judges are no-nothing idiots. If they figure it in as a demerit, then the builder says they were elitist and rivet counters. While I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to some areas and subjects, certain outrages are too far out. Things like Tiger II tanks at El Alamein, A6M5 in Russian markings at Stalingrad. I have no problem with weird stuff, but there are categories for that. Encouraging contest entrants to let the judges know what they are looking at and what the builder was trying to do, would go a long way towards helping the judges make better decisions. Another thing I noted was that the non-IPMS groups often take into account skill level. When everyone starts talking about GSB vs 123, they don't seem to mention skill level. I am positive this effects some people. A newbie who enters for the first time and gets thrown in the deep end with the old hands can feel really worked over when they don't place. (Sometimes they win big, which is even worse.) So, perhaps rather than try to change our awards system, we should look at modifying it to take into account skill level. Novice, advanced, and master, for example. Less ridged judging for the newbies and tighter for the masters. Thoughts? Dak

Lets make something clear, I was not apologetic in my conversation with my acquaintance. I told him we never did judge like he suggested and never had. His remark was based on what he was told by a head judge where he was judging. I have been continually telling lackwits who insist we are rivet counters that they are full of it enough to make their eyes brown. The big thing is different groups look at different points as to what is good craftmanship. This in turn makes some think other groups are too picky, or not picky enough. One thing that would help is stressing to contestants that they should NEVER assume the judges KNOW EVERYTHING about the subject being judged and note things like deliberate gaps, seams crooked markings, etc. I have lost count of the times I saw something that did not look correct and found nothing in the remarks box. A simple comment like....the marking on the left side is deliberately crooked....would help. Many do excellent work, but based on craftmanship, it looks bad. This in turn would make it easier for the judge to make better decisions.+ But in the end, any award is based on the opinion of the judges and that is still only an opinion of a small group, a mere handful of people. Dak

Nick, Why do you feel the need to just be rude? Do you just sit at the computer looking for some way to be mean nasty to people? No wonder people get down on IPMS. I posted here to discuss what is a problem I feel we need to address, yet you immediately start calling people names and insulting them. Your remark was silly and bigoted, because you automatically put this person into the lackwitted I hate IPMS group, and he is not. He was simply repeating a silly myth. The individual I was talking to is familiar with IPMS. He is also a top level figure painter. What I was trying to point out was that there is still adherents to the stupid rivet counter myth among top quality, experienced model artists. No, I don't give a negative clank about what the sour grapes wannabes. They do nothing but sit and whine rather than try to get better. But this man was not like that and has plenty of experience, probably as much as you. I agree we judge on craftmanship, but as I noted, what is good craftmanship depends a lot on what you consider the proper style. I have learned there are numerous styles and can judge models based on the style of the workmanship. Some cannot. To me, a un-weathered model is poorly done. I also feel the same about a model without a figure with it. Super clean models are boring to me and come across as amateurish, but some feel differently which is fine. Dak

The guy I was talking with was not some sour grapes loser. In fact, one of his group was a was a judges award winner at an IPMS National a few years ago. This is why I see it as a PR problem that needs to be addressed. I engaged him and pointed out we done judge on accuracy and gave him my general view of the Chicago school of judging. I don't think I changed his mind, but he had something to think about when we were done. Part of the problem is style. Figure painters. car guys, track heads, etc, all see craftsmanship differently. I have been often criticized by aircraft guys for making my airplanes too dirty for their taste. But when I look at an F-15....for example.... with foot prints all over the upper services, I tend to think most airplane models are under weathered and thus poorly crafted. I also feel the majority of figures are over shaded. This doesn't mean they aren't pretty and well crafted, but just that they are done in a different style. Nick's last comment is exactly the kind of silly comment that puts many off, rather than engaging in dialogue which can find common ground. It also implies he has no understating of how the figure judging works. Dak

Nick, You over step here. This particular model builder....a top level figure painter.....is DEFINITIVELY not a low performer. (I would post images of his stuff, if the stupid system allowed me to post more than 0.002mb.) Nor am I suggesting we apologize for anything. I simply think we need to address the misperceptions many seem to have about IPMS Judging instead of ignoring them. I blame a lot of this negativity on Bob Letterman of VLS , back in the nineties. VLS put out a lot of mediocre products and Letterman got very defensive and began making extremely negative statements about IPMS being too picky, etc. I spend some time explaining we don't count rivets, or hang up on detail points. I still think our system needs simplification and modification, but I like it infinitely better than point systems used by some groups. Unfortunately, some chapters use their own system disregarding the National system. Many people perceive these to BE the IPMS system having never seen a National convention. Dak, National Contest Judge

I was at a non IPMS style contact yesterday.....one I attend annually....and got into a discussion about judging methods. These guys are primarily figure painters and view models differently than most IPMS members. My acquaintance remarked they were admonished not to be like IPMS when judging; "don't count rivets!". I told him we don't do that and I never have, nor have ever been at a contest where I have seen judges apply such stringent measures. However, he and other still believe this silly myth. They are firmly convinced IPMS are insane for accuracy and will throw out a beautiful work for some trivial point. This is a public relation problem we need to address if we want to sustain or grow the membership. It is not something that can simply be ignored in this day and time with in the age of the world wide web. Like all those internet myths that keep making the rounds, it keeps building until it becomes an established truth in the mind of people who should no better. We ignore it at our peril. Dak

I am not sure what this statement has to do with the conversation. It is not about the quality of their work, but about why they hate IPMS. They are oblivious to their personality problems and how they effected others in the group. These "haters" tend to lash out at anyone that doesn't want to play their way or takes exception to their actions and they are incapable of grasping their social awkwardness. Dak

David, I don't disagree with you basic remarks, but I was speaking in more general terms. Explaining it to a head judge is easy, because he is experienced and understands your reasoning. Explaining it to an angry, self-absorbed, belligerent, contestant is a different matter. "That doesn't matter" is their favorite phrase. Unpainted plastic, it doesn't matter. Crooked parts, that shouldn't matter. They often start extolling how the model we didn't like won numerous awards at other contests all the time ignoring the words "other contests".On the other end, explaining why three guys picked the Ferrari over the Mustang to a hard core Mustang guy is a headache. Telling a modeler you bumped him down because of a small fleck of hard to see dust is ridiculous. I have lots of friends who look at my stuff long before it gets to a contest. They are more than willing to point out all the problems in extreme detail. If it is something I can fix, I will, but if it is unfixable without rebuilding the model, I will take the hit and just accept it. I simply don't want to hear what the judges thought, because form past experience, they will not help me and I don't really think they help anyone else. There are countless sites and magazines showing of models and techniques which show what most consider good models. Why does anyone need to ask a contest judge after the event? Dak

In the cases I’m referring to, there was no real tie. The judging team had no real problem coming to an agreement. It is just that in the end we saw it as a toss up. When we ran the choice by the head judge, he had no problem with our decision. Dak

I’m not speaking about hypothetical scenarios. I base my remarks on what I have experienced. I don’t want to name names or give exact place and times out of politeness, but it all has happened. Dak

When you get down to the very end and have to choose between two very nice models....one with a little silvering of a decal and another with the trace of a mold release mark.... but otherwise equal in work, you have to make a choice based on simple appeal. Sometimes that means you pick the one you personally like most. Bluntly, any judge that won't admit this is deluding themselves. Everyone has pet peeves that they pick on. Trying to explain this tiny almost trivial point to a self-absorbed person without them getting angry is impossible. In 2015, I had to choose between a model with a bad decal and one with a cracked window. One got a 1st and one got a 2nd. The only other model there got 3rd. In ANY other category, NONE would have placed. I have been judging model contests since 1972, and have attended and/or entered a contest every year since 1969. I looked at lots of models and take my responsibility as a judge seriously. I have seen judges debate for thirty minutes whether water running by a log should have had more wake, then bump it because of such a silly point. I have seen arguments on whether a ship should be bumped because it had no anchor. You can say we don't judge accuracy, but enter your P-51 without a propeller and see how far you get. I bet the guy with the micro dust speck thought it was irrelevant. And to me, it would be too. This is the biggest reason I would prefer a GSB system, and this is also why I don't want to have feedback. Knowing about that tiny speck will not improve my work. It would be something impossible to plan for because you won't know about it until it is done and then it is too late. And quite frankly, building at my level, I would never ask why I didn't win first. My ego is not so shallow that I have to have explanations for every non win. Dak

Capricious? When you are choosing between two equally good models, both with equal, but different flaws. It is impossible to explain your choice to someone. If you really want to improve things, we should ditch the category system and go to a skill level division set up using GSB. Dak

The problem is that most entrants don't want or need feedback on their work. In most cases, they are quite aware of their short comings. What most want to know is why the other guy won, which judges are not allowed to discuss. As I commented earlier, The difference between a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd is often the mental flip of a coin. Trying to explain that to a disgruntle contestant is unpleasant. Sometimes, it is not even possible. Dak