Dakimbrell

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

The problem with the current 1-2-3 system is it is time consuming and requires more and more splitting of categories. I believe eventually it will become untenable as it is now, if the numbers continue to grow. We need to start working out ways to make changes. Personally, I would prefer a GSB combined with a skill level division rather model type categories. Dak

Gil, You don't have to sell me on the basic GSB concept. I've been a advocate for over forty years. In fact, I think some of your remarks overly complicate the idea. I am not opposed to an increased cost...if needed....and I personally would like to go to a generic award for the National, in a general effort to cut costs. I just think it needs to be clear if there is a need for increased cost. Too often, complications get glossed over in the heat of enthusiasm. I am opposed to a point system used in judging and I dislike the concept of judging with non judges in the room. Hopefully, your remarks illustrate what others are thinking. Dak

I agree there would be no need to retrain the judges. If you have reached the point of judging at an IPMS National, you should be pretty much aware what is good modeling work. There is no such thing as a national standard, but like porn, I know good and bad work when I see it. The idea of IPMS judges being too picky is ones of the silliest myths I have ever heard. If anything IPMS judges are too forgiving. I do not like trying to judge when people are in the room, so I think it should all be done at one time, as is done now. Time is not an issue, in my opinion. Judging is generally easy for me. In most cases, the "winners" stand out. In those cases where they don't, that is why the team works well. I'm still not convinced Gil's cost estimates aren't over optimistic. I also think Gil does not take human nature into account. If judges can give more than one award, I think by nature, they will. Gil seems to set his own standard here. I have seen many cases where there are several gold level models in a single category, and I think many Judges...at least the first few years... will be inclined to be gold heavy. I like having the head judges review what the team has done and have them justify their choices. Dak

Rusty, Fixing it as we go, is what has caused so many problems over the years. That is no way to make a major change to an important event. Currently, the 1-2-3 system works because everyone...both judges and contestants....know how things work. It is clear, to me, from talking with people about this for years, that no one has presented a cost analysis, or put down precisely how it will be done. Right now it is still just a loose idea. I think it behoves those who strongly support GSB to put out some hard facts. Dak

I have heard lots of general talk about GSB over the years. To date, no one has offered a clear and precise description of what we would be getting. Yes, I get the general idea, but I would like the GSB proponents to address some details. For example, I would be in favor of GSB if we used our current judging method, but I would not be in favor, if we went to a numerical scoring. Also, I really want to hear how it will be paid for...not some ephemeral "we'll work that out later". I agree, in general, that being able to give multiple awards would be more equitable, but if the cost would jump dramatically people need to be aware before they start supporting or opposing a method. People also need to understand under the GSB there will be occasions where a category only has Bronze medals because of general poor quality work. Ans would we be required to give an award, at all? Dak

I like the basic concept of the GSB as long as it is based on the current judging methodology. I.E.The collective judging in teams of odd numbers. I believe this to be the best way to judge an art form. I find the collective discussion, give and take, gives the best consensus of the group. I like to understand why a team judge feels a way he does, because he may have an observation which may change my opinion, or I may have one that will change his opinion. However, the big bottleneck for IPMS would seem to be cost. How do you estimate the needed number of awards without setting a limit? And setting am limit defeats the main advantage of the GSB. IPMS has shown a reluctance to go to a generic award for all chapters to use , as each hosting chapter seems to want its own stamp on each National. Some may think this a trivial point, but it is one that needs to be addressed early before other stuff gets going. Another point needs to be addressed, too. Do we keep the judging time as we do now, or change to a rolling judging that starts on the first day entries are put out? I for one, don't like judging with a crowd of spectators because it inhibits discussion. Dak 39410

At the last national where I judged, we had the basic issue of the top four models, in the category, all being very good. In the end, we made the final choice based on our personal preferences. All the entries were good, and all had minor defects, just different ones. Quite frankly, any could have been first. I have found this to be quite common particularly on the inverse...all are equally poor. If there is a gap on the real thing....the base of the Panther cupola, for example.... and the judge says the reason I lost was because I didn't fill it, then I am a bit annoyed. We always judge accuracy, to some degree. That is why we don't like seams on the wing of the Spitfire, or silvered decals, or misaligned parts, etc. I have seen silicone used so heavily on real aircraft that the REAL thing would not win an IPMS awards. There has long been an ongoing debate on the correctness of some weathering. Even providing information does not always work. I once provided pictures to back up everything I did. The judge told me they never looked at the information. Another even told me he only judges on craftsmanship and never looks a documentation. This is why I no longer want "feedback" from judges. Give me an award or don't, I don't want to know what the judge thought. Ignorance is bliss. I maintain what people really want is to hear why the other model won, not why theirs didn't. Personally, I ALWAYS look at the documentation. When I see something odd...like poorly hand painted markings, for example, I assume it is poor craftsmanship, unless I see some documentation. As for Open/GSB, I like it, but the final factor will be cost. I don't believe it can be implemented with out some major funding for the needed awards or going to a generic award purchased on a National level. Dak

The definitions of art and craft overlap. Regardless of whether you are carving a twenty foot marble statue or a 1/72nd Spitfire kit, the process is basically the same...inspiration, planning, rough work, and fine finishing. Removing unwanted stone is fundamentally the same as smoothing out the edge of a wing. Everyone posting here knows quite well what IPMS judges look for during the contest. As noted, that information is quite well known and easily accessible. You also are aware a model is judged relative to other models in the category. A model that places first in a field of four might not place in a field of ten. Everyone also knows judges are often unfamiliar with the subjects they are judging and that they will sometimes mistake an accurate element as a failure in craftsmanship. This has happened to me on several occasions. How would you feel if the seam or bad paint you judged as poorly done craftmanship turned out to be accurate? How can you explain to a contestant that the model did not win because when choosing between a Spitfire and a P-51..... both excellently done.... that the Spitfire won because they liked the camouflage better than natural metal? Can open; worms everywhere. Why is that a good idea? Dak