[Tiger #112]

Working on DML's Tiger 1 (kit 6608) as number 112. The more I research the Tunisian Tigers, the more confusing it gets. There is an awful lot of contradictory information. Well, the objective is completion, not perfection.

Dak

[Char B1 bis Flammwerfer]

The Tamiya German version with the Blast models conversion set.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

On 7/5/2021 at 2:12 PM, noelsmith said:

Sometimes I feel that there is an expectancy for judges to know everything and have encyclopaedic knowledge.

This illustrates why I say model building is an art form. As a group, we tend to see models as "accurate" things, but in reality, the way we actually build them is a creative endeavor. We may know what one side of a tank or airplane looks like, but in most cases the far side is an enigma so we make it up as we go. We want the model to be accurate, but we also want it to be visually attractive.

Perhaps, it would be better if we just tell the judges to simply pick the models they like regardless of other factors.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

Most major manufacturers get it right, at least based on the information they have. However, interpreting the instructions can be tricky at times.

I remember one where the builder tried to mount all the options on the same hard point then complained how nothing fit. 
 

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

40 minutes ago, dmorrissette said:

African or European? HAHAHA

Dave

Hah, hah! You survived the test! These things are important. But what is the name of the woman who own the house where Guy Fawkes hid his explosives? 
 

Dak
 

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

Even though, for me, it is a way of life and not a hobby, in general, it is all fun to me. In fact, attention to detail makes me more interested in all things. How else would I have learn what the most common reason for stoppage is in a Bren gun or that 2021 is the same calendar as 1773 and the correct answer to “what is the airspeed of a coconut laden swallow”. By the way, that is a trick question.

Nothing is superfluous.

Dak

P.S. For this going to Vegas, black can come up ELEVEN times in a row on a roulette table. The Martingale System is a sucker’s bet. 

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

I’ve met a couple judges I’m convinced live at Area 52. (Area 51is just camouflaging.)

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

Based on a photo of the real thing they are upside down. The long segment should be down. 
 

This backs up my opinion. The part is misaligned or improperly positioned. Accuracy or bad craftsmanship? Or both? A fine line. But how many would know right off? But from now on, it will be the first thing we look at on a Hawkeye model. 

The model looks fine, and in a light category could still place. In a heavy category the upside down parts would  probably bump the model, if someone caught the problem. 

Still, someone who didn’t judge will bitch about how stupid or picky the judges were.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

It’s the wrong color grey. 😛 And the incorrect color red for the stripes. 🤪EVERYONE knows that shade of red was not used until 2010. And the tires aren’t bulged properly.😝

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

God is in the details, but if you do it well enough, no one will think you did anything at all.

Of course the line is thin between accuracy and craftmanship, and it moves depending on the category, number of entries and the opinion of the judges. We decry being too picky, but give the highest praise to those who achieve both accuracy and excellent craftsmanship. A model with a mispositioned part by itself is a minor thing. In a category with three entries, it becomes more critical for the judges. In a category of ten models it may mean the model doesn't place.

I chose the tank exhaust as a concrete example of a visible point where the two concepts collide. As it turned out, it became an excellent example of why we cannot judge accuracy. James Corley showed that depending on which version---French or German--- the instructions show different positioning.

If you carefully read my opening post, you will see, I am am pointing out how things like this are difficult for judges to deal with. A limited amount of information is why we don't judge accuracy. It is also why we employ multiple judges and have the head judges check what and why winners are chosen.

It also serves to illustrate why many who grinch about the judging are wrong to do so. Two kits of the same model with two different, but correct positions. With out a doubt there will be someone who insists the tank shouldn't have placed because something was clearly wrong! At least based on their information, which is incomplete.

However, it is also true many who will accept something as trivial on one type of model will then be very upset when they see it on their personal favorites. I cite as an example, the guy (in 1979) who told me a Panther tank with an open hatch was an "open topped vehicle", but an F-4 Phantom with an open canopy was not an "open cockpit airplane".

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

Gil,

Like many you missed the point. I was not trying to show a major problem, but in part discuss the thin line between accuracy and craftsmanship. 

Also, I was hoping to illustrate the problem many judges face as well as how many grinches focus on a small detail to “prove” how fickle IPMS judges are.

As it turned out, additional information shows that there is some variation in the Char B1bis exhausts.

The free range system IPMS uses allows a free flow of information and that is what makes it such a good system. It has a wonderful redundancy which generally works well.

In the end, how “good” or “bad” an entry is depends on your personal interest in the subject. 
 

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

I have never gotten any significant feed back from judge’s notes. Usually, they miss the real flaws and pick some point where they are actually mistaken and I was correct. It has gotten so bad, that I really don’t want to know what the judges think. Give me an award or don’t, but don’t lecture me on what you thought was right or not.
 

Personally, I think the Saturday morning after action judge table is more helpful to people. Being able to talk directly with some of the judges and have them look at a particular model is better than impersonal notes on a paper.

There is a fine line between accuracy and craftsmanship. That is why we need a group of judges working together and why those who never judge will never understand the problems we face as judges.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

I guess it depends on which version you are building. I'm working on the German version. But this isn't really about the B1 bis as much as about judging problems.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

Interesting replies. As you can see, this is why those who don’t judge have it easy. They can fixate on one model and wax poetic about its good or bad point and how the judges were blind or over critical. They rarely get down at eye level with all the entries and compare them. 
 

Also, this shows the advantages of our system. Several judges reaching a consensus. And as a group, the information base is increased which aids in making decisions. 

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

But Ralph, are you saying you would accept parts going the wrong direction on an airplane? Or even a wrong part——day Spitfire exhausts on a P-51 or 109? At what point do we draw the line? 

In a contest, these models might still do quite well compared to others in the category. 
 

But you see my point about the reactions of non-judges. Some would argue that the judges were stupid for ignoring the wrong part while others would scream about us being too critical.

Dak

[Accuracy or Craftmanship]

I have been working on a 1/35th Tamiya Char B1 bis and while researching it, I found that a number of model builders put the exhausts on upside down. This illustrates the problem model judges face. Is this a craftmanship issue, or an accuracy issue. We don't want to judge accuracy, but with the exhaust tuned downward, the part is technically misaligned. But how many will know this? How critical is it to the overall model? Would something similar be ignored on another type of model? It would be easy if all the models were the same, but when they are all different types, it gets tricky. Craftmanship or accuracy, or both?

It is easy for people who never judge to criticize those who do judge as too picky, when they don't have to make the decision.

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

No, I remember because that year I brought a knife to a gun fight and won nothing. 
 

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

They put them in the middle in Loveland, I think. 
 

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

1 hour ago, jcorley said:

There is one major flaw in most dioramas:

A weak or non-existent story!

From the rules:

"Dioramas are story-centric, specifically built to tell a story or convey a message."

I agree completely. I lobbied for this for years and finally people started doing it. Of course, what is a good story is subjective. I have still seen a number of winners that obviously got picked because of the volume of work and not how well the story was done. But generally, IPMS is getting much better at picking a good story which actually makes sense. I learned my diorama building from Shep Paine and a good story was always the focus.

What I hate seeing is a good story done poorly with poorly executed models and figures. Or a really beautiful model with a poorly executed story.

I really hope they put the dioramas in the middle of the room at Las Vegas and not jammed up against the wall like in Chattanooga. In the middle of the room, you can see them much better.

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

Basically, I agree with Gil.

Personally, I wish IPMS would evolve into a system where there just awards but no placing and that more that three could be given in a category. Perhaps base the number relative to the number of entries. 

For many years it seemed that the judging in dioramas was poorly done. (note that dioramas usually get left until almost last at the awards presentation and often pushed to the side or back tables at the show). I think in part, because dioramas were seen as the ugly stepchild and many times the most experienced judges wanted to deal with the more main stream categories. But that has started to change. At Chattanooga, dioramas were a killer class. 
 

Also, up to about 20 years ago, IPMS was EXTREMELY aero centric, which is why AMPS got created in the first place  that now has changed, too.

Still, the free range committee judging we use works best. The system is flexible and fast. You can’t win if you don’t play.

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

I dIsagree Nick. Here I pointed out a particular point as proof that the oft vaunted AMPS system is no less flawed than the free range IPMS system. I also showed that the IPMS system does not pigeon hole the model as does the numeric systems. And that those who complain IPMS is too harsh or critical would probably do worse in a numerical judging system. I think that is very much a distinction WITH a difference.

And at this point, no one has shown that I am wrong. 

Worrying about why we have a contest is somewhat pointless. Obviously, plenty of our members as well as other groups want and enjoy the competition.

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

If you don’t play, you can’t win. It applies in Vegas and model contests.

Nick, you are off topic now. This was about judging systems  Not whether we should have contests or not.

AMPS pigeon holes the model. IPMS does not. When it comes to picking winners or losers, AMPS certainly does by through its regimentation. You always stand a chance at winning at an IPMS contest.

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

Strike a nerve, did we Nick?

I can’t speak for your Senior year creation, but I agree, art critics  can be fickle as well as model judges. 

Well duh, of course some are better at some things than others. Just because you can do an airplane model very well doesn’t mean you can do cars well. Me, I’m a renaissance modeler and do many things. (How well is for others to decide  😉)

But my point was and is that AMPS judging is not superior to the IPMS method, just different. Also, that it is  a myth that IPMS picks winners and losers any more than AMPS. The models are awarded for a specific place and time at an IPMS show and the whole thing might change the next day. Many top winners in years past would not do as well now because everyone got better. 

I believe Van Gogh cut off and ear to show how much he love a girl. The modeler’s equivalent is throwing out or selling his stash because a lover thinks they are childish. 

Certainly, there is competition in art. I’ve seen many art contests over the years. I remember one where someone did a small painting of a Stug III. Students in art school get graded all the time. You often see the ultimate winner’s works on our highways and box art. Dragon would not have done near as well without Ron Volstad.

I do think the the IPMS judging system is superior to the AMPS system because while not perfect, it is more flexible and (at least for me) much more fun than judging for AMPS.  And I hope we never adopt a point system. 
 

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

David,

For me, model building as a way of life has led me to some very interesting things in life. It is far from just sitting at the work bench. But it quit being just a hobby fifty years ago. In that time I have traveled to far away places and see and done many things, but at all times I was thinking how can I do this as a model. The time wasn’t just spent at the work bench. Your view is extremely limited if you think modeling is only about the model. Everything is a modeling subject if you see it as art like me. 
 

Dak

[Oranges and Tomatoes]

5 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

why do we feel the need to compete in the first place? 

Why do we have the Super Bowl, World Cup, Grand Prix, NASCAR, the PGA, March Madness, the America's Cup, cheer leading contests, the Olympics, etc. People enjoy competition and it is probably hard wired into our brains.

Ralph, you are being a bit pedantic, but probably I am too.

Perhaps we should set up an experiment as a seminar at a national and see what results we get from the different judging systems. The exact same set of models judged by two different teams and perhaps a popular vote. We could show which is faster, and see if they come up with similar results. Then open up for questions and comments.

Model building at our level is creative and you cannot really evaluate it with numbers because those numbers are still based on the opinion of the Judge. The AMPS system doesn't do this well because of it's design and methodology. If you participate and like it, fine. I and many others prefer the free range IPMS system. It is far more flexible and does not button hole a model.

If the AMPS system works as designed, then there is no reason to take your silver rated model to another contest. Its value has been set. If that is not true, then the system isn't working. IPMS judging is for one brief point in time. Another contest with a different set of entries and it is a whole different game. A numeric judging should produce the same results every time, right? Most of those who whine about IPMS judging being cruel would suffer worse under a numeric system.

David Von Almen, please speak for yourself. To me model building is a way of life, and an art form, not "a hobby". The outcome of the contests is as important to me as World Cup is to Manchester. However, I do agree I am there for the fun. I want to win, but if I don't, there is always next year. You can't win, if you don't play.

Dak