Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


JClark last won the day on May 17 2018

JClark had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

21 Good

About JClark

  • Rank
    Styrene Junkie

Profile Information

  • FirstName
  • LastName
  • IPMS Number
  • Local Chapter
    Craig Hewitt
  • City
  • State
  • Gender
  • Location
    Scottsdale, Az
  • Interests
    32nd and 48th Jets and some WW2 props. 350th Ships and 35th scale armor with some F1 cars thrown in for good measure.

Recent Profile Visitors

494 profile views
  1. DAK The class head judge may have agreed with your choice. But did he know HOW you came about it? That's the key. You find whatever nit picky detail you can to make a decision. I have said my peace on how unfair this is to entrants to simply pick your favorite.... And all I am saying is in the final stages, depending on the entries, it always comes down to fining the one with the least weighted errors. That's defendable. Picking your favorite is NEVER defendable. I'm signing off from this thread. Really no more can be discussed... Later Jim
  2. DAK You'll be hard to miss, LOL... We don't run out of awards because there is a budget per a set number of categories. We had 196 categories last year with 5 extras allots per the NCC. I requested we only do 4 since 5 would put us over (By1) our package requirement of 50 per block when ordering. If anything we had extras left over from categories not used. Each class head judge knows how many categories they have and the freedom the make changes on the spot but they have a budget to stay within. Right now that's a very positive thing for both the NCC and the local host. You may see both going hand in hand, you may have personnel "feelings" about how judging should be done. You may "Feel" personal appeal is relevant, But show me where in the rule book where it states you can use "feeling and personal views" . You can't because it's not there and it's not quantifiable. Rules are there for you to use, not do as you wish. How how you choose to model is up to you. But once you enter the "Contest" and right now that is what it is. You have rules and criteria that will be used to judge your model . As a judge you have to fairly apply those to have a fair outcome. If not then what happens when the entrant asks why they didn't place and your reply as a judge is " you didn't weather your model". Entrant> Well the rule book didn't say I had to weather my model … We have negative based outcome judging for a reason, its clearly quantifiable , you can point to any of the issues that are called for in the rule book as to why you came to your decision. Using personal likes,,,, not so much. But in the end I get your position. You want to classify things in construction as accuracy because that's the way you (feel) about it even thought we are told not to use accuracy in our decisions because we can't know everything about every model.. You want to pick what you want in judging because that's the way you (feel) about it. I can see why your point of view makes sense to you. But when you judge the correct way you have to put away your bias, apply the rule, put on the blindfold and hold the scales. Dave I would rather have and be a part of a society with members who care what is going on and have a passion not only for the hobby but the convention/contest and society. Even if we disagree. Being engaged is part of the fun. Right DAK ? All Ok it's official, the dead horse arose and was promptly hammered back into the ground. That's all from me Folks, See you guys and gals in Chattanooga ;-) Jim
  3. DAK We are picky because these are points of craftmanship... Period. Not because they are not on the real things. Yes we are building models based off the real thing but in the end we are judging models in front of us not the real thing. And the models in front of us need to be constructed in a manner that do not have glue and seams because it's been established that in the course of construction you don't' leave those things behind. If we used your line of logic then accuracy would rule supreme because everything down to glue and seams is all about accuracy. I would strongly suggest reading the rules and application of accuracy. Again "The horse is beginning to smell here" If you pick something you like over something you don't then you are doing two things. 1) Not applying the rules because no where in there does it allow you to do any such thing. 2) You do a disservice to the entrant. … Now you may run your local shows like this and that is your prerogative but it doesn't adhere to the principals laid out in the handbook. You mention two different teams getting to different results. I would say if that's happening then there is your problem . Two different teams doing whatever they want picking what they like and NOT administering the guidelines set for in the handbook. If both teams apply the rules they should both be getting close to the same results. Placements may vary but the same 3 to 4 models should be in the running. So you prove my point that if the rules are not being applied correctly its a utter crap shot and I ask again , how is that fair to any entrant to any contest. It's not a representation of what is best, but it turns into merely what 3 people like. There is a big difference there. One "Your way" is based on popularity, the other , a decision is reached based on rules applied to see which model is more correctly executed . My points on your multi tier system were/are more questions seeking clarity on your proposal. My questions would be (and I'll use your example of 72nd novice aircraft) would that be jet or prop? would there be multiple sub categories 105a,b,c,d...do we use the current category structure like we do now. And what formula do you use to come at total for 72nd novice aircraft? Lets say you have 80 entries in 105 A through D, how many awards are budgeted? Lets say you place a number on those 80 at 20, what if you run out of awards? Do you get more form other lesser populated categories? If so we already do that. I would also say this about a multi tier system with one generic award, "IE either you get one or your don't'" I don't see it flying with the membership . At least the current survey underway gives options of two well know systems. This would be completely different and I don't think very well received. We have a hugely successful contest/convention as it is now. To can that in favor of something never tried won't happen. All of these are things each local has to consider when hosting a National contest. Ask me how I know... In closing, if you are going to Chattanooga look me up and we can talk about this further ;-) Jim
  4. Dak No, again we are picky because you can't leave glue behind while building "A model"... Comparing glue blobs to silicone used on real airframes is quite the stretch. If you want to use putty and paint it to replicate said silicone then that's another matter which should be pointed out on the entry form. Take credit for the effort put in . But calling glue blobs a non construction issue is simply not correct and is used in the handbook as an example of what not to do when building a model. It's not discussed as an accuracy issue. Your local guy is a perfect example of not reading the rules and should not be surprised when he doesn't finish well regardless of what "He feels" is important. It's about what is written down not how everyone feels. AKA the rule of law. You tried explaining that to him to no avail. Well I would say that person can't be reached if they don't want to listen. Pre shading vs non pre shading. If you are apply the rules correctly the fact that one is and one isn't won't play into the decision. If it does then you as a judge are picking what you like and again you can't do that. How is any entrant supposed to know what you like as a judge? They loose out because they decided to go pristine and you like weathered? how is that a fair application of the rules? and ultimately to our fellow modeling brethern. Agreed on the mixed judging team. It has many applications to police actions such as those items that you brought up. If it comes down to the team being unable to come to a consensus and needs to talk to the class head about something like this then so be it. That's why we have class heads, to give guidance to the team in making it's decision. Ok now I may be beginning to understand your system. No more categories just lump everyone together per division. Ok so we have a budget of 196 categories with 3 places each. That's 588 total awards. Would you now just give a generic award to a model with no place "since there isn't a category" ? And how would you budget those 588 per division and what happens if you run out? Another question, you say novice would get more awards, I would say that the masters modelers would get more awards since they are much more likely to get things correct , that is if I am understanding your system correctly. I can see where you're going with the multi level but I'm not to sure about scrapping our current system . Another question is if you don't have categories nd are not competing against each other then in your multi level would it be more of an Open system? and if so then you need more awards for the 3 colors in GSB. That's one of the points in open GSB system, there isn't a budget for awards. if you meet the standard accordingly then you awarded one of 3. that's hard to budget for unless you by one award that stays the same year in an out and you have plenty on had with the extras to carry over from year to year. Or do you just hand out 588 awards that do not designate anything other than here is an award. Just trying to understand you system... Jim
  5. DAK > Well, I suppose that is how you look at them, so I stand by my statement. I would never judge the shade of paint, or put calibers to a model, but that big glob of glue is not accurate (generally) and is poor craftmanship as well. As the book says and it IS what we follow, Accuracy is historical in nature and impossible to enforce since we don't know all about all entries. Calling a glue blob an accuracy is issue is simple not the correct term. Glue blob is construction, 3 national insignia on one wing would be accuracy...This is the kind of thing that gets people confused when we say we dont' judge accuracy when you say we do. That is simply not true or is not supposed to happen. DAK> All model building is art. Not all is great art anymore than the doodles on a napkin by Picasso are great art. (regardless of how valuable they are.) At the very least, model building is found art...where you take premade items and turn them into something else. Each model builder brings his own unique take on how something should look. That means the shade of color used, specific placement of markings, application of paint, and countless other little details. For example, that figure you mentioned is based on a two dimensional picture, so you paint the back side...the unseen side...to suit your minds eye. Agreed, that is why I posted the picture as an example... DAK> There are a number of vehicles where not all wheels touch the ground unless it is under load. I have seen aircraft that sag to the side because of pneumatic or hydraulic bleed off, when powered down. There are countless things which not all are aware of and the entrant must make the effort to explain things. The judge should not impose his view on the situation. In times past, I have met judges that did claim something is not possible even though the evidence was presented to them. It is hard to discuss this because for every example given someone will find an exception. Agreed but at some point if it's not included on a judging form assumptions have to be made. Kits come ready to be assembled in a square and plumb fashion. It's also spelled out in the rules. To use excuses that the real thing may have been leaning to cover up the builders errors is simply gaming the system. Now if the builder purposely leans an aircraft because of an asymetrical load and makes note of it then I guess I could buy that. But to just to come out with that as a general statement as an excuse then that is just going to get the builder into trouble. DAK> We do judge style. It is ambiguous and changes over the years, but a certain look becomes popular...like Verlindenization was in the late seventies...and if the model isn't following that style, it suffers in competition. Its all part of a big picture that people pick up on subconsciously. Certain colors are not appealing, no matter how accurate they are and thus put people off. If you do then I would say you are doing it wrong. No where are we allowed to judge style. DAK> The skill level based contest as I have described it over in the Survey string, is based on the entrant's own personal choice as to what level they want to compete at. We would not be creating a Master class. If you feel you are as good as those in the master division, then enter there. It does keep the allow the newbies from being FORCED to compete with the masters, as they are now. The number of awards needed would not change, if we use a single award system. I.E. you win an award or you do not; there is no ranking of the award as the is now. The awards would be apportioned out based on the number of entries in a class. More models in a class; more awards in a class. Not that I am opposed to skill levels but you are adding classes and divisions. You say we would not be creating a master class but then say people could compete there if they so desired? How can that be? If you have 3 different levels of competition the for example you will triple each and every category. And yes awards would triple too regardless of what you hand out since all three levels in each category would have to be awarded. As i understand it and example would be #107A novice, 107A intermediate, 107A master. 3 places for each thats 9 awards as opposed to the 3 we have now for #107A. Also not to mention the time involved to judges triple the amount of categories. But I made my points in an earlier post in this thread on that account... Jim
  6. Wow Ok, Finally done. Many good points brought up by all. And to defend Nick I too thought that the yellow star comment may be going off the rails. We have a multi faceted problem that while some see as a problem others don't. Bad PR , bad impressions, ugly anti IPMS images in ones heads out IPMS. Ect. But then I look at the progression of our hobby as a whole. Every year before the Nats I go through all my convention issues of the Journal. I have them all from 73 to today sans 75,76,77,81,90 and 91. Lots of articles to re read in those too. And guess what, the same things were talked about 25,30 and 40 years ago. This leads me to believe nothing will change in those respects. But what do we keep seeing? It's like Gil says, it's hard to argue with success and this show at the national level is pretty successful . And when you have the success we currently enjoy and the profits made then it's a hard nut to bust to try and change things while enjoying thousands of entries every year at the Nats. DAK mentioned some publicity things. That may help and probably should be done but any big changes to the convention need to be ok'ed by the membership as a whole. That's what the new survey I believe is trying to accomplish. It is a good sign that we have members wanting to make things better. Even if the things brought forth aren't adopted. What I do find maybe a bit comical is the sub groups. It's good thing as it enlarges the scope of modeling as a whole. But then you look at the why part of their creation and scratch your head. Lets use AMPS as an example. They felt left out, disgruntled ect, so they formed their own group and did things the way they felt they should be run. Good for them!! I genuinely applaud them for that. They did what people tell others, If ya don't like it go start your own company, group or whatever. BUT "Ya knew it was coming" those same people come back to IPMS and compete and complain. They have the best of both worlds, they have their subject niche to go to and then IPMS which includes everyone which lends the question, why did you leave in the first place? Because they like competition. And now they have two to go to. We aircraft and ship modelers are left out in the wings with only IPMS. Am I campaigning for more specialty groups? No, just wondering out loud. Our motto is for modelers by modelers so we are rightfully inclusive of everyone and always have been. They say perception is reality but that doesn't make it correct. Just ask any magician that.. OK, enough rambling from me. Good discussion. Jim
  7. Or This post got me thinking DAK. There was a figure put out by "If I recall correctly Andrea" of a Napoleonic figure mounted on a dappled grey horse to celebrate one of their companies anniversaries. The rider was pulling the reigns to the right and twisting to the right and the horse was starting to rise up as if to try and turn right to face a foe. Really cool looking figure that makes me wish I could do it justice and to justify the cost LOL, but my point here is this. That figure WAS based on an actual famous painting that I don't know the name of. So if you have a model of a painting that is considered art then why isn't the same exact subject in 3 dimensions not art? Jim
  8. Noel But Dak isn't wrong either. I too have seen what he is talking about. But then I do agree with Mr. Walker too. It's a multi faceted issue. Jim
  9. Dak Honestly I'm not picking on you and agree with the gist of what you're saying. But I think your use of the word "accuracy" is what bothers me. It is spelled out in the handbook that we don't judge accuracy. Errors in the build process are not accuracy issues. What we judge is the application of any finish from factory fresh to heavily weathered. I'll use autos as an example of the pristine. Paint needs to be smooth and without any blemishes as orange peel Ect. Now the other end of the spectrum is Armor that can go to a flat factory fresh product to once emerging from a mud bog. Is the one that is covered in mud covering so much of the model you have a hard time telling what type of tank or vehicle it is? if that's the case then I would argue that the weathering is poorly applied unless it's in a diorama representing it's emergence from a mud bog. So in essence its about application not accuracy . A muddy tank is accurate, a factory fresh tank is accurate. A rusty tank is accurate. It's how those various forms are applied that's judged. Weathered aircraft for example, if someone applies a wash and you see pooling in corners then that's a ding as the wash wasn't applied properly. I have seen panel lines with wash applied that were airbrushed over. That's a ding because it wasn't done in the correct process. Heavily applied paint in cars or orange peel is dinged but could be considered "accurate" because a lot of cars out there on the road have orange peel. That's why we don't judge accuracy. It's impossible to know everything about every possible subject. And I agree if the modeler is trying to convey something other than the norm then they need to alert the judges, YOU ARE ABSOLUTLY SPOT ON! but the slippery comes when modelers know they have messed up and try to cover up mistakes with excuses. Well the real aircraft leans in real life so that's why I modeled it as such. Yeah right you just weren't about fixing it because we all know Models are supposed to be square and plumb to the naked eye. Your main point of reading the rules would go a long way as to what judges look for. It's like you said, as an entrant they have to be convincing not only with their work but with their documentation. If a team has a question about a build they do or should be looking at the entry for per the head judge as he tells us every year to read the forms.. Jim
  10. Whooo Hooo I'm on p.2 now... Dak Totally agree with your first paragraph.... Now You said that "we don't like seams and globs of glue because they are not are not accurate", No! We find those as build errors in the process of building a model. Not as accuracy issues. Accuracy is more in the historical context, not the process of construction or finish. As to your overweathering of said tank if the emphasis is directed at a really muddy tank IE one that's bogged down in ALOT of mud that carries over onto the tank then my question is are you in essence trying to tell a story with the tanks struggle to get out of a mud bog. Or do you have a tank on a nice piece of wood sitting there dripping in mud? If it's the first then it makes more sense, if it's the latter then you as a judge start to wonder if this is just a screw up and is the entrant gaming the system but overloading it with mud to cover all the mistakes? I'm not an armor judge but have talked with many and do dabble in the dark arts of it LOL. Jim
  11. Noel Well we are passionate about our hobby. Granted maybe to much so. But "You knew it was coming" I would rather have this debate and get it out and talked about rather than just accepting whatever goes. I was watching a video of a British national judge being interviewed and was asked about judging. His last comment really struck me as very odd "and maybe a reason for your side of the pond to have more discussions" but he ended his remarks by saying that in the end its what the judges like. That really got me bothered since how is an entrant to know what any particular judge likes? maybe that's allowed for over there but as an possible future entrant I would never enter a contest knowing that the winners are whatever the judges decide what they like. Jim
  12. Good points Gil Something that just popped into my head as it relates to the National and multiple levels. Again apologies if this has been mentioned as I am still on P.1... But if we do as suggested then we are doing more than tripling out levels, we are tripling our workload as judges. As it is now we go to a category makes cuts. That first cut "usually" gets rid of 75% of the category in relatively quick amount of time then we start nit picking ;-) .. Ok lets assume those 75% (O boy I'm in trouble now) that don't survive are your entry/beginner level that would be in another category in a new multi tiered system. So now you are having to go back and in essence re-judge those that don't survive a first cut in a traditional system. That can be daunting since most of those have a lot more errors to quantify. That will take a huge amount of time. I personally have struggled over trying to pick a 3rd place over any 1st vs 2nd . As a matter of fact 95% of the time it has been my experience that 1st sets itself apart. But I digress, triple the cats and you'll triple the workload. Triple the workload on Friday night and you'll loose a lot of those volunteer judges . Ok, back to finish P.1 of this, LOL Jim
  13. Hi DAK I'm still on p.1 of this thread but this "The above quote" jumped out at me and may have already been addressed. I have to disagree on this one point because no where is Style mentioned in the judges handbook. Style is a personal "Like" and we don't judge likes. How is any entrant to a contest to know what a particular judge likes in whatever style and then how do they build to that judges preferences' ? You use weathering of aircraft as an example. I too prefer weathered aircraft BUT it has to be subtle. Now aircraft weather differently based on numerous factors up to and including factory fresh. Same with most other models in other major classes. So to say a model not being weathered is a sign of poor craftsmanship is in my mind not adhering to the judges handbook. I have seen some very impressive non weathered models. An example was a 32nd scale F-18 at Columbus Nats in 15 where the builder had opened up everything as it rolled down the assembly line and was painted as such. Or the 48th B-1 in the same contest. You can go further back in time to the 70's when Arlo Schroder and Mr. Lee were running roughshod over the aircraft entries with their beautiful scratch built entries that were not weathered very much if at all.. Many National best in show winners have been un-weathered. So in closing good craftsmanship is spelled out for all of us in the Handbook. We as judges apply these guild lines to the entries in making our decisions or should be. Is this always the case? No! and that is where I feel we can get better as judges. Apologies if this has been beaten into proverbial dead horse.. I'm new to the thread and this is fresh road kill for me. So the horse is still fresh ;-)
  14. Guys I don't think many of us would have a problem with someone adding a custom printed part. In a way that is what we do when we add aftermarket resin. Only difference being someone else scratch built it or designed it to replicate it en mass for the consumers. So you're scratch-building with a printer. I do see though where the argument could be made that the skill necessary to design and print that part are vastly different than what we did in the past and continue to do by scratch building. It's virtual modeling that is then brought into the physical world via the printer. So the question begs, are we virtual modelers and if so then I would argue what we do is dead. We assemble plastic , finish it, paint it ect. Those are vastly different skills than sitting behind a keyboard to then only hit a print button. An analogy if I may. You paint a portrait on canvas with paint. Or do you paint a picture on a computer screen and hit the print button. In reality thats two different things since it's two vastly different mediums being used to get to the picture. If and when full models are becoming the norm then I would assume a category would be created to enter them in just like vac form and scratch-built's have their own categories. Construction wouldn't be an issue since it's all ready built by the printer. Really the only thing you could look at is paint application. Jim
  15. OK But.... There is a difference between parts and the whole kit. I think we go down the slippery slope if we allow whole kits that are printed and already fully constructed right off the printer. Parts are different in that you are adding them as in aftermarket parts for conversions/updates ect. A whole printed model is (For me) much different. Jim
  • Create New...