Jump to content

JClark

IPMS/USA Member
  • Posts

    636
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by JClark

  1. Agreed Ralph. We were shot down (pardon rhe pun) by AZ DPS as well by Phx pd when we worked on our sheet for the reason I gave. So we tried. we got lucky again after asking with the Bondurant school of doing to do some of their high performance cars back in 2010. We gave consideration to doing USS Arizona decals but seeing how you get those in the kit and their very basic nature we decided against it. Designing a decal sheet for the Nats as you know is quite the chore. We as a group knew that we wanted to appeal to as many different areas of modeling as possible, we had to keep color count at 8 and release on the sheet also had to be considered all while keeping the cost within a very small budget. It does seem that Omaha has taken a different tact thought with their past few sheets. Jim
  2. Various problems we ran into in 2010 and 2018 with decals, especially racing subjects was sponsor decals and licensing. Cop cars are problematic due to official seals being replicated for criminal purposes. Jim
  3. Who is on this National steering committee? I'm guessing these are appointed positions? Jim
  4. DAK It's up to you where you want the W.12. If you want it in 103 I'll let it stay there, just know that the only thing judged will be the actual aircraft. It's not in the entrants best interest to move something with a weak story. Why penalize them if that's how they wanted to display their model. Jim
  5. Noel This is exactly why the change was made. it's not OOB anymore and people have to remember that. An Eduard weekend edition kit could be OOB provided you don't add any aftermarket. How is a profi pack kit with the aftermarket included in the kit the same as the weekend kit? It's not. The intent of OOB when the rule was created was to build the kit as they came out in that era because of the falsehood prevailed that you had to add extras to win. By adding the extras in the box is semantics as it doesn't follow the spirit of the creation of the OOB rule. So that's why there is a name change and an attempt to get back to where the original meaning was. Times have changed, kits have changed. So if you can't add Eduard PE to a Eduard Weekend kit for an OOB build but you can add the very same Eduard PE to the same kit just because it came in the box then what's the point? Hence the thrust to get back to the basic attempt. Building basic kits that didn't come with all the bells and whistles. Personally I would like to see OOB and now BKB go away since I do not see any reason for it since the logic behind it's very creation was a fallacy. For all those who want to build that way that's fine, enter in the regular categories, you'll do just fine. You don't need extras to win, what you do need is overall execution of construction and finish of your project. Jim
  6. James Agreed. Very few reads the rules, Very few bother to vote , The forums are looked at by only a few but facebook , yeah wars breakout over there. Jim
  7. James The NCC makes changes to the rules every year as needed. This is an attempt to clean up the never ending 30 plus year questions of "what can i add to an OOB build" all the while trying to keep to the original concept as flawed as it is. The NCC can't go to the membership everytime they need to amend the rules which is just about every year. This is what the NCC does, it falls in their laps to to write and then administer the rules for the contest. Jim
  8. Ralph It's never been a requirement (That I know of) that the NCC are to have rules ready on Jan 1. Many times the host web site isn't even up by then. So they try their best to have them ready at the beginning of the year. Other times its up as soon as the previous convention finishes. It all depends. Mike Yes I do believe you would be able to enter it in the new BKB. Again the Spirit of the rule is to eliminate kits that come with parts considered to be aftermarket included to either replace provided parts or just as a addition in a multi media kit. Jim
  9. Ralph To spin it that your 2016 experience's happen every year or is the norm is just that, Spin. I wasn't on the NCC then so I can't speak to the delay. But it always the aim and goal of the NCC to get the new rules out at the beginning of the year. Case in point, this year there was a delay as the Head judge came this>< close to loosing his home due to wild fires that ravaged his community where over 600 homes and business were lost in less than 24 hours so I think we all could cut him some slack for having to move out of his home for over week or more until utilities could be restored which all happened after our final online NCC meeting finalizing the rules. So it took some time to get his life back in order. And I would say we're lucky we got them as early as we did all things considered. Stuff happens, life happens in this all volunteer society. But as I said earlier we all still have 25 weeks to read the rules which I would wager most won't and then act all surprised when they get there. Jim
  10. I posted this on the National convention Facebook page. So its easier to copy and paste. All... OOB is based on a false pretence that you have to add extras to win. That has has NEVER been the case but OOB was created to satisfy the vocal minority. Then as soon as it came out what was the first question? "What can I add?" well are you not getting away from the spirit of the rule then? I did the math as I have every IPMS convention issue of the journal from 1973 forward save for 3 years. In the years when 1,2,3 and OOB were awarded 38% of the time one of the placements was also the OOB winner. Then when no sweeps came into effect that had to change since you couldn't have a model winning a place and OOB so that very fact right there proves OOB can does and will compete against models in a regular category. Its time has come and gone. We have created a BKB category to try and save the spirit of the rule which is to build what came in the kit, and not a kit that has all the modern conveniences of resin, photoetch and associated aftermarket that's commonly available. If you read the first sentence in the new rule a lot of questions can be answered. But this is what happens when people try to game the rules and that's what we are trying to get away from. I've been in IPMS since 95 and in that time all I have heard is people wondering what is acceptable and what's not. And why is that? Because entrants were allowed to add things to models which is exactly what their complaint was about the regular categories and thus needed another award. I don't get it, which is it? You want to build OOB but still add things? Once you add ANYTHING the slippery slope starts, Well if I can add seat belts and antenna then why not brake lines. All BKB is trying to do is get back to the basics for those who want to build that way again based on a falsehood of needed extras to win. As Mr. Peterson pointed out rules changes for the next convention have always come out around the beginning of the year. This is NOTHING new. And for those complaining that they have already built models for the old OOB rules and will be in the regular categories then all I can say is see the above statement, IT DOESN"T MATTER!!! . When judged we don't look at those things, its all about Execution, if anything you have a better chance since you have added minimal things to screw up. I 'll also add that 25 weeks before a national I think is plenty of time to adapt to a new rule that in its essence is very similar to the spirit of the original OOB rule. Now for some numbers, we had 2,680 models in Las Vegas. 313 were OOB entries, thats 11%. We are having a 30 plus year argument and continual questions about what's allowed since no one can agree and constantly argue about "Why can't I add this if I can add that" for a part of the national contest that accounts for 11%, Really? Jim
  11. All Let's not get down in the weeds. I would say a lot of answers can be found in the first paragraph > The spirit of building BKB is two-fold: ● First, to limit yourself to using only those components supplied by the kit makers of older/simpler/less-expensive kits, and yet work to get the best result regardless of any shortcomings in the base kit, such as may exist with its detailing or accuracy. ● Second, to compete at a more basic level, knowing that basic modeling skills are the only difference-maker - not what variety of detailing materials is supplied by the kit manufacturer, nor by aftermarket detailing sets, nor by using more advanced re-building or scratchbuilding skills. The general BKB approach is to build what came in the kit box. One question , can I enter a Eduard Profi pack kit?... I'll answer with a question> Is an eduard Profi pack kit and (Older/simpler/less-expensive) kit? I would say no. Seems everyone wants to microscopically examine the wording of the rules and skip over the intent and spirit of the rule as stated in the beginning. Or what can I get away with. We tried to close those doors with the main thrust of the opening sentence, (see above) . Can we have an exception or definition for every possibility that arises? No. And that's what happens,people start trying to skirt around the spirit of the rule. And that's another reason why the class head and over all head judge have to final say. I guess the alternative is to pick a year and say if the kit is made after this year it doesn't qualify. And that you can't ADD ANTHING and can't use anything that can be classified as AFTERMARKET . But I'm only one voice, the NCC has to agree with respects to their particular class. Now let's look at logistics. We had 901 Aircraft entries in Las Vegas, 158 of which were OOB/ or the new BKB. I'm lucky that I have a small team to try police the entries but we miss stuff and now we will have to not only look at each one entered but further examine to see if they qualify for BKB. So if the teams find something we missed then chances are they will get moved permitting that the regular category where the entry will land hasn't already been judged or they will be told to bring it next year and enter it in the appropriate regular category. Again all we can do is administer the rules that everyone agreed to by entering. We can't help if the rules are not read. And if they are and still have questions then I'm sure most of the class heads are in the contest room most of the time or can easily be reached. Personally I don't see the reason to even have OOB or the new BKB. Its given nothing but troubles for 30 plus years with "what can I do, how close can I come and not cross the rule, what can I get away with, well its in the box top art why can't I add it?" . All the while complaining that the category is needed because the entrants feel they need to add aftermarket to compete. Which has been proven statistically to be a falsehood. 38% of the time when IPMS awarded 1,2,3 and OOB, one of the places was also the OOB so OOB can and has competed with regular entries. So we try to shut that door and then it's (why can't I add X ?). So lets get rid of those 13 OOB/BKB categories and add them to the regular aircraft class categories. It's time has come and gone. Jim Clark Head Aircraft Judge
  12. Dak Then all choices in AMPS are wrong since they only grade models based on their opinion not direct comparison. That's why certain open systems across the planet works for them, they are willing to dismiss errors for stuff they prefer. That's a bias. It's even been openly said if you don't paint in a certain style at a particular show in Europe that uses open judging that you won't be considered ,and use the excuse that judging is subjective to be able to do that.So they openly make excuses to do what they want,, that's open judging.That's not sticking to the rules. Does a judge in a court of law overlook a law because they may personally not like it and think it unfair? NO , they are their to make sure the law is followed. That's our job, to make sure the rules are followed. We're not their to say we'll the finish is so great it over comes the pin marks , seams, glue, alignment , and other "basic"issues. There is a reason the phrase "Back to basic's" exists.. And with that the Titanic slips beneath the icy cold waters. Gentlemen it's been interesting to say the least. Jim
  13. Cameron Construction first is not a Bias, it's listed as a first criteria in the judging guidelines. Any entrants finish as stellar as it may be will never overcome a basic issue.If you can't get the basics correct then it's all for naught. Put on the uniform, shine all the buttons, make sure you're lint, free shine the shoes but it's all for nothing if your shoes aren't tied. If you can pull of some fine finish then you can get things straight. That's not bias, that applying the guidelines as writen.All you want to do is concentrate of the fun stuff, the finish and let that sway your opinion. At this point I would have to ask you if judging is a good fit for you since you clearly have a bias when NONE should exist. Jim
  14. Cameron Again it's not just construction, YOU know that. Also picking what you may like isn't fair to the entrant plain and simple as they have no idea what to build to. And when I look at a model crooked gear, leaning fuselage, canopies not straight, bombs and ordnance not properly aligned on racks stick out like a sore thumb regardless of whatever finish is on them. See alot of that in nervous magizes that concentrate on the wow of finish .. Now he's the thing, I'm not elected, I set no direction in the rules other than to tell the judges to follow them and not go off and do what they want based on how they "interpret" them. As far as representing ,well I'm only one voice. Jim
  15. Dak> Of course you see the system as fine. You are in a position of authority and such people are rarely ready to admit there may be a better way to do things. Next, you throw out the specter of "ruining the National Convention" to instill more fear of change. I have not said we need to change things now. I merely put my ideas out as food for thought because things do change and we need to have some ideas where the problems may develop and have some possible answers at hand. (Acting, not re-acting.) Rather than ask for more details or explanation---even through a private message, all you have really done was belittle and stone wall the subject. I would also point out, it was rigidity to change which created AMPS, in the 1980s, when IPMS was so areocentric they refused to listen to the armor guys, who then went and started an entirely new group which has syphoned off members, money, and attendees from the IPMS National. I also note you just ignored the the problems I brought up. (Which have been on going for decades.) You also haven't apologized for slandering me. First off I'm not in a position of any authority it's much more an administrative position and I have only done this job for one year. But I do have experience in the system of many years. The GSB arguments are nothing new, Back in 2004 at the National this was talked about so it's far from nothing new and all the points you brings up were brought up back then. As for ruining it you and other don't' realize the amount of people that will leave IPMS if a change is made. We have talked about this before. How do you grow the society by doing something that will make people leave it? So the new ideas aren't really that. Those are facts and no belittling is occuring. Just rehashing history...Actually AMPS firsat year was 93 and yes it was born out of IPMS's reluctance to change. SO what? Good for them for starting thier own thing. I admire that kind of drive and attitude. If you don't like something, don't try and change it start something new. They wanted to be more like all the rest of the shows in Europe using the open system. Why should IPMS do like all the rest? why can't we offer something different ? You say I belittle but then you use words like "IMPS being s so aerocentric" IPMS has always been the one show that welcomes everyone. It's not IPMS's fault if aircraft is popular. And who says they didn't listen? just because they didn't enthusiastically embrace the idea? And when you say it "Has" syphoned member's, well I see a lot of APMS guys year in and year out at the National so AGAIN how bad is IPMS? that they attend our show, set up stands, and enter the competition. So I'm not buying that...What problems have been going on for decades, I've been in for decades and I don't see the problems you see so are they really problems or jut issues you don't like? And for the slander , well please point out where I supposedly did that. I admitted to the mis-quote but Slander???? Jim
  16. DAK What you see as a problem I see as an opportunity to fair adjudicate a contest. It's not a problem.. Change the system and guess what, you'll still have complainers and people calling us elitists . The way we do things works, works well as is evident in participation and is as fair as it can be.. Change it as you suggest and we run the real risk of ruining the National event.. So yes. that's why I'm defensive about what we do and defend it against "ideas" based on "feelings" and preconceived notions. There isn't a need to change. I'm all for change if needed but it's not here. Jim
  17. So Dak 3 runners show up, run a race and 3 cross the line.No records broken but they finish. So according to you if none of them meet a supposed "standard" none get awarded? That's the point, there is no standard in a competition. Each contest against each other, NOT a standard, that's why it's a competition.... it's the most fair and un bias way to do what we do. Do anything other than that and you open the door to bias. And you are correct, I miss quoted you and quoted Ralph. Jim
  18. Ralph To bad you're done with the thread because I was not talking about any of your posts, I was replying to DAK... I thought that was fairly obvious when i quoted him in my post, but I guess not. As for ever increasing awards costs how does that apply when we have a fixed amount of awards every years that hasn't changed in how many years now? What has more to do with costs is what the local decides to do for the national show. You may like to receive re-treaded awards year in and year out but I would venture to say most do not. As for bad behavior, well humans are> "Insert favorite adjective here _____" ... I've never seen it in the past 25 Nationals I've been to. Local shows? well all bets are off. To Dak > While choosing winners based on what we like is more the fact than the exception and really isn't all that bad a concept. Just because it is the one "I LIKE BEST" doesn't mean it isn't the best crafted. Then those judges are doing it wrong. Period, no where in the guidelines we use does it allow for us to be bias and pick what we like, again how is any entrant supposed to know what a judge likes and how do they build toward that goal? they can't thus it's unfair ... So to answer your statement > Just because it is the one "I LIKE BEST" doesn't mean it isn't the best crafted. I say it isn't the best one because you have already allowed bias into your decision making process so there is no way to tell if it truly is the best one because you are bias and we have no time for bias in our judging. > While many ask "what is wrong with my model?" most really want to ask "why did the other model win!". True! but in your case you can simply tell them you didn't like it, since you favor biased judging. I want to see how that one goes over... > Judging will continue to become more difficult as the number of entries increase. In theory, the number could eventually reach a quantity we cannot judge in the time available Well then we must be doing something right to keep getting the attendance we are getting. So yeah let's toss it out the window and do something completely different... How does that make any sense at all ??? You run the real risk of ruining everything that's been built and killing attendance thus any money that's made or now lost. I assure you IPMS can't afford to many National contest/convention failures. > We like contests. They will continue to be the main draw of the National convention. However, there are some people who are obsessed with an established ranking of the winners. Well DAK that's what a contest is. Ranking of winners. It's not a grading at an exposition, 2 vastly different things.... > The line between accuracy and craftmanship is often hard to see. There are numerous situations where the judges clearly based their opinion on what they thought was accuracy. Not really, Things have to be straight, there is mechanical accuracy that have to be accounted for. Example I had a category this year with 19 entrants all of which had crooked gear except for one. A basic issue but somehow some people think these models need more recognition ? So lets trash our current system, and now allow for more awards and recognition but yet we can't get by a first cut since all have basic issues that are wrong. So yeah lets just toss out basics, look for awesome paints jobs (Which many have advocated for) and award the ones we "Like" .... Seriously ? No Thanks, I'll pass... Jim
  19. What"s the point in entering a contest where if I am judged good enough to receive the same ol award. BORING!!! You may not care about what awards look like but I don't need a bunch of generic cheap awards sitting in my case that I can't tell one from the other and when they were awarded. When we did medallion's in 2018 we and a small handful left over and thank goodness we did because we had to replace 12 that were stolen off the tables they were so popular. Vegas had more models on the tables than we did so I would venture to say they probably had less awards left over if any then we did in 18. Your arguments about it being a win at all cost are hype. And you haven't answered my question about what qualifies someone to "GRADE" my model. Are they an expert or something? You don't need that qualification now because judges are comparing flaws from one model to another and again not picking out what they like or inspires them like happens in Open/GSB. Also who is going to store these generic awards and haul them around from year to year? DAK you stated> Somewhere along the line that concept got perverted into this Win At All Costs, "You ain't a 'real' modeler until you win at the National Convention", vision that far too many modelers these days hold in their noggins. Where do you get off making that assumption? That's nothing but hype to push your agenda. I see this argument being made all the time and NEVER see it. Maybe, just maybe because it is just like the premoridial days of IPMS where we get together and have a friendly competition. Jim Clar
  20. Gee that's the one thing that makes each hosts unique to their show, the awards. You start handing out cheap generic awards then what's the point? As it is now we have 196 categories splits included plus 5 ad hoc contest wide awards for a total of 201 for a grand total of 603 awards.Thats a fixed number. Anything else makes it damned hard to plan for and how do you limit what gets what if you do anything else? You have no number to work off of. I would rather have judges nit picking then picking what they "like" .My question is how am I as a builder supposed to know what a judge likes and which judge will I get to look at my model, i'll need to know this so I can build to what they like so as to be judged fairly. See you can't do that and be fair. The more Objective you are judging the better as it takes bias out of the equation. I also say that's why the lady holding the scales is blindfolded. That's why I tell my guy's it's not about what you like, it's about what's on the table and what errors you find so that you can quantify your rankings .I would much rather be ranked against my peers than to be given a grade by someone who likes or dislikes my model. And what qualifies that person to give that grade,that opinion. Judging is much different than grading. Also more times than not 1st place jumps out at you and it's the placement from 2nd and 3rd or two contesting 3rd place that's a chore.One year (OKC) we spent alot of time trying to decide on 3rd since all the rest entrants had big issues. This year I had a team tell me every single model save for first place had basic alignment issues in their gear. So how is it that all of these models need recognition when most are having real issues? And finally we want to "grow" the society, we want more and more models on tables. We had over 3k in Vegas, we're pretty damned successful as it is, why do we want to mess with success ? We're quickly getting to the point where we won't be able to handle the job of judging. And everyone with all their suggestions need to remember and consider the judges volunteering their time. Push to hard for drastic changes and you'll loose the judges. Then what happens? do you have a reserve pool of 250 judges sitting around that I don't know about and if so why aren't we using them now? Jim Clark NCC/ Head Aircraft judge
  21. DAK All you are asking for is that Dio's be placed where they can be seen better. What about everyone else? It seems to me that you're wanting your favorite front and center at all times with power allowances no matter the cost. Did you know that if power is brought out into the contest room this year for your front and center Dio displays that it will cost the local and thus IPMS 1k per drop ?. When the time comes that you actually plan a national contest then you will really have an idea what all is involved. Everyone wants their respective class up front, Jr's to promote the hobby, Display only's to promote only displaying models as they do in Europe, Now Dio's because Dio's are disrespected along a wall "That has only happened 2 times in 15 years" and then there is the Aircraft are always treated better and have a favored status. Man I have to laugh. Most times we are put in the back of the room because of this misconception that we are favored. In Chattanooga we were in the back, but guess what we had 1 third of the total entries. We're not favored but we are the most popularly attended Class. Big difference.. So again since 06 you have had it your way sans two different times and that's not good enough? At the end of the day it's up to the local hosts to manage the room as best they can with all the factors they have to juggle. Jim
  22. Pete Was that at the National level because I went back and looked and the last time there was a civilian vehicle class at the Nats was 92 from 93 on class 5 has been called Automotive. James Change for the sake of change is pointless. You may "Feel" a change is better, that doesn't necessarily make it so. Jim
  23. DAK Yes, there are out lets in the floors of many venues. That doesn't mean you can simply plug in. Sometimes power has to be turned onto those that are in the floor, sometimes the facility will state they have to have their electrician come in and plug in the extension cord. All of that cost IPMS money. in 2018 we had to pony up $35 for every single plug that went into an outlet. You get an entrant that brings 2 powered entries and you're now paying him to show his/her stuff. So much can be done with LED's these days that I don't see much demand for anything other than battery operated items. I'm getting ready to build a Warhammer Imperial knight that will have 4 flickering , 1 breathing/pulsing, 3 solid and one trailing row of LED's all powered off a 9 volt battery. Go check out evandesigne.com for more lighting ideas.. Jim
  24. Dak This will be my last reply on this. Ok, I went back and looked at my convention issues all the way back to 06 (14 conventions) . There were only 2 years that Dio's were up against a wall, 07 and 19. There was bleed over from the main isles in 12 and 13 to tables up against a wall. So to say dio's are always up against a wall or make it sound like Dio's are always pushed aside or relegated to poor viewing positions simply isn't true. MOST entries that are powered these days are done so with batteries. Very, very few are powered via plug in. I've seen more aircraft,cars and sci-fi that are under their own power more more than i have seen them powered via extension cords Especially these days compared to say 15 years or more ago. So in closing as the numbers have shown you're making suggestions' for an issue that doesn't exist. Jim
  25. Dak As we have talked about it may not be possible to always put dio's up front . Local chapters are at the mercy of the venues as to where power is required. You say putting everything that needs power in one spot. So now you are asking judges to pull entries out of their categories (Not just Dio's) to put in one spot. You could in theory have a low or high number in one spot from a multitude of categories. That makes judging very difficult since now judges who are looking at one category would now have to go look for something that "May" be in the powered section? It becomes a logistical nightmare for judging. Its bad enough when we have to split out individual entries that don't physically fit into their categories as it is now, let alone add another caveat of power. Another consideration is where is the power drop in relation to the table layout? is it under the tables or is it in the middle of the isles? it may not be possible to always align table rows so that your power drops are under tables to avoid tripping hazards. You're not terrifying the villagers but there is alot to consider when making these kind of requests. I am sure most chapters who do host the convention/contest do they best they can with what they have to work with taking into consideration all aspects. Especially the chapters that have done it multiple times. Jim
×
×
  • Create New...