Jump to content

JClark

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    571
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by JClark

  1. On ‎7‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 6:36 AM, Dakimbrell said:

    This is a big part of our PR problem, although a bit different from what I originally posted about.

    Noel, you have not answered my question about Rembrandt's Night Watch and my diorama Capturing The Moment? Why is one art and the other not? (ignoring the size difference.) The diorama (as a whole) is not a kit. It is a composite of many elements to create a scene and tell a story. The idea is as original as the Night Watch and similar in concept.

    All the fore thought which goes into doing a model, is virtually the same as a that for a painting. Inspiration, choice of subject, research, and point of view. The final choice in how it is to be displayed is also an important element.

    Taken as a whole, Capturing The Moment is a grouping of many different elements. The placement of each element was carefully considered for visual effect in much the same way Rembrandt posed his figures if the Night Watch. Even if it is nothing but Found Art, it is original in concept. So, please explain WHY this is not an art form.

    No one can force you to be considered and artist. I am only pointing out by accepting what we do as art, we will appeal to many who at first thought we are only a group of children. The simple changing of a word here would make a big difference.

    Dak

    IMG_5167.JPG

    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

    fc889d2a1b23d7587ac6d5f4c69b32e0.jpg

    mpance01.jpg

  2. On ‎6‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 12:26 AM, noelsmith said:

    John Walker has just given in my opinion one of the most succinct views about percption of IPMS in general, members and non members attitudes, and how competition is viewed both from outside and inside this organisation.

    Dak's last post about modelles not joining IPMS because they are cheap and lazy is a bit strong. He is missing the point as there are many an excellent modeller out beyond IPMS who make models purely for enjoyment to their own style and not have to be hide bound by any competition rules. Also, there are people out there that cannot afford the latest big kit that is released. On my retirement pension you can count me amongst those folk, but I still remain a member since I joined back in 1974.

    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

  3. On ‎6‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 6:48 PM, Dakimbrell said:

    How realistic a technique is done is a question of accuracy. Which is what I am saying, the two often go hand in hand. We may not judge how many rivets are accurate, or the shade of paint, but a big glue glob along the wing root is both poor craftmanship AND (generally) not accurate. However some glue globs in some places might be. Fogging around the edges of some canopies might also be accurate.

    My point is the builder needs to let the judges know if this is done deliberately. Encouraging more people to fill out the comments box is something which could pay us back with happier entrants and better informed judges.

    Dak

    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

  4. On ‎6‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 9:36 AM, Dakimbrell said:

    Back on topic, I have been doing a little local research and found those who grinch the most about IPMS being too picky, etc, also don't make much effort to fill out the comments/note section on an entry form. One guy said he didn't understand what the box was for? When people do weird things, they need to note and explain them.

    We talk about only judging craftsmanship and not accuracy, but these things often over lap. We don't like seams and globs of glue because the are not accurate. I recently had some AMPS guys say the weathering was overdone on a model, yet all the weathering was based on specific photos which I should have included with the entry sheet. Or is heavy weathering poor craftsmanship?

    Dak

    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

  5. On ‎6‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 11:20 PM, noelsmith said:

    Interesting to see how much debate goes onto the IPMS USA forum about PR, judging and contest rules etc in different threads.

    Certainly do not see this amount of debate on the UK website!  Maybe us Brits are a bit  too laid  back to bother about lengthy debates on our forum. It would certainly be a bit more live!y if there was. I do not think we are any less passionate about our modelling however. But maybe our psyche is just a bit different from our American friends.

    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

  6. On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 7:26 PM, ghodges said:

    Personally, I like the skill level idea. I remember my very first contest of ANY kind...which just happened to be the 1978 IPMS Nationals in Atlanta. To say I was in over my head was an understatement!

    The skill level idea does open up other cans of worms.....

    1) The first "gut" reaction would be that we need to triple the categories.... needing one each for the levels of "novice", "intermediate", and "master". That's not really true of course, since you could design the novice AND master cats to be more general on the theory that those two will have the least amount of people in them by comparison.

    2) "The awards costs would be too much"....true, if you simply tripled the standard Nats awards....but why do we have to do that? IF (and I say IF) we were to go to 3 levels of competition, then you have 3 levels of awards: Certificates for the novices, ribbons for the intermediates, and medals/plaques/trophies (whatever) for the masters. This saves money AND also gives an incentive to move up in the rankings.

    3) "There'll be a resentment to being "ranked" by your building ability within IPMS"....could be....but then isn't there an un-official ranking among IPMSers now? Don't we all KNOW who the honchos are? And based on our own personalities, don't we either admire or resent their "celebrity" and ability to repeatedly win? And if IPMSUSA was to allow you to select the ranking you compete in to BEGIN with (until you rise by dent of winning), then how could you complain about having to compete on the level you chose?

    4) "Creating  a MASTER CLASS of builders will create resentment among the lesser members"...sort of a caveat to the above...and I think it's disproved by the many other societies that DO have "master modelers". They're generally admired and the desire to join THEIR ranks is the general reaction to being in their club, competition, and company.

    I'm not sure it could be done at this late date, but I do think the idea has some merit. If YOU think back on your decision to join your local club and IPMSUSA, I'm betting there was some intimidation you had to overcome. "I can't join them...THOSE guys are good and know what they're doing"! It's the same when it comes to contests....you have to overcome the intimidation of going up against "honchos" and learning to swim in the deep end as things are designed now. Adding skill levels lowers the level of intimidation, allowing newer members to start in the shallow end if they feel the need to build their confidence before stroking for deeper competitive waters.

     

    Gil :smiley16:

    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

  7. On ‎6‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 3:26 PM, Dakimbrell said:

    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.

    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 ;-)

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. Dak

             Ok. I'll give it a go as I try to wrap my head around your logic of 1)adding something to an OOB build and 2) only to ask for it to not be judged. I wonder why it would be done in the first place BUT with that said I would say that if it's done in other classes as you have shown with the photo's then I guess it would be allowed in A/C as well. But that is not my call.

           Now DAK , will you answer my question as to why you feel an OOB model wouldn't be competitive in a regular category when OOB builds openly competed in the past and won in regular categories 33% of the time?

     

    Jim

  11. DAK

        Certainly didn't want to come off as condescending. That was not my goal. Just to give you the insight you were looking for. If I did come across that way you have my apologies. I do have to ask, why do you think it wouldn't be competitive no where else?  it's when you make statements like that (See below) that lead me to believe that you think OOB is looked at and judged differently.

    32 minutes ago, Dakimbrell said:

    I think it will look good and based on my study of the OOB categories, I feel it would be competitive there, but no where else.

     

    Jim

  12. DAK

                You pay your money, you take your chances. Here is what I would recommend. Build the model to the best of your ability.You stated > (During that time I have learned there are some areas you don't compete in unless you are prepared to go all in) Well I would counter that you should always go all in if you are competing at the Nats. Don't ever think you can enter something and not put your best effort forward as you have no idea what will show up from year to year. What areas at the Nats don't you have to be prepared to go all in??? .  So add your figure, enter it in OOB. (IF) it gets moved into the regular category due to the addition of the figure then you are ready to compete there since you have built the model to the best of your ability. Always put your best effort forward. Don't assume because it doesn't have belts or other things added that it will be dismissed especially since you will have the instructions included with the entry and that your original intent was to enter it OOB. The team will see that and note it. My main point being don't assume anything one and two don't assume it's out of the running because it's an OOB build that got moved to a regular category. I have seen models stay in OOB with weapons added that weren't called for in the instructions. Unfortunately it's not all as black and white as I think we would all like it to be since every eventuality is impossible to plan for. So all anyone could really say is be ready for any eventuality. Or if you have quams about the distance then wait until the Nats are closer. That's what I had to do this year with 3 of my builds. I finally got the chance to enter two 32nd scale builds and a 350 ship dio. So there is my opinion, build it, bring it and show it "Sound familiar ? LOL"

     

    Jim

  13. DAK

               Unfortunately you may not find what you are looking for here. All we can do is only give our opinion. That and whatever a cup of coffee costs will get you said cup. It really is up to the class head judge and it may take some discussion amongst the judges and the class head to make the final call at the contest. So now it's really up to you if you want to bring it and take the chance. Yes as Nick said , where the entrant places the model shows where they want or think they should be. That is taken into account. And if I were a betting man I would wager that's "Probably " what would happen, it would stay put. BUT I nor any other judge here can't give you that info since we are not the ones making the call.

              What I do want to ask is why do you think your model wouldn't compete in a regular category? The same things are looked at in both. Just because extras are added doesn't mean yours or anyone else model wouldn't place. Many years ago when OOB's were in the regular categories ,over 33% of the time one of the place models was also a OOB build. Believe me, I did the math 😉 

     

    Jim

  14. Just when you think you have seen everything lol. It's a tweener. I remember one year there was a figure "Japanese ww2 pilot" standing beside his plane... (In a figure category) and I believe it placed. So if the figure judges can do it why not aircraft judges?  I see the logic of it adding to the model so that could put it into a regular category. You may say disregard the figure but Gil has a point. Although we have pressident with the Japanese pilot figure. We also had a 32nd Spitfire this year with a pilot standing by the tail in a regular category where the pilot wasn't judged. So where does this go? Oob A/c, regular A/c, diorama, or a figure category?. Its a good question but I have a feeling it probably would remain where the builder put it unless it blatently violates a rule. Just my 2 cents.

     

    Jim

  15. Double sided sword Ralph. Why become a member if you can get it all for free?  Membership has it's perks and admission to the seminars is one of them. Those seminar rooms cost money and for GA to take up seats that are being paid for by IPMS members who registered for the convention really isn't right. I always thought that was the rule for conventions.

     

    Jim

  16. Point of clarification. Access to the sky train is in the middle of terminal 4, it's not really by a security check point. Simply exit your security point and head towards the middle of the airport. If you have any questions look for the big information desks at one of the 4 exits from security. There are a ton of signs in BLUE that will lead you to the sky train. Once on the platform (Don't worry it's inside)  Take the train headed to EAST Economy parking. Stay on the train to the 44th street exit. That's where you will get off, buy your ticket for the west bound train to 3rd Street and Washington. Exit there and then head north a block and a half and the hotel will be on you left/west side. Hope this helps. My main point for posting was to look for the train in the middle of terminal 4. Now that's assuming you are coming in on Southwest or American. if you are coming in on Delta/Frontier/Jet Blue/ you will come in to terminal 3. simply look again for big blue signs that will direct you to the terminal 3 platform. Only one way to go from there since that's the end of the line. If arriving on United or Alaska that's in terminal 2 and you will have to walk to terminal 3 and again look for the big blue signs directing you up to the platform in terminal 3. Also check out www.skyharbor.com and scroll down to the sky train link.

     

    HTH

    Jim

     

  17. All

            The model entry forms are now up on the web site. Simply fill them out  and print. To locate these simply click the Forms tab on the left hand side of the main convention page www.ipmsusanationals2018.org  . Also please ask your respective clubs about category sponsorships to see if your club has done so. They go along way in covering costs associated with the Convention.

     

    Thanks

    Jim Clark

    2018 National Contest Chair

  18. Dr. Soup

    I am the contest chair for 2018. As of right now we have 11,free tables for display only. 4 were taken this weekend by a gentlemen that will be bringing every 72 scale piece of armor ever produced. We can certainly put out an announcement on the web site asking past Best of show winners to bring their past winners. I want to say the Virginia guys did something like this back in 14 for the 50th. So I will ask our wen master to put it out there. Thanks for the suggestion..

     

    Cheers

    Jim Clark

×
×
  • Create New...