Jump to content

Feedback from Judges


Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, JClark said:

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

You are right. It definitely is not just construction according to the rule book. The problem is that in the meeting you stated "construction first." That makes construction over finish which is your bias. Sorry, I was wrong about being elected. How did you get your title? Was it appointed by NCC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is where I come from. At one contest, I was involved with two other judges who took 2 hours to judge 15 models, in 3 categories, because they felt obligated to look at every little detail. In the end, the results were exactly the same as my choices when we started and I did an initial sweep of the entries. 3 of the models were eliminated because they belonged to one entrant who had multiple entries.

I do not say we should not look at construction and finish, but spending 15 minutes quibbling over a possible seam line on the drive shaft of an Opel Blitz truck which could only be seen with a flashlight, is a waste of time. At some point, just pick what you think is the best. There will always be someone who disagrees with the results.

Dak

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I would bet money I could the pick the top three winners of a category on the initial walk through 98% of the time. 
And with two other judges, 100%. Its not rocket science.

As I said, someone will always say it was wrong because of technique, technical, or historical accuracy.

Dak

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the band kept playing on!      Titanic 1912

Edited by noelsmith
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dak is right. It’s not rocket science. It is hard work, however, to obsessive- compulsively set aside any  bias you may have, ignore what you “like”  (or don’t like), and conscientiously and scrupulously apply the judging criteria to each entry-as a team. I would also submit that, perhaps, judging is not a good fit for anyone who thinks that they can pick the winners 98% of the time after the first walk through. That kind of “Pride ….goeth before destruction.” It also is a disservice to every entrant in the category and inevitably tempts one to ignore what is a clear mandate given every year to every judge- evaluate each entry carefully. Nick

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we have here is a failure to communicate. When I say “what you like”, I do not mean just picking the Ferrari because you prefer them to Corvettes, but rather having considered the basic things we look for like alignment, etc. 

What I feel is pointless is nit picking over whether a tiny bit of slivering on a decal is more critical than a almost invisible mold release mark on the inside of a wheel well door.

This nit picking has given IPMS it’s bad reputation and in the makes little difference as someone will say all the choices are wrong. 
 

Dak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

 

Edited by JClark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JClark said:

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

1 hour ago, JClark said:

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

 

 

 

The rulebook does not state anything about hierarchy of errors and what is valued above others. Your analogy would be great if our models could walk. 

 

"Throughout the judging process, the first and most important things for judges to consider are the basics. Typically, the judges' first cut will identify models that exhibit flaws in basic construction and finishing such as open seams or gaps, misaligned parts, glue marks, or poorly applied paint. Often, it is this ranking of the models on the basics that will determine the final outcome in the category being judged. Only when these basics don't allow for a clear-cut ranking do the judges begin to look deeper. (The next sections cover "the basics" for each of the major classes in IPMS competition.)"

This is taken from the rulebook and you will see that they reference all of the basics and not pointing towards alignment as the highest regard. I would challenge you to create a point system on where all of the errors rank. Are they all equal?

Just because it is listed first does not mean that it is the most important and only observed part. If that would be the case then we would only read Genesis.  

 

Maybe I am naïve.  How is an open system bias? Don't they use a specific rubric to be graded on a theoretical standard?

 

In a court of law, they do have laws for sure. There are things that are objective with that. What you fail to see is that the punishment can vary widely. Maybe a cool weathering job is considered a "first time offense" or maybe giving points based on military service. Hell, you could even plead insanity.  

The other part where the Judge in a court actually makes a good point is that a judge interprets the law. They look at precedent and other factors to weigh in. Granted, not exactly a criminal court but maybe legislative/constitutional. the rule book is like the constitution. The rules are set forth but interpretation changes from time to time and amendments are changed. 

Also, wasn't the Titanic build correctly are more of a series of unfortunate circumstances? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Clark,

First, I am not in favor of the AMPS system because I don’t think you can quantify creativity. 
 

Second, our free range system is still very dependent on personal opinions. I have often seen aircraft judges criticize armor models as too dirty or gig them for seams which are correctly done. Too often, judges look for hidden problems and miss the obvious. 

I simply don’t see any reason to spend a lot of time quibbling over some minor point because in the end someone will still complain the judges got it wrong.

While your argument has some merit on basic models, is doesn’t work as well on dioramas, some Sci-fi, and figures.

Dak

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

Maybe I am naïve.  How is an open system bias? Don't they use a specific rubric to be graded on a theoretical standard?

Why yes, yes they do. 

They are the same exact criteria that IPMS/USA uses--well, at least they are in most of the shows that use open judging that I am familiar with.

Repeat after me:  Straight, Square, Plumb, Fit, Finish.

R

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Ralph Nardone said:

They are the same exact criteria that IPMS/USA uses--well, at least they are in most of the shows that use open judging that I am familiar with.

Repeat after me:  Straight, Square, Plumb, Fit, Finish.

I concur. I just don't feel you can successfully quantify a creative activity using a score sheet. It works for some, but not for me. The times I participated in AMPS judging, I did not enjoy it and found it to regimented. I think the free range method of IPMS is superior.

And in the end, AMPS judges make mistakes too, and people complain about how the judges got it wrong.

Dak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the band still plays on regardless!I

Including me now I have read the thread a bit further!

Incidentally, am I missing something? I keep seeing open competition judging referred to in posts. What is open to you guys?

Telford is an open competition in as much that it is open to all IPMS members to apply to pre enter directly without branch/chapter eliminations taking place beforehand.

Also, reference was made by one poster here that a European show dismisses entries if a certain painting style has not been adopted. Please name that show and what evidence you have. Or are you just repeating rumour? If the show in question is a general model show and not a niche subject show that inference would simply be an impossibility.

In ANY show I would imagine that judges look at the basics of assembly first like alignment of parts, sink marks not filled in, mould seams left untreated, the list goes on. At least that is the criteria of any judge worth their salt to sort out the also rans first and foremost. Then and only then should the paint job and/or decal application be judged.

There is an old saying that a coat of paint covers a multitude of sins! Not so as a scale model is only as good as the preparation and that includes the assembly basics!

Edited by noelsmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open Judging is what many call the "Gold-Silver-Bronze" system, where each model is scored/evaluated (since some contests using this system don't do scores) individually, and multiple models in the same group can earn the same award, i.e., if the category is Armored Vehicles, Allied, 1935-1945 and there are 15 models in that group, all 15 can earn a medal. 

That's why I try to state "open judging".  As far as I know, all IPMS/USA shows other than the National Convention contest are "Opens", as in open to anyone who wants to enter.  The only obstacle to entering an IPMS/USA National Convention is membership--you must be an IPMS (any branch) member to enter.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALL judges make mistakes, and ALL evaluation/scoring systems have flaws. 

To me, the scoring system we use inherently scores creativity--we allow a fair bit of leeway on the final finish and degree of difficulty. 

It is but one reason that, while I prefer the scored systems, I'd just as soon as not have an exhibition-only show.  Bring what you've built and show it off.  No pressure.  No worries if a judge will ding you for that antenna that broke in transit.  No fretting over whether or not the shade of RLM 81 you used is "correct".  No heartburn if your model doesn't "win".

To me, anybody who shows off their work is a winner.  I have no pathological or physiological need for some trinket that says so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having work with several systems over the years, I haven’t found numerical scoring to be particularly effective and tends to take much  more time for no better results.

I call the IPMS method free range because the exchange of ideas and how we look at the entries is much more easy going and free. I dislike systems which dictate what and how you must examine on an entry.

In theory, with a point system, your model is fixed at a certain level. So, if it scored low at a regional, it can’t do better at a National.

In the IPMS system, past performance doesn’t matter. What placed third at a regional might take a first at a National because of the competition differences. But then, I am a gambler as well as a chess player.

in the end, someone will still say the results are wrong and the judges had no clue what they were doing.

Dak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ralph, thanks for coming back about how open competition is interpreted in the US.

Telford and your Nats are IPMS members only competition. Telford allows IPMS members from any nation to pre enter. Is it the same with your convention?

My understanding of open in this context is that IPMS members can enter these two competitions directly without having to go through branch/chapter eliminators beforehand.

We used to run eliminators at local UK branch level a number of years ago but it was dropped in favour of direct entry for a number of reasons.

Local shows in the UK tend to be open competitions for any visitor to enter on the day. I guess the US is similar at local level.

From what I understand is that GSB gets referred to as open in as much that there is more latitude to present more awards to models reaching high set points gradings as opposed to the first past the post 123 system. There are pros and cons for both that have been discussed ad infinitum in other threads however.

 

Edited by noelsmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the IPMS/USA National Convention contest is open to all branches of IPMS with a valid membership card.  In Columbia in 2016, we had folks from several other IPMS branches (UK, Argentina, Canada, etc.).

Judging format is all a matter of preference, but the overriding question is this: what is the goal of the contest?  If it is to pick "winners" and "losers", the system IPMS/USA uses does that quite well--as it should, it has been in use for decades.  

If, however, the goal is to recognize more modelers for their work and offer some insight as to why it placed where it did, the open judging systems are designed to do just that.

In recent years, some modelers have been asking for more.  So, enter the open judging arguments.  Whether they participated in one of the handful of IPMS/USA local shows that use a form of open judging, or experienced it with another organization, they decided it is the "better" method.  As I said, "better" can only be applied after one summarizes the end goal for the contest...and IPMS/USA wants to keep choosing "winners" and "losers"

And as I've also said for years, I prefer an exhibition--no contest, no judges, just put out your models and show them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

Yes, the IPMS/USA National Convention contest is open to all branches of IPMS with a valid membership card.  In Columbia in 2016, we had folks from several other IPMS branches (UK, Argentina, Canada, etc.).

Judging format is all a matter of preference, but the overriding question is this: what is the goal of the contest?  If it is to pick "winners" and "losers", the system IPMS/USA uses does that quite well--as it should, it has been in use for decades.  

If, however, the goal is to recognize more modelers for their work and offer some insight as to why it placed where it did, the open judging systems are designed to do just that.

In recent years, some modelers have been asking for more.  So, enter the open judging arguments.  Whether they participated in one of the handful of IPMS/USA local shows that use a form of open judging, or experienced it with another organization, they decided it is the "better" method.  As I said, "better" can only be applied after one summarizes the end goal for the contest...and IPMS/USA wants to keep choosing "winners" and "losers"

And as I've also said for years, I prefer an exhibition--no contest, no judges, just put out your models and show them off.

This is very true. According to the current NCC, the main goal of contests is to have one and be profitable. What are some better goals of a contest?

  • Pick winners and losers. Do we need to re-evaluate what makes a model a winner?
  • growing the hobby. Can the way a contest is ran entice more members?
  • improve the skills of the contestants. Rather than having contestants leave not knowing why they are "losers," we could do better to provide feedback.
  • Be the most prestigious contest in the nation. how do we make winning the contest have more value? Many people do not care about winning. 

What are some other noteworthy goals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As noted, people care about winning. If not, no one would bet on the Supper Bowl or the World Cup.

No one actually loses in this contest. What happens is is many don’t win. There is a difference. No matter how good you are, there will be someone who is just a tad better.

In the end, it comes down to what the judges liked about a model more than what they didn’t like.

And someone will still say they got it wrong.

Dak

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Dakimbrell said:

As noted, people care about winning. If not, no one would bet on the Supper Bowl or the World Cup.

No one actually loses in this contest. What happens is is many don’t win. There is a difference. No matter how good you are, there will be someone who is just a tad better.

In the end, it comes down to what the judges liked about a model more than what they didn’t like.

And someone will still say they got it wrong.

Dak

From Merriam-Webster:

Contest: A struggle for superiority or victory.

Victory:

1 : the overcoming of an enemy or antagonist

2 : achievement of mastery or success in a struggle or endeavor against odds or difficulties

Lose: to fail to win (a game, contest, etc.)

Look, I understand the gist of all this.  Yes, nobody really "loses" at a model show--but I know several individuals who had to be "talked down from the ledge" when they didn't win at the Nationals.  To many, the opposite of winning is losing.  They didn't win the big shiny, therefore, they lost.  The fact that they weren't told *why* they lost is what grated with them.  One of them never "got it", even when we started having hotwash sessions at meetings before shows to point out things that needed attention.  The other ones took what we showed them, and they learned. 

Note that they didn't learn through osmosis, other modelers had to help them.  A modeler without a local club is further handicapped, but if IPMS/USA would do something official to help, it might be a good idea.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first, it is not so much why one didn’t win as why another did win. I have seen many winners I personally thought were inferior to one that didn’t. I can see numerous flaws on these “winners”, yet a group of judges missed or ignored them.

I mean exactly what I posted. It is not so much losing as not winning. You can lose a race because you aren’t fast enough, but this isn’t a race as much as a creative activity. Your model might not win at contest A but takes a 1st at contest B. At our level, it is a case many very good models with a few (perhaps) exceptional models.

In this day and time, there are hundreds of magazines, books, and websites, etc where a modeler can go for information. A few scribbled sentences on an entry form aren’t really going to be much help.

I have no sympathy for those who have to be talked off the ledge. You pick yourself up, dust off, and come back again. Those who just give up from one defeat truly are losers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...