|
Post by haggis on Nov 12, 2013 21:53:03 GMT
Wow, what an unbelievable best in show model. Quite simply that is the finest piece of modelling I have ever had the privilege to see. Just mind blowing!
Some of you may know I have some definite views on the competition. I will send my annual thank you to to Tony as once again he worked extremely hard in organising the comp. Cheers Tony. My only organisational debrief point would be to ask if there is anywhere bigger as it was a bit small for 1300+ models! Plus some extra lighting would really help. But I'm not sure what other spaces could be used, maybe a recce at some stage would be useful? Maybe that's the best place so we're stuck with it and have to make the best of it.
However, my main debrief point once again revolves around judging, I think even more so there were some really odd decisions. Here is what I said in another thread on Facebook...........
I judged this year and I have some thoughts. The reason it takes so long to judge is the categories, each has to be scored out of 10 and there are loads of them. Construction, decals and markings, painting, realism and originality of subject. There may be a few more but I forget. The total score is then compared and the gold, silver, bronze are awarded from that. Already you can probably see the flaws. It takes far too long for a start. Next, I had a T-55 in a few years ago, it came nowhere, the reason is it got 0 out of 10 for decals as it didn't have any, if I gave it a modest 7 out of 10 (as I can actually put decals on properly and got that from another AFV I entered that year) I would have got Gold. Next, WTAF has originality of subject got to do with it! That's far too subjective and has nothing to do with modelling skill rather than skill in choosing an obscure model to give it an advantage.
My solution to judging: Invite all gold winners to judge, some may say yes and slowly you build a credible team. Next, if you have to do it numerically (I'd prefer not to though) have 2 categories, one for construction, one for finishing. Find a bigger space and invest in some descent lighting. To be honest, just because someone has been doing it for years doesn't necessarily qualify them. I think this is proven by some of the odd results this year.
lastly, have a head judge in each category to act as a moderator. He would be there to correct any barking mad decisions! That bloke would have to have impeccable credentials, maybe even voted for rather than appointed or a previous best in class winner?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2013 22:38:53 GMT
The one thing that troubles me about previous winners being considered better judges, is the possibility of getting in a rut. Although build quality is indisputable, some other aspects are down to taste, and if someone wins because a deciding factor is that he happens to have the same tastes as a judge, then he will pass on that taste when he himself becomes a judge. It is the same principle that has held back industry and scientific thinking for centuries. But then, what do I know? I've only ever won one First, and never been a judge.
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Nov 13, 2013 0:10:37 GMT
So how would you improve things?
|
|
|
Post by fastcat on Nov 13, 2013 14:42:06 GMT
Maybe decal application should be included in with the marks for general standard of finish. Not everyone uses decals for markings these days with masks becoming more popular and some categories can feature anything from dozens of decals to none at all eg. Civilian vehicles covers anything from an Indy car plastered in decals to a road car, possibly with none.
With regards to the marking, surely it isn't essential to allocate marks to every entry. Why not do a quick selection and eliminate those that clearly aren't in the same league as the best on the table.... a sort of qualifying round. Do this until there are only five or six left and then start using a marking system to differentiate between the awards.
Maybe that's something for the Competition Secretary to have a look at for next year.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by fastcat on Nov 13, 2013 14:46:45 GMT
PS, Couldn't agree more about the "Best in Show". The clever thing was that it totally captured the spirit of a Bugatti. A real work of art. I went back to it several times and saw more each time. A phenomenal level of skill and artistry. Dave
|
|
|
Post by NoelSmith on Nov 13, 2013 18:37:02 GMT
Decal application should I feel be judged in 'overall finish'. I agree that gaining points simply because a model has a lot of decals applied e.g. a rally car plastered in decals opposed to a family saloon with just number plates automatically marks the saloon down if judged by the letter and therefore gives it no chance. Also, I think 'originality of subject' should be dropped altogether. Are we judging modelling ability or a competitors knack of choosing something unusual? If someone chooses to make a model of say a popular mark of Spitfire, they should not lose out simply because someone else chooses to model some obscure aircraft.
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Nov 13, 2013 19:10:09 GMT
You're not suggesting anything new here - the head judge concept is something we try to implement whenever we can (and do so in some categories). As Tony has stated in a previous thread, judges are generally former class winners so they do have a track record of quality modelling.
We are however beholden to the membership (UK and overseas) to volunteer their services to be judges - we cannot (will not) dragoon modellers into judging if they don't want to so we work with the volunteers we get.
From memory (it's a few years since I ran the comp), the five judging criteria are: construction, originality of subject, painting, decals/markings and overall finish (10 points for each - max possible = 50 points).
Regards, John
|
|
|
Post by andyargent on Nov 13, 2013 22:23:29 GMT
interesting thread.This was my first time judging at the nationals and i must say it is a bit of a task.I do agree with a previous post on doing a sweep to pick out obvious models that would not content for awards. I have been fortunate enough to win two years in a row as a category winner on dio,s as well as golds for my other entry,s. Therefore if others think my work is good enough to win then i would think i may know a bit on what is a good diorama and would be happy to judge that category as long as i didn't judge the cat i have entered.I.e if i entered figure diorama i would willingly judge armour vehicle diorama category which i did this year.I saw some very credible modellers in the judging hall this year judging like Jamie Haggo and Andy Brown,Dan Sanky and Kev smith along with Tony Horten so there were people that knew what they were on about. but I would hope most judges know there category to judge. I think the section on the judging ticket should read Overall finnish including decals if applied,that way you will not be penalised if it had no decals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2013 12:01:24 GMT
Haggis, I'm not a carpenter, but I can see when a chair leg is shorter than the other two. Oh, and when there's one missing. I couldn't mend it; I would expect a carpenter to do that.
There are two similar threads running here. Every contributor has put forward sensible points, and we are never going to all agree on everything. If there were a perfect solution, someone would have surely thought of it in the last 50 years. In that time, I doubt whether there have been any really serious disputes that haven't been resolved. I'm just going to sit back and enjoy the hobby.
|
|
|
Post by fastcat on Nov 14, 2013 12:54:58 GMT
Having thought about this for a while, how about doing away with the points system completely? It doesn't always pick the best model as the criteria used carry equal weighting and there may be other criteria to take into account such as difficulty and standard of kit ( look at the starting point for the very fine model of the Laird-Turner Meteor for instance). If it's possible (no idea how many judges are available but there was an excellent suggestion by Harriet on a different thread about creating a pool of judges) have the judges work in three's.
Work in sweeps, in eliminator sessions until only five or six models are left which allows for Gold, Silver and Bronze and several Commended awards, the latter number being flexible, depending upon entry number and quality of models submitted. Select the first three or four and each judge rank them until an agreement is reached, hence three judges (casting vote) although two could work together equally well.
The advantages are that it's flexible, can take into account any number of issues not catered for in fixed criteria and above all should be much faster in reaching a conclusion. It ought to be possible to complete a whole class in less than half an hour. Let's face it, if it's possible to choose a National Champion in this way surely it works just as well for a Class Winner. And it's a system that many one day events use anyway.
Yes, there will still be complaints and moans from disenchanted pot hunters but they can be treated in a similar fashion to the way they are dealt with now and that's always going to be a feature of any competition, regardless of the judging system.
Just my thoughts on the matter. Dave
|
|
|
Post by NoelSmith on Nov 14, 2013 16:40:22 GMT
Dave. To a certain extent I do agree with your comments about the points system. Any competent judges looking across the table for the first time can usually see straight away what is in contention. When I used to judge at SMW and had to use the points system I used to give the same marks for decal application and originality of subject to all the models I judged regardless. As I saw it the points system unfairly handicapped models with less decals. It also unfairly awarded points simply because a modeller chose to make an unusual subject and I considered that not to be judging the model at all but the modeller's choice. My personal judging was always firmly based on build quality first and foremost, and that encompassed overall build quality, finish and decal application combined as a whole. Accuracy was my second criteria, as my way of doing things was to judge the overall modeller's ability first. In fact there only needs to be 2 headings on any judging slip...1. Build Quality 2. Accuracy (Accuracy of course to a certain extent has to be subjective according to the subject matter if the model is purely fictitious. Or alternatively, if accurate information about a subject known to be real is unavailable and one has to make an educated guess.) I reckon that the judging could be speeded up no end if only 2 main criteria, Build Quality and Accuracy were used on the judging forms. Food for thought perhaps, as most judges pretty well know without having to wade through lots of headings that just slows the process down.
|
|
MikeC
Moderator
Too many SIGs for my own good!
Posts: 804
|
Post by MikeC on Nov 15, 2013 6:56:47 GMT
Going back to the 60s and the days of Alan Hall's conversions in Airfix Magazine, one was always reckoned a "true modeller" as opposed to a mere kit builder if you did some sort of conversion work rather than working straight from the box (or 2/- bag). The ultimate conversion I saw, and I seem to recall it was not AWH's but could be wrong, was an Airfix Puma into a Hind A - for those not familiar with helicopters two very different beasts.
Is this perhaps where the "originality of subject" crtierion comes from? In other words, a subject not available in kit form and thus requiring more work/skill. And thus, given the proliferation of subjects available as kits now compared to then, is it time to drop the "originality of subject" criterion?
|
|