Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ok, so this guy and I are having a discussion about judging in the wake of him not getting the results he was looking for in his class. He was a nice guy and good, experienced modeler. He said to me that he did not understand why Jet A (no pun intended) did not beat Jet B when Jet A had so much more action than Jet B. He did not know that I judged the class, so I told him and then informed him that although Jet A was very nice, the judging team had seen a couple of slight finish issues. However, Jet B had a fantastically realistic finish with no noticeable flaws. He countered that Jet A was loaded with weps, had a superdetailed cockpit, etc., where as Jet B was built clean, cockpit closed, no weps, etc. I told him understood, but that my understanding of judging was that basic construction, alignment, quality of finish, and decals were priority criteria, and only if two models were equal in those respects, did you go onto the extra "action."

I told him that if we were judging the "whole model" concept, the results might have been different.

As it sits now, the more stuff you do to kit....the greater the challenge you take on, and the greater the risk of messing something up.

The simpler, the better, because we are looking for "flaws" before considering anything else.

Should the judging guidance be changed? Opinions please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting scenario. In the case you describe, I think that it would depend on just how egregious the finish was on Jet A. If it were only slightly less than Jet B, I actually would have been inclined to give the nod to Jet A. I have judged at the Nationals level, so I do understand the guidelines, and realize that "technically" the decision to award 1st to Jet B was the correct one. However, if they are that close, than I would begin to account for "level of difficulty". From what you describe, he did indeed add much more detail, but it sounds like he pulled it off without messing it up. That, in my opinion, should play into the final decision. That really is a tough one. Now, if Jet A's finish was noticeably inferior, than the decision was a good one. In regards to judging, I'll say that the results can be very head scratching. I've seen instances at three different Nats where you just had to wonder what the judges were on they made their decision. I'll be open and say that I was entered in one of them. The other two were mind-boggling decisions. It just happens to be what the judges see and look for on any given day. If there are a number of good models in the category, it really turns into a crap shoot for who's going to get what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa. dude, you are so throwing a bomb into the room...

This issue has come up a few times with a great deal of discussion.

I agree with your assessment on the judging process if you are doing an "IPMS contest" using the IPMS judging criteria.

Should we change the rules? Perhaps. I like the IPMS methodology since it is somewhat objective and judges apply similar criteria in examining a model . First priority is basic construction, then finish, then detailing, realism, authenticity and lastly "degree of difficulty". If we arbitrarialy ignore flaws in the basics for the "wow" factor then we do a dis-service to modelers who pay attention to the basics. However, if we eliminate a model that has a lot of added bells and whistles because of a flaw in basic construction we do a dis-service to those who would advance the art of modeling.

I still believe we need to focus on the basics. A truly skilled modeler will get the basics right and still add the extras to make the model really stand out. And we are trying to recognize genuine skill, not just a nice effort.

My $.02...

Jeff "Mongo" Cramer

Ok, so this guy and I are having a discussion about judging in the wake of him not getting the results he was looking for in his class. He was a nice guy and good, experienced modeler. He said to me that he did not understand why Jet A (no pun intended) did not beat Jet B when Jet A had so much more action than Jet B. He did not know that I judged the class, so I told him and then informed him that although Jet A was very nice, the judging team had seen a couple of slight finish issues. However, Jet B had a fantastically realistic finish with no noticeable flaws. He countered that Jet A was loaded with weps, had a superdetailed cockpit, etc., where as Jet B was built clean, cockpit closed, no weps, etc. I told him understood, but that my understanding of judging was that basic construction, alignment, quality of finish, and decals were priority criteria, and only if two models were equal in those respects, did you go onto the extra "action."

I told him that if we were judging the "whole model" concept, the results might have been different.

As it sits now, the more stuff you do to kit....the greater the challenge you take on, and the greater the risk of messing something up.

The simpler, the better, because we are looking for "flaws" before considering anything else.

Should the judging guidance be changed? Opinions please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit of the problem with the IPMS judging standards, no extra credit is given for doing more work, and it opens up more areas for flaws on the builders part, however this is criteria that is being used at this time. Now the question is, does 5 extra things done to a model outweigh one minor flaw, vs. a cleanly built model with no extras but no "WOW" factor. I'm pretty sure we don't want to start the "Whole model concept" and the winners being models that have every bit of aftermarket that you can buy on the kit, and excluding modelers who either can't afford, don't want to, or build a kit that doesn't have any aftermarket axailable for it. Maybe it's time to do what AMPS does and break it down to what the builders do to the model so various levels of detail compete against each other. This is how AMPS breaks it down http://www.amps-armor.org/ampssite/contestRules.aspx . That being said how " Slight" were the finish issues?

Ken :salute:

Link to post
Share on other sites
That being said how " Slight" were the finish issues?

Very slight.

Jet A was a flat painted jet with a decal that was supposed to represent a glossy painted area. The paint under the decal was slightly rough, but not much. The other part was the burner cans were not "metalized." It looked like regular metallic paint, and it also looked as though they might have been sprayed with dullcoat. Aside from that there was a minor glue mark. Jet B had no flaws that were noticed and had just an outstanding finish. It looked like a real jet sitting there. No deductions were noticed. However, as I said before, no action.

BTW, when I said the dude I was talking to did not like the result, it was not HIS build, but someone he knew.

As a bit of philosophy, I advised him pretty much to "just keep swimming" on don't sweat it. On to the next show. If a build is good, it will get recognized soon enough.

I have learned to just deal with whatever happens. I had a build that won a local and was nominated for best of show. I took the same build to another local and it finished 5th. Then I took it to Cocoa Beach and finished 3rd. Go figure. When you get to the top five or so entries in a heavily contested category, it can break out any number of different ways depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Edited by DutyCat
Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't really judge art. It's all a matter of opinion.

I really disagree with that statement. The basics are not subjective at all. I agree with the criteria for judging discussed at the beginning of this post. I don't do judging, but one of my friends does and we have spoken about it at great length.

Subjective calls come only long after the list of basics has been critiqued. Seams where there shouldn't be seams, no seams where there should be seams, rivets sanded off, bad wings roots, uneven wings, misaligned stabilizer, etc, etc. Probably 10 different things can go wrong with paint, finish and weathering.

For my friend, (Dave) for those of you that know him, aftermarket detail does come into play after the basics, but even that is not a big bonus unless your talking about scratch built detail.

Very little "opinion" is used in real judging.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The simpler, the better, because we are looking for "flaws" before considering anything else.

Should the judging guidance be changed? Opinions please.

No, quality over quantity. Put it this way.

If one built a million dollar 8000 Square foot house, with the walls not squared and level. Bad fit of the interior moldings, doors that did not shut right.

Then one built a 1000 Square foot beach house, took their time over many summers, walls squared and level. Fit of the interior moldings nice, square sharp edges no seams, doors shut when you blew at them.

Which of the two has better craftsmanship?

Certainty, not to me, the over priced Piece of crap, wasted materials and the land it sits on.

If one was to invest more time, money plus materials, would one think the craftsmanship should be better quality?

Build to your skill level. If your over your head, do not expect to take home the prize.

Edited by Wayne S
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a professor, I have had many conversations about grading papers. To me, model contest judging is like an instructor who grades papers by starting with a perfect score and then subtracting points for errors.

The way I grade, which is to start at 0 and then add points for getting things right, seems like it would reward a challenge. The more difficult the build, assuming you do it well, the more points you'd get.

:cheers:

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay,

You know, I am sorry but I know Exactly what model you are talking about. This model had Issues as I was told by some. My friend competed against it in Jax and his aircraft placed better than your friends. He is happy that it placed and it did better than he expected. But your friend has to learn from what ever mistake's if any where made on his aircraft and move on. Stop Bitching about why his aircraft did not place first and move on to the next model. Boo Hooing is not going to help make it better.Their are some out their that are trophy hunters and it is sounding like that this is the case. I am not a trophy hunter like some out their are. I go and compete yes but I do it to learn from others and the winners. If i winn great, if i don't oh well. I am their to help the club and to show off what i built.

My model did not place at all I thought I did okay, but I am not on this site Bitching and moaning about it because it did not place. I know that his aircraft with all the bells and whisles showing was the same one in Jax. I know he place fifth and others did better and he went off on the models by showing everyone around him why he was displeased about it. Your friend needs to stop beating the dead horse :deadhorse1: and move on to the next model.Their will be other shows.

Frank

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow Frank, :o

Did you read what Dutycat actually wrote? :rofl:

There are a number of interesting ideas raised in this thread. I like the anology of the two properties Wayne.

Mike, (milicari) do you think that it is possible to start from zero on judging a model and work up or are there many more variances compared to say, written work? Perhaps by deducting points, especially when the models being judged are likely to be to a very high standard for the final medal places, it might be easier and less time consuming?

{~thinking outloud~........It is possible that this topic could be discussed in a grown up way but I suspect that it will degenerate quickly like so many other judging topics.}

(I wonder how long it is before "that" F-15 is mentioned as an example....... :deadhorse1: )

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have participated in many contests in the past and a couple of Nationals. Judging is always a difficult task and I don't envy anyone who has been a judge. Someone always questions why this model did better than that one. That's why there has to be criteria for judging something.

Basic construction, paint, decals have to be the starters. From there, you can tackle difficulty, details, etc. If the basics aren't there, the rest really doesn't matter. I've seen some beautiful models not win because there were flaws. How many times have you seen a model plane look absolutely wonderful on top, only to turn it over and see a join line? This is why basics are so important and must come first.

I always looked at contests as fun, a learning experience, share with fellow modelers, see other modelers work, and to show off my work. Also, to hit the vendor's room with excitement and anticipation! I took criticism of my builds well, because there is always room for improvement. I questioned better builders for their techniques and for points on what I brought to the table. Never got my feelings hurt for losing, and never rubbed it in when I won. I don't understand all the weeping and gnashing of teeth at contests from some folks. If things are that tense for them, maybe they need to find a new hobby. As one old modeler told me a long time ago, "I build for myself, not for others or for contests." "If I win, I win. If not, then I enjoyed competing and sharing the hobby I so much enjoy." "Seeing other folks work and the comradery of it all." I build for my enjoyment first and foremost, the rest is just icing on the cake. It's the experience of the whole thing, not for a trophy or a plaque. It's nice to have your work recognized by your peers, but not necessary to enjoy the experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What really ticked me OFF, was that I showed up late on Sunday and missed the whole stupid thing!! I was angry....mad...and still had $200 in my pocket. What kind of contest do you show up late with $200 in your pocket, and everyone is done? Can you believe it?!!

BTW, made the wife was really happy that I still had the money in my wallet....what the heck is that all about?!!

-Jim

The Jax show last year I placed 2nd and Greg placed 3rd....what dumb dumb did that? I still say Greg slipped someone a thinner.....LOL!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Very slight.

Jet A was a flat painted jet with a decal that was supposed to represent a glossy painted area. The paint under the decal was slightly rough, but not much. The other part was the burner cans were not "metalized." It looked like regular metallic paint, and it also looked as though they might have been sprayed with dullcoat. Aside from that there was a minor glue mark. Jet B had no flaws that were noticed and had just an outstanding finish. It looked like a real jet sitting there. No deductions were noticed. However, as I said before, no action.

Knowing that there was a minor glue mark, I'd say you guys made the correct decision. The finish issue might have been iffy, but the glue mark is a definite oopsy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Frank, :o

Did you read what Dutycat actually wrote? :rofl:

There are a number of interesting ideas raised in this thread. I like the anology of the two properties Wayne.

Mike, (milicari) do you think that it is possible to start from zero on judging a model and work up or are there many more variances compared to say, written work? Perhaps by deducting points, especially when the models being judged are likely to be to a very high standard for the final medal places, it might be easier and less time consuming?

{~thinking outloud~........It is possible that this topic could be discussed in a grown up way but I suspect that it will degenerate quickly like so many other judging topics.}

(I wonder how long it is before "that" F-15 is mentioned as an example....... :deadhorse1: )

:cheers:

I did read what he wrote and I Know which model he is talking about. This gentleman was at the Jax Show. He made his complaints to about 25 diffrent people and asked them what they thought and then he proceeded tell those same persons what his gripes where about other peoples models right in front of others. I think that the judging is fine. Everyone judges diffrently and can find diffrent flaws in the subject being judged. The more doors that are opened and the more you load the model with gives you more oporunity to f***-up.

Case in point Jet A is built very nicely and has its flaps down bombs loaded, and radar being worked on and no pilot. Jet B is in the same senerio as Jet A but has the pilot and the radar nose is closed. Which one would you pick?

As a judge I would pick Jet B. Bomded ladden Aircraft do not have work performed on while waiting for take off.

It has noting to do with judgeing Critiria it has to do with the Set up of both aircraft.

Frank

Link to post
Share on other sites
Case in point Jet A is built very nicely and has its flaps down bombs loaded, and radar being worked on and no pilot. Jet B is in the same senerio as Jet A but has the pilot and the radar nose is closed. Which one would you pick?

As a judge I would pick Jet B. Bomded ladden Aircraft do not have work performed on while waiting for take off.

It has noting to do with judgeing Critiria it has to do with the Set up of both aircraft.

Frank

Frank, you pick what the rules/bible tells you to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I did read what he wrote and I Know which model he is talking about. This gentleman was at the Jax Show. He made his complaints to about 25 diffrent people and asked them what they thought and then he proceeded tell those same persons what his gripes where about other peoples models right in front of others. I think that the judging is fine. Everyone judges diffrently and can find diffrent flaws in the subject being judged. The more doors that are opened and the more you load the model with gives you more oporunity to f***-up.

Case in point Jet A is built very nicely and has its flaps down bombs loaded, and radar being worked on and no pilot. Jet B is in the same senerio as Jet A but has the pilot and the radar nose is closed. Which one would you pick?

As a judge I would pick Jet B. Bomded ladden Aircraft do not have work performed on while waiting for take off.

It has noting to do with judgeing Critiria it has to do with the Set up of both aircraft.

Frank

While agree with some of your points ("The more doors that are opened and the more you load the model with gives you more opportunity to f***-up." ) I disagree with others ("It has noting to do with judging criteria it has to do with the set up of both aircraft.")

Who cares about the set-up? You're judging on craftsmanship not whether it's accurate or not. Judging accuracy is subjective. As a judge you can only focus on how well the model is built. It's impossible for a judge to know every single aspect about every single subject. Just look at the forums here where people asked about A-4 slats being open on the ground. You can never for sure say that the way a model is depicted as being wrong because someone, somewhere will dig out documentation to prove the opposite. All you as a judge can do is judge on what you know regarding how well the model is built.

Judges are imperfect beings because they are human. I've had many a model of mine fail to place because judges missed obvious construction flaws on models they did place. Oh well, I got over it an moved on.

I've also judged a few contests and it never mattered how much resin or PE a guy used, or if he painted his plane pink (yes, I've seen that) with purple trim. The pink plane with a flawless paint job will always place over the accurate cammo scheme with crooked landing gear and badly applied PE.

The only way to have a level playing field in a contest is to grade on workmanship.

Jeff

Edited by jbrundt
Link to post
Share on other sites

These discussions about contest judging seem to come up on various forums relatively frequently, usually when someone feels like another model should have won. It seems to me that there are a few basic realities regarding this topic. Starting with the first one:

#1 – Someone is always going to be unhappy.

People can debate to the end of time about whether a particular judging is fair, or which system is better, but in the end someone is going to complain about judging. No system is perfect.

#2 – The debate about IPMS type judging vs. AMPS type (gold-silver-bronze) will always go on.

Whenever someone posts criticizing about judging at IMPS contests, people always reply touting about how much better the gold-silver-bronze type system is. Both types have their pros and cons, and this will never be settled. It just spawns more argument that has the potential for getting out of hand (I’ve seen a lot of threads on HS go bad and get pulled).

#3 – IPMS judging is not going to change, at least not as long as the same IPMS Head Judge is in place, and maybe not even afterwards.

It’s quite clear that the people (or person) in charge of IPMS judging are not interested in changing from their 1-2-3, basic constructions counts philosophy. Right or wrong, it’s not going to happen and the Head Judge has made that quite clear on a number of occasions. In fact, the President’s column in the latest IMPS Journal addressed this very topic and made clear that they believe the current system is the right way for IMPS contests.

Bottom line, this was an IMPS regional contest, hosted by an IMPS chapter, and so was judged under IPMS judging rules. If people don’t care for IMPS judging, then they shouldn’t enter IPMS contests. Not saying it’s right or wrong, just that it’s the way it is. Debating amongst ourselves in this forum may be entertaining, but I don’t think anything is going to change on how IPMS contests are judged.

Just my 2 cents.

Edited by Dave Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
These discussions about contest judging seem to come up on various forums relatively frequently, usually when someone feels like another model should have won. It seems to me that there are a few basic realities regarding this topic. Starting with the first one:

#1 – Someone is always going to be unhappy.

People can debate to the end of time about whether a particular judging is fair, or which system is better, but in the end someone is going to complain about judging. No system is perfect.

#2 – The debate about IPMS type judging vs. AMPS type (gold-silver-bronze) will always go on.

Whenever someone posts criticizing about judging at IMPS contests, people always reply touting about how much better the gold-silver-bronze type system is. Both types have their pros and cons, and this will never be settled. It just spawns more argument that has the potential for getting out of hand (I’ve seen a lot of threads on HS go bad and get pulled).

#3 – IPMS judging is not going to change, at least not as long as the same IPMS Head Judge is in place, and maybe not even afterwards.

It’s quite clear that the people (or person) in charge of IPMS judging are not interested in changing from their 1-2-3, basic constructions counts philosophy. Right or wrong, it’s not going to happen and the Head Judge has made that quite clear on a number of occasions. In fact, the President’s column in the latest IMPS Journal addressed this very topic and made clear that they believe the current system is the right way for IMPS contests.

Bottom line, this was an IMPS regional contest, hosted by an IMPS chapter, and so was judged under IPMS judging rules. If people don’t care for IMPS judging, then they shouldn’t enter IPMS contests. Not saying it’s right or wrong, just that it’s the way it is. Debating amongst ourselves in this forum may be entertaining, but I don’t think anything is going to change on how IPMS contests are judged.

Just my 2 cents.

All valid points, however I would like to clarify some points in my post as it refers to point #2 above, the only AMPS idea I was pointing to was that models with a similar level of detailing compete against one another.

I attended the AMPS judging seminar at last years Nats, and to be honest their style of jugding probably would only work for them, if you are going to award Gold Silver Bronze, you really have to judge every model, and that would be far to much work for most clubs.

Ken :bandhead2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the model that won. I built it. I am not sorry it won. It had no competition from any thing that sore loser brought to the table. And it should fair the same under any competition judging rules.

100_5713.jpg

100_5714.jpg

100_5716.jpg

100_5717.jpg

100_5718.jpg

Edited by TF51GREGWISE
Link to post
Share on other sites
As a judge I would pick Jet B. Bomded ladden Aircraft do not have work performed on while waiting for take off.

It has noting to do with judgeing Critiria it has to do with the Set up of both aircraft.

Frank

Interesting that you went there. I overheard someone mentioning points being taken off because "the real jet would not have these panels opened or be in this configuration with weapons loaded." To begin with, often the builder is trying to display the various features of an aircraft that you might not see at the same time...an F-18 speed brake open on deck with no pilot in the cockpit, for example. Or a full set of weps on the jet, but the engine removed and sitting on a stand nearby. To me these are artistic license items and allow you to show your building chops. The build should not be gigged for being operationally inaccurate.

There were a couple of instances this past weekend where certain judges had first hand knowledge about certain types of aircraft and had to be guided away from using that to gig a build. In my case, I was judging 1/48 multi-engine and there was an S-3 in the group. The build was fine, but I noted several finishing items that were not quite accurate and mentioned one of them(Senso/Tacco hatch coloring, the other being lack of Mach tape on the leading edges). Gil Hodges, who is one of our IPMS First Coast dudes, is an experienced, well known judge and contest coordinator. He walked by and kind heard what I was saying, stopped, and sort of hovered there(kinda like when your boss comes in your office and just watches you...you think twice about everything you are doing and saying. I thought about for a second, realized what I was doing, and retracted my remaining observations until the category had been judged.

Later on, I overheard the group that was judging 1/72 jet. I had a camo VFA-86 F-18 in there and one of the judges was an expert on F-18s. He was kinda ripping it, saying things like...this is incorrect, this transition is supposed to be smooth and was not corrected, but they way the kit is engineered, it is hard to fix.

I think Gil said something to him about it. Later, Gil and I were talking, and he said something to the effect of, "A judge is not supposed to use intimate knowledge of a subject to gig it. How many people are going to know as much about an S-3 as you, or as much about an F-18 as that other guy?" It made sense, but people who are "experts," or in some cases think they are, us that knowledge all the time at shows to gig builds. It is anything but a perfect science. Everyone does the best they can, but we all have our biases.

As a side note, when I had this same F-18 build up at Warner Robbins in October, one of the guys on the judging team said something like, "You know this F-18 is a nice build, but the thing is, the AB tailcode should be on the outside of the fins. I had no photos next to it to show, so he was using what knowledge he thought he knew to gig the build.

"It's not what you don't know, it's what you know that just ain't so."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...