erussell wrote: I wouldn't worry about not getting the nod of the judges. What do they know anyhow. I'm disappointed that 'degree of difficulty' isn't part of the judging criteria,
What one judge may like, another judge may not - the human element comes into play. Only way around this is to have multiple judges per category and this is impossible of course. I've been told too that often the judging results can be so close and only a point or two will determine the placings. I've tried and failed campaigning for some "degree of difficulty" factor to be including in the judging.
There are some very good points here and in other posts on this thread. Despite the best intentions of the system to make it objective, there is inevitably a subjective component to judging. Once you have tried it, you will have more appreciation for the difficulties.
The excellence and variety of their work is the reasons the civil / airliner etc community has had a pretty good reception at Expo. Another as yet unfulfilled expectation was the provision of some experienced modellers as judges. I don't mean experienced judges, I mean people like myself, a moderately experienced modeller who is a relative newcomer to judging. I pretty much guarantee that after a couple of judging sessions you will have a better appreciation of the system.
Addressing the degree of difficulty criterion, there is nowhere near the degree of expertise in the judging panel to assess it. For example, next model show, go through a category you are not particularly familiar with - maybe sci-fi, cars or armour - and rank the degree of difficulty in each entrant. I have as good a general knowledge as the next man and couldn't.
Thanks all of you for the kind words about Expo 2016 - we do our best to make it better each year.
Hi Ed
I totally agree with you in regard to judging and when I am a bit more "time rich" I do fully intend to become more involved in judging. Without a doubt it makes one a better competition modeller knowing what the judges look for. I tried and gave up on my quest for "degree of difficulty" to be part of the judging criteria - shot down in flames ages ago. Why I think this should be part of judging is the massive degree in quality between kit brands and types these days. Some kits fall together and others need a massive amount of work. As I see it right now, there is nothing that covers what has happened underneath the paintwork. Vac form and resin kits are way harder to build than the "Tamigawa" kits that largely fall together. Degree of difficulty is easily documented in the references supplied with the model. It's real easy to limit this so judges aren't confronted with a "builders bible" - just limit this reference material on the build to say 1 page with decent photos. As it stands right now, a modeller just needs buy a well engineered kit, give it a decent paint job and expect to be scored fully and maybe get a trophy. This process to me severely limits skill levels moving forward. Literally 30 seconds of searching found these links following.
http://www.amps-armor.org/ampssite/Docu ... tRules.pdf Here's another where "degree of difficulty is mentioned -
http://www.classicplastic.org/CPMC-flyer-2015.pdf Here's another -
http://www.5artsfest.com/images/Models% ... Draft3.pdf I just think given the technology of models these days, those that choose to build more difficult kits should not be penalised, rather praised to tackling greater challenges. We may as well just have a Hasegawa & Tamiya comp otherwise - don't get me wrong, I love these brilliantly engineered kits as well!
Degree of Difficulty could involve say no more than 5 points in the overall score. My fear in this not being part of the scoring is for those truly complex and difficult builds, modellers will not be bothered entering them and just build a easy kit knowing it will more likely get a favourable score far easier - see where I'm heading here? "Realism" does not cover degree of difficulty in the build I feel. I know I'm pissing in the wind here, but I also know that I am not the only modeller who feels this way. Point taken about the range of model classes that could make this criteria difficult. I think it is easy to document whether a model is OOB or has had a large amount of modification/detail added - a photo tells a thousand words. Have aircraft modellers judge aircraft models, armour modellers judge armour, Sci-Fi modellers judge Sci-Fi. As I've mentioned, degree of difficulty would only have a light weighting to separate a model that has fallen together in 10 hours versus another that has taken 100 hours of blood sweat and tears - both say with equivalent skill used in the overall paint job. For the "Open" categories, why should a modeller go the extra mile with difficult models, conversions, special decals, etc if all that is required is a good finish and paint job? Often the true genius lurks underneath. I really pong after all the urinating into wind! When will I learn?
