Some constructive points there guys. As will have been apparent from my own posts, I freely acknowledge that there are varying standards in judging at different events and that it would be desirable to see some degree of improvement in certain areas! However, there have also been some statements that, from my own experience, are simply not correct and I've not felt able to let these pass.
Back in the late 70s and 80s the scale scene was much more competitive than it is today with MPBA "qualifiers" being held up and down the Country and you did have to have some consistent success to get into the final. (Now you can just enter on the day...) The standard format was that all boats would get two runs around a steering course and be judged for realism on the water. The Exact scale class would also be judged on the table. All the participating clubs were using the same set of rules so there was a reasonably consistent approach between events. At the best ones, where the organisation was top notch you could have a really good day out. Things have changed since then as people have moved away from the competitive events in favour of free sailing ones with the result that, where there is an attached competition, it can take almost any shape or form and is frequently not thought through very well. I barely remember my article that Bowwave mentions (any idea when it was?) but I think that it is a good idea to perhaps give this subject another airing in Model Boats which would reach a wider audience than this topic will. I will sound out Paul Freshney to see what he thinks. Although there have been modifications in the years since I was involved in drafting them I still think the MPBA Scale Judging rules provide an excellent model(!) for others to be encouraged to follow, at least in principle, if not in some of the detailed practice which may not be appropriate in a "Show" environment.
With regard to Neil's comments concerning Commander Alwyn Greenhalgh I remember him very well as we were on the MEE Judging Panel together for some years but he stepped down many years ago so those comments, if reported correctly, are no longer true. However, it would appear that he was making the assumption that the builder would get all aspects of the model to generally the same standard and not that it would be treated to a poor standard of finish!
It is also not true that part finished models are not judged. We have had one or two instances in recent years when a partially complete model has been entered but in one case it was an 18th century naval vessel shown unrigged. Since such models are commonly left unrigged anyway, as per Admiralty Board practice, it was valid to judge it in that condition. However, because the builder made no bones about it being incomplete as he intended to add the rigging it was awarded a certificate of Commendation only in the circumstances to acknowledge the work put into it to date. The parts of the model on show were in fact complete - it just lacked the masts and rigging which can be considered optional on a "Board" type model. OK, some people might think this was a bit of a compromise but I thought it was an appropriate one. No other entrants lost out in any way by doing this.
One further point which has not been raised here so far is that there are two types of competition; the one where the judges are invited to select the "best" model and those like the MEE where models are marked against an absolute standard whereby more than one medal can be awarded if there are entries of a sufficient standard. This is why you frequently see more than one Silver or Bronze in a class although multiple Golds are much rarer although not unknown. I think it is often the first type of competition which gives rise to problems as the models are being judged directly against each other rather than against an absolute standard.
Colin
Author
Topic: Why? ( Weathering, paint finish and judging models. ) (Read 40538 times)