Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[Colin Bishop]

Well, I'm sorry you've had a bad experience but don't try to tar everyone else with the same brush. You obviously have a personal axe to grind here and this seems to have coloured your contributions to the topic. Just how do you think taking peoples' disabilities into account by applying positive discrimination would possibly work in practice? Do you give them 10 extra points for suffering from Parkinson's, 5 for being blind in one eye and 15 for being paraplegic? This is just something out of Alice in Wonderland - "Everyone has won and all shall have prizes". You appear to be advocating a handicap system (literally!) How could you possibly make it work? What rules would you use?

Bear in mind that in most cases, Judges are just fellow modellers who have usually been press ganged into doing the job and probably don't all that much enjoy it. I don't know what the situation was at Blackpool but in many competitions it's expected that the entrant will have supplied the judges with documentation and photos on how the model was built which is of great help since, as you quite rightly say, judges can't be experts on everything.

Colin

[Martin (Admin)]

Topic renamed.

[das boot]

Blimey...steady there lads. As Bernard Bresslaw used to say..."I only arsked..."


Rich

[toesupwa]

I guess there are two 'stages' of weathering..

1/ As new, straight out of the dock.
2/ As a working boat.

I suppose there are stages in between too...

Some boats never get weathered as the crew / company are forever re painting etc... but then there are other boats that just get hammered..

[Bowwave]

Well, I'm sorry you've had a bad experience but don't try to tar everyone else with the same brush. You obviously have a personal axe to grind here and this seems to have coloured your contributions to the topic. Just how do you think taking peoples' disabilities into account by applying positive discrimination would possibly work in practice? Do you give them 10 extra points for suffering from Parkinson's, 5 for being blind in one eye and 15 for being paraplegic? This is just something out of Alice in Wonderland - "Everyone has won and all shall have prizes". You appear to be advocating a handicap system (literally!) How could you possibly make it work? What rules would you use?

Bear in mind that in most cases, Judges are just fellow modellers who have usually been press ganged into doing the job and probably don't all that much enjoy it. I don't know what the situation was at Blackpool but in many competitions it's expected that the entrant will have supplied the judges with documentation and photos on how the model was built which is of great help since, as you quite rightly say, judges can't be experts on everything.

Colin

This is a very valid point,   it would be difficult and perhaps even wrong to single a modeler out on the grounds of their disability to be given preferential treatment, were would you draw the line. Judging  is a subjective task and yes I think judges must have a certain  gravity to certain types of vessels that’s only natural. However  if an individual modeler wished his or her model to be judged then that is  their prerogative but it is very useful  to make the judges life less subjective if as Colin quite rightly points out more information{ photos}  regarding the full size vessel / method of construction of the model and plans in small format is made available ,  Judges do not and can't know it all. it’s also a rewarding task in its self  to compile this information  and it could be seen as a distinct  part of building  the model and not as an  after thought or even a chore. After all many modellers make use of this information in the first place.
Bowwave

[Bowwave]

Bowwave,
Your last pic is exactly the point I was making,
Yes she is clean and tidy, but look just a little closer.
There is discolouration fwd of the door and on the pipe above.
The IMO registration number isn't painted like a sign.
I am not criticising the vessel, she is well kept, just raising my point.

Bob

Bob you are quite right and well observed. But I qualified my comments with the word "almost"  I agree no ship is ever 100% clean but then again the point I was making was that it is OK to present a model in a clean fashion , it doesn't have to be weathered  or made to look unkempt even if many ships are in fact  exactly that .
Bowwave

[nhp651]

No axe to grind, Colin, but I do think that the judging system on ALL shows should be of a standardised form, so that modellers know what they are aiming at, and at present there isn't.
However I really am not bearing a grudge  to anyone, as (as I said) I don't bother to show for competition, just for fun these days, and as I said it is nothing personal against you so please don't take it as a personal slight.
Just thought I'd stir things up a little for christmas and get things heated up.
Neil.

[Colin Bishop]

Neil, I certainly don't disagree that judging arrangements can be improved. I wouldn't want them all to be standardised as this would mean that the same boats would always get to win. I favour different types of competition, some just on the table, others with a combination of on the water and table marks etc. so that there is something to appeal to everyone during the year. What I'm sure you will agree with however is that ALL competitions should make it clear in advance just what the rules and criteria are and how they are going to be applied. Then if you know the lady mayor is going to be judging you can take a chance and put a bare chested Action Man (no, not you Dave  ) at the helm.

Colin

[Bunkerbarge]

...and as for getting things heated up for Christmas how about starting an argument at home.  That way you can deal with the consequences yourself rather than us.


Just back to one of the very early posts on weathering regarding brush painting.  I think it all comes down to scale and what you would expect to see at that scale.  A 1/96th warship would almost certainly be better sprayed but an old 1/12th scale work boat would almost certainly be better brush painted.  I agree that the wrong size brush can make things worse, which is exactly why I try to use a brush of an appropriate size for the scale.  On a 1/12th scale boat a flat brush of approximately 10mm is not far off a 6" brush in real terms so would give quite a realistic effect.  I know it will take a long time to paint but you can't beat the resultant realistic surface effect.

[DickyD]

Just noticed this topic.

Great, an argument and I didnt start it.

Must have been to busy enjoying my hobby.

[Bowwave]

What a contrast An outlandish paint job for a new ship

But even the model building  industry can be down to earth or water  in portraying reality of finish.

Bowwave

[nhp651]

I  agree with you, Colin about the criteria for judging, and who is judging to be made public to the exhibitors before hand, and possiblt the judges have changed for the better, as the years have gone on, but I have the same nagging feeling about finishings.
what would judges make of a model presented to them in the "raw" so to speak.
Say for instance, I am a superb modeller with fantastic skills but am absolutely dyer at painting!
Do I leave the model as an unpainted item to show off the technical side of my building skills and earn points for showing such skills,or possibly loose points because the model is presented in an unfinished state, or do I totally blow it all by making an appalling mess of a beautifully executed model by painting it because I know I am lousy at painting.
After all, people have certain skills: some can build, and some can paint. some can do both and some can not.
This scenario isn't strange.....you only have to look at Model shipwrights and their "admiralty dock side" type models which are left in a "virgin" wood state.
None of them are painted, and "finished" yet they constantly gain praise and appraisal for their technical workmanship.
How ever put such a model  or any "virgin" model for that matter, in front of the Lord Mayor or any  member of the public, and they would say that it isn't finished, and yet put a similar model but poorly built, but painted, to such people and the painted one would win, because it has been painted and looks pretty, although of poorer technical quality.
And that is why I think such vaguries should be sorted, and criteria be made public, with a standardised judging system.That doesn't meen that the same boats win every time.

[Colin Bishop]

Neil,

My belief is that a good modelmaker is a "rounded" person in terms of skills. Somebody who can make a superb model in constructional terms should be equally capable of painting the thing. It's just another skill to be learned, not something to be treated as " I could never do that". If you are lousy at painting then do something about it, it's not rocket science. Even Stavros can do it and he's only had two centuries of experience. 

Admiralty type models are "unfinished" because that's what Admiralty type models are, not because the builder can't paint it - they aren't supposed to be painted. The one below was built in the 1750's - it's a traditional way to build models of this type which modern modelmakers follow.

Models should be judged according to their particular circumstances and historical precedent where appropriate. What is appropriate for a static model is not necessarily the right method for a working one.

Colin

[Bowwave]

Colin  a conundrum  , what would be the right course if two models were of the same vessel but  one was  static  and  one working. presumably they would have to be juged the same  if they were in the same judging category ? Just a thought.
Bowwave 

[Bunkerbarge]

I think one of the biggest problems with Judging is not just that it is very subjective and what pleases one judge doesn't please another but more importantly the varying levels of dedication of the judges.  At a very large show only this year I observed a judge looking at a model and declaring it a kit because it had a fibre glass hull.  If he had bothered to read the book that was sat in front of it he would have known that it was made from a scratch built plug and was a completely scratch built model.

I have every confidence in Colin's ability to decide from an all round perspective what model is of a higher merit should be scored higher but until you get a degree of consistency in judges it will always remain a minefield.  Maybe tighter rules would help but then they have to be applied across the country at all shows and I can never see that happening.

Maybe the categories are not effective enough and rather than the old "Kit" and Scratch Built" we should be looking at "Technical Content", "Finish", "Static", "Working" and "Historical Accuracy" as more relevent criteria.

There again of course the judges would need to be a bit smarter   (Sorry Colin, couldn't resist!)

[Colin Bishop]

That would depend upon the judging criteria of the competition Bowwave. However, in a comparable situation in the ME Exhibition, if you had two kits of equal external quality and one featured lots of working features such as lighting, smoke unit, operating crane, and various other electronic effects then it would have the edge over the other one as more work had gone into it.

To explain a bit further: the headings under which a model in the Kit Class is judged are:

Realism/Effect - If you stand back from the model does it look realistic or has the builder achieved the effect they were aiming for?
Complexity - How complex was it to construct the model? Lots of working features will gain additional points.
Detail/Workmanship - How well has the model been built in terms of the builder's skill? This also recognises the quantity of work that has gone into the model.
Finish - This is particularly important for a kit as the manufacturer will have done the design work, provided the materials and given instructions on the building sequence so that the builder can most add value by the standard of finish.
Presentation and Documents - Has the model just been dumped on the table or does it have a nice stand, a glass case even? Has the builder provided documentary evidence of the build, particularly where the original kit has been enhanced in various ways or even used to depict a sister ship? It is also important if internal features have been incorporated as judges are not in the business of wrenching the top off a model to see what's inside!
Bonus - Not often used but is intended to recognise something out of the ordinary such as the installation of a camera providing telemetry to the shoreside operator etc.

Colin

[ian kennedy]

As an MPBA judge of 14+ years service at regional and national level, I think some of the comments here are valid but my understanding as a model maker is this...

If you present your model to be judged at an event competitively then it is in your own interest to include documented evidence to assist the judge in making balanced decisions, for example photo's of deck planking being laid, working features, construction methods etc

Text and photographic documentation explaining the period and condition that the model is presented in eg; as built or modified/altered in later life.

Also as Colin has said we as judges are all human and not everyone knows everything, We do this voluntarily to give something back to the hobby. Personally I know more about warships than civilian vessels and this is where the model makers documentation assists the judge in understanding the model prototype and its various features

Paint finish is as Colin states, always best represented as in new condition, I have personally seen some poor paint jobs covered up by poorly applied weathering techniques eg; real rust granules  blobbed onto a 1/96th scale warship....unfortunately the modeller hadn't taken into account the particle size of the rust and if the vessel were full size then they would be as large as footballs.

Ian

[nhp651]

Thankyou, Bunkerbarge, for actually understanding my arguments, and the problems I have had in accepting judges decisions throughout the years.(not on my models though as I haven't exhibited for 22 years, but on others that I have seen at shows) so it is not a personal grudge but rather a fight for the "underdog" really.
I remember on one occasion a guy submitting a static waterline model of a cargo liner( forget the name of the ship) with her derricks stowed and derigged, and her anchor with studded chain showing barely above the water line.
He was harshly judged because the judge subjectively misjudged the ship to be incorrectly rigged( or not finished was his words) and the anchor should have been shown tightly set in it's hawse hole.
The builder pointed out that she was depicted as coming onto station ready to let go her anchor and that the derricks were as she would have been stowed whilst on passage, and he knew this, as he had modelled her as seen and sailed on.
The judge would not have any of it, and refused to listen to more experienced knowledge.
As for your comments, Colin about being an all rounder, sadly that doesn't wash I'm afraid.
I must point out now that I have no problems with my painting or modelling skills, but am putting over these points so that we CAN change the lott of the modeller so that those new to the hobby do have a fair chance in shows.
Those modellers are many that are technically decent, but haven't mastered all the aspects that you are suggesting they do before they exhibit their prides and joy, and the inconsistant level of judging at shows only goes to cause trouble, arguments and resentment amongst modellers.
I do think it is a little niave of you to think that every one is , or should be, of a competent level at all aspects of modelling before they exhibit.
I am a good modeller, but there are certain areas that I would never touch,( nor wish to touch) that others have no problems with at all..weathering being one of them.
That doesn't mean to say that I an not a good all round modeller or have to accept that a judge's decision is right, and as Bunkerbarge says in his last post, there are aspects of judging that need to, and should be changed, in the more important of our exhibitions, so that there is a level playing field, and not a subjective view because one judge prefers one model over another, and therefore uses flimsy excuses to mark  the other  down.
This is, and has been, a problem as long as I have been building models, and probably longer, and sadly the majority has absolutely NO  say over what  the minority decides, but at least it is worth thinking about and putting a case forward for change.

[garston1]

I've been a static judge fo about ten years now, and as far as I can see there's no real right or wrong in painting a model. But if you were to judge most of them some people wouldn't give a second look. What's not realised is, that something like a WW2 Merchant ship would probably go for four or five years without a proper paint, and usually only painted in what was to hand, but mainly red oxide or rust!. Warships out on Convoy duty would sometimes have all their paint stripped to their pre war colours, so there would be various shades of grey. Models painted this way would also have to be precise so as not to make them to over the top. You have to know where to stop. But as always, some rivet counting judges still wouldn't give them a second look. They don't actually know the work that goes into making them 'wrecks'. Below is my Drifter, never won anything, and wouldn't expect it to, rivets not straight, knots in rigging etc, but i still think it's the nicest on the lake (but that's me)

[Colin Bishop]

Yes Neil, but you are not actually proposing a practical solution, just bemoaning the fact that judging is frequently inconsistent which is indubitably true. The MPBA in particular have attempted to address this with their judging seminars over the years and with some success but however good your judges are, and however carefully the rules are framed, if you enter a model where one of the major features, be it workmanship, finish or whatever, is below standard then it will, and should, be marked down against a model which is of a higher quality. In a competition of any sort you don't get marks for trying. You get them for achievement. Anyone who is not prepared to accept that basic principle should save themselves a lot of grief and simply not enter.

I would dearly love to see overall higher standards of judging, but judges are appointed by clubs, show organisers and Uncle Tom Cobley and all. We can exercise no control over this except to boycott those competitions which are badly run and maybe, through discussions like this, encourage more debate and hopefully higher standards.

Colin

P.S. Great looking model Garston - very realistic 10/10 in my book!

[Reade Models]

I have been reading this thread with great interest.

I have no experience of judging whatsoever, either as a judge or a modeller, and I'm curious to know just how subjective this aspect of the hobby is?

Are there set rules and criteria for judging, or is it all down to the whim of the guy with the clip-board?  What are the classes of entry in the various branches of the hobby?

Can any of you with the necessary background cast a little light on this subject please?

Malc

Garston's drifter is absolutely stunning...

[Bowwave]

I've noted at many shows were there is a competitive element that few modelers entering statically judged events support their work with any documentation. So it could be argued that the judges are in fact at a disadvantage from the start. How can a judge confirm that a model is in fact what it is meant to be or what the owner / builder says it  is on a display slip? How do you prove it? If information was presented then much of the speculation, guesswork would be removed and the judge can go on to judge the merits of the build.
Bowwave

[nhp651]

sadly, Colin. i don't have a solution, mainly because i am not a judge, and am therefore not privvy to the ircles in which you operate.
Also i am not bemoaning the judges pursee', but the inconistancy of the remit and overall standard which affects the general modeller.
as to your question, bowwave.
sometimes there is prescious little information about a ship to be modeled except maybe a scanty photo and basic set of plans to go on.

[Colin Bishop]

Malc, As R/C Scale Secretary of the MPBA over 25 years ago I spent two years of my life assisting with the formulation of the then R/C scale judging rules. It was a very difficult job for all involved although we did eventually get a consensus. I think that, in some respects, things have gone downhill since then with everybody doing their own thing, sometimes successfully but often not. people assume that the subject is simple but it isn't and there is disappointment when things don't go the way they hoped and there is friction as you will have seen from this topic. To run a decent competition you need to have a well thought out and tested set of rules and a bunch of very competent people to enforce them. Unfortunately, in too many cases one or both elements are missing and hence the angst and frustration that you are seeing on this topic.

As a result, many events just settle for a general sail round the pond which is in some respects rather boring. I like to have a testing course to negotiate although i don't care whether I win or not. There are still some clubs which put an effort into their sailing courses but not as many as of yore. I also detect a degree of resentment against people who build top class models which never used to be evident in the "old days". Maybe we have just lapsed into a "mediocrity" culture!

Colin

[Colin Bishop]

Neil, I am not a "Judge". Just a modeller who judges on some occasions like many others. There are no exclusive "circles" in which we operate, no modelling Freemasonry. What you see is what you get!

Colin