Nationals

[Ronv]

Models these days are mixed media......plastic, resin, photo etch, cloth, wood just to name a few.

Should name be changed to International Modelers Society  IMS?? Good question for the IPMS committee. I don't have a preference either way.

RonV

[Herk]

I sent an email to the National Contest Committee to recommend some new categories (moving ships whose main construction medium is wood to their own separate category, similar to what they have at the Richmond Contest) and also asking why there is no scoring system to back up the selections of first, second, or third, or best of show etc. I'll let you guys know if I get a reply.
RonV

build
Good idea!  I am sure those that build the "plank on plank" wooden ships will say it takes a different skill set for that type build vice the putting two halves of a hull together with another piece or two of plastic on top for a deck.  I remember my 1/72 scale Old Ironsides build - the rigging alone can be a real challenge.
I do have one question for the senior (not by age!) club members on this subject - if we are the International PLASTIC Modelers Society, why are we having a different building medium (wood) included in the contests.  If we are being magnanimous to these modelers by giving them a venue to display their creations, the creation of a separate category makes sense not only in the judging between wood & plastic but it helps highlight the construction skills for this medium.
Comments???
Regards to all,
Steve

[Ronv]

I sent an email to the National Contest Committee to recommend some new categories (moving ships whose main construction medium is wood to their own separate category, similar to what they have at the Richmond Contest) and also asking why there is no scoring system to back up the selections of first, second, or third, or best of show etc. I'll let you guys know if I get a reply.
RonV

[Herk]

Yeah thats okay, always open to opinions! I read through the judging criteria for the nationals committee and they clearly state that they don't have a scoring system since this is art. But I still think a scoring system is necessary just to in the least add weight to the decision of who gets First, Second, or Third. Data is King!
Thanks
RonV

This is where using a "two tier" judging system could be part of the answer for the future.  A technical judging of the entry using the IPMS core standards on a specific numerical scale (1-5 or 1-10).  This would then be combined with a subjective judging of the entry as an "art form".  Again a numerical scale, but one that the judge should be prepared to defend with specifics beyond the "I like it".
As a historian that views our hobby as "history in miniature" we modelers need to present our subjects in the best light possible.  As we get farther and farther from the historical events most of us model and have less and less of the veterans that participated in the events (Les Munro, the last surviving 617 Squadron 'Dambuster' pilot has passed away in NZ at 96 yesterday.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11491819&ref=newsl_afternoonnewsdirect_J20080609_142008_1716_1129_825738151) we need to make sure we are accurate in what we present. 
Regards to all
Steve

[Ronv]

Yeah thats okay, always open to opinions! I read through the judging criteria for the nationals committee and they clearly state that they don't have a scoring system since this is art. But I still think a scoring system is necessary just to in the least add weight to the decision of who gets First, Second, or Third. Data is King!
Thanks
RonV

[WoodyG]

Guys: Again, mostly great ideas ... I hate to be the devil's advocate, but getting something through the IPMS E Group is like going through congress.  I saw something in the magazine that some guys changed some car categories, but I think the president asked them to do so.  Possibly, if you made a summary of all the ideas that you really think might stick and send it to the E Group, perhaps it would gain some interest.  I don't think their way of judging has changed in many years.  Just my opinion.  Cheers, Woody G

[Ronv]

I saw the award winning P-47 and it was pretty awesome!

As for the dustup on Hyperscale I haven't read it but will take a look. Is accuracy a criteria of judging?? I don't think it currently is but it must be in some peoples' minds.

So this brings in the need for some sort of scoring system while judging to deal with issues like this. The scoring system should be beta tested at smaller contests and then refined for the Nationals.
RonV

[lgriffin]

Good report, Matt, and congratulations on your win!

Regarding the big dust-up on Hyperscale over the Judges' Grand Award winning P-47: I don't think anyone was saying that the model was undeserving of the win. Some pointed out that were a couple of accuracy issues, so a huge debate ensued about how accuracy can be/should be /shouldn't be/currently isn't/ part of IPMS judging. Further antics ensued when an individual took umbrage that anyone would question the credibility of the builder, which, of course, was never in question except in his own mind, and when challenged, this individual resorted to impugning others rather than produce evidence that the builder's model was correct on a couple of points that are by all accounts incorrect.

Regarding bargains at national conventions: I've not come across too many bargains at national conventions (I've been to 12 or so). But the variety of stuff is astounding.

I'm looking forward to Columbia, SC next year.

Regards,

Lee G.

[Herk]

Guys: I think most of your ideas are terrific, yet, I don't see how this could work without being very time consuming for the judges, etc.  The same guys win every year if they are able to make it to the nats.  I personally have never entered a nats because I am well aware of my shortcomings.  Those guys are just too darn good! How you would pick the 'masters' for that category I just don't know.  Depending on which area of the country you are in, there will be many different 'masters'.  Lee, did you look through your IPMS Journal and see a 'favorite' of ours, the UPS driver's Flettner Helo came out of the closet and won 1st place, when did we first see it? 1992.  Cheers, Woody

Woody - while I can't speak for Ron, my intent for selecting the "Masters" comes in the definition for both the category and the standards these individuals will be judged against.  As for the definition of the category, this would be a collection of previous "Best in Category" winners (a requirement for multiple wins could be a part of this) at either Regionals or just at Nationals.  This could need some empirical testing to find what is the best way to go.  The standards would first be a very strict interpretation of the IPMS core standards ((numerical grade of 1 - 10) - NO mold seams or injector marks, silvering in decals, etc.  Considering these contestants are considered Masters we can assume they come through this segment with straight 10's.  A second segment of judging would be more subjective (see my previous posting).  A combination of these two grades would be the subject's overall grade for the contest.
Matt's suggestion for a computer program to help consolidate and then tabulate grades would be a good answer to the time issue.  If you read my last post, I know that this could be a time consuming and possibly costly endeavor, but if it helps to make a completion such that modelers like you (& me) will feel that we have a better chance when entering the Nationals.
Regards, Steve

[WoodyG]

Guys: I think most of your ideas are terrific, yet, I don't see how this could work without being very time consuming for the judges, etc.  The same guys win every year if they are able to make it to the nats.  I personally have never entered a nats because I am well aware of my shortcomings.  Those guys are just too darn good! How you would pick the 'masters' for that category I just don't know.  Depending on which area of the country you are in, there will be many different 'masters'.  Lee, did you look through your IPMS Journal and see a 'favorite' of ours, the UPS driver's Flettner Helo came out of the closet and won 1st place, when did we first see it? 1992.  Cheers, Woody

[Herk]

The reason I suggest a "Master's" category is that I have been to a grand total of 2 Nationals (yeah I know a small number but patterns are emerging) and have heard pretty much the same names at both. Obviously these people who are winning at the Nats are great modelers since they are winning in the same categories year after year. I give them much credit to their skills by managing to do so!! But If you win a number of years in a row in 1/48 scale Allied aircraft you should be put into a "Master's" category for 1/48 scale Allied aircraft. This would also generate more fame for the winner of a Nationals Master's Category.

I like the Amps style of judging and was excited to hear Matt talk about the modified judging rules that were used in Columbus. An overall score that takes into account building, painting, weathering etc would mean more than a judges opinion that they like one aircraft over another. One of the reason's I tend to stay away from judging is that of the few times I have judged with someone that other person will gravitate to a particular model for no apparent reason or they recognize a model built by a friend of theirs. I think a score card would be of good use and take the subjectivity out of why a model is the winning model. Also I like the Amps style of judging were the model is taken behind the curtain and judged by a panel of judges and the model with the highest score wins. Data is king!

In my few local/regional contests, I too have heard the same names repeatedly for specific areas A/C, Armor, etc which can lead to new contestants not to want to continue competition.

If I read Ryan & Matt's comments correctly movement to a more systemized grading system based on the core judging criteria for the IPMS that covers all genres - are things aligned, are seams and seam lines & injector pin marks addressed, is the paint applied consistently and evenly, are there glue spots, are the decals silvered, etc. would help to improve the final outcome of our shows/contests.  While these areas can be given a "technical" grade (1-10) the addition of an "artistic" grade for authenticity (how close to the actual subject is the model [this could be called "realism"]) as we are trying to duplicate in miniature a larger scale subject, overall finish to include weathering (if an outdoor subject) or paint job for cars or subjects "just off the assembly line" EXAMPLE: An M35 Duce with cargo and no mud or dust on the wheels and body is NOT realistic while an M35 with no weathering could represent one just off the GMC line waiting delivery to the front line. 

In many areas, specifically WW II, early to mid to late aviation (1903 - 1920, 1920 - 1940, 1940 - 1947, 1947 - 1970) the subjects we produce are historical in nature and need to be as accurate as we can make them.  Younger generations will only read about some of these subjects and never see a 3D rendering beyond our models.

Many of these areas could be included in the definition of what is an IPMS Master modeler.  These requirements while inline with the core criteria could have a much more stringent grading due to the fact that the subject IS DONE by a Master Modeler.  If some one is looking for an example to use for this designation, I say look no further than Shep Paine.

Creation of a computer program for IPMS that could be "licensed" to individual clubs/chapters would help to create a more uniform judging across they Society.  This would need to be a collaborative venture between Chapters in a Region and then between the Regions to get a final program for all Regions and the National.
Regards to all,
Steve

[Matt C]

I think you could have a feed back loop for the modeler and make it in a timely matter if one upgrades the system. If you had a computer system/app. Judges could enter values/comments and the results tabulated for category winners, best of and other awards. This removes the one judge swaying other judges.

Of all the schemes for judging I've heard, this may make the most sense. It's how they score other "artistic/technical" sports, such as figure skating and drifting where there is no clear "I finished first or scored the most points" winner. After a collaborative review of each model by a judging team, each judge could "vote" confidentially on a score card that allowed you to rate construction techniques in several categories, like seams, alignment, paintwork, glue spots, etc., on a 1-10 scale, which would allow a technique driven average to determine the winner of each category (sorta what happens now in a roundabout, collaborative way). In addition, allowing each judge to rate each model in a couple of artistic categories, like realism, weathering, overall finish, etc., would allow for judges' "popular choice" awards to be given out for various artistic merits as well.

Although AMPS offers a different way, I don't think the core judging criteria for the IPMS is particularly off base. It allows a large number of models to be evaluated by judges that are, in general, non-experts, or at the most, experts in one or two narrow areas when it comes to the subjects being modeled. However, theoretically, all of the judges have a non-trivial amount of experience building models, and thus ought be able to evaluate the skills and techniques used in their hobby. I know you hear aircraft guys say they can't judge autos or armor and vice versa, but really the core is there in all genres - are things aligned, are seams and seam lines addressed, is the paint applied consistently and evenly, are there glue spots, etc. This is what makes the IPMS style of contest and judging do-able considering the vast array of subjects that need to be judged in a reasonable amount of time with a limited number of volunteers.

I'm frankly surprised there isn't a splinter group of aircraft accuracy guys yet... it seems as if AMPS and the NNL car groups somewhat exist to break away from the IPMS style of judging already, of course, I don't know the history of these enough for that to be much more than speculation or an educated guess.

[Ryan K]

I think you could have a feed back loop for the modeler and make it in a timely matter if one upgrades the system. If you had a computer system/app. Judges could enter values/comments and the results tabulated for category winners, best of and other awards. This removes the one judge swaying other judges.

[Lee_K]

Most people who experience the AMPS-style Gold/Silver/Bronze judging system with achievement levels have reported very positively.  The problem for IPMS is two fold: variety and scale. 

1. AMPS is able to focus on figures and armored vehicles, so getting judges with experience is something that is a bit easier when an IPMS contest has cars, trucks, dinosaurs, figures, science fiction, armor, ships, airplanes, rockets, and anything else that might wander in the front door.

2. AMPS spends a lot of time with each model, providing written feedback and assigning points to a criteria.  It's labor-intensive and tends to break down when you have hundreds of models to judge.  At the regionals we get 500 to 600 models.  At the Nationals, it is over 2000.  Contestants want their models judged in a couple of hours so they can pack up and go home.  Unless one can arrange to have dozens of judges in all the potential categories ready to judge the minute models start walking in the door, the potential for disaster is great with the volumes that an IPMS contest can see.

I personally would prefer an AMPS-style method to be the way for IPMS to go, but the two sticking points above make that a difficult row to hoe.

Lee K

[Ronv]

The reason I suggest a "Master's" category is that I have been to a grand total of 2 Nationals (yeah I know a small number but patterns are emerging) and have heard pretty much the same names at both. Obviously these people who are winning at the Nats are great modelers since they are winning in the same categories year after year. I give them much credit to their skills by managing to do so!! But If you win a number of years in a row in 1/48 scale Allied aircraft you should be put into a "Master's" category for 1/48 scale Allied aircraft. This would also generate more fame for the winner of a Nationals Master's Category.

I like the Amps style of judging and was excited to hear Matt talk about the modified judging rules that were used in Columbus. An overall score that takes into account building, painting, weathering etc would mean more than a judges opinion that they like one aircraft over another. One of the reason's I tend to stay away from judging is that of the few times I have judged with someone that other person will gravitate to a particular model for no apparent reason or they recognize a model built by a friend of theirs. I think a score card would be of good use and take the subjectivity out of why a model is the winning model. Also I like the Amps style of judging were the model is taken behind the curtain and judged by a panel of judges and the model with the highest score wins. Data is king!