Modellers Without Borders

Exhibition & Evaluation Principles Part 1

There’s been a lot of interest in how MWB plans to tackle shows and judging. Here’s the first in a series of updates on our philosophical approach to shows and judging. We want to know what you think. Share your thoughts!

Principle 1

Evaluation is optional. We embrace all modellers, regardless of why they create models. Some strive for perfection and seeks accolades; others enjoy the process and simply want to share their work with others. Both are equally valid, and both have a place at our exhibitions. Regardless of whether a modeller’s works are entered for evaluation or for display, all models will be displayed side-by-side with the same care and respect.

Principle 2

Only the end result matters. Our primary objective in evaluation is to determine how well a submission portrays the person/people, thing(s), or event it represents. Does a cleanly-built model of a roadster give the impression of a lovingly-restored roadster with a fresh coat of polish? Does a heavily weathered model of a tank give the impression of a battle-worn combat veteran? Judges evaluate submissions based on what the Entrant intended to portray; not how the Judge would have tackled that subject, what materials or techniques were used, how accurate the entry is, how difficult it was to create, or how much work was involved in creating it.

Subscribe for Early Updates

Bruce Worrall

15 responses to “Exhibition & Evaluation Principles Part 1”

  1. Adam Stephenson Avatar
    Adam Stephenson

    How would you define what class a modeler should fall into ? General, Advanced, Master, etc ?

    Reply
  2. Tony Stencel Avatar
    Tony Stencel

    Perhaps a category for “disabled” (not sure what the PC term is) for modelers who deserve a platform to display their work, where just completing a kit is a huge accomplishment. Veteran/Civilian, youth,seniors all acknowledged for their hard work and perseverance.

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Hi Tony.
      We plan to have a Junior category (for modellers under 16) to reflect their accomplishments, and at this point we’re thinking that every Junior entry receives some sort of recognition (at least a certificate, if not a medal).
      The idea of a disabled/veterans/first responders category is an interesting one. On one hand it would be good to recognize the accomplishments of folks who face real challenges. On the other hand would highlighting them as a separate part of the community work against our aims of inclusiveness?
      Another consideration – how would we ensure that only veterans/first responders facing legitimate challenges received this consideration? I can’t see us asking for a doctor’s note or something similar.
      It sounds like a worthy idea… we’d need to give some thought to the practicalities of making it work.

      Reply
      1. Robin Van der Sande Avatar
        Robin Van der Sande

        I do like the idea, and at the same time I agree with Bruce that is definitely brings another set of specific challenges with it. Assuming the information part can be dealt with on a voluntary basis (and that’s a bit of a stretch), bear in mind for example that the vast majority of handicaps are invisible. Also, the limitations are extremely different from one case to another, and therefore so is the impact on modeling abilities. This is a prime example that being inclusive is often easier said than done.

        Reply
  3. Martin Hulst Avatar
    Martin Hulst

    Contest principle 1: I’m having a hard time envisioning how to this might work. Especially the side-by-side principle. What if I want to do sig type display, will you put this directly next to contest entries that strive to win medals? That might not work, because sig type entries often have a all-ound setup, dressing up the whole display table, not just the models. Putting other stuff next to it is not ideal. But maybe I misinterpret.

    Contest principle 2: I’m not adverse to this contest principle, I rather like it. But I do urge you not to over engineer these principles. You have to keep in mind how to implement them. Does the modeller need to explicitly list his or her intent? Because then I’m out. My principle is: I want to show my model, let it hopefully speak for itself, and let the judge tell me what he or she thinks.

    Cheers from Holland!

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Hi Martin.
      The “side by side” idea speaks to an individual’s combined display of models from all genres, regardless of whether they are entered for evaluation or not.
      Sigs would be separate, as they are group displays, not individual ones.
      With regard to entrant’s intent, there will be a place on the entry form for the entrant to describe what they were aiming for with the model. This principle also speaks to respecting obvious aspects of a model – for example whether it’s weathered or not – and that a judge’s personal views on how a subject should be tackled (I don’t like weathered aircraft) is not part of the evaluation process.

      Reply
  4. PELLAN Jean Avatar
    PELLAN Jean

    Hi,
    Thanks for those clear principles.
    Greetings from France

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Salut Jean, et bienvenue!

      Reply
  5. John Kress Avatar
    John Kress

    Then there should be space for the builder to explain their goal.

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Absolutely. There will be an area on the entry form for that.
      When we talk about “what the modeller intended” we’re talking about things like whether they decided to weather their model or not, whether they wanted to show the subject as damaged, or perhaps factory-fresh and clean.
      The idea is that a judge’s personal preferences (say for example with regard to weathering) should have any bearing on how they evaluate a model.

      Reply
      1. Robin Van der Sande Avatar
        Robin Van der Sande

        Should « not » have any bearing 😉

        Reply
  6. David Waples Avatar
    David Waples

    Thanks for the ideas about Exhibition and Evaluation. I’ll be interested to see how it all comes together and how you imagine these gatherings. I’m hoping that workshops play into your gatherings and not just seminars. Some good back and forth round tables where modelers can bring their questions would be interesting.
    Best of luck!
    Dave

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Hi David. We’re looking at three possible types of attendee activities at exhibitions… presentations (informative presentations on various subjects), demonstrations (presentations where specific tools, tips, and/or techniques are performed by the presenter), and workshops (attendees have a chance to practice specific skills). I like your idea of Q&A round tables too.
      The exact number and mix of these activities will obviously vary from exhibition to exhibition.
      We’re also thinking about “retreats”, which would offer spots on what would essentially be a weekend-long workshop at some location, not affiliated with an exhibition.

      Reply
  7. Brad Belsheim Avatar
    Brad Belsheim

    When do we think the first contest will happen?

    Reply
    1. Bruce Worrall Avatar
      Bruce Worrall

      Hi Brad. At this points it looks like the first one will be in the US, probably in the fall of 2025. There are plans for one in Australia early in 2026 and the sometime later in 2026 in Canada.
      Lots of work to do. 😀

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.