Your cart is currently empty!
Time for more insight into our philosophy surrounding Exhibitions and the Evaluation of models. Part 2 generated some interesting discussion and suggestions. Hopefully you’ll find Part 3 equally engaging. Let us know what you think in the comments below or on our Facebook page.
Principle 5
Deserving creations are rewarded. Evaluation against a standard (discussed in the last update) allows us to reward any submission that meets or exceeds that standard. Modellers taking part in a juried exhibition are not competing against other modellers: they are competing against a standard and will be rewarded appropriately if that standard is met.
Principle 6
Celebration, not elimination. Evaluation will focus on the positive aspects of a model, giving the creator the benefit of the doubt where necessary. While any model that isn’t perfect will have flaws, evaluation criteria will focus on what is done well. For example, word pictures describing the evaluation of the paint finish on a model might say, “Most of the finish is smooth,” instead of “Some of the finish is rough.” It may seem like a small nuance in language, but it reflects our core belief in providing the most positive and rewarding experience possible. Judges will identify what the Modeller did well and what could be improved using text (or maybe even audio) feedback notes, but the language used will always be positive and encouraging.
8 responses to “Exhibition and Evaluation Principles Part 3”
To see some of the problems that have already plagued the Warhammer/D and D modelers, consider the comments coming from previous Golden Demon and GenCon events. The method proposed avoids most of these problems and still acknowledges excellence.
Hi Paul,
We’re trying to strike a balance between celebrating excellence and rewarding effort (especially among young/beginner modellers – more on that in the next update). We’re also trying to reduce the number of “classes” as much as possible, while still acknowledging that people from different communities (like wargaming minis) want to feel that their genre is recognized and not simply lumped in with all of the other models.
Because we’re establishing a new organization from scratch, we’re in the fortunate position of being able to pick the best practices from across multiple organizations and genres (and of hopefully avoiding issues that may have plagued other organizations/genres as well).
If an honest and constructive critique is provided for each entry, there’s no need to worry about how the critique is worded and whom might be offended. These particular principles are beginning to sound sort of “woke-like”.
Hi Tony. Some might call it “woke”, but we feel that modellers will be receptive to an evaluation system where the feedback they receive is designed to encourage them, even if it’s pointing out things that they can do better.
AMPS has a similar philosophy, and the positive energy at an AMPS show is really something to experience.
I like the direction you’re going in. Looking forward to seeing it come together.
Thanks David. It’s coming along, but there’s still some work to be done. 🙂
“Modelers taking part in a juried exhibition are not competing against other modelers: they are competing against a standard and will be rewarded appropriately if that standard is met.”
This is how the Nautical Research Guild and the Wisconsin Maritime Museum Contest have judged models for many years.
Hi Toni. This is a common feature of “Open System” shows. Our system uses some Open System features, and this is a principle that we believe very strongly in.
Leave a Reply