Re: the colour thing

[Olga Betts <sae@arts.ubc.ca>]

David V. wrote:

I'm not sure I like an entire category for color (or colour <g>), unless it
means something like "vibrance" (or would that be "hue saturation" <g>).  In
other words, I don't really think that one entry should get more points for
using red versus the entry that uses only green plants (or no plants, let's
not forget that).  What about someone who uses red gravel?  What about the
color of the backdrop?  This will probably all be covered in the
Composition-Content-Concept-Impression category.
______________________

I think you have the wrong idea. Colour would come into it as "how colour
is used" not as points for "a" colour or "many" colours. A beautiful
aquascape of only greens or even an entirely done in red tank could get
good marks for use of colour. Colours that didn't work well, or added
nothing or were too overwhelming wouldn't get good marks. [Gee all these
things are hard to express] We have to face the fact too, that no matter
what scoresheet or judging guidelines we set-up there will always be
subjectivity. What one judge loves, another will hate but if we do it right
it should all even out so that the "most" admired entries win.

I think Karen's idea of working on the basics and having a trial judging is
a great idea. Only way to get across how it would work... if it would work.
I think we should all have a go at judging! Be really interesting to see
how things came out.

Olga
in Vancouver

  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@aquatic-gardeners.org
  with "unsubscribe aga-contest" in the body of the message.
  To subscribe to the digest version, add "subscribe aga-contest-digest"
  in the same message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-contest