Judging criteria

[krandall@world.std.com]

James wrote:

>For example, if I was presented with three photographs of three aquascapes,
>one of yours, one of of Karen's and one of George's, I seriously doubt that
>I could say who had set up which one. I also might have great difficulty
>deciding which one, if any, was better than the other two. The three of you
>share far more than you might individually care to admit regarding how an
>aquascape "ought" to be set up.

You wouldn't get an argument from me.  In fact, it would go as "proof"
towards the fact that we _do_ have an "American Style" ;-)

>Now, place a photograph of an "Amano" style tank in the mix. Especially one
>which uses a "minimalist approach" (very Zen, I know...). Knowing the
>"styles" the three three of you obviously like, at least from seeing
>photographs of your aquascaping efforts, even I could tell that it would be
>unlikely that this fourth tank was aquascaped by any of you.

Actually, I _have_ set up a couple of tanks like this, but have found I
don't have the time to keep them in that shape.  I have made a conscious
decsion _not_ to maintain that kind of tnak. (Not that I am not readily
willing to appreciate their beauty.

>But can you guarantee me, 100%, that the guidelines each of you follow to
>set up (and judge) _your_ style of tank is appropriate, or even valid, for
>the set up and judging of the _other_ style of tank?

That's why I suggest a "mock" contest to test whatever guidelines we set
up.  We will have differences of oppinions about what tank might win, but
the _scores_ should reflect the tanks we like best.  I also think that
while it may be too early to set points values in stone, we _do_ need to
discuss relative values of criteria.  As I mentioned before, I think "wow"
value, whatever you want to call it, should count for more than anything
else.  I think that we _should_ address both plant condition, and the
appropriateness, condition and number of animals in a tank.  But because
both of these things are hard to assess from photos, they _must_ be given a
much lower weight than other criteria.  

In regards to Olga's and your comments on color, I agree that color is
important, but I also am not sure that it needs a separate criteria.
(although I could go either way on it right now)  I think that James saying
that you can have a striking display with just green plants is an over
simplification.  The fact that a tank is simple in concept, or doesn't
include red plants does not mean that "color" is not used well.  The color
of the substrate, driftwood, rocks and background, and the different shades
and tones of green plant used all contribute to the composition.  "Color"
doesn't _necessarily_ mean "red plants".

Karen
  ------------------
  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