Re: Mock Judging Results - prescreening of images

["James Purchase" <jpurch@interlog.com>]

Erik wrote, regarding pre-screening of entries to pull out obvious fakes:

"I was talking to my wife about this one, and she said something very
sensible: "Did at least one of the judges disqualify it?"  If only one
does, there we go.  End of story.  Seriously, I don't think we need to
make this "pre-screening" thing a big issue.  Just let the judges know
that's one of the rules."

James responds:

I hope both you and your wife are right on this one. I'm willing to go along
with people who have more experience in judging of aquariums on this one (I
have none), but what happens when we state up front in the Submission
Guidelines that images altered in ways other than Contrast, Brightness, Tone
and Sharpness are ineligable, and then some Judge ignores our request that
faked images not be scored (the Judge might miss the fact, depending upon
how good the Photoshop work was done) and gives a score to an image which
turns out to be fake??? Will that fake image and the score it received be
included on the Web-site and CD-ROM in contradiction to our statement in the
Submission Guidelines?

This may sound like I'm being picky, but if the above scenario happens, we
will look like a bunch of hacks who can't follow our own rules and
guidelines (or couldn't agree on them). I realize that there may be altered
images which will get by most of us (some graphic artists are _really_ good)
and we may end up, in spite of our best intentions, with altered images on
display. We may also not have _any_ problem with altered images. Right now
we are all just guessing.

But I suggest that if we are _not_ going to prescreen the images, we provide
explicit instructions to the Judges that electronically altered images are
NOT eligable for the Contest OR the Showcase.

Alternatively, if the judging is going to be done via the Internet and Erik
is going to set up a form to receive the scores and comments, the simple
inclusion of a field labelled "Suspected Altered Image" could take care of
any possible problem. If any Judge suspects that an image has been altered
or faked, all that they would have to do would be to check off the
appropriate box on the form. We (the contest organizers) could then contact
the entrant via e-mail (I would imaging that anyone capable of
electronically altering an image is going to also be a computer literate
person, so they will have e-mail) and simply ask for proof that the image is
genuine. If the proof provided passes "muster", we can include the image,
scores and comments for that particular image. If the entrant cannot provide
proof that the image is genuine (like two or three more shots of the same
aquacape from different angles which ALL show the same feature), then its
out.

Now, it occurs to me that requiring multiple images of each aquascape will
pretty much rule out all but the most ardent of cheaters. It would be pretty
difficult for someone to make an alteration that wouldn't show up in at
least ONE of them. so I may be worrying needlessly here, but the above
little "check box" could satisfy everyone.

Make sense?

James Purchase
Toronto


  ------------------
  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