[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Index by Month]
Re: Judging the AGA aquascaping contest.
Hi Steve,
I would only add to Karen's excellent detailed comments, to say that last
year it was VERY hard to get enough judges, so there were only three
total. I didn't want to bug Karen for a third year in a row, so she got a
"break". :) There was also a miscommunication in which one of the judges
wasn't able to e-mail me or the other two, so there was no opportunity for
"deliberation" on final tallies. The previous years there had been four
judges, and they got a chance to communicate amongst themselves at the
end.
This year we are blessed with FIVE judges, and at least four of them go
back quite far in the aquascaping hobby.
Karen hasn't yet seen all the other judges' scores, because one of them
isn't completely finished yet, but this year promises to be *very*
interesting, as some of the categories the judges are spot-on, clearly in
agreement on the best tank. But other categories vary widely, with one
judge's #1 entry being another's #15. This is even reflected in the
comments, with what one judge thought was a design flaw being considered
an innovation by another. From what I've heard, the Amano contest has had
similar situations!
I hope you enjoy looking at the site this year, and I *really* hope you
enter next year.
- Erik
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Karen Randall wrote:
> Dear Steve,
>
> First, I want to thank you for communicating your feelings about the AGA
> contest. It is always easier to remain silently discontent than it is to
> speak out. Expressing your feelings in the respectful way you have is always
> welcome!
>
> Second, I want you to be aware that the judging of the 2003 contest has
> already been completed. So while your comments will certainly be taken into
> consideration, there is no way they can affect the 2003 contest.
>
> Now, on to the "meat" of your letter. Please remember that aquascaping
> contests are a relatively new phenomenon outside of the Netherlands, and the
> criteria used there are far more rigid than ours, as well as being based on
> "live" judging rather than photographs of entries. The AGA 2000 contest was,
> as far as I know, the first of its kind. The first Amano contest followed
> closely on its heels. Now, if you count all the ADA and AGA contests
> together, we have a track record of 7 contests over a period of 3 years...
> not very many still! There have also been a few smaller, private contests
> during that period of time, but I don't know a whole lot about them.
>
> Of those 7 contests, I have had the privilege of judging 5 of them.
> Therefore, I probably have more experience with the process than anyone else.
> First, I must tell you that you are correct in your supposition that judging
> these contests takes a great deal of time and effort, and there is no
> remuneration. Even "recognition" is minimal.<g> Unlike other established
> types of competition, there is, at least so far, no "training" for judges of
> aquascaping contests. Even the judging guidelines are somewhat fluid from
> year to year... being adjusted as we learn what works best, and what point
> systems hopefully put the best tanks on top.
>
> In terms of choosing judges, a lot of time and effort went into deciding what
> types of people should be approached to judge. The first year, at least one
> person suggested using people outside of the aquarium hobby; people with a
> specific art and design background, but no knowledge of aquaristics. While
> this might sound like a good idea from a strict design perspective, our
> aquariums, first and foremost, must be healthy, sustainable habitats for our
> plants and animals. It was finally decided that while artistry was
> important, it could not be at the expense of sound husbandry practices.
> Therefore, the choices were narrowed to those involved with aquariums, either
> professionally or as hobbyists. Ideally we would have experienced aquarists
> who also had a good feel for the artistry of aquatic gardening, even if they
> had no formal training in that area. With those thoughts in mind, the
> organizers of these contests need to use the people they can get. Overall, I
> think we've been fortunate with the caliber of judges we've had for AGA
> contests. As I said before, it is a LOT of work to judge these contests, and
> many people just don't have the time to do it more than once. Last year's
> judges were probably the least experienced team of judges, and I think their
> comments reflect that. Still, I'm sure you will agree that everyone is
> entitled to their own opinions when it comes to art. I think that we owe it
> to these people to accept their hard work in the spirit in which it was
> offered. They worked very hard to not only judge the tanks but also write
> their comments, whether we agree with them or not.
>
> I did not judge the AGA contest last year. I have to agree with you that I
> would not have placed some of the tanks in the order that they ended up last
> year, but I also show horses, and I know there are many times I don't agree
> with the judges decisions there either!<g> It is a fact of life that there
> will be differences of opinion. What is nice about the AGA contest is that
> _you_ as a member can go into the site, look at all the same materials the
> judges saw, and make your own personal decision about which tanks you liked
> best. The MAIN point of the AGA aquascaping contest (and the ADA contest as
> well, for that matter) is NOT to establish winners and losers, but to share
> our love of beautiful aquariums with one another. There will always be
> disagreements about the specific merits of individual tanks.
>
> I'm sorry you decided not to enter the contest this year. We have an
> excellent, experienced group of judges. (if I do say so myself ;-) As you
> said yourself, the quality of tanks in the contest has increased every year,
> and you will see yet another increase in quality this year. We are now
> reaching a point where MOST of the tanks entered are truly exceptional... to
> the point that we are considering the need to add some sort of division
> specifically for those who want to share their "just pretty planted fish
> tanks" in the future. We certainly don't want to discourage participation
> among those who are not, first and foremost, artists!
>
> Even among those who consistently, year after year, have entered very high
> quality tanks to the contests there are certainly no guarantees. One of the
> top tanks in the ADA contest, among over 500 entries last year, was submitted
> by not only a novice aquatic gardener, but a complete novice aquarist! And
> as an aside, you may be interested in the mechanics of judging for the ADA
> contest. Because of the large number of entries, ADA makes the "first cut"
> before the entries are even sent to the judges. We only get to see the tanks
> that the ADA staff has decided to include in the "top 10%" or so. I have
> seen MANY tanks in the close to 500 tanks that are cut from competition that
> I felt were far better than some that were included. At least in the AGA
> contest, you know that ALL the judges were involved in scoring every single
> tank.
>
> While I am glad you voiced your concerns, and I recognize them as valid, I
> also urge you to join into the spirit of friendly competition which the AGA
> Aquascaping Contest is meant to be... Much more a vehicle for sharing our
> love of this hobby than a path toward individual recognition. Who knows?
> Whether you win or not, if you enter, you have the opportunity to share your
> work and ideas with hundreds of other aquarists, perhaps inspiring them to
> greater creativity. If you don't, you will never know how much of an impact
> you might have had!
>
> I am cc'ing this letter to our AGA board. This is a small, concerned group
> who I am sure will read your comments in the spirit in which they were
> intended. I think it is important for them to hear your feelings too!
>
> Thank you for writing. I hope you decide to enter next year... I'd love to
> see your tanks!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Karen Randall
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Steve
> To: krandall@rdrcpa.biz
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 4:19 PM
> Subject: Judging the AGA aquascaping contest.
>
>
>
> Karen,
> For a while now I have wanted to send a message like this one to the AGA
> member list @ thekrib.com, but I thought that some may find it offensive,
> when it should be insightful. I would really like to convey the overall point
> of this message to anyone who cares while not offending anyone, which is why
> I am sending this to you, a great writer and editor. I became a member of the
> AGA at your open house last February which is something I had wanted to be
> apart of for quite some time. I have formal training in the fine arts
> including but not limited to painting, sculpture, and composition design.
> These are a few thoughts I had about the aquascaping contest of years past.
>
> I have only been a member of the AGA since February 2003 and I have yet to
> post on this forum. I have taken much of my aquascaping inspiration from the
> aquascaping contest pictures posted on the AGA website. Now I did not enter
> the contest this year only because I was less then impressed with the judging
> of the 2002 contest. In the 2001 contest the judge's comments that are posted
> at the bottom of each of the entry page seems to me to be insightful, and
> express a critique that basically follows the basic overall rules of design
> whether it be painting,sculpture, or aquascape. I really wanted to submit a
> tank for the 2002 contest. Well the 2002 contest came and went and I still
> had not signed up to be an AGA member.
> For me the 2002 AGA aquascaping contest entries were far superior to 2001,
> but I was really thrown off by the judging technique used. It seems to me as
> though personal preference of arrangement and species used played a much
> greater role in judging then the rules of design. I saw many tanks that were
> striving for the "Amano look" with American flare and I think a few had great
> success. The use of negative space in the aquascape is difficult to achieve
> while keeping the aquascape balanced, but when that is achieved it should be
> rewarded. Also when the judge's comments are suggesting the addition,
> subtraction, or relocation of items in the aquarium (aside from equipment)
> one might try to visualize the tank after those changes and come to see a
> tank that looks like every other tank out there. Is there a judging criteria
> for originality? I know that judging a contest of this size may not be easy
> and the rewards may not be more then recognition, but there are many
> different set styles of aquascaping including the eclectic style and all of
> these styles are only visually pleasing when they follow the set rules of
> design not tradition.
> I am aware that a judges job is to impart a criticism to find the best
> overall composition and I am sure that is what the judges for the 2002
> contest were going for. When I look at each picture posted to the contest, I
> have an immediate overall feeling about the aquascape. Then when I further
> inspect the aquascape, with the help of additional photos, I am either more
> or less fond of the overall composition. This is how I view the entries after
> the judging for both 2001 and 2002. It is not until after I figure out what
> makes the aquascape a success or not that I read the judges notes. For 2002 I
> had disagreements with a majority of the comments and especially with some of
> the outcomes. Now I know that the judges have more aquatic gardening
> experience and know how then I do and I respect them for it. I mean if it was
> not for each one of their own personal experiences in aquatic horticulture,
> we may not be as advanced as we are with growing aquatic plants. At the same
> time we really need to encourage new styles of aquascaping and not suggest
> that the eclectic aquascape be changed to be either Dutch or Amano styles,
> but rather it's own entity. I would really like to see the judging get back
> to the basics of judging the aquascape as it appears in the picture and
> accepting it for what it is and not what we hope it becomes. I say this
> because this years contest is surely going to be more difficult to judge the
> anything in the past and next years contest will be even more so.
> Sincerely,
> Steve Wilson
>
--
Erik Olson
erik at thekrib dot com
------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "incorp".