----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 10:37
PM
Subject: Re: Judging the AGA
aquascaping contest.
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 -----
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