Rendakor wrote:I disagree RAWdangers; the only fair time to discuss judging, criteria, etc. is now, before the first round of scores has been posted. To do so afterwards would just seem like complaining because Video X won while Video Y lost, and thus unlikely to result in any change for that or future rounds.
As a competitor, it is not our job to tell the judges how to judge. That is up to Code. Having this entire debate about how to judge before we've even seen how the judges judge seems offensive to the judges in my opinion, as if we are saying that we don't trust them to judge and expect them to conform on our, the competitors, wishes, which they are not supposed to do. I'm not saying that they should be biased or unfair but I'm trusting them to judge fairly, before I have a problem with them. And about complaining afterwards, I agree that it can seem whinny sometimes, but again, if there is a serious problem in the judging, we'll only know after seeing the results. Then you can take that up with Code, and if he agrees, then we have a problem. However, we are creating a problem now, where it doesn't exist.
This is why guidelines are used, so that there is no confusion. Don't get me wrong, you are allowed to have an opinion within the guidelines but follow the guidelines as they are laid out, not what your opinion might be of the guidelines. What's the point of having standards if no one follows them? Hell, this statement says it all:
Each video will be judged based upon the following criteria:
Not "could be judged" or "may be judged" "Will". I expect the videos to be judged as outlined, not "as outlined based on what the judges think it should be".
Certainly, and I expect them to follow the guidelines. But let's not play the 2nd amendment game and only look at only a portion of what Code posted.
Aye, Code gives the criteria that each judge is going to use to "score" the videos. However, he has not laid out a point by point system, dictating what qualifies a 1, 2, 3, . . . 20 score. That is where the judges come in. It is up to them to decide what is a 1, 2, . . . 20, in their opinion while using the guidelines as what they are, a guide. If Code had given a point by point system, in which originality was never mentioned, then i would agree that originality has no part in judging. However, he hasn't, and he's left it up to the judges to interpret the criteria. The judges have to be able to differentiate between the videos and decide who gets to move on, and who gets eliminated, and the idea of originality is certainly, I believe, a fair standard. I'm not saying the a video thats really original but poorly edited should move on over a super well edited video using 5cm, but I do believe that originality is fair game.
In terms of concept, originality fits in, in my opinion, in the fact that the judges must consider what is a good concept and what is a bad concept if they are to be able to differentiate scores. If they were to judge based solely upon a literal interpretation of Code's guidelines, then you are probably going to have 20 or more videos with the same score. And if the judge believes that being more original is part of having a good concept, then that is their interpretation of the criteria and they would still be adhering to Code's guidelines.
We've been focusing on originality as part of concept, but I believe that it could also fit in the Overall criteria. If a video is the same as 20 other videos, than it may not necessarily come together for a judge as a video that is different and stands out.
The quote of Code's rules saying "will be judged on the following criteria" in my opinion is only stating that the judges can't just create a new category called "Originality" and then give points from 1-20, but if they incorporate originality within the criteria Code has given, that should be fair game.
Oh yeah, Kit, feel free to count this xPP