AWA's VAT info for 2009

[madmallard]

We're still polishing off the submission rules and will be done shortly. As soon as they're ready we'll post them and a link.

In the meantime, I wanted to take a moment to go over each of the 3 contests we run in the VAT, and their characteristics.

The Video Art Track

After a big demand at AWA 5 in the form of a packed to the gills main events room during the AMV contest, The VAT began at AWA 6 to supply the fans demand for original and parody videos. Since then, the VAT has had a dedicated room during the entire weekend to run fan made videos of all kinds, not only AMVs, but live action music videos, original animations and movies, and so forth. We screen them all. And for AWA 6, to help further proliferate entries, we setup 3 different contests for 3 different needs to be addressed.


EXPO

AWA has always been as inclusive as conditions would allow to people's submissions. Before the Expo contest, the submission rules had no time limit or number of entry limit, except for a 2 hour VHS tape limit.

The goal of the Exposition contest has always been to give as many videos the chance to be shown as possible at the con for an audience, while awarding recognition to as many deserving videos as is practical. The judges for these awards are the general VAT staffers.

Expo was set up to be similar to how contests at most other cons had been running their AMV contests at that time, except that there were no pre-established categories. The VAT gave(gives) Expo awards whenever and of whatever type they felt appropriate to that year's entry, with no award guaranteed from one year to the next (with the exception being a 'grand prize'.)

Expo has changed very little in its rules over the years. In fact, the length submission continues to be 2 hours worth from one editor. Impressions of Expo from the editors that get back to us range kind of wildly.

Professional

Even 10 years ago, many editors were lamenting that they weren't getting a fair shake in face of editors whos names were more well known with winning videos, feeling they were getting shutout as soon as someone saw the credit of who made the video.

Other editors were complaining about the judgments of the various convention coordinators around the country, feeling unsatisfied with what videos were being awarded compared to those that weren't.

In both cases, the editors were looking for something that gave them a more serious sense of elevated standards to their work being submitted.

Pro was established to address these issues. To address the dissatisfaction with the coordinator's judgments, the contest is ONLY judged by the people who actually enter it with a video of their own(the VAT only judges in case of ties). To address 'accidental' editor favoritism, the entries were judged blindly with no credits or names on them to take away any expectation based on the editor's name. To address the focus of elevated standards, specific rules about having your video blind judged, and then sending us blanks to put the judging screener videos on to send back to you were made part of the rules. The only restriction was 2 entries per person.

Other than that, there was no rules on content, nor restriction on whom could enter, just like in Expo. As the hobby has grown, we've had to change that to restrict to editors over 18 as the videos entered and judged may be of a mature theme.

The system was without issues. Blind judging only works if people don't know you made the video. MOST people made it a point to not tell anyone what their entry was, did not put them up online until after AWA, or only submitted brand new videos to be judged. However, there is simply no feasible way to stop people from sharing whom entered what if they chose to.

Some entered throwaway videos in order to get a copy of the screener. This is less of a factor than it used to be as internet download speeds in the last 4 years made it easier for such abusers to get the vids themselves.

Some of the less restrained editors who submitted began creating junk categories, deprecating award names, and generally going out of their way to insult the other entries openly. We know who each of those editors are, and cut such things immediately as they were a distraction.

MASTERS

This is our only contest done outside of our regular inclusion tone. Master's was named for the PGA Masters that takes place in Augusta, Georgia, and mimics the 'invitation only' participation of the contest. (as well as the green jacket being awarded to the winner). This contest was made for editors who were seeking to participate under more restricted competition from a similar level of standard. Many editors were interested in continuing to compete, but didn't want to be seen as trolling with winning videos or diminishing/intimidating newer talent from competing. Others wanted to simply have more extensive and critical judging of their work than they had received before.

For the standard, only those editors who had already one an award at any convention's contest could enter. And they HAD TO enter a video that had not been submitted to any contest previously. It was also repeated that this contest would dissect the video on a very high and specific level during its judging. All technical characteristics and all artistic choices were heavily scrutinised. There were no runner's up, only one winner decided by the current VAT director (with any previous Masters winner having the option to judge instead of participate.) This judging is also done blind.


Which contest should I enter my video in?

That seems to be a question that everyone has a different answer to, but as far as the VAT is concerned, the main difference of the contests is whom judges it. For Expo, its the VAT. For Pro, its the editors. For Masters, its the director.

If anyone has comments or questions about each of the contests particulars, feel free to post them. (Since the submission rules aren't up yet, those questions about the rules themselves will have to wait.)

[Haunter103]

[Nya-chan Production]

"one an award at any convention's contest could enter"

Probably an often given question,

What does count as an award?

- do honorary awards count?

- what about judges' vs watchers' awards? If con gave both, does that mean two people from that con could possibly enter?

- how will you check if the editor really has some said award (especially if it's on a foreign con)?

- what if I make a con with only me entering and judg... oh, wait, this one is irrelevant :>

Anyways, I guess you get the question ^^

Regards to answer (b^^)b

[outlawed]

Other editors were complaining about the judgments of the various convention coordinators around the country, feeling unsatisfied with what videos were being awarded compared to those that weren't.

I think a more accurate assessment from that camp who liked Pro was they felt audience voted contests were screwing good videos over because the fans were just picking the vids with their favorite anime or a quick joke. I don't recall many contests that didn't involve audience voting back in 99-02. "ZOMG that video was a SELL-OUT of course it would win"

Some of the less restrained editors who submitted began creating junk categories, deprecating award names, and generally going out of their way to insult the other entries openly.

AMVs are serious business~~

I figured some just did the deprecating awards out of a stupid sense of humor. Knowing how things are on the INTERNETS these days I'm guessing they are far worse than the joke categories used to be. Of course with the insulting entries part it's nice to see some folks still have some competitive spirit at least (now if only they could back up the smack they're talking... ) =p

As the hobby has grown, we've had to change that to restrict to editors over 18 as the videos entered and judged may be of a mature theme.

Didn't realize you guys finally had to adjust that. Do you know which year that started exactly? I know 18+ entries had been sent before but as I recall for several years after it was still the old have parent/guardian sign this statement deal. Mind you it has been 5 years since I sent anything to pro =p

[madmallard]

"one an award at any convention's contest could enter"

Probably an often given question,

What does count as an award?

- do honorary awards count?

- what about judges' vs watchers' awards? If con gave both, does that mean two people from that con could possibly enter?

- how will you check if the editor really has some said award (especially if it's on a foreign con)?

- what if I make a con with only me entering and judg... oh, wait, this one is irrelevant :>

Anyways, I guess you get the question ^^

Regards to answer (b^^)b

Before we were discussing things in 07, we leaned toward inclusion. The proliferation of contests and cons around the world meant our ability to actually check up on some of these awards is limited to a certain degree. So we now exclude awards given by 'online only' contests, and we exclude 'honorable mention' type awards. This would include the awards given by the AWA VAT under the categories of "individual staffer awards" and "editor awards" that were previously okay.

Again, this decision was meant to standardise the content that would get into Masters. Moving to qualifying with actual awards issued makes our verification efforts a bit more realistic, and helps with that standardization.

[madmallard]

I think a more accurate assessment from that camp who liked Pro was they felt audience voted contests were screwing good videos over because the fans were just picking the vids with their favorite anime or a quick joke. I don't recall many contests that didn't involve audience voting back in 99-02. "ZOMG that video was a SELL-OUT of course it would win"

that was some of it too, but not the spawning idea to my recollection.

AMVs are serious business~~

I figured some just did the deprecating awards out of a stupid sense of humor. Knowing how things are on the INTERNETS these days I'm guessing they are far worse than the joke categories used to be. Of course with the insulting entries part it's nice to see some folks still have some competitive spirit at least (now if only they could back up the smack they're talking... ) =p

If it was just simple smack talk & ribbing, I'd be less inclined to give it attention and just move on. But its not, and it bears mention. Considering the volume of videos we process from around the world, it doesn't impress.

Didn't realize you guys finally had to adjust that. Do you know which year that started exactly? I know 18+ entries had been sent before but as I recall for several years after it was still the old have parent/guardian sign this statement deal. Mind you it has been 5 years since I sent anything to pro =p

I'm thinking it was 05, but not sure. and actually, that form was just for general 'mature content' being sent out on the judging discs. I believe an entry or two drifted into the 'adult content' area and we simply had to proceed on the logical course.

[Castor Troy]

How about the rules for MEP submissions?

[madmallard]

those usually come directly from those running them. The only MEP that the VAT ever ran internally is the Short Attention Span Theatre, which is not running this year.

[Kionon]

Deadlines?

For those that might win an award in the next few months as contests roll in and out, there could be people who qualify for masters pretty close to the cut off date for submission,

[madmallard]

again, the submission rules will be up shortly and separately.