VCAs = Urgh?

requiett · Post by **requiett** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:37 am

Not to mention his failed cereal promo.

Ashyukun · Post by **Ashyukun** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 11:10 am

Arigatomina wrote: The only way around it is limiting videos to a set number of categories they can compete in, and weeding out inappropriate nominations. Both have been suggested and requested - even by the creators in some cases - and it hasn't and probably will never happen.

Another option would be to cut out the redundant categories like Fun and Comedy, Drama and Sentimental, Artistic and Original. We keep adding categories hoping more vids will be nominated and there will be more variety, but all it really results in is having the same videos nominated for even more categories than they would have been to begin with. Again, this has been brought up and dismissed. It's not going to happen.

One way of dealing with this would be to have each editor in addition to having to click 'all my videos are in the catalog' have to assign one (and only one) of the 'genre' categories to each of their eligible videos for the year in question, and not allow people to nominate the video for anything outside of that genre, or weight the nominations such that if you nominate it out of its designated category it counts for a fraction of a vote instead of a full one. With as many genres as we have now, it should be pretty easy to pick one. Or even concede a bit and allow a 'sub-genre' which nominations under that category count for more than an 'out of genre' vote but less than a 'primary genre' one.

This would cover the 'genre' categories, which make up about half of the VCA awards. While I personally love the idea of recognizing new editors and their first videos with the "Best Rookie" and "Best First Video" categories, I would put my vote toward dropping them from the VCAs. This is I believe the second year where there's been problems with videos being shown (and nominated) as eligible for the categories that really shouldn't be, and it seems to be proving too difficult to accurately verify what videos and editors should really be eligible. For the other overall categories, like Best Visual Effects and Best Lip Sync, it should remain a free-for-all.

Just my ¥2.

Aria Mournesong · Post by **Aria Mournesong** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:34 am

Ashyukun wrote:This would cover the 'genre' categories, which make up about half of the VCA awards. While I personally love the idea of recognizing new editors and their first videos with the "Best Rookie" and "Best First Video" categories, I would put my vote toward dropping them from the VCAs. This is I believe the second year where there's been problems with videos being shown (and nominated) as eligible for the categories that really shouldn't be, and it seems to be proving too difficult to accurately verify what videos and editors should really be eligible. For the other overall categories, like Best Visual Effects and Best Lip Sync, it should remain a free-for-all.

Just my ¥2.

Sounds like a reasonable start at the very least to me

DriftRoot · Post by **DriftRoot** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:44 am

Arigatomina wrote: Another option would be to cut out the redundant categories like Fun and Comedy, Drama and Sentimental, Artistic and Original. We keep adding categories hoping more vids will be nominated and there will be more variety, but all it really results in is having the same videos nominated for even more categories than they would have been to begin with. Again, this has been brought up and dismissed. It's not going to happen.

*coffin lid creaks open*
These categories aren't necessarily redundent. Everything I'm about to say is based on my ignorance of AMV competitions, except for Anime Boston's, which I tried but failed to enter this year. Even so, it's relevant:
For 2006 AB has set up a new category - fun - which shares the limelight once occupied exclusively by comedy AMVs, the other options being romance, drama and action (if I remember correctly). The "fun" category was created after forum polling which resulted in just about everyone agreeing that it was needed. Why not stick with just comedy? Because of the fatal trap "comedy" sets up for AMVs that may not be gag-oriented, but can't end up in the other three categories. When you're voting on comedy, the gag-oriented videos are obviously going to be judged funnier than those that are "just" fun - particularly when 90% of the audience may not be AMV creators themselves who just might vote for a fun video over a comedic one if they're wavering and technical merit becomes the deciding factor.
Dance is not necessarily funny, but it is fun, I agree. The whole concept of making a dance video out of anime is, itself, an amusing one. But fun and comedy, IMO, definately need to be kept apart. Drama and sentimental are a little too close if the voter is supposed to be judging for the AMV that grabbed them the most, emotionally.
Artistic and original - well, the former seems to fall on the side of an AMV that's a stunning example of visual art, where it's obvious the creator went to great lengths to make it all look fantastic and give it high style. The latter falls more on the side of being conceptually stunning, an AMV that has, with great success, moved in a really different, maybe surprising, direction that requires skill to pull off. Yes, artistic and original can overlap, but it's entirely possible for AMVs in one category not being nominated for the other - reason enough (for me) to show that there is a need for these two categories.

Ashyukun wrote: One way of dealing with this would be to have each editor in addition to having to click 'all my videos are in the catalog' have to assign one (and only one) of the 'genre' categories to each of their eligible videos for the year in question, and not allow people to nominate the video for anything outside of that genre

I think that's a great idea and, even better, it's not new and shocking (ignorance sans AB speaking again): editors entering the AB competition must choose the category they are submitting their video for, although it may be moved to a different group if the power's that be feel it's out of place. Entrants can only win more than one award by earning non-genre recognition (best concept, best editing, best of show) via official judging, not audience votes. Note: at AB, nongenre winners can win judge's-only awards *claps for Scintilla.*
I think stamping AMVs with certain categories when you upload them is a good idea - it also helps the viewer identify what the AMV is supposed to accomplish (for instance, being fun or being laugh-out-loud funny) and evaluate its success at this. Non-genre awards could still be available, but perhaps only to those videos that make it into the semi-finals? This way, only the best AMVs up for a genre award get shots at being named the best of non-genre categories such as no effects, artistic, video of the year, etc.

One could also take a more extreme stance and advocate that non-genre voting would take place only after the genre winners were announced to assure top quality and an even higher sign of achievement (i.e., not only did you win for best comedy, you won most original against all the other top videos of the year, not to some uppity AMV that didn't even get into the semi finals for anything other than most original, meaning it couldn't even win a genre award). Because the non-genre awards are applicable to ALL videos, logically the only videos eligible should be those that have already proved their respective worth against everyone else. Only after the top videos are identified would voters start sizing up the group up in non-genre ways, the idea being - "out of these 10 AMVs, which is the most original," not "out of these 300,000 AMVs, which is the most original." You'd probably get more voter turn out if they only had to deal with a very small number of AMVs.

Having editors choose a genre category when they upload their video and handing out awards accordingly is convenient for weeding out all but the very best AMVs. The power's that be would, obviously, have the authority to decide that an "action" AMV is most definately more humor-oriented and switch the categories. If the PTB can dictate rules for everything else, they can certainly dictate this!

So what's my stand? I'm unfortunately a very logical person, so I'd have to go with the more extreme voting process. I've never liked the fact that a video that doesn't make it into the finals for a genre award can still win the non-genre ones - clearly their video wasn't enough to let them win a genre award, after all, because someone's else's AMV has already been deemed "better" than theirs.
However, a-m-v.org is just not a logically hardcore place, so it would probably ruffle fewer feathers if the less-extreme process was adopted, whereby all finalists have a shot at non-genre awards, not just the genre winners. I also know that - logically speaking - there can be a fine line between a genre winner and loser, and the loser just might have the better concept - losing out only because other components of the AMV didn't stack up high enough to put them in first place. This would probably be the best way, if genre categories were strictly enforced.

Wow, longest post yet? Not sure... *crawls around the graveyard some more*

DriftRoot · Post by **DriftRoot** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:56 am

I forgot to add that the popularity-contest element of the VCAs is unfortunate, but let's face it, that's not something that really can be corrected. Streamlining the voting process by enforcing who's eligible for what is not a solution and could even make more AMVs win even more awards - something the thread author was originally protesting.

I think focusing on what can be improved about the VCAs will achieve better things than ruminating over what could be (in a perfect world) improved, but never will right here.

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 1:18 pm

DriftRoot wrote:These categories aren't necessarily redundent.

I know. If you're talking semantics or even strict definitions, they're not the same. I know that and you know that, but it's pretty clear that the people voting don't know that. Glancing over the past contests you can see which categories wouldn't be missed if they were deleted.

Just take "Best Effects" and "Video of the Year." The best effects video has always won video of the year. Always. Four years in a row. Tell me there's really a reason to have two separate categories when it's obvious the same video is going to win them both because - in the viewers' eyes - they're the same. If a four year never-changing pattern doesn't prove it, wait till next year and you can use the five-year pattern instead.

I just think when we know that according to the people voting one category equals another, there's no need to have them both. But I agree, they are not necessarily redundant. Last year we only had one of the expected overlaps - Effects and Video of the Year (the never changing overlap). The worst year was 2003 when we had the same videos winning Artistic/Original, Romantic/Sentimental, Effects/Innovative (note that 'Innovative' was never used again because having two 'artistic' and 'original' categories was more than enough without a potential third), Trailer/Parody (what trailer isn't a parody? only an original audio trailer), and the eternal Effects/Video-of-the-Year.

There's definitely improvement in last year over previous years (4 in 2004, 5 in 2003), but I think that's due more to the videos made last year than to the viewers suddenly having the ability to discriminate between very similar categories.

Regardless, this was brought up last year and dismissed with the same definition-based explanation you gave. It's true according to the viewers on this site that the video of the year is the one that best uses digital effects. But that doesn't mean - technically speaking - that a video has to use effects to be the best on the site. It just has to use them to be *voted* the best. And that's not what the categories are based on. They're based on their meaning, not how they're used by the voters.

/sidenote - I think the popularity-contest aspect is entirely appropriate. If we wanted a non-viewer-based contest, we'd have judges and it wouldn't be called the viewers' choice awards.

Knowname · Post by **Knowname** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 2:21 pm

Many VCA categorys are nothing but popularity contests (ie the meps that were in the finals for dance last year). For instance the most improved editor award typically just goes to a very good editor (of coarse many very good editors HAVE improved alot at some point, and that is the thought for this inane popularity hoar). As I said in the most improved thread, many ppl may not have been noticed until this year so it's more about your popularity rather than your skill. Most artistic and Best viz effects, while slightly different, basically means the SAME thing!! Best first, imo, should be taken out. Rookie of the year is an awesome award, imo the best one as if you can go from 0 to popular enough to win this award in one year that, most likeley, is a direct result of your skill (could be a result of your 'personality' but best rookie, your rateing a person not a video anyway). Best first, compaired with this, is just a waste of time.

I am a bit guilty of the popularity bug though, I'm afraid (especially in the nomination round as I don't think twice about these, too many to choose, thank god for 3 rounds!!), I didn't vote for NTB or Jihaku, unfortunateley... as I knew there is NO way they wouldn't make it through lol. I probly wouldn't vote for them still! to make room for excelent videos like Wizard and stuff ;p.

Aria Mournesong · Post by **Aria Mournesong** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:47 am

Knowname wrote:Many VCA categorys are nothing but popularity contests (ie the meps that were in the finals for dance last year). For instance the most improved editor award typically just goes to a very good editor (of coarse many very good editors HAVE improved alot at some point, and that is the thought for this inane popularity hoar).

That's very true that it's all a giant popularity contest. I also think that "Most Improved Editor" is kind of an insulting category and needs to be taken out. I mean, honestly when I make a new AMV it's better than my previous AMVS in at least SOME area. How can you really gage how much someone has "improved'.

I'll take Michele for example cause he loves me =P. He's getting a lot of votes in this because his AMVs are starting to get well known. However, if you look at it from a purely technical standpoint has he REALLY improved?
He's defenatly adding -more- digital effects to his AMVs which produce the "ooh and ahh" effect an a-m-v.org creator because we're looking at it from a "Wow I wish I could put stuff like that into my AMVs" standpoint. However, digital effects also tend to mask the minor flaws that will get ripped apart in a normal AMV.
Moving from Michele to another AMV I watched earlier last year about Tenjou Tenge, it was a Digital Effect bonanza. It mostly caught my attention because it had three-pages of people praising it on the Announce board. BUT despite all the flashy affects the guy added, his synch wasn't on very well AND you could still see the subtitles masked under a black boarder in the main focus scenes. If you looked up at the smaller screens in the video they weren't mask at all.

So I guess my point in all of this was: The category feels insulting to every other AMV creator on the site aside from the one who wins.

Rookie of the year is an awesome award, imo the best one as if you can go from 0 to popular enough to win this award in one year that, most likeley, is a direct result of your skill (could be a result of your 'personality' but best rookie, your rateing a person not a video anyway). Best first, compaired with this, is just a waste of time.

Rookie of the Year = popularity contest too.

Half of these "Rookies" that were being pimped so hard are people that have fallen into the a-m-v.org IRC-clique as I like to call it. Most of them I've either never seen post on the boards or make a journal or ever really heard of their AMV =P.

So that can be done away with as well, cause like "Most improved" it's insulting to the other AMV artists.

dj_ultima_the_great · Post by **dj_ultima_the_great** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:46 am

Aria Uchiha wrote:Half of these "Rookies" that were being pimped so hard are people that have fallen into the a-m-v.org IRC-clique as I like to call it. Most of them I've either never seen post on the boards or make a journal or ever really heard of their AMV =P

Whoa, wait. I was supposed to get popular from being in there? *wonders how she managed to fuck that one up* Oh, wait. I know. I posted on the forums. And wrote in my journal. Well, hell... ~_~ I dun gone and screwed my chances, now didn't I?

Actually, I'm more baffled by the nearly unknown site members who only have to put AKROSS in their announcment thread to have it swarmed by the masses. But that's just me. : /

- Jen

Prodigi · Post by **Prodigi** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:56 am

dj_ultima_the_great wrote: Actually, I'm more baffled by the nearly unknown site members who only have to put AKROSS in their announcment thread to have it swarmed by the masses. But that's just me. : /

- Jen

I don't find that baffling at all. Their all so freaking good