Shay <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message news:3f596921@news.povray.org...

> What I'm doing is going through in Winvote and giving things a ballpark
> score as I add comments. When I'm done with that, I'll get them all into
> the order I want and then go down the list giving out entries/20 ones,
> entries/20 twos, etc.. That's the fairest way I can think to do it.
>

Same here, get them all on the board, then go back and look at the details.
I usually don't read the textfile on the first time through, the ball park
is more based on very basic reactions;
  artistic - does it make me want to look twice or do I automatically head
for the back button,
  technical - are there any glaring artifacts or conversely any objects or
effects that make me drool,
  concept/originality -  can I tell what it is without reading the file, do
7 other images look the same
  interpretation - does it fit the topic (a pretty broad call in this
round...)

> I also find that it helps for me to form a concrete idea of what my
> qualifications for each category are for the round. For 'Surrealism' I'm
> using:

I always find the categories start to bleed over into one another...

>
> 1. Artistic Merit - Does the look of the entry reflect the tone of what
the
> entrant was trying to communicate?
Here's where the bleeding starts... "reflect what the artist was trying to
communicate" = artistic -vs- "reflect how the artist communicates the
theme"= concept/interpretation.  Artistic & concept to me are often closely
related. For more strictly artistic criteria I look at composition, use of
color, visual appeal.

>
> 2. Technical Merit - How much of what is in the picture is the entrant's
own
> work? How do the details hold up to close inspection?
Technical bleeds the least, but even here I look at artistic/concept - if
the image is minimalistic I don't expect a lot of high technicality. Someone
with limited technical skills, but who knows their limitations and works
well within them I will give a better technical score than someone who uses
highly complex techniques but produces a mediocre product. To me, part of
technical ability is knowing when and how to apply it.


> 3. Creativity/Interpretatin - Is the picture at all provocative? Does the
> image inspire any curiosity within me about the objects, events, or
> viewpoint of the scene?
Definitely bleeding now... "provocative","curiosity", while I agree they
count conceptually, to me those weigh heavily in the artistic score as well.
Interpretation I relate strictly to the round topic, if I can't make the
connection even after reading the textfile, that's a 1.

And after saying all that, it's STILL a tough round to score!  And I'm
wondering why the usual contingent of totally off-topic, completely
composited in photoshop, blatant ignoring-of-the-rules entries seems to be
missing this round...  highly suspicious.

RG

Post a reply to this message