|
 |
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 21:42:13 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 13 Jun 2009 12:22:20 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>
>>I would concur.
>>
>>Maybe the way to approach it is to use three different scores that are
>>weighted differently (OK, I'm stealing an idea from the scoring
>>methodology for Iron Chef America here).
>>
>>In ICA, they use three scores - taste, plating, and originality. Taste
>>is weighted 10 points, the other two are 5 points each.
>>
>>With IRTC, it seems to me that the three categories might be something
>>like "concept", "technical", and perhaps "realization" - the last one
>>being how well the concept + technical is realized in the final image.
>>The first two could be weighted to be of lower importance (but important
>>to the overall end result) and the last one is the "taste" (if you will)
>>- how well the concept and technical components come together.
>>
>>
> Or then just give the highest scores to the ones you like the best ;)
Well, yeah, ultimately it comes down to that. :-)
The thought regarding using the ICA-style scoring is that you add up each
judge's scores for each category and then get an overall score that's
used for the final result. That gives a chance (not a big one, but a
chance) that someone who isn't artistically competent a shot at winning
based on their concept and technical aspects.
That also makes it less clear who the winner is likely to be just based
on looking at the image.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
