"Tim Nikias" <JUSTTHELOWERCASE:timISNOTnikias(at)gmx.netWARE> wrote:

> As for the audio-issue: the IRTC clearly states that judges should focus on
> the animation, so they might as well just switch it off to watch the movie,
> and rate by that.

Well, no. The rules say to "focus" on the animation. This clearly means that
it should be judged with the sound _on_. If the entry was intended to be
judged without sound, it would have been submitted without sound.

But the judges aren't complaining about the _animation_, but that the
_story_ is not understandable  without sound:

   "Baffling without sound."

One could argue similarly that the "rusty025" and "travel_lb" submissions
aren't understandable without being able to read the titles.

Further, another judge claimed the rules specifically instructed him to turn
off the sound:

   "The words may have been great but the guidelines are to judge without
sound."

But it says no such thing.


> Then again, if the audio truly sucks, you wonder if the
> author wasn't able of knowing that by himself.

That's not my problem at all. I happen to agree with the criticism of the
sound _quality_.

My concern is that judges apparently deducted points because the _story_
relied on audio, even though it's clearly allowed in the rules. I'm just
trying to clarify this now, so it's not an issue for judges in the future.

-- David Cuny

Post a reply to this message