View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-01-2007, 12:42
BuddyB309's Avatar
BuddyB309 BuddyB309 is offline
I freaking love animating!!
AKA: Peter Casey
FRC #1625 (Winnovation)
Team Role: Animator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Winnebago IL
Posts: 838
BuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond reputeBuddyB309 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to BuddyB309
Re: A challenge to all 2006 Regional AVA winners

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin342 View Post
Looks like this grass roots competition is really taking off!

To keep it simple I suggest we keep the same judging criteria that Auto desk uses:
  • Concept - 35 points
  • Creativity - 35 points
  • Technical Execution - 30 points

For judges we have two options

1. Student Judges
Done at the Regional, just like last year. One student from each team that submitted an animation can judge. The Organizer (2006 Regional AVA winner) would have to find a quiet area to set up a TV/DVD player or laptop with all the animations loaded. They would have judging forms printed and arrange viewing times for the student judges. After every judge has submitted their forms the organizer will tally the results & present the trophy.

2. Professional Judges
The Organizer will find a couple local industry or academic professionals (in computer arts and/or broadcast) to judge the animations before the Regionals. The results would be kept top-secret until the trophy is presented to the winning team.

What do you guys think? The first option has more student involvement but could be very difficult to organize.
I personally like the peer reviews. I know it is hard to organize but I think most animators that submit an animation to the competition would be willing to take time to judge. Also the peer judges will know what it takes to archive the animation. They will know what the other animation team made their own models or just used the default models that came with the program. However, the professors would be unbiased, but the fact that they won't know the program will seem to cause problems.

For example. My friend entered a Lego design competition at the fair. He spent a week coming up with his own Lego scene and he was proud of it. He took it to the fair and put it up on the table and judges started looking at all of the entries. The problem was, the judges didn't know a thing about lego's or any of the Lego kits that were out there and gave the awards to the kids who went to the store, bought a Lego kit, and put it together following the directions that came with it. This competition was suppose to be a creative "come-up-with-your-own-Lego-scene" but the awards were going to the kids that followed directions because the judges didn't know about lego's.

Thats why I think we should go with peer judges. They truly know what it took to get an animation to look the way it does. They understand the time it takes.
__________________
A.K.A Llama

check out my latest animations Appliance Night Out, Infant Intolerable, Fishing Like a Loony Tune, VVV Roadside Assistance

Life? I have a life. It is sitting at my computer and Animating. AND DRAWING!!! WEEEEEEE!!!!

Last edited by BuddyB309 : 17-01-2007 at 20:31.