[Insert huge grin here]

Thanks, Pierre!

Betsy

Pierre & Sandy Pettinger wrote:

> At 08:45 PM 4/24/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>I also photograph the exhibits and the doll contest, but if these were
>>professionally shot, it would be nicer. I may still take reference
>>photos, just in case, but you get the idea.
>
>
>
> Sandy and I are planning to completely photograph all dolls as they come in
> and you will get copies of these as well as copies of all the registration
> information.
>
> Pierre

—
—
Betsy R. Delaney

************************************************************************
http://www.hawkeswood.com/ * http://www.OutOftheBlackBox.org/
http://www.Costume-Con.org/ * http://www.sickpups.org/
http://www.SchoolWithoutWalls.org/
************************************************************************

From Chris Wilrich…

Begin forwarded message:

> Another thing that occurred to me was concerning the Doll Costuming
> Contest. If any of
> you noticed the 24″ “mini-me” that I carried around on a few occasions
> at CC23, he’s a
> Japanese resin ball-jointed doll, and I am a member of the Asian BJD
> community as well as
> the Anime community (there’s quite a bit of crossover). A lot of ABJD
> community people
> are superb doll costumers. (I could get you links to some absolutely
> breathtaking work!!)
>
> If we however want to lure the BJD costumer people to a Costume Con
> (and I think we
> possibly might want to! :p ), there’s going to have to be
> accommodations. As it is, I would
> NOT have entered Kasai (my boy) at CC23, given the facilities, even if
> I had brought him
> with an elaborate costume.
>
> These types of dolls are collectors items, are typically considered by
> their owners to be
> basically “their kids”, and they cost upwards of $450 – actually, many
> cost over $1000,
> and some secondary-market Limited dolls reach over $2500 within a year
> of original sale.
> For the arm and leg that my Limited Volks boy cost me, there is no WAY
> on EARTH
> I’d leave him in a display room if he were not safely locked in a
> glass case where he could
> be seen but NOT touched or – Gods-forbid – stolen. (It would take a
> hecka moola poured
> into a doll costume to make an outfit worth more than he is)

Many of you saw either Chris’ or Ann Catelli’s BJDs at the con, that
gives you an idea what she’s talking about.

I think the idea of display cases for the doll exhibits merits some
serious consideration. Yeah, costumes on display in the exhibit room
are also very valuable but they don’t have the same sort of resale
value and they’re not as small or usually as fragile.

If our doll costume competition attracts the attention of more BJD
collectors and costumers, it could translate into attending memberships
in a way that other dollmakers and costumers wouldn’t necessarily; most
of these folks wouldn’t consider shipping their dolls in for
competition.

—
andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
(Kevin’s)
“It’s not pink, it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.”
–Manfred Pfirsich Marie Rommel

read the FAQ… Ridicule: http://www.idiots-r-us.org/
read the FAQ… IBMWR: http://www.ibmwr.org/faq-files/
read the FAQ… AirList: http://www.airheads.org/faq.html
read the FAQ… Hoaxes & Urban Legends: http://urbanlegends.about.com/

Andrew T Trembley wrote:

> From Chris Wilrich…
>
> Begin forwarded message:
> > For the arm and leg that my Limited Volks boy cost me, there is no WAY
> > on EARTH
> > I’d leave him in a display room if he were not safely locked in a
> > glass case where he could
> > be seen but NOT touched or – Gods-forbid – stolen. (It would take a
> > hecka moola poured
> > into a doll costume to make an outfit worth more than he is)
>
> Many of you saw either Chris’ or Ann Catelli’s BJDs at the con, that
> gives you an idea what she’s talking about.

So that’s why she didn’t have her doll “in” the competition room.

> I think the idea of display cases for the doll exhibits merits some
> serious consideration. Yeah, costumes on display in the exhibit room
> are also very valuable but they don’t have the same sort of resale
> value and they’re not as small or usually as fragile.

Now that’s it brought up, I’m stunned in retrospect that there were not
cases or at least shields to keep folks from touching/taking the dolls.

As I remember folks reaching out to feel the fabric and hair.

> If our doll costume competition attracts the attention of more BJD
> collectors and costumers, it could translate into attending memberships
> in a way that other dollmakers and costumers wouldn’t necessarily; most
> of these folks wouldn’t consider shipping their dolls in for
> competition.

I think this is a add to the “find it” list for the actual con. Either
lockable cases, big enough for the larger dolls, or at least some sort
of shield that keeps grubby little hands (like mine) off the dolls.

JohnO

It has been accepted practice around here to have locking cases for lead-miniature painting competitions. But they are in 25 mm figure size.

I have not thought a lot about the cost of housing dolls size figures. The CONduit art show does tend to have a person present in the room at all times that it is open. But in the case of CC-23, there was usually someone posted outside of the room.

The technology is now becoming available for video-recording surveilance, and eletrical alarming of the dolls. Tagging, like they do in clothing stores may be possible, but most of us don’t own that technology.

Charles

—– Original Message —–
From: Andrew T Trembley

From Chris Wilrich…

Begin forwarded message:
> Another thing that occurred to me was concerning the Doll Costuming
> Contest.
<snip>
there’s going to have to be
> accommodations. As it is, I would
> NOT have entered Kasai (my boy) at CC23, given the facilities, even if
> I had brought him
> with an elaborate costume.
<snip>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I know that the balticon Art Show has lockable cases that they use for
some of the 3-D Art. I’ll be talking with them about borrowing the
cases before CC-27. I suspect that maybe some of the larger regional
con Art Shows may have similar items.

Marty

John O’Halloran wrote:

>Andrew T Trembley wrote:
>
>
>> From Chris Wilrich…
>>
>>Begin forwarded message:
>> > For the arm and leg that my Limited Volks boy cost me, there is no WAY
>> > on EARTH
>> > I’d leave him in a display room if he were not safely locked in a
>> > glass case where he could
>> > be seen but NOT touched or – Gods-forbid – stolen. (It would take a
>> > hecka moola poured
>> > into a doll costume to make an outfit worth more than he is)
>>
>>Many of you saw either Chris’ or Ann Catelli’s BJDs at the con, that
>>gives you an idea what she’s talking about.
>>
>>
>
>So that’s why she didn’t have her doll “in” the competition room.
>
>
>
>>I think the idea of display cases for the doll exhibits merits some
>>serious consideration. Yeah, costumes on display in the exhibit room
>>are also very valuable but they don’t have the same sort of resale
>>value and they’re not as small or usually as fragile.
>>
>>
>
>Now that’s it brought up, I’m stunned in retrospect that there were not
>cases or at least shields to keep folks from touching/taking the dolls.
>
>As I remember folks reaching out to feel the fabric and hair.
>
>
>
>
>>If our doll costume competition attracts the attention of more BJD
>>collectors and costumers, it could translate into attending memberships
>>in a way that other dollmakers and costumers wouldn’t necessarily; most
>>of these folks wouldn’t consider shipping their dolls in for
>>competition.
>>
>>
>
>I think this is a add to the “find it” list for the actual con. Either
>lockable cases, big enough for the larger dolls, or at least some sort
>of shield that keeps grubby little hands (like mine) off the dolls.
>
> JohnO
>
>
>
>
>
>
>View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Betsy,
Dora was kind enough, if not crazy enough, to do the fiddly computer
stuff for Darla and myself in Utah. I’ll e-mail her and ask her to get the
stuff to you, if you don’t have her e-mail address. If you do, e-mail her and fill
her in. I’m sure she help you out with all the stuff you need.
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

(1) The Retrospectives were very interesting, and well-attended, and I hope
future Programming Directors continue them.

(2) What can be done to bring up the numbers on the Fashion Show? So many
of us feel it is an integral part of CC, yet very few designs actually get
made up. (Although the “Sunday Afternoon Event”–Fashion Show plus Single
Pattern–seems to consistently draw participation of 7-8% of the
convention’s attendees.)

(2a) Are the falling numbers because there are so many different
competitions that people have limited time and $$ and the Fashion Show is a
casualty when they participate in other things (Doll Contest, Iron
Costumer, etc.)? I enjoy seeing committees experiment with other types of
competitions and don’t want to discourage that, but I don’t want to see the
Fashion Show become extinct, either.

(2b) Are the falling numbers because there are now tech rehearsals
and pre-judging for the Historical, so folks who would do both events have
conflicts?

(2c) Are the falling numbers because the Folio needs to come out
‘way before the con? 2 months is definitely too little lead time; 4 months
may even be too little lead time. (We tried to do 5 months lead time on
this one and ran into layout problems that took an extra 30 days.)

(2d) Is there some other way to deal with Single Pattern? One
thought would be move it off Sunday and run it as part of the Social by
picking patterns that fit with the Social’s theme; Kevin’s thought is to
run Single Pattern as part of the Fashion Design Contest/Folio/Show and
have entrants draw up their intended modifications.

(3) After the glitch on Sunday night re the Founder’s Award (and, I
believe, the President’s Awards and Cement Overshoes Award as well), there
needs to be some centralized (and well publicized!) location where folks
wanting to make announcements / give awards can sign up.

(4) I would like the term “presentation awards” re-thought for the
masquerades, as it is misleading. The awards given for the stage
appearances are NOT for presentation alone–they should take into
consideration how the costume moves and appears under stage conditions,
scope of work attempted, quality of execution as visible from stage,
etc. A better term might be “stage awards” or “general awards,” although
“general awards” sounds a bit boring. Workmanship awards were always
intended as “extra credit” for doing things that might not be visible from
stage, but were never intended as the sole means of physically judging the
actual costume(s).

More as I think of it…just got home last night and am still a little fried.

–Karen

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I need complete (or as complete as possible) membership lists from all past
CC’s for an upcoming research project relating to CC.

I just need names, not necessarily addresses.

If you have info to contribute, please contact me off-list. I regret that
due to Life Stuff, my personal collection of old PR’s (and materials from
CC-1 and CC-6) is practically non-existent.

Thanks for your help!

–Karen

Too fried (and too late) to think clearly about this stuff tonight, and
this weekend will be busy, but two general thoughts come to my mind.
This is personal opinion here, and not of any official capacity
whatsoever. YMMV!

1. Fashion Show participation: More lead time is definitely a good
thing, but hard to coordinate if the deadline for receiving designs is
the end of the summer. I think there’s a conception out there that
putting the deadline too close to the current CC steals the thunder of
that con. Not sure if it’s true. And it’s been years since I submitted
designs for the folio. I’ve been too focused on the recordkeeping and
not enough on actually constructing costumes for at least the last few
years. Also, I looked through the folio once I received it, and
honestly, there were maybe two designs I wanted to try and construct,
and both were claimed by their designers.

I have only successfully constructed one garment for the Fashion Show.
Prior to that, I attempted to construct two costumes based on my designs
for CC5, which proved disastrous.

I know there were more people signed up to participate in the show, but
in the end something must have happened (and boy, have I been there!) to
keep them from making it to the actual stage.

2. If we’re going to contemplate new names for the types of awards, now
might be a really good time to come up with them, since Andy and I are
just a couple weeks away from submitting the rewritten Guidelines for
chapter review and ICG adoption. If you don’t know what I’m talking
about, go here:

http://www.costume.org/guidelines-committee/

The second draft got a bunch of comments from me that Andy needed to
review, and time ran out before the Annual Meeting (a mixed blessing, I
think). We still have time to make changes to the doc, and it would be a
really nice thing if we could manage to make changes before another
round of reviewing happens. Since Costume-Con figures heavily in the
descriptions of the process outlined in the Guidelines, it seems to me
to be a logical place for changes to be announced. Either that or
Costume-Con will need to develop its own set of specialized guidelines
for competition.

Note that I’m not suggesting what those changes might be, or how we
might go about the process of establishing a separate set of guidelines.

I haven’t got a brain at the moment. Still reinstalling necessary
software and restoring data on my computer, and I have billable work
expected to be done on Monday. After which, I’ll be posting all the data
from CC23 on the Costume-Con.org site.

Just plain ol’ Betsy (sans titles)
(Who is now going to bed, because tomorrow is going to be a very long day!)

Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> (4) I would like the term “presentation awards” re-thought for the
> masquerades, as it is misleading. The awards given for the stage
> appearances are NOT for presentation alone–they should take into
> consideration how the costume moves and appears under stage conditions,
> scope of work attempted, quality of execution as visible from stage,
> etc. A better term might be “stage awards” or “general awards,” although
> “general awards” sounds a bit boring. Workmanship awards were always
> intended as “extra credit” for doing things that might not be visible from
> stage, but were never intended as the sole means of physically judging the
> actual costume(s).
>
> More as I think of it…just got home last night and am still a little fried.
>
> –Karen
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I was approached before my masq about some special awards from guilds and the
raffle. In my opinion, I think special awards that are not connected with the
masquerade should be presented before the awards for that masquerade. The
reason we stick around through half time is to find out who the winners are. This
is also why there is consideration about keeping half time interesting enough
to keep people around. So why eat the peas if we can have the chocolate cake
first?

I know I can’t make every masq director think the way I do about this, but I
can present my case.

Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 11:02 PM 5/6/2005, you wrote:

>(1) The Retrospectives were very interesting, and well-attended, and I hope
>future Programming Directors continue them.
>
>(2) What can be done to bring up the numbers on the Fashion Show? So many
>of us feel it is an integral part of CC, yet very few designs actually get
>made up. (Although the “Sunday Afternoon Event”–Fashion Show plus Single
>Pattern–seems to consistently draw participation of 7-8% of the
>convention’s attendees.)

I’ve mentioned in the past that I think that the Single Pattern steals from
the Fashion Show. That was why we didn’t have a Single Pattern for CC21 and
why we won’t have one for CC24. 21 had more Fashion Show entries than many
recent CCs with Single Patterns.

> (2a) Are the falling numbers because there are so many different
>competitions that people have limited time and $$ and the Fashion Show is a
>casualty when they participate in other things (Doll Contest, Iron
>Costumer, etc.)? I enjoy seeing committees experiment with other types of
>competitions and don’t want to discourage that, but I don’t want to see the
>Fashion Show become extinct, either.

Which is why we’re trying the Costumer’s Eye competition for 24.

> (2b) Are the falling numbers because there are now tech rehearsals
>and pre-judging for the Historical, so folks who would do both events have
>conflicts?
>
> (2c) Are the falling numbers because the Folio needs to come out
>’way before the con? 2 months is definitely too little lead time; 4 months
>may even be too little lead time. (We tried to do 5 months lead time on
>this one and ran into layout problems that took an extra 30 days.)

We definitely feel the folio needs to be out 5-6 months in advance, and
ours will be out by Thanksgiving (hopefully before) for a Memorial Day con.

> (2d) Is there some other way to deal with Single Pattern? One
>thought would be move it off Sunday and run it as part of the Social by
>picking patterns that fit with the Social’s theme; Kevin’s thought is to
>run Single Pattern as part of the Fashion Design Contest/Folio/Show and
>have entrants draw up their intended modifications.
>
>(3) After the glitch on Sunday night re the Founder’s Award (and, I
>believe, the President’s Awards and Cement Overshoes Award as well), there
>needs to be some centralized (and well publicized!) location where folks
>wanting to make announcements / give awards can sign up.

The next PR for 24 will have a direction that all special announcements and
awards must be cleared through me and Les Roth. (no we’re not censoring
anyone. Cleared in the sense of informed of.) We’ll probably also announce
that at the social as well. That way we can prepare a list and, hopefully,
not have any problems.

>(4) I would like the term “presentation awards” re-thought for the
>masquerades, as it is misleading. The awards given for the stage
>appearances are NOT for presentation alone–they should take into
>consideration how the costume moves and appears under stage conditions,
>scope of work attempted, quality of execution as visible from stage,
>etc. A better term might be “stage awards” or “general awards,” although
>”general awards” sounds a bit boring. Workmanship awards were always
>intended as “extra credit” for doing things that might not be visible from
>stage, but were never intended as the sole means of physically judging the
>actual costume(s).

I can see this, but I don’t have a good word here. I suppose I have always
seen “presentation” to include all the above.

Pierre

>More as I think of it…just got home last night and am still a little fried.
>
>–Karen
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

“Those Who Fail To Learn History
Are Doomed to Repeat It;
Those Who Fail To Learn History Correctly —
Why They Are Simply Doomed.

Achemdro’hm
“The Illusion of Historical Fact”
— C.Y. 4971

Andromeda

I think this is opening a can of worms left alone. To sound a little un-PC
here, it’s like trying to use the language to change people’s perception –
like those trying to morph “handicapped” or “disabled” in
“differently-abled”, which brings a snort from a lot of people it doesn’t
really work.

If you want the perception changed, you need to educate people accordinglym,
not just change the title. Nora has said it’s a matter of semantics, and I
agree. The question becomes, then, how do you educate people? Well, you
probably have to start on the grass roots level. Breaking down the
distinctions between Workmanship and Presentations in the Guidelines might
be tedious, but necessary, reading. You would need to explain it to your
audiences, too — but that would only work at a CC. Most other regional
venues wouldn’t give a flip.

I thought the theory was, Workmanship awards were to counted as any other
win, if agreed upon by the MD and the contestant.

Sounds like a good topic for a roundtable discussion at Archon.

Bruce

>
> (4) I would like the term “presentation awards” re-thought for the
> masquerades, as it is misleading. The awards given for the stage
> appearances are NOT for presentation alone–they should take into
> consideration how the costume moves and appears under stage conditions,
> scope of work attempted, quality of execution as visible from stage,
> etc. A better term might be “stage awards” or “general awards,” although
> “general awards” sounds a bit boring. Workmanship awards were always
> intended as “extra credit” for doing things that might not be visible from
> stage, but were never intended as the sole means of physically judging the
> actual costume(s).
>
> More as I think of it…just got home last night and am still a little

fried.

>
> –Karen
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

I thought it was always done this way(?) It would seem anti-climactic,
otherwise.

Bruce

—– Original Message —–
From: <osierhenry@cs.com>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] Thoughts After CC23- Special Awards

> I was approached before my masq about some special awards from guilds and
the
> raffle. In my opinion, I think special awards that are not connected with
the
> masquerade should be presented before the awards for that masquerade. The
> reason we stick around through half time is to find out who the winners
are. This
> is also why there is consideration about keeping half time interesting
enough
> to keep people around. So why eat the peas if we can have the chocolate
cake
> first?
>
> I know I can’t make every masq director think the way I do about this, but
I
> can present my case.
>
> Henry
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

In a message dated 5/7/2005 11:12:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
costumrs@radiks.net writes:

>
> I’ve mentioned in the past that I think that the Single Pattern steals from
> the Fashion Show. That was why we didn’t have a Single Pattern for CC21 and
> why we won’t have one for CC24. 21 had more Fashion Show entries than many
> recent CCs with Single Patterns.

Pierre,
Do you think that there is some way to combine the two? Perhaps a
“featured pattern” in the folio? If I win my bid for CC28, I am planning, at this
point, to have the Single Pattern be based on a Trench Coat pattern, to fit in
with the Spy theme.
Henry
PS My friend and Char loved the Two Color Doll concept!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

That is exactly what we will be doing for CC26.

There will be a Single Pattern DESIGN contest as part of the Folio.

The intent of the SPC was to encourage people who were afraid of pattern
drafting to create something for the show. It was not supposed to
supplant Future Fashion. I hope by rolling it back in we can get the
best of both… some Future Fashion designs that have a clear suggested
starting point for the drafting-phobic.

Kevin

>
> Pierre,
> Do you think that there is some way to combine the two? Perhaps a
> “featured pattern” in the folio? If I win my bid for CC28, I am planning, at this
> point, to have the Single Pattern be based on a Trench Coat pattern, to fit in
> with the Spy theme.
> Henry
> PS My friend and Char loved the Two Color Doll concept!

I fear that part of the confusion about awards order on Sunday Night
(after the Historical) came about because of the unusual nature of my
half-time performance. I didn’t want to do the “reveal” of pulling off
my headdress until site selection was announced and there was last
minute juggling of the order going on back stage to accomodate me. And
because it was last minute juggling, some of it got screwed up.

Kevin

In a message dated 5/8/2005 1:55:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
kevin@twistedimage.com writes:

> That is exactly what we will be doing for CC26.
>
> There will be a Single Pattern DESIGN contest as part of the Folio.

Excellent! Mind if I copy your idea, if I win?
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 5/8/2005 2:01:02 PM Central Daylight Time,
kevin@twistedimage.com writes:

> I fear that part of the confusion about awards order on Sunday Night
> (after the Historical) came about because of the unusual nature of my
> half-time performance.

A) Ah! That explains why things happened like they did.
B) I didn’t think your performance was unusual. Next time, can I be one of
the boys in the chorus?
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> (4) I would like the term “presentation awards” re-thought for the
> masquerades, as it is misleading. The awards given for the stage
> appearances are NOT for presentation alone–they should take into
> consideration how the costume moves and appears under stage conditions,
> scope of work attempted, quality of execution as visible from stage,
> etc. A better term might be “stage awards” or “general awards,” although
> “general awards” sounds a bit boring. Workmanship awards were always
> intended as “extra credit” for doing things that might not be visible from
> stage, but were never intended as the sole means of physically judging the
> actual costume(s).

I entirely agree that “presentation awards” and “workmanship awards” are
really bad names, and when describing them I generally boil it down to
“40′ away in a theatrical context” and “2′ away without theatrical
support.” Janet, Pierre and I talked about this a bit in the Judging
workshop panel. Both judge the costume, just from different perspectives.

I’d hesitate describing workmanship as “extra credit” as we have enough
people repeating the idea that workmanship awards aren’t important. If
technique and construction are important, workmanship awards are
important and need to be valued as much as presentation awards.

As to the renaming, it’s a minefield. When Kevin and I suggested
renaming the divisions to more accurately reflect their nature, we might
as well have suggested sending “master costumers” off to the
concentration camps. The nazi references were avoided, but barely.

One of the items I push as a standard in competion rules is including
judges’ instructions as part of the rules, and publishing them so
everybody can read them. Yeah, I know, who reads competition rules? A
few lines explaining what presentation and workmanship judges should
consider can help educate competitors and attendees as to what the
judges are looking at.

To some extent, this also falls under the symbiotic relationship between
the ICG and Costume-Con. Doesn’t mean that I’m against addressing it
here, though.

Betsy and I are going to get the final substantial changes from the last
review cycle implemented in the ICG guidelines draft and submitted. This
isn’t one of the changes that’s making it in right now. However…

Once the new guidelines are in and approved (assuming that happens), get
your chapter board member to introduce a motion renaming “presentation
awards” to something more accurate and “workmanship awards” to
“technical awards” (as suggested by Janet Anderson) or something else
more meaningful. Personally I like “up-close-and-personal awards” and
“out-in-the-audience awards” but that’s probably a bit too silly to be
acceptable. I think this is much less a minefield than division names,
and it might not blow up in your face.

andy

In a message dated 5/8/2005 6:31:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
attrembl@bovil.com writes:

> Once the new guidelines are in and approved (assuming that happens), get
> your chapter board member to introduce a motion renaming “presentation
> awards” to something more accurate and “workmanship awards” to
> “technical awards” (as suggested by Janet Anderson) or something else
> more meaningful.

Hmmm. Like the second new title. Can’t think of a new first one.
Henry
who runs masquerades at smaller area cons and can help affect changes like
this

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Frankly, I don’t thinkchanging the tielt will help – I feel it’s more of an
education issue.
But if you’re going to use “technical” for Workmanship, then logically the
Presentation awards become “artistic”.

Nora

> In a message dated 5/8/2005 6:31:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
> attrembl@bovil.com writes:
> > Once the new guidelines are in and approved (assuming that happens), get
> > your chapter board member to introduce a motion renaming “presentation
> > awards” to something more accurate and “workmanship awards” to
> > “technical awards” (as suggested by Janet Anderson) or something else
> > more meaningful.

Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:

> Frankly, I don’t thinkchanging the tielt will help – I feel it’s more of an
> education issue.
> But if you’re going to use “technical” for Workmanship, then logically the
> Presentation awards become “artistic”.

Like I said, I like “up-close-and-personal” and “out-in-the-audience.”

andy

At 04:17 PM 5/7/2005, you wrote:

>I was approached before my masq about some special awards from guilds and the
>raffle. In my opinion, I think special awards that are not connected with the
>masquerade should be presented before the awards for that masquerade. The
>reason we stick around through half time is to find out who the winners
>are. This
>is also why there is consideration about keeping half time interesting enough
>to keep people around. So why eat the peas if we can have the chocolate cake
>first?
>
>I know I can’t make every masq director think the way I do about this, but I
>can present my case.

I agree Henry. I believe everything extra should go before the main
awards. The last thing announced should be Best in Show.

Pierre

>Henry

“Those Who Fail To Learn History
Are Doomed to Repeat It;
Those Who Fail To Learn History Correctly —
Why They Are Simply Doomed.

Achemdro’hm
“The Illusion of Historical Fact”
— C.Y. 4971

Andromeda

That’s pretty close to most accurate, though.

The Academy presents its awards in two divisions: Technical Awards and
all the rest, lumped under Academy Awards. I think they extracted the
Technical Awards from the main show to shorten the event overall.

I don’t think we want to go there, though. It takes most of the control
over what gets awarded out of the hands of the judges, if there isn’t a
specified category that applies to a given costume.

Just educating people in the changes to the Guidelines, assuming the
version Andy and I are working on is approved, will be hard enough.

My $0.02, adjusted for inflation…

-B

Bruce & Nora Mai wrote:

> Frankly, I don’t thinkchanging the tielt will help – I feel it’s more of an
> education issue.
> But if you’re going to use “technical” for Workmanship, then logically the
> Presentation awards become “artistic”.
>
> Nora

Hi Re: presentation judging.

originally the workmanship awards were for ‘the small fiddlebits that you
can only see up close’
that quote or many like it are from numerous MC’s over the past 20 years.
slowly the workmanship awards have proven to be more valued than before in
the costumers heads, and perhaps rightly so. The non CC audience still
mostly doesn’t care as they can’t see it, and barely care about any of the
awards as a whole.

As workmanship has gained, presentation had turned into, well presentation
in many cases.

You all seem to be agreeing that presentation/artistic/stage judgeing is
about the entire costume, NOT just the routine, so thats what needs to be
stressed.
TO THE JUDGES, not neccesarily in the guidelines.

in 15 years of judging, I’ve never had an MD give us a briefing on things like

Try your best to always give a best in show
don’t judge a style of costume against others you have seen in the past of
a similar style
don’t judge a specific costumer by what they’ve done in the past
only judge a costume against what is in this particular masquerade
The quality of best in class or best in show may vary from con to con, as
they are only the best on that one particular night.
A great joke is not automatically a great costume.
It’s a costume event, presentation routines are there to provide a better
forum to view the costume

It’s these types of things that judges need to be reminded of, AND held
accountable for.
Then, no name changes or other juggling is required.
The names will represent what is being handed out and thats what needs
tweaking.

I watched about 40% of Pierres judging teaching tape. after each segment
comments were solicited by the folks watching.
almost 90% of the time, the comments were directed at the routine and not
at the costume.
When our bloodrites from cc12 came up. more experienced costumers commented
on the interaction of design styles ,color choices, and such. Awesome and
interesting.( I could take the critique and offer answers as to why choices
were made, no problem)
the people TAKING the class commented on how we moved and why. (
erronious buzzer sound here)

Nobody likes the stage and the ‘performing’ part of the hobby more than me,
but if it came to it, I’d rather we all just walked on, took a model turn,
and walked off, if thats what it took to have a level field so the COSTUME
was judged.

So, we all want a good show for the audience, they pay the bills.
Most of you seem to want the costumes judged on stage ( as they are
designed to be seen) and close up judging off stage. how do we ensure that
the stage judges are looking at the whole piece and not just the schtick?

and, do you really care, or are you trying to make two seperate but equal
awards here.One for making something, and one for showmanship. On the east
coast and lately at CC’s thats what looks to be happening.

Ricky

At 11:06 AM 5/9/2005 +0000, Andrew Trembley wrote:

>I’d hesitate describing workmanship as “extra credit” as we have enough
>people repeating the idea that workmanship awards aren’t important. If
>technique and construction are important, workmanship awards are
>important and need to be valued as much as presentation awards.

But Workmanship awards ARE extra credit as long as Workmanship judging is
NOT mandatory. And Workmanship judging always has been optional in the
F&S/F at CC and at the masquerades at general conventions. Plus I’m not
sure Workmanship judging should be mandatory, as that will open the whole
Historical Masquerade can of worms for the F&S/F–lower numbers of entries
in the masquerade because of people being afraid to enter because of the
workmanship judging, judges needing more time to judge everything so the
necessity of scheduling other times during the con to do individual
workmanship judging, etc., etc.

As long as Workmanship judging is optional and the Workmanship awards are
not the last thing announced at a masquerade, they are automatically
assigned to second-class status. Our audiences have been trained by the big
awards shows on TV to think that the last award announced is the most
important (just as the Technical Awards get buried at the beginning or
middle of the Oscars and the Best Picture award gets handed out last).

–Karen

At 11:06 AM 5/9/2005 +0000, Pirre Pettinger wrote:

>I believe everything extra should go before the main
>awards. The last thing announced should be Best in Show.

I completely agree.

–Karen

This discussion of what is being judged, relates to some others aspects of the Costume show, that was discussed during CC-23 preparation.

What needs to be the role of the lighting, for the masquerades? In a historical sense, that was not really an issue. (like pantomime), it has tended to be minimalist lighting conditions, with each contestant getting essentially the same lighting, but allowing for different announcing and timing.

In some dance competitions at the Peery’s Egyptian, they have tended to use similar lighting for each performance, in order to try to create an equal setting for each number. But this theater also had enough lighting that “specials” were possible, such as the top-lighting used to good effect in the “Succubus” or the back-curtain lighting used in ascension. I know the show directors planned on having a three-zone lighting option (left, center, right), as well as having warm, neutral and cool lighting colors.

My impression is that this costuming art form has slowly been drifting away from it’s ealy orgins, and now has a stong performance aspect. I don’t think it would make sense for it to be a simple runway format, based on what I have seen.

As a performance artist (more-so than costumer), my bias is towards creating the best performance I can, based on the limitations presented — in fact, I’m more interested in the audience response, than any awards. But I’m also aware that the event is judged, so that has created the need for uniform time-limits, etc.

There does seem to be a tendency for fans to push boundaries, adding props, animatronics, what-ever. Given our fannish origins, I don’t expect this to trend to stop.

I did get the impression that what can be done for a venue does need to be understood, and conveyed to the contestants, while they are still in the early part of their design phase.

Charles
CC-23

—– Original Message —–
From: Ricky & Karen Dick
To: runacc@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: [runacc] Digest Number 223

Hi Re: presentation judging.

originally the workmanship awards were for ‘the small fiddlebits that you
can only see up close’
that quote or many like it are from numerous MC’s over the past 20 years.
slowly the workmanship awards have proven to be more valued than before in
the costumers heads, and perhaps rightly so. The non CC audience still
mostly doesn’t care as they can’t see it, and barely care about any of the
awards as a whole.

As workmanship has gained, presentation had turned into, well presentation
in many cases.

You all seem to be agreeing that presentation/artistic/stage judgeing is
about the entire costume, NOT just the routine, so thats what needs to be
stressed.
TO THE JUDGES, not neccesarily in the guidelines.

in 15 years of judging, I’ve never had an MD give us a briefing on things like

Try your best to always give a best in show
don’t judge a style of costume against others you have seen in the past of
a similar style
don’t judge a specific costumer by what they’ve done in the past
only judge a costume against what is in this particular masquerade
The quality of best in class or best in show may vary from con to con, as
they are only the best on that one particular night.
A great joke is not automatically a great costume.
It’s a costume event, presentation routines are there to provide a better
forum to view the costume

It’s these types of things that judges need to be reminded of, AND held
accountable for.
Then, no name changes or other juggling is required.
The names will represent what is being handed out and thats what needs
tweaking.

I watched about 40% of Pierres judging teaching tape. after each segment
comments were solicited by the folks watching.
almost 90% of the time, the comments were directed at the routine and not
at the costume.
When our bloodrites from cc12 came up. more experienced costumers commented
on the interaction of design styles ,color choices, and such. Awesome and
interesting.( I could take the critique and offer answers as to why choices
were made, no problem)
the people TAKING the class commented on how we moved and why. (
erronious buzzer sound here)

Nobody likes the stage and the ‘performing’ part of the hobby more than me,
but if it came to it, I’d rather we all just walked on, took a model turn,
and walked off, if thats what it took to have a level field so the COSTUME
was judged.

So, we all want a good show for the audience, they pay the bills.
Most of you seem to want the costumes judged on stage ( as they are
designed to be seen) and close up judging off stage. how do we ensure that
the stage judges are looking at the whole piece and not just the schtick?

and, do you really care, or are you trying to make two seperate but equal
awards here.One for making something, and one for showmanship. On the east
coast and lately at CC’s thats what looks to be happening.

Ricky

View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/

——————————————————————————
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/runacc/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
runacc-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 5/9/2005 9:53:12 AM Central Daylight Time,
castleb@pulsenet.com writes:

> in 15 years of judging, I’ve never had an MD give us a briefing on things
> like

The only briefing I gave my judges was Judge every entry on its own merits
and don’t be swayed by the name of the person wearing it.

Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In my opinion, I think that many costumers dream of “the ultimate stage
conditions” with all the lighting, sound, etc., effects that we can dream of
possible. But, having been in very few situations where even part of it could
happen, most of us have learned to deal with the simplest conditions, if not the
worst. I’m glad that the theater folks lent there ideas to all of us who got up
on their stage!

I personally applaud Ricky and Karen for being one of two entries that
thought about the possibility of the stage in Utah. Admittedly, there was some last
minute hotel room conferencing about it, but we pulled it off! Yippie for
everybody!

I agree that many costumers have been adapting to the situations of poor
stages and thinking “What can we bring on with us for great effects.”

Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<ahem>

Might I suggest we stay on one topic (Pres vs. Work) before we de-railed by
the whole lighting issue (as interesting as it may be)? Let the first
discussion play out, otherwise, as usual, nothing will get resolved.

Bruce

A “Presentation” award is not just for the presentation – it has to be the
whole package.

Sure, I could get up and dance across the stage but I’m not being judged on
my dancing. It’s on my concept, my movement, my music choice, AND what I’m
wearing. Does the costume fit the concept (or vice-versa)? Can I move in it
the way I should be able to? Does it fit? Does it stay together?

An entry with a good or funny schtick might win some type of presentation
award even though the costume wasn’t as good, but not BiC or BiS – that
requires the whole package.

And have you ever noticed how many BiS also win some sort of Workmanship?

Nora

Ricky Dick wrote:

> in 15 years of judging, I’ve never had an MD give us a briefing on
> things like

Here’s the briefing I did for CC21, which was included in the
masquerade rules packet (and I know you read those rules). It does not,
obviously, mention specifics on what judges should be considering for
presentation and workmanship respectively, but it should. This briefing
was discussed with the judges and clerks at dinner before the
masquerade.

Judges’ Instructions

“Excellence deserves award” is your watchword.

I ask that you be serious in granting awards. A serious award with a
funny name is fine. Please don’t grant an award if you don’t think the
entry has real merit. No “joke” awards.

You are encouraged to award “Best in Show” and “Best in Division” (for
each division) if you find such awards are appropriate. For all other
awards, please judge each entry on its own merit.

It’s up to you to decide whether an entry deserves a major or minor
award. Consider, though, that for novice and journeyman division, major
awards indicate you think the entrant deserves a nudge into a more
experienced division.

Please identify “minor” awards by using “Honorable Mention” in the
award name. Anything that doesn’t have “Honorable Mention” in the name
is a major award.

For each award granted, please identify the entry and the competitor
being granted the award. For example:
� you wish to give a child a presentation award for a costume made by
an adult. Name the child.
� you wish to give a workmanship award to the person who did all the
beading on a group entry. Name that person.

If you need help identifying the appropriate person to grant an award,
ask your clerk.

Competitors who have entered re-creation costumes are asked (but not
required) to provide as documentation a color photocopy or print of the
image the costume is based on. You may ignore any documentation beyond
that.

If you think a personal or business relationship with a competitor will
make it difficult to be objective in your judging, please talk to both
me and your fellow judges about the problem, and we’ll come up with
a�reasonable course of action.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On May 9, 2005, at 9:09 AM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> At 11:06 AM 5/9/2005 +0000, Andrew Trembley wrote:
>> I’d hesitate describing workmanship as “extra credit” as we have
>> enough
>> people repeating the idea that workmanship awards aren’t important. If
>> technique and construction are important, workmanship awards are
>> important and need to be valued as much as presentation awards.
>
> But Workmanship awards ARE extra credit as long as Workmanship judging
> is
> NOT mandatory. And Workmanship judging always has been optional in the
> F&S/F at CC and at the masquerades at general conventions. Plus I’m not
> sure Workmanship judging should be mandatory, as that will open the
> whole
> Historical Masquerade can of worms for the F&S/F–lower numbers of
> entries
> in the masquerade because of people being afraid to enter because of
> the
> workmanship judging, judges needing more time to judge everything so
> the
> necessity of scheduling other times during the con to do individual
> workmanship judging, etc., etc.

Agreed. I just would prefer to avoid using the term “extra credit”
because I believe it would further dilute the perceived value of the
awards.

I have watched (and suffered through judging) the percentage of entries
that take workmanship judging grow a lot in the last few years. Last
year at Noreascon I could count the number of entries that didn’t take
workmanship judging on one hand (well, maybe two).

—
andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.irlm.org/ – mailto:webmaster@irlm.org
“Anybody who takes this seriously deserves to”
— Donna Barr

On May 9, 2005, at 8:42 AM, Charles wrote:

> My impression is that this costuming art form has slowly been drifting
> away from it’s ealy orgins, and now has a stong performance aspect. I
> don’t think it would make sense for it to be a simple runway format,
> based on what I have seen.

Actually, what you’re describing is nearly opposite of what has been
happening. Between Pierre’s “Masquerade of Champions” tape and Carl’s
half-time videos, we watched presentation times shorten over the last
two decades from sometimes 5 minutes down to the 45-90 seconds we see
now.

—
andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
(Kevin’s)
…remaining .sig trimmed for better message/.sig ratio

On May 9, 2005, at 7:53 AM, Ricky & Karen Dick wrote:

> I watched about 40% of Pierres judging teaching tape. after each
> segment
> comments were solicited by the folks watching.
> almost 90% of the time, the comments were directed at the routine and
> not
> at the costume.

Yeah, I saw that too. Note that I tried to steer the room towards
costume-related discussion where I could. Unfortunately, the quality of
that tape is pretty degraded and it was very difficult in many cases
(Bloodrites in particular) to make out details.

Some of it just boils down, though, to the basic nature of video. The
viewer’s focus is forced to the camera’s focus, and that’s following
the action of the presentation. About half-way through I realized that
was a serious problem. It’s much more difficult to consider the costume
or group of costumes in this situation.

The judging panel was an experiment, and I think a qualified success.
If we do this panel again (and I would like to) I want to provide the
attendees with more materials for the practical section, including a
checklist of criteria that they should consider when viewing each clip.
The attendees needed a bit more direction.

Since Pierre & Sandy’s is an ICG archives repository, Pierre will be in
a good position to make up a new and better tape when he gets Carl’s
DVDs.

—
andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.bovil.com/
“It’s not pink; it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.” –Manfred Pfirsich
Marie Rommel

This is very definitely the case (thank goodness). It’s pretty much the
norm on our regional level, at least, anyway.

A lot of that can be attributed to MD indications long before the
masquerade, but also, now that the trend seems to be heavier with Journeymen
and Masters at many venues, they all know better. At the ones where the MDs
allow people to hang themselves, those novices seem to only make the mistake
of running over 1 minute once.

Bruce

—– Original Message —–
From: “Andrew T Trembley” <attrembl@bovil.com>
To: <runacc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [runacc] Digest Number 223

>
> On May 9, 2005, at 8:42 AM, Charles wrote:
> > My impression is that this costuming art form has slowly been drifting
> > away from it’s ealy orgins, and now has a stong performance aspect. I
> > don’t think it would make sense for it to be a simple runway format,
> > based on what I have seen.
>
> Actually, what you’re describing is nearly opposite of what has been
> happening. Between Pierre’s “Masquerade of Champions” tape and Carl’s
> half-time videos, we watched presentation times shorten over the last
> two decades from sometimes 5 minutes down to the 45-90 seconds we see
> now.
>
> —
> andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen – http://www.bovil.com/
> San Jose, CA – ’72 R75/5 ’86 R100 (mine) – ’92 K75sa ’03 R1150R
> (Kevin’s)
> …remaining .sig trimmed for better message/.sig ratio
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

A very good point – one I hadn’t considered when Pierre did the panel here,
once. It would be harder to discern the quality of the costume along with
the movement, so there may be an inherent bias by the audience, since
choreography and concept are going to be the most detectable components on
the videos.

I concur that an updated judging panel video is really needed. Something
for CC25, as a panel on masquerade evolution and the judging issues? That’d
give folks plenty of time to put together the necessary clips. 🙂

Bruce

—– Original Message —–
From: “Andrew T Trembley” <attrembl@bovil.com>

> Some of it just boils down, though, to the basic nature of video. The
> viewer’s focus is forced to the camera’s focus, and that’s following
> the action of the presentation. About half-way through I realized that
> was a serious problem. It’s much more difficult to consider the costume
> or group of costumes in this situation.
>
> The judging panel was an experiment, and I think a qualified success.
> If we do this panel again (and I would like to) I want to provide the
> attendees with more materials for the practical section, including a
> checklist of criteria that they should consider when viewing each clip.
> The attendees needed a bit more direction.
>
> Since Pierre & Sandy’s is an ICG archives repository, Pierre will be in
> a good position to make up a new and better tape when he gets Carl’s
> DVDs.
>
> —
> andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
> http://www.bovil.com/
> “It’s not pink; it’s peach-colored. Pink is tacky.” –Manfred Pfirsich
> Marie Rommel
>
>
>
>
> View the Document: http://www.Costume-Con.org/procedure/runacc/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

At 01:55 PM 5/8/2005, you wrote:

>That is exactly what we will be doing for CC26.
>
>There will be a Single Pattern DESIGN contest as part of the Folio.
>
>The intent of the SPC was to encourage people who were afraid of pattern
>drafting to create something for the show. It was not supposed to
>supplant Future Fashion. I hope by rolling it back in we can get the
>best of both… some Future Fashion designs that have a clear suggested
>starting point for the drafting-phobic.
>
>Kevin

I will be very interested in seeing how this works. I’m certainly open to
keeping the concept of the Single Pattern. I think its a great concept. If
we can figure out how to avoid impacting the Future Fashion Show, then I’m
all for it.

Pierre

> >
> > Pierre,
> > Do you think that there is some way to combine the two? Perhaps a
> > “featured pattern” in the folio? If I win my bid for CC28, I am
> planning, at this
> > point, to have the Single Pattern be based on a Trench Coat pattern, to
> fit in
> > with the Spy theme.
> > Henry
> > PS My friend and Char loved the Two Color Doll concept!

“Those Who Fail To Learn History
Are Doomed to Repeat It;
Those Who Fail To Learn History Correctly —
Why They Are Simply Doomed.

Achemdro’hm
“The Illusion of Historical Fact”
— C.Y. 4971

Andromeda

In a message dated 5/9/2005 5:13:28 PM Central Daylight Time,
casamai@sbcglobal.net writes:

> Might I suggest we stay on one topic (Pres vs. Work) before we de-railed by
> the whole lighting issue (as interesting as it may be)?

Sorry, Bruce. Just commenting on the comment.
Henry

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This discussion is getting very interesting.

I would like to make a few points.

First, when judging the stage presentation a judge should be appraising the
costume itself first and foremost. Granted in conversation we often compare
this entry to another with a similar theme from x years ago or comment that
y costumer did better work in that other masquerade. However, that’s not
what we should be judging.

Presentation of a costume is important. However, the intent of the
presentation should be the display of the costume. The lighting, music and
choreography choices should all be about showing us the costume. While the
presentation can improve the look of a costume, we shouldn’t be so
distracted from the costume itself.

I can say, without naming specific conventions, that I have seen terrific
presentation that have received no or small awards because the costume was
poor or suffered from some major design flaws.

I agree with Karen, though, that Workmanship will always seem a less
important award until and unless it becomes mandatory. (and I’m not
advocating that)

Pierre

“Those Who Fail To Learn History
Are Doomed to Repeat It;
Those Who Fail To Learn History Correctly —
Why They Are Simply Doomed.

Achemdro’hm
“The Illusion of Historical Fact”
— C.Y. 4971

Andromeda

Bruce wrote,

>I concur that an updated judging panel video is really needed. Something
>for CC25, as a panel on masquerade evolution and the judging issues? That’d
>give folks plenty of time to put together the necessary clips. 🙂

I think Carl is also trying to get first generation tapes onto dvd to do
this, he certainley borrowed a bunch from us that some at least are the
originals.
also, we are working with him to get some sound editing so we can fix that
which we can’t replace, even in some cases, finding the cd of the music,
and just re-recording it fresh if there are no cuts.

Ricky

— In runacc@yahoogroups.com, Pierre & Sandy Pettinger
<costumrs@r…> wrote:

> I can say, without naming specific conventions, that I have seen

terrific

> presentation that have received no or small awards because the

costume was

> poor or suffered from some major design flaws.

There is no shame in giving the lesser or middle-of-the-road costume
with the terrific presentation a “Best Presentation,” “Most Humorous,”
or “Best Concept” award. But does it deserve a Best In Show, Judge’s
Choice, or Best In Class? Only if the quality of the individual
costume(s) is higher than the other entries in the masquerade.
Ultimately, it still should be about the costumes.

Over the last decade, we have seen more and more “joke” presentations
in the East Coast masquerades, and declining numbers in the
masquerades overall. If judges consistently give the highest awards to
the best schtick vs. the best costumes, there is *no* incentive for
anyone to put the effort into high-quality, serious costumes, and I
think our artform loses something important thereby.

–Karen

Andy and I judge BayCon frequently, and we strive valiantly out here to
make sure the Best in Show really is BIS.

BayCon uses its own set of rules, allowing for longer presentations
(closer to anime cosplay, but informed by ICG guidelines. *Especially*
when guild members are on the judging panel, which is most of the time).

One group in particular *usually* does spectacular costumes enhanced by
very entertaining presentations. Their “One Ring Circus” (a LOTR/Moulin
Rouge crossover) was hysterically funny and showed off their fantastic
LOTR recreations to good effect. It was definitely BIS material.

Their Pirates of the Caribbean/Gilbert & Sullivan crossover was not
nearly as effective, and so that year the brass ring (sorry. couldn’t
resist) eluded them. Jack Sparrow, on the other hand (who invaded their
entry from his own, completely in character) had both the character and
costume nailed, and he did win major awards that year.

I suspect I’m simply agreeing vehemently with Karen here.

grizzy1955 wrote:

>
> Over the last decade, we have seen more and more “joke” presentations
> in the East Coast masquerades, and declining numbers in the
> masquerades overall. If judges consistently give the highest awards to
> the best schtick vs. the best costumes, there is *no* incentive for
> anyone to put the effort into high-quality, serious costumes, and I
> think our artform loses something important thereby.
>
> –Karen

On May 11, 2005, at 4:36 PM, grizzy1955 wrote:

> Over the last decade, we have seen more and more “joke” presentations
> in the East Coast masquerades, and declining numbers in the
> masquerades overall. If judges consistently give the highest awards to
> the best schtick vs. the best costumes, there is *no* incentive for
> anyone to put the effort into high-quality, serious costumes, and I
> think our artform loses something important thereby.

Some folks take the maxim “Short is good, funny is better, short and
funny is best” a little too far.

At internationals (and we’re really talking about CC here, but I’ve
seen the same thing at WorldCon) simple and/or dramatic presentations
tend to take “Best in” awards. Our champion of “funny” is Daren Bost,
and we all know he’s known for whiz-bang costumes in service of the
worst jokes.

Looking to regionals and west-coast locals, there’s quite a bit of
serious work and even the funny presentations usually feature excellent
costumes.

Even at our Anime conventions and furry conventions (where “masquerade”
entries tend to be performance focused) the winners tend to be the ones
with the coolest costumes; perhaps it’s just a regional judging
tradition that’s taken hold.

—
andy trembley, Bitchy Design Queen
http://www.irlm.org/ – mailto:webmaster@irlm.org
“Anybody who takes this seriously deserves to”
— Donna Barr

We seem to all be agreeing with each other, on what type of judging is
acceptable, and what things get judged where.

Pierre’s message below makes it pretty plain .

So at what point do we hold judges, and MD’s accountable for things
being askew, and judges having thier own aggendas.
In the mid eighties, panels at some east coast worldcons and regionals
got so out of whack that by the time I was starting to be asked to
judge, ( 1987 or so) the MD or assistant was ALWAYS in the room with
the judges, availible for questions about policy, but also obviously
to me to ‘monitor’ what went down in there. To make sure that there
were no shennanigans.
This also stops one aggresive judge from being a leader back there and
shouting down other opinions.
we all know it happens, but most of the folks reading this won’t let
it happen when they see it. but we all still like to compete and there
are plenty of times when there are judging panels that make you go,
huh?

A strong MD with the briefing list I wrote that no one here has taken
acception to would do a lot to make things run smoother.
The last time I judged, LunaCon 2003 the assistant MD was with us, and
ran the judging, things ran smooth , things ran clean.

So where does the buck stop.

I can see where the next four CC’s will have as much ‘guidance’ as is
felt neccesary in these fields as we all are right here on this list
now. Does that mean it will all stop?
Can the way we run the next few trickle around and effect change?

And on a seperate topic, are judges decisions to be kept to
themselves?
I have always assumed that I would be held responsible for my
decisions and have to speak about them when asked.

From what I can tell, that doesn’t seem to be a universal thought.
For me, if I was MD and asking someone to judge it would ONLY be with
the understanding that they
A- abide by the briefings I gave ( which no one here as said are
wrong)
and 2-That they be willing to explain thier choices, not in full
public, but at least in private should a costumers request that.

I’ve sen judges asked in a public/dead dog forum to answer, and have
them say, no, but I would speak to the one costumer privately, and
thats a great way to handle it.

Ricky

>
> I would like to make a few points.
>
> First, when judging the stage presentation a judge should be

appraising the

> costume itself first and foremost. Granted in conversation we often

compare

> this entry to another with a similar theme from x years ago or

comment that

> y costumer did better work in that other masquerade. However, that’s

not

> what we should be judging.
>
> Presentation of a costume is important. However, the intent of the
> presentation should be the display of the costume. The lighting,

music and

> choreography choices should all be about showing us the costume.

While the

> presentation can improve the look of a costume, we shouldn’t be so
> distracted from the costume itself.
>
> I can say, without naming specific conventions, that I have seen

terrific

> presentation that have received no or small awards because the

costume was

> poor or suffered from some major design flaws.
>
> I agree with Karen, though, that Workmanship will always seem a

less

> important award until and unless it becomes mandatory. (and I’m not
> advocating that)
>
> Pierre
>
>
>
> “Those Who Fail To Learn History
> Are Doomed to Repeat It;
> Those Who Fail To Learn History Correctly —
> Why They Are Simply Doomed.
>
> Achemdro’hm
> “The Illusion of Historical Fact”
> — C.Y. 4971
>
> Andromeda

Just so people know, I’m watching this conversation from a distance. I
think I made it fairly plain that I wasn’t happy with all the decisions
that were made at CC23 (as a judge), and I have come to the conclusion
that I would much rather be on the other side of the table as a result.

You’ll find me in the greenroom, onstage, or in the audience, but I’m no
longer interested in participating in the judging aspect of the events,
for reasons I’ll happily share privately if asked.

In this particular case, your mileage won’t vary. My measurements are
accurate.

Betsy

grizzy1955 wrote:

> We seem to all be agreeing with each other, on what type of judging is
> acceptable, and what things get judged where.

[snip]

I’m sorry you feel that way. I hope I did not contribute to your
discomfort in any way.

As one of your fellow judges, I thought you did an excellent job. There
was some spirited discussion, but I came away very satisfied with the
choices we made. I think we did the best job we could do; it was an
excellent masquerade, as Costume Cons often are. I would gladly do it
again, should anyone wish to ask me sometime in the future.

Karen

Betsy Delaney wrote:

> Just so people know, I’m watching this conversation from a distance. I
> think I made it fairly plain that I wasn’t happy with all the decisions
> that were made at CC23 (as a judge), and I have come to the conclusion
> that I would much rather be on the other side of the table as a result.
>

Ricky wrote: “So at what point do we hold judges, and MD’s accountable for
things being askew, and judges having their own agendas.”

As I recall, various cons rejected the ICG model masquerade rules _because_
they seemed to dictate policy and procedure. For CCs, we’re okay to ask for
accountability. But I am not sure how we can hold regular con judges and
MD’s accountable.

I know that with our local con, Conduit, we in the Guild do volunteer to
judge and try to “raise the bar”. However, we sometimes run afoul of the
concom which often asks Writer GoH’s or other guests to also serve as
judges. These guests can have their own notions about judging. This can
cause friction.

Dave Doering

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

grizzy1955 wrote:

>
> So at what point do we hold judges, and MD’s accountable for things
> being askew, and judges having thier own aggendas.

As Andy and Pierre said in their judging workshop, all judges have
biases. What the MD has to do is pick judges whose biases balance each
other, so there isn’t one agenda working, but rather a variety of
viewpoints available. This does mean the MD may have to work a little
harder, and go outside the regular recognized pool of potential judges.
Fresh blood is good; no matter how much a particular judge may intend
to be completely open, I think we recognize that it’s easy to get into a
groove with your choices, and a groove over time can become a rut. If a
number of judges are in a similar rut, then the masquerade results all
seem to look the same, which can be discouraging to people who are
trying to push the envelope – often that isn’t rewarded, so a certain
sameness creeps in – and quite frankly, that makes for a boring masquerade.

>
> This also stops one aggresive judge from being a leader back there and
> shouting down other opinions.

This is why 3 judges are an *absolute* minimum for any respectable
judging panel.

>
> we all know it happens, but most of the folks reading this won’t let
> it happen when they see it. but we all still like to compete and there
> are plenty of times when there are judging panels that make you go,
> huh?

Or worse yet, go, “WHAT???” *incredulous facial expression* “You must
be kidding me!” *disgust and indignation*

>
> And on a seperate topic, are judges decisions to be kept to
> themselves?
> I have always assumed that I would be held responsible for my
> decisions and have to speak about them when asked.
>
> >From what I can tell, that doesn’t seem to be a universal thought.
> For me, if I was MD and asking someone to judge it would ONLY be with
> the understanding that they
> A- abide by the briefings I gave ( which no one here as said are
> wrong)
> and 2-That they be willing to explain thier choices, not in full
> public, but at least in private should a costumers request that.
>
> I’ve sen judges asked in a public/dead dog forum to answer, and have
> them say, no, but I would speak to the one costumer privately, and
> thats a great way to handle it.
>

I was confronted by one person at the con suite, who was in a
presentation, but I don’t believe was one of the costume-makers (memory
fails me here). I was taken aback by her approach, which was very
in-my-face, as though I “owed” her an explanation. Thanks go to Pierre,
to whom I was talking at the time, for throwing me a lifeline, which
seemed to take the wind out of her huffiness. She still wasn’t happy,
but she also realized she wasn’t going to get an answer, either – at
least not the answer she wanted, and certainly not in that situation
with that attitude. I waited to see if the costume-makers and
organizers of the presentation had any questions (since I figured she
would go complain to them), but they did not approach me. Maybe they
talked to one of the other judges – I don’t know.

Karen