Competition: with Marijn Van Gils

Competition is a big part of the modelling, whilst not being, in any way, essential to the hobby. If all competition ended tomorrow, people would still be making models and the shows would still happen, albeit somewhat differently in some cases.

But we do have competition, and its often a central part of many shows. Certainly, many people love to debate the merits and demerits of this and that show and competition. But we don’t often look into why we do it, and what it means in the hobby beyond the results.

One of the first competitions and shows I went to, which really made me reconsider what was possible in the hobby, was Euromilitaire. My first year was 2005, and one of the models that year that really stunned me, was the vignette of a Belgian observation ballon crew under attack, which won Best of Show. That model was by Marijn Van Gils.

I followed Marijn’s work avidly from afar, over the internet, but eventually I would get to speak to him in person, and found out just how deep his enthusiasm for, and knowledge of modelling, runs. A man who seems to have never lost the the rush of discovering something new, and making things. In addition to his award-winning models, I found someone with a love of looking at the work of others and a highly accomplished and skilled judge at competitions.

So, when I wanted to tackle the subject of competitions, Marijn was top of my list.

Before we carry on, remember you can listen to this interview on the Model Philosopher Podcast at https://modelphilosopher.podbean.com/

Chris

All right, so what do you think are the current systems for competition? Should we go through them and enumerate them, so to speak?

Marijn

Okay, the problem with that though is that there are a lot of systems and usually when you hear about the different systems, especially on the podcasts nowadays, almost every podcast has been talking about the difference between the different competition systems and it usually gets reduced to or IPMS system or AMPS system or open system, usually as used originally by Chicago show or the World Expo for example, but there are a lot of variations to these systems. For example, not every IPMS show is done the same way as the IPMS nationals in the USA for example. There’s a lot of variation to that.

The problem with discussing according to these systems is usually also that there are a lot of aspects to the organization of a show and the way a system is made. Usually, these aspects are all thrown together in the different systems, in the discussions about the different systems, and it gets confusing really quickly what we are talking about exactly and in which system. So I think maybe instead of going over like “the IPMS USA National System is this kind of system and this is the pro and cons” and then the next system maybe it’s more interesting to talk about the different aspects of the competitions and of the judging and what difference, what variation there can be because really there are almost as many systems as there are shows and I think that’s very good, that’s excellent because I don’t think there is a best system.

There are good reasons why there are different systems. On the one hand, there are certainly practical reasons. Not every show is the same. Some shows have two days, which means there is plenty of time to judge. Some shows only have one day, which means that time is a real constraint for judging, because after judging you also have to [complete] the administration of the competition in order to prepare for the award ceremony. Maybe you have to take photographs to embellish the award ceremony and you need a bit of margin in case errors are made and need to be corrected. So on a one -day show, typically you have one hour, one hour and a half to do the judging. That’s it.

So that’s a big difference for example already and that has consequences to how you organize your judging. On the other hand, also the type of models that you have can be very different. Sometimes it’s really mixed but sometimes it’s very specialized like APMS is very specialized in armour. Other shows are very specialized but maybe not exclusively, with only a tiny amount of other stuff. For example, a figure show. You can easily work with the typical open categories of painting and open. Open is then anything that is extra on painting. So modifications, conversions, scratch builds, dioramas is all in open. Just subdivide in those two, maybe different levels, maybe fantasy historical if you like. And everything that’s not a figure can easily be put in the ordinance, class, ships, tanks, airplanes, all together because there are only a few of them at the show anyway.

But… for example at IPMS USA nationals, you can’t do that because there are too many aircraft, too many tanks, etc. to all put together in the same class and have them judged by the same people. So a lot depends on what type of show you have practically, but also philosophically. Different shows attract different kind of people. Some modellers are more geared towards the, let’s say, engineering mindset where there is a certain way to do things where stuff can be quantified, other people are more geared towards artistic idea about modelling where quantification is not so not so simple or impossible and most people are somewhere in between, but some shows cater more for one direction, other shows cater more for the other type of people. Some shows cater more for people that like very competitive competition, for those shows 1, 2, 3 system may be the best. Other shows consider competition more as a juried exhibition. For those shows I believe Gold, Silver, Bronze is much better.

I myself, I have a very clear preference for the type of show I go to and for the judging systems and everything, but that doesn’t mean that it’s the only right system. There are different people with different opinions, with different ways of enjoying our hobby, and it’s okay to have shows and systems that cater for them. Not all shows have to cater for me and you, of course.

That said, we can of course go into certain aspects and we can of course talk about our preferences too. There’s nothing wrong with that because with everything philosophical there are also reasons and arguments why we adhere to a certain philosophy and it’s okay to discuss those of course.

Chris

I think in some cases too, cultural background comes into it in that if you have a very competitive society, it tends to produce competitive modellers who want to win and to exceed others. So that’s not a bad thing, it’s just something you could point to as the reason behind why some national shows are more based on a 1, 2, 3 system and that sort of thing.

Marijn

Exactly.

Chris

But also within modelling, we tend to talk about modelling as a monoculture, but it really isn’t. There are lots of different cultures within modelling. And as you’ve pointed out, particularly on the figure side, they’re more into the idea of a juried exhibition and so on. So, and less, as you say, engineering based. It’s great that there are all these different cultures in modelling.

Occasionally I come across people who take the same model to one show and do very well, take it to another show and don’t do very well at all, and blame the show, say, “the judges didn’t know what they were doing” without realizing that there are different philosophies at each of those shows and a model might do very well in one philosophy and not do very well in another. It doesn’t change how good the model is.

Marijn

Absolutely, I couldn’t agree more.

Chris

It just changes how maybe you could look at it in terms of, well, OK, it’s strong in this aspect, but not so strong in that aspect and so on. So I think it’s very important for people to understand this idea that there are different cultures before they enter, because then their expectations will be adjusted based on that.

Marijn

Exactly, yeah that’s very true and well it can also affect your choice of shows that you will visit.

Hopefully not too much because there is much more to shows than just a competition. Anyway, just as a sideline, the discussion we’re having now about competitions and judging, in the scope of the hobby it’s just a small discussion. Most modelers never enter a competition, most probably even never visit a show. But amongst the people who do, it’s a discussion that pops up regularly.

As you can also see on the different podcasts. And well, it never fails to be entertaining. So I don’t mind having this discussion at all. It’s always fun.

Chris

Well, the reason I wanted to have it is usually when it comes up, it is in the context of this system is better than that system or what’s wrong with this system or, and I wanted to kind of not have that discussion because , A: it’s been talked out, but also B: it leaves out an awful lot more that we could talk about, about why we compete and so on. So, I mean, why do we compete? Why do some modelers like to compete in competitions?

Marijn

Of course, I can mostly talk for myself, but I think most of the things why I like to compete will also appeal to other modellers in a certain degree or another, because there is more than one reason, I believe, certainly for myself.

Maybe first the obvious competitive aspects. It’s nice to be able to see where you stand, where your level is. We’re passionate about our hobby, we want to improve, so we like to have some kind of feedback on how we are improving, how it’s going, and there are different ways of doing that, and competition is one of these ways. It has its flaws.

For example, detailed feedback on how you can improve further is very difficult. There have been suggestions made or attempts made, but so far I’ve seen nothing that really does the trick. I feel the only way to really get that kind of detailed feedback on how you can improve further and what exactly may be not so good about your model and what you can do about it.

I think you can only get it one on one while being in a conversation with other modellers. Scores on a score sheet is not going to tell it to you. Little comments made with that score sheet on a judging is not going to tell it to you. One of the last episodes of the Plastic Posse podcast also commented on it. They kept it very positive. But yet they were having fun with these comments on the score sheet when coming home from AMPS USA. And to be honest, I had exactly the same experience with that kind of system of feedback. You don’t alleviate the questions that the competitor has, you just make the questions more detailed. Instead of thinking like, what’s wrong with my model? You see like, what’s wrong with my chipping?

Chris

I mean, it’s bad enough when they say “too much chipping or not enough” or something like that. But when it just says “chipping”, you know literally nothing about why they didn’t like it.

Marijn

Exactly. Exactly.  But well, of course, giving criticism is very difficult, taking criticism is very difficult, and written form is usually the worst way to try to do it, and both of the directions of this communication. So I think the only good way is personal communication that can be online, that can be personal, in person, at a show, at a club. So competition is never going to replace that kind of feedback, I think. On the other hand, it can give a kind of feedback that is pretty honest. For example, the people at your club or at the show may be afraid to hurt your feelings about where you are exactly as a level. They may give you good pointers about what to improve on certain aspects.

But to get the big picture of where you are, competitions can be much more honest. So I think competitions can be quite effective for that. But you should never look at the result of one competition. If you think” I want to know where I am, I’ll register. “In one competition, it’s a bit hit and miss. You can get exactly what you deserve. You can get a bit more, you can get a bit less. There can be a fluke and it can be way off.

It can all happen, it’s normal. It’s part of the way judging happens. It’s human’s work. Mistakes can happen. Anyway, it’s hard to be too precise also about the judging results. Difference between a silver and a bronze, or a bronze or nothing, can be sometimes really small.

and can be sometimes matter of opinion of the judges on that specific day. So you shouldn’t think too much of the results of one competition. Instead, go to 10 competitions and then you will see where you average out more or less. And that will tell you really where you are, I believe.

Chris

There’s also the issue that in the 1,2,3 system, it doesn’t really tell you how good you are compared to last year or what have you, because your result is based on who else is in the room on that day.

Marijn

That’s a big advantage of gold silver bronze, indeed.

Chris

But even with gold, silver, bronze, there’s that kind of nebulous, “the level of the hobby at the moment”. So it’s only ever the best assessment of the judges. So like you say, go to more than one show, particularly if it’s something you’ve worked on a long time and you’re really, you know, you’ve invested a lot in, don’t just take it to one show and get one opinion, take it to a couple of shows and see what people think.

Marijn

Absolutely. And you also need to take into account that also with Gold, Silver, Bronze system originally as conceived in the USA with the Open system, the idea is to judge against the level of the hobby at the moment. But you can do that when you’re at top level shows with the top level modellers of the world in attendance in all categories.

You can’t do that with smaller local shows, because then only a couple of people will win a gold and nobody else will. It’s only normal that at big international shows the level is simply higher than at smaller local shows. So at anything but the biggest, highest level shows it is necessary not to just look at the level of the hobby, but it is necessary also to look at the level of the competition.

That doesn’t mean that in every class something needs to win a gold, but you have to take into account in a certain way what is on the table and adjust accordingly to what is necessary, which level is necessary to get the gold, get the silver, get the bronze. So in that way, judging against the level of the hobby is a little bit abstract for many shows. But for shows like Chicago show or MFCA or World Expo or SMC, yes there it is possible to judge against the level of the hobby. And that makes those shows interesting I think. If you’re interested in the evolution of the hobby, where it is going, what is new, what are new developments, new techniques, new styles.

These are the shows where you can see it and where it will also be reflected in the awards to a certain extent.

Chris

That makes me think of another benefit to competing actually. It’s not just finding out where you are, it’s having your work on show, particularly in the US where they have a lot of shows where there’s no display. It is a form of display. You shouldn’t only enter a model in order to win something. You should enter it for the fun of entering it and for showing it, sharing it.

Marijn

Absolutely. I was starting with the obvious competitive aspect as a reason for entering a competition, but for me personally putting your model on display is more important. Maybe that’s probably the first reason for me. To me there are  more reasons. First, well besides the competitive aspect, and second is to show your work. The third reason is to use the showing of your work as a kind of tool to meet other modellers, as a conversation starter, let’s say. And thirdly as a learning tool. From the feedback you get, through the competition, partly but mostly also by seeing your own work amongst other people’s work at the table and get inspiration from all the… well that’s basically a fifth reason. Basically just to get inspiration, see what’s new, what can be done better by studying other people’s work in the flesh, because it’s different than on photographs, especially small photographs on social media.

Chris

Very.

Marijn

it’s not the same as seeing models in the flesh in reality. And then talking with the people who built them, asking questions to them about how they do this, how they do that, why they do it like that. That’s a goldmine of information, a goldmine of inspiration. It really charges the modelling Mojo 100%.

So as a learning tool, as an inspiration tool in that way, to show your own work, whether you win something or not. Because, well, you know, the competitions, they are the place where a lot of models are together. The new models, people bring their latest, their newest work, their best work. So it’s a place where a lot is on display, is to be seen. It attracts a lot of attention from the viewers. If you want your work to be seen, it’s a great place.

It’s not the only place, you can also bring it to a club stand or Special Interest Group stand. You can also not go to shows, show it online only. But the competition is one of the places where you can show your work and I think it’s a great place for it.

Chris

I think everyone looks at the competition. So, if you want it to be seen, that’s the place to put it. But also, as you say, it’s kind of interesting, colours change when you put one against another. Sort of how you perceive the colour changes completely. And it’s the same with your model. You put your model next to other models and suddenly you can see your model the way other people see it. I quite often get kind of snow blind looking at my own models you know, you get so into it and you look at it so much that you kind of lose perspective on it a little bit. And when you put it next to other people, that perspective snaps right back and you can immediately see, that wasn’t quite as good as I thought it was. Or, that’s actually better than I thought it was because you know, you’re seeing it against other people of a similar level.

Marijn

Absolutely. And in that way, you can also more easily compare what’s the difference and why it looks better, or not as good. The other models maybe they have more contrast. They are painted in a more contrasted way, or they are displayed in a different way, or their colours are more bright or lighter or whatever. This kind of things…They pop out at the competition table, but not on your own workbench or on your own Facebook page.

Chris

Mm -hmm, and that can really help.

Marijn

Absolutely, absolutely. Well, of course, there are also different philosophies. Some people have the opinion that, well, online, so many more people are going to see my model than will ever see my model on a competition table. On a competition table, maybe hundreds of people will see it, maybe even thousands or thousands, but online it can be many, many thousands. So…those people feel like,” well, my model just needs to look good on the photograph. That’s what I’m working for”. A well photographed model that looks good on a screen. Perfectly fine. But you can also be off of the idea. And that’s my personal opinion. That’s well, I’m not a photographer. I’m a modeler. I make small, three dimensional objects. And one of the great things about it is that it is three dimensional, and that you can look at it all around. And that it is small, that you cannot necessarily blow it up on the screen. That it is something small, that makes you go into it, get closer to it, be drawn into it. And that’s why I prefer to model in a style that I try to make my models look as good as possible in the flesh. I don’t care how they look on photo, I want them to look good in the flesh. And that style of modelling will look at its best, especially at the modeling shows.

Chris

I think if you’re good at making your model look good in photos, you’re good at photography more than you are at modelling. It’s a very different experience to seeing it with your own eyes.

Marijn

Yes, it is, it is. And when you look at other models and you’re trying to learn from them, you’re always thinking about “What can I take from this model that I could apply and that will make my model better”. And it’s easier to judge that when you see the model in the flesh, I think.

Chris

Yeah, I mean, no matter how intellectually you know the size, let’s say of a 1/35th figure and you’re looking at a photo on a screen, no matter how much you think, I know how big that is and you understand the scale, it’s not the same as being in the physical presence of something that is a different scale. And it’s only when you’re actually there with it that you can really appreciate all the subtleties of something, I think. I think quite often as well, even when people’s photos are good, the camera is never quite as good as your eye, there are subtleties. Something I notice a lot with your work and with a lot of other people’s work is there are a lot of tones that get lost in photos. And I can appreciate the colour and the blend and the subtlety of it a lot more in person than I can on a screen.

Marijn

Yeah, I think you’re right. I think you’re right. And well, if you love models, it’s just fun to watch them in reality too. You don’t need to always think only “how can I apply this to my own modelling” to just enjoy going around the competition tables and enjoy everything that’s on display there. So that leads me also to another idea. The competitions, they are not only there for the competitors.

There are more reasons why a competition is a valid thing to organize. Of course, first of all, like we just said, just for the sheer joy of watching models, it’s not only for the competitors to go around to watch models. Every visitor of the show can enjoy the models there. And it’s a great way of concentrating a lot of great models together.

And also they are grouped by subject, which is often something that’s important to people to look for the subject matter that they like. It’s an attraction point at a modelling show to have a big bunch of models together ready for viewing. So just for the general audience, it’s also a good thing to have a competition.

Is it necessary? No, because there are other ways of displaying models at modelling shows and some shows are doing that and very successfully like Shizuoka or also the… I forgot the name. There is a show I think in the north west of the USA or was it in Canada? I’m not sure. Where they’re also working with display only, no judging. and it also, I also forgot the numbers, but it was in the 1000 or 2000 models they have. So it’s not the only way, but it’s a way that works. It does attract, it does attract modellers. It’s not necessary to attract modellers, but it is a way to attract modellers to bring their work and put it on display. And in that way, it’s also, functional not just for the visitors of a show, but also for the organizers of a show.

There are certainly variations to this, but in Western Europe we often have like a kind of ‘Holy Trinity’ of stuff at shows and they’re all equally important. That’s the thing that binds all of them.

The ‘Holy Trinity’ is trade stands, one, club stands or special interest groups, second and third the competition. And they’re all equally important and they all reinforce each other.

The club stands, they provide people to enter the competition and to go and buy from the traders. The traders attract the people that come to buy, so they also attract people that want to come with club stands. The competition also attracts people who want to see great models, who also go and do some shopping on the site. They all reinforce each other. So that’s why most Western European shows nowadays have some of each and try to have a good balance of each or as much as possible of each. It’s also not necessary to have all of them. I have been to shows with no club stands or with very little trade or like we just said with no competition. So it’s perfectly possible to do it in another way. But to have this ‘Holy Trinity’ of trade stands, club stands and competition, it works for many shows.

Chris

What do you think competition does to the culture of the hobby?

Marijn

Well, as with anything, there can be positive and there can be negative aspects to it, as with anything.

Maybe quickly the negative aspects. If the competition aspect is taken a bit too far, it can create bad feelings with people. It can also create some overly… competitive atmosphere between people or also between modelling clubs or also between modelling shows, which I think never helps. It does nothing to further our hobby or the social aspects of it, on the contrary. So I consider those to be negative aspects. On the other hand, competitions can do a lot to improve the contacts between people. It can do a lot to improve your personal modelling, as we discussed before.

It can be simply fun to have the thrill of entering a competition for the competitive aspect. And it can also be a kind of stimulant for people to not only do their best work, but mostly also bring and show their best work for others to see. And that can be a bit of a driving force to the hobby. Certainly not the only one, plenty of people can come up with great and innovative stuff on their own without ever entering a competition and also spreading it to the world. Jean Bernard André is one of them. He never enters competition, but he’s providing a lot.

Chris

There isn’t a class for him is there really? “Small picture -sized water -based dioramas”, it’s quite a niche class.

Marijn

Haha, indeed, indeed, but it’s very innovative work that’s providing a lot of inspiration for a lot of people at the moment, I think. But no competition has been needed for that to happen.

Chris

He doesn’t seem to be that interested in competition, but that’s fine. I mean, a lot of people aren’t for sure.

Marijn

Yeah, of course. Absolutely, absolutely. But another new styles and trends and materials and techniques have been spread around the world by first being seen at competitions. So competition can be one of the driving forces to further the hobby and to spread new ideas, I think, especially because it also brings people into contact with one another.

Like I mentioned before, having your model on the table can be a great conversation starter when you’re looking around on the competition table and you meet somebody. One of the first questions to ask is, “do you come here often?”

Chris

hahaha

Marijn

No, I mean, “do you have a model on the table?” And if they say “yes”, “okay. show me” and you go together and look at their model and discuss it and you made a new friend. It’s that simple. And the same can happen.

Chris

There’s been a few times where I’ve seen a great model on the table and I’ve, you know, I’ve asked around who made this and you end up becoming friends with the person who, you know, who made it.

Marijn

Me too, absolutely me too. Of course, this can happen also at SIG tables or club stands. It can happen there too. Competition is not the only way to meet other people, but it is one of the ways and it’s a great way. It helped me a lot.

Chris

Occasionally I meet people who build for competition. What do you think of that?

Marijn

Well, to each their own. Personally, I don’t. I build what I build and when it’s ready, I place it on the competition tables. Before I had children and I had more free time and I could, let’s say, plan my time a bit more freely. In those times Euromilitaire was still one of the biggest competitions, I would use Euromilitaire as a kind of deadline for certain projects. Not because I wanted to compete, but mostly because it was just a stimulus to get it ready, to put in some extra hours, not to rush it, that would not be so good I think, I wouldn’t enjoy that, but just as a stimulus to, okay.

It would be fun to have it ready and on the table then, because I like to show my work, not for the competition, but mostly to show my work, which could be fun if I would be able to show it there. So let’s put in some extra hours now. Nowadays, it’s not so easy to just say, let’s put in some extra hours for weeks on end because of family life. So, I don’t do that anymore. But for me, that was a fun way.

But really building just for the competition with the idea it has to reach that standard so I can get that level of medal at that show. I never did it. If some other people do it, great. I have no problem with that, to each their own. As long as they don’t get too disappointed if they don’t succeed in what they’re aiming for.

Chris

I think for me, it goes back to what we said earlier about the different cultures, different shows. It kind of feels like chasing a phantom to try and build for competition, that you’re trying to achieve something that you perceive to be what the judges want, when you can’t ever really know what they want. And for me, that’s kind of a rudderless way to go about building a good model.

Marijn

Exactly. yeah that’s also the reason why I don’t do it because chasing a medal it’s all about let’s say form or the shiny packaging and it’s not about content. When you model for content you model just to make the best model you can make, to make the model you wanted to make.

I think that’s more important than the medal because indeed, medal doesn’t have so much, it can have a certain meaning but it shouldn’t be the ‘be-all-and-end-all’ of what you’re doing as a modeller, absolutely.

Chris

It might depend what kind of model you are, a modeler you are though. I mean, if you’re the kind of modeler who can only make work that you deem yourself to be good by sticking to, you know, sort of the inner, I can’t describe it, by being true to what you’re really interested in and what you’re really motivated by in terms of the subject and the methods and the form and so on. Then, you can’t build for competition, but maybe some people out there, are just more motivated by making a model that ticks the boxes they know fits. And I guess it just depends on your motivation, what you get out of it.

Marijn

Yeah, indeed, indeed. And probably that will reflect on other aspects in life too. Different strokes for different people. But the thing you mentioned about you never know what the judges want is indeed also in a way very correct. Not that judges just do whatever and are completely, well, making everything up on the spot. It’s not like that, of course. But I think it is true that an award is nothing more, but also nothing less than just the opinion of the judges that judged it on that particular day. Just the combined opinion of the two or three people that judge your work. That’s the award. And there is no more meaning to it than that. But also, no less meaning. If you respect the people that judge it, that can be very meaningful. If you don’t really respect those people, then of course it’s not so meaningful anymore. So it can also be a good idea to go to competitions where you respect the people that do the actual judging.

And that can also bring us to, well, what aspects of judging are important for a good quality judging.

Chris

I was going to say, you’ve got a lot of experience judging, many years. What do you look for as a judge?

Marijn

Excellent question.

So, most importantly, maybe let me start with what I think we should never look at. It has been discussed on other podcasts, I think, or other episodes, so we shouldn’t go too much into it. Accuracy, historical accuracy, or whatever kind of accuracy is not something to be judged, because simply a judge can never know everything about everything that’s on the table. He can know everything about Shermans, and judge the Sherman models on the table accordingly, but he won’t know anything about the modern French tank that’s right next to it, for example. It’s impossible to be consistent in judging when you use that criteria, so I think it should never be used.

What do you look at is, in two big groups, on the one hand more technical aspects; and on the other hand more artistic aspects of the model. So technical aspects, well it mostly comes down to how neat you work, how sharp you work, how detailed you work, how precise you work. So for construction, how neat do you work? Are there any seams left? If you filled any gaps, is it done in a way that you don’t see the gap anymore? Is there any glue spots left or not? For detailing, it doesn’t matter if you use photo -etch or not. It matters if you do it well. That’s always the thing. You always look for not what is done, but mostly how well is it done, especially with the technical things.

The details, are they sharp? Are they glued on in a precise straight way without glue blobs and stuff like that? Painting, airbrushing for example, is it a smooth coat or is it a rough coat with grain in it? The transition between the colors, is it as sharp or as blurry as it was intended to be? How precise has the model been working?

Again, the same with weathering. It’s not important how much weathering there is, it’s important how well is it done, how convincing is it. Is it applied in a neat, precise way? That doesn’t mean, does it look clean? It can look very dirty, but does it look dirty? Can you see that it is intended to look that way? And does it look convincing? Is the texture consistent with what the modeller is trying to do?

So, all these different technical aspects, you look at them and you look at every part of the model, both construction, painting of vehicles, but also figures, groundwork, anything on the model. You look at all of those. And then there are the artistic aspects on the other hand. On one hand, it can be about storytelling. On the other hand, artistic can also be about purely visual aspect. Does it look good? So with the storytelling, does the model say what it is trying to say? With dioramas that can be narrative, a story can also be much less narrative. You already had a nice write -up about different ways of storytelling, so people can go and read that one again. (https://modelphilosopher.com/the-demise-of-the-original-story/)

Chris

And that’s a subject we’ll be coming back to on the podcast in the future as well.

Marijn

Yeah, indeed. So, and also with single vehicles or figures, there can be storytelling to certain levels going on or not, if models are clearly not trying to tell a certain way, a story of a certain kind or a certain atmosphere that doesn’t need to preclude them from getting a gold medal, for example. Just if there is an intention to tell whatever level of story you judge, how well they are succeeding in doing it, how well the model is telling that type of story. And then the other artistic aspect is purely visual, how good does the model look. And that comes down mostly to the aspects of, in my opinion, to contrast and harmony. If there is not enough contrast, a model will look very flat and lifeless. It doesn’t have any punch, it doesn’t really speak. A model needs to have a certain level of contrast in it, in the paintwork, in the detailing, in the composition. It doesn’t just need to be dark light colour contrast, it can also be the hue, the brightness of the colours, it can be also the dynamics in the composition. This is all aspects of contrast that bring models alive.

On the other hand, there also has to be a certain level of harmony, because if it’s all contrast and no harmony between colours or in the dynamic shapes or lines in the composition, then it just becomes an assault on your eyes. Then it becomes too much gaudy, garish. I’m not sure if these are the exact words that mean what I’m trying to say, but…

then it becomes too much and just looks ugly basically. It looks out of balance. It’s too much screaming instead of telling something.

Chris

It’s noisy, there’s no kind of clarity to it.

Marijn

Exactly, exactly. So you also need a certain level of harmony. You can use bright colours, but you cannot use bright colours all over the piece everywhere for everything. For example, you can have very dynamic sweeping lines in your composition, but you will also have to counterbalance these with other elements, so it doesn’t look like it’s toppling over. So you need to have both contrasts and harmony in your model to make it visually pleasing and to… well…basically just make it look good. So these are more artistic aspects, but of course these artistic aspects can never really be seen separately from the technical aspects, because for example in order to get a high level of contrast it’s not just artistic choices that you’re making, but you also have to be able to technically apply the right paints, right shades of paint in the right place for example. There is also a technical aspect of that.

I always feel for example that, let’s say in the paintwork of a model or a figure, you can never have too much contrast. But you can put it in the wrong place, and then it looks out of place, and then it doesn’t look good. But if you know exactly where to place the maximum contrast, you can get away with anything. So there is a technical artistic aspect to all models.

They also intertwine with one, another and it gets more complicated because there are still some more things that you can look for. One thing is originality. How original is your model? Is that something that we should take into account, or not? There are different opinions about that. I think it should be taken into account because that will stimulate creativity and in the end that will stimulate the advancement of our hobby and of the artistic side of our hobbies for sure. But it wouldn’t be right to punish people who just want to build a nice model and enter it in the competition. If they do, if they build a very nice but beautifully done and technically outstanding model, why shouldn’t they win an award simply because they haven’t created something really new or really original? So I think originality should be awarded or should be rewarded in the judging, but we shouldn’t go really too far with it. Still, technical and artistic aspects should also be taken into account still. And certainly, it should be only done in a positive sense. It should only add for the models that are original. It shouldn’t…let’s say, detract points from models that haven’t tried to do that.

Chris

Maybe it’s a way to earn bonus points if you see what I mean. So it’s not a requirement, but if you do something original, it can be rewarded.

Marijn

Exactly. If your technical level for example is not gold level standard but you create something really original, maybe you can get the gold because of the originality. So exactly, the bonus points is exactly what I was trying to say. And there is one other aspect like that: the, sometimes-called ‘scope of effort’. How difficult is something, how complicated or how big or how ambitious is a project, should that be taken into account? And I think here the same goes as for your originality. If you do, if you are brave enough to throw yourself into something very ambitious, very difficult, with a lot of work, with a lot of technical challenges, yes, you should be rewarded for that. But the person who just wants to build a great kit and make a beautiful model out of it, with not too much effort or time invested, should also be able to gain a gold medal.

Chris

The only problem I have with scope of effort is effort isn’t a concept that comes with a connotation of quality. You can put a lot of effort into something, and it can still be awful.

Marijn

Absolutely, absolutely. So that’s why it shouldn’t be an aspect that really makes the big differences. If your technical level is not high enough to get a bronze, by making a huge diorama you shouldn’t be able to get a gold.

Chris

But are we saying, maybe, that if it’s a borderline case, that maybe if they’re bronze, maybe bronze, maybe silver, but there’s a lot of effort, you say, “okay, silver”.

Marijn

Indeed. Because of course it’s not really out of the reasoning that, well, the modeller did so much effort, it is so much, look at all the work, it’s so much work. It’s not just to reward that, it’s to reward people taking chances, to reward people making efforts, trying something ambitious. Otherwise, we will end up with competitions with only very simple builds of great new kits.

Chris

I think I’m gonna get myself in trouble here, but I think one of the biggest problems with modelling is there is not enough originality and not enough risk -taking.

Marijn

Well, I would also like to see more, but then again everybody wants to take something else out of this hobby and I feel most people simply don’t feel the urge to try and make something new.

Chris

Yes, for sure.

Maybe that’s a big enough subject for another day, I think.

Marijn

Absolutely, absolutely. But you saw with the technical aspects, the artistic aspects, scope of effort, originality, all of those combined, it becomes quite complicated. Especially because there is a lot of variation between models, as we have also touched upon. Not every aspect is equally important for each model. Some models use a great kit with little building effort as a canvas for fantastic paintwork, while other models are completely scratch built but then carry a rather basic paint job. Neatly done, but not trying to go far artistically with not just weathering but any kind of telling something with it. So, and these are both very valid ways of making a model.

They should both be able to be rewarded in a competition if done well. So all the different aspects that we have just discussed, they need to be balanced always and it will be different for every model again.

So it’s quite a complicated affair. And that’s where I think sometimes the judging systems can be helpful or can be a bit counterproductive. As we said before, the results of a competition, the awards, are basically the reflection of the opinion of the judges at that specific moment. So I think a judging system should enable that opinion to shine through directly in the reward. It should enable that indeed what the judges think is exactly what the award will be. If the judging system somehow obstructs this, then it can be counterproductive.

To give an example, my preferred way of judging is to just get together with two or three judges, look at the class that you’re judging, preferably individually, just look around, scan everything, take a first look at everything, and get an idea of what the level is, especially at the smaller local show where you also have to assess what level is present at the show, get a feel for it, get an idea which you think are the best models, form your own opinion to a certain extent, then get together with the other judges and start like, “okay, let’s start from the top level, what do you think could get a gold here?” Somebody says, “I think this model”. Somebody else says, “I agree.” Third one says, “I agree.” Okay, easy. The golds are always the easiest ones.

“That one too? okay, yeah, it’s not as good, but yeah,” if we say, “okay, which ones would get a silver? Yeah, this one, that one, okay, yeah, I agree, I agree, yeah, but that one, okay, it’s clearly still one step up from the silvers, not as good as the first gold we gave, but still it’s closer to that one. Okay, that one also gets a gold, that one is in the same level, it’s a step up from the silvers” we have defined, and you work your way down from there, discussing together, in that way.

My least favourite way of judging is with a score sheet, where you have a set of judging criteria, like construction, detailing, airbrushing, decals, and each gets scored to a certain amount of points, and then they’re added up and subdivided. Because in that way, you can get for each of these aspects, the honest opinion of the judge and they can score the airbrushing really honestly to what they think the airbrushing is actually worth. But there is no flexibility in how these different aspects are balanced to one another. So instead of leaving room for both the model that has more emphasis on painting on the one hand, and on the other hand to the model that has more emphasis on construction, you all make one unity of it. And basically you say there is only one right way to make a model in this class. Usually that’s not the goal of these systems. The goal is usually of making sure that everybody judges in the same way and try to make things as objective as possible.

But I think it doesn’t really help so much with objectivity. I think it just makes everything more uniform. And I think that’s not a good idea because of how complicated all the aspects of modelling are and how different models can be, even in the same class. And I have judged also in competitions where you do fill in score sheets and at the end you hand them to the chief judge and then the administration is done. But while you’re judging and while you’re giving points, you have absolutely no idea how this will translate into a certain award.

Chris
Yeah, I did that at Moson. It was a very odd experience because even we judges didn’t know until the award ceremony who got what.

Marijn

Exactly, it’s very weird. As a judge I never have a good feeling with that system. It is possible that the opinion translates correctly to the awards given. It is possible, but I think it’s a system where mistakes can sneak in very easily, much more easily than just a couple of guys together saying I think this model is worth that award. That’s very clear, that’s very to the point, that’s very direct..

Chris

I think for me the problem with it is it doesn’t allow for something that I’ve seen happen a lot when I’ve judged at open shows where we’ve gone through and we’ve made selections and then thought, you know, I think we’ve been a bit harsh actually, we need to go back and lift the scores up. Because I mean, in the open system, you’re there to reward modelers not to take away, it’s an addition rather than a subtraction system. You’re trying to look for the good, not punish the bad. So you quite often go back and go,” you know, we’ve been a bit harsh on this” because you’re trying to be good and you’re trying to spot things and everything else. But at the same time, maybe you can be a bit too tough. If you just fill out a score and hand it in, you don’t get to revise your opinion.

Marijn

Exactly, exactly. That’s also one of the reasons why I’m not really a fan of judging systems that take really long and especially where multiple teams are judging the same class of models. That’s something that’s often done with AMPS.

Sorry guys, I’m a big fan of the organization, a big fan of the type of shows you put on, but this aspect of the judging I’m not a fan of. I have to admit I’ve only judged and competed according to it only once, but for half a day people are judging models that are coming in. You haven’t seen the totality of the class yet, because they didn’t come in yet, so you have no idea of the general level that’s present. So you start judging and indeed at a certain point you may realize that you have been a bit harsh, but at that point it’s not possible anymore to adjust. It’s too late. And even a bigger problem, there are only a few classes, so you’re in a team that’s judging a certain class, but on the next table there is another team that’s judging the same class. Or maybe after an hour or two of judging you stop, and another team takes over and they continue judging the same class. But they may be a bit harsher or a bit less harsh. Even if you’re using score sheets, well, one team might give a 7 for a quite neat airbrush job, another team might give a 9. It all depends on… well, that’s a problem. I don’t think modelling is very quantifiable.

In order to be consistent, I think the same people should judge an entire category and they should be able to keep an overview of what’s in that category while they’re doing it.

Chris

I think, you’re always trying to be consistent when you’re judging. And I hate to keep going back to IPMS USA, but that’s why they have the system they have because of the consistency they believe it gives them across it. And, you know, no matter what else I might or might not think about the system, that’s kind of their motivation. And I think the only way you can be consistent is to have the same judges at least across the same class, if not more than one class. That’s the only way really.

Marijn

Absolutely, indeed. By the way, I’m a firm believer that we’ve talked now a little bit about how certain systems can have an impact on the quality of the judging, but I’m a firm believer that by far the most important aspect for the quality of the judging is the judges.

Chris

Absolutely, yeah.

Marijn

The system is mostly there to make things happen. Some systems can, as we discussed, can be a bit counterproductive. Often, they’re there for good reasons, but it doesn’t always work out in my opinion.

Other systems work perfectly, I think, in making it happen in a smooth way, but mostly the system should be there for practical reasons, to make it happen and to make it happen as good and as smoothly and as quickly as possible. But what really makes the quality of the judging is the judges themselves. So I think that’s also one of the reasons why it’s important to have a judging system that is efficient and fast.

I’m not saying that judges should work very fast and not look very carefully. I’m just saying that if you have a system that necessitates the judge to look at each and every individual model, even though it’s clearly a gold or if it’s very clearly not going to win anything; and fill in an entire score sheet for each individual model on the table, well, you will have your judges there for several hours on end. In some competitions I’ve seen it happen for five, six, seven hours of judging. If you let the judges just write down which ones get the gold, which ones get the silver, which ones get the bronze, you cut down on the administration time, your judging team has to do by tenfold and you can get the same judging done in an hour, or maybe two, with less judges. And that’s an important point. The less judges you need, the more easy it is to get enough judges for your competition. And the more feasible it is to actually invite people with a lot of experience in modelling and in judging, people that have a good eye for it, people that are respected by the competitors, because again, if you respect the opinion of the judges that judge your work, your medal has some value to it. If you don’t respect these people, your medal has no value whatsoever. So if you have a very efficient, fast system to work with, you can do it with less judges. You can get better judges or you can make sure that there are, well, that your smaller group consists only of good experienced judges, and I think you can have the better quality of judging.

Chris

How do you think we can improve competition for competitors, for judges, for the hobby?

Marijn

Well, I think the most important thing is to have a good atmosphere. And when I hear other people talk about it, and I agree, when you think about the competitive aspects of a competition, people mostly just want to know that their model has been looked at and that it has been assessed fairly, no more, no less. Of course, there are always those people who just want to win no matter what, but I think this is a very small minority and we shouldn’t take them into account. We just have to make sure that the judging is done as well as possible and because it is done by humans, it’s never going to be perfect. There is always matter of opinion in it, there is always going to be discussion about it. But the more you can rule this out, the better it will be for the long -term atmosphere around the competition. That’s, I think, one thing. On the other hand, there can also be the social aspects. I really like the way figure competitions are doing it now for decades already, but maybe it can be expanded a little bit beyond that, how models of individual modelers are grouped as a display. Because that makes it easier to go to your display or to the display of the person you just met and go and check out their latest work or talk about your own latest work at your own display, without having to go like, “yeah, I have something here on this table and I have something on the other side and over there I have another model.” I really like the displays, it makes it easier and just more fun to mingle with the other modelers around each other’s work.

Chris

I think for having your own sort of level in the hobby assessed as well, it goes back to what we’re saying about going to various shows and getting a range of opinions on your work, where you’re giving a range of your work. So it’s easier for the judges to accurately assess where you are at the moment in terms of your abilities and your skills. Because if one of the models is not so good,  that’s not the one model they’re looking at. They’re not going to say, “he’s a silver level modellist at the moment”, they might look at the other one and say, “well, that’s a gold.” And in which case they’ll look at the silver one and go, well, it’s not as good as this one, but he’s obviously capable of doing something really great. And so, you know, you get an accurate picture of where you are if you supply more than one model and put it in.

Marijn

I think so too, indeed. Well, of course, if they would be in separate categories, you will… Well, no, that’s not so relevant, because this place will also be split up for several different categories, of course. There is a good reason to have different categories. Of course, with the open system, if indeed theoretically you judge against the level of the hobby and you judge completely open gold silver bronze you could put everything in just one category. Theoretically that is possible and I think the new show in the Salt Lake City area is going to do something maybe not completely like that but close to that with very, very few classes or categories I believe, so I’m curious. Absolutely, I’m interested.

(Marijn is referring to the Rocky Mountain Hobby Expo https://rockymtnhobbyexpo.com/)

Chris

It should be very interesting to hear what comes from that.

Marijn

But once there is a certain amount of models, it becomes of course a bit difficult just as a quantity. Well, we have discussed how it is important, for consistency reasons, to have the same people judge the same class all over. And of course, once there are too many models, you need to split up the models somehow to make it possible for a judging team to get it done in time. On the other hand, if you want to have capable judges, nobody knows everything about everything and I’m not talking about historical accuracy, but I’m talking about the current styles and techniques in certain genres. These can be very different from automotive modelling to figure painting. For example, there are big differences and it’s impossible to find judges who know enough about each subject of each genre, to be able to judge well. You need to split it up a little bit also, according to genre, simply because the styles and techniques differ. As a judge you also need to know a bit about what materials are used, what kits could be used or are available, or figures or whatever, so you can recognize what [extra work] has been to it or not. So you cannot be up to date with every genre you’re able to judge, well enough I think.

Chris

I think in a way you already answered the question about what can be done to improve shows. I think the number one thing is to invite really good judges, to be selective about who you ask to judge.

Marijn

Absolutely. And I think some of the best shows with the best atmosphere that I have been to, do exactly that. Euromilitaire used to do that. SMC is doing that. World Expo is doing that. Moson is doing that. MFCA, Chicago Show are doing that. KMK Show is doing that, of course. Well, no, basically we do the judging with club members only because we don’t need such a big team as, for example, SMC. We can do the entire work with 12 to 14 people, and we have plenty of people in the club that have enough experience with judging and with the different genres that we can get it all done within the club which makes it easy to say, “okay, we’re not competing ourselves as club members. We do the judging.” And in that way, there certainly won’t be any bias that we’re trying to help our own club members more than others or whatever.

Chris

I think it’s fair to say you have an unusually high number of world -class modelers in your club as well, which helps.

Marijn

at risk of… what’s the word? Of tooting my own horn too much. I think you’re right. But it’s an asset both for club life and for developing modelling within the club. And it’s also for organizing the competition at our show. And it’s not just for those reasons, it’s because there are plenty of other people around that we could also ask from other clubs in Belgium, and outside, that visit the show that we could also ask to do the judging; together with us, or instead of us. That wouldn’t be a problem. The thing is, if you do it with your own club members, it’s easier to make sure everything runs smoothly and efficiently. You know everybody very well. It’s easy to communicate. It’s easy to keep the time, to check if things are running out you can very easily say to people like come on it’s time to round it up because we still have to do all the other stuff before the award ceremony so it’s just a very efficient way of working and for me that’s one probably more important even a reason to do it with club members alone otherwise we in the past we did it with people from outside the club too and as a quality that doesn’t make a difference. [There are] plenty of good modellers around. But you’re right, I think inviting judges rather than just using whoever feels like judging at the day, whether it’s their first show or they have been around for decades, it’s important to have a grasp on who is doing the judging.

Marijn

One aspect to improve the competitions from the point of view of the general public is to provide good lighting, provide enough space to circulate and don’t make the tables too low. Try to elevate them to a height that is back friendly. But of course, every show has their technical challenges with the venue and with whatever can get organized. So it’s of course understanding that not everybody can do it as well as the next show. At our show too, we also have to find a balance between the space available and the materials available and what we can provide for the visitors as a comfort.

So for example, at our new venue, we have, I think, a very nice central location with very good natural lighting, but that can depend on the weather at the moment. It’s on a kind of multiple level stage area, which makes it possible to put the tables at the edges of the levels. And in that way, you’re able to view it from one side more top down, while at the other side, the tables are much higher because it’s on a level that you’re not standing on. And you can look at the models much better without having to bend down. But there is one big disadvantage, only the first level has a ramp, the rest has steps. So for wheelchair accessibility, it’s problematic. [We have not] found a solution for that yet, which is really a pity I think. So we will continue to think about that for the future. But just to illustrate, there are always pros and cons and technical issues to overcome.

Chris

Absolutely.

Marijn

things will rarely be perfect, but just thinking about these things is already important for an organization of a competition, I think.

Chris

Well, Marijn, I think that’s a good place to end. Thank you very much for this conversation today. And I hope listeners enjoy it. Do write in if you have any comments or questions for Marijn. Thank you.

Marijn

Thank you very much, Chris. Thank you.



I hope you enjoyed this discussion.

I have one last thing to ask, putting together this blog and podcast comes with some cost, If you can, please do support the Model Philosopher by becoming a Patron at https://www.patreon.com/theModelPhilosopher