New Category for the Whiffies

[tc2324]

As some of you may have seen from Chris`s, (NARSES2), comment in the sway thread, we are going to trial a new category for next years Whiffies award.

This category will only be nominations of builds from any category that are of the highest standard. MichelC`s recent Me 163 being an excellent example.

The working title for this category will be the Top Gun Category, (best of the best, you get the idea), but I am open to other suggestions if you think you have a better title.

So with that in mind, I`m off now to edit MichelC`s and anyone else s nomination this year into the new category.

[darthspud]

sort of "Ultimate Whiffie" category?

[tc2324]

sort of "Ultimate Whiffie" category?

That`s the idea.

[MichelC]

How about the "How to Make People Feel Embarrassed" category?

OK ... er ... not sure what else to say...

Thank you guys, really!!



M

[perttime]

Does being in the "Top Gun" category disqualify you from the mere-mortals' categories, like in many sports?

[PR19_Kit]

How about the "How to Make People Feel Embarrassed" category?

Many of us are already in that category Michel, but we're there because we've got no HOPE of building models like you do! 

[kitbasher]

Why not a category for the best whif found on another site or forum?  Host site/forum of the winner notified in due course, thus generating (one hopes) favourable publicity for this forum and the modelling genre.

[Dizzyfugu]

As some of you may have seen from Chris`s, (NARSES2), comment in the sway thread, we are going to trial a new category for next years Whiffies award.

This category will only be nominations of builds from any category that are of the highest standard. MichelC`s recent Me 163 being an excellent example.

The working title for this category will be the Top Gun Category, (best of the best, you get the idea), but I am open to other suggestions if you think you have a better title.

So with that in mind, I`m off now to edit MichelC`s and anyone else s nomination this year into the new category.

As a side note: I'd take this category away from the "creative" core. If I understand it correctly, this new one is rather supposed to cater to breathtaking finish/execution (sort of), not to the idea behind the whif?

[tc2324]

Cheers for the replies chaps.

As I said this is going to be a trial for next year to see if it works.

As Dizzy quite rightly pointed out, this award is for the quality finish. I personally am a great believer in ideas and even if the finish of a members model is not quite as perfect as some, I`m always happy to nominate them.

I can see that there may be some overlap issues, ie, should the Me 163 for instance also be included in the best jet?

The way I see it and how I think it should work is this. (Again lets use the Me 163 as an example)

1. MichelC posts his finished 163 model. It is without doubt built to a very high standard.
2. I nominate it for `best jet` and `top gun` awards.
3. All `top gun` nominees are forwarded to the Academy which will then recommend which ones, if not all, go forward.
4. Any nominees that are not forwarded for the final list will be put back into the relevant category.

I think this should work and I don`t want to make it overly complicated.

Obviously all feedback is welcome.

[MichelC]

How about the "How to Make People Feel Embarrassed" category?

Many of us are already in that category Michel, but we're there because we've got no HOPE of building models like you do! 

OK. I don't know what to say to that. So instead, I'll try and say something constructive about the Whiffies new category.

Dizzyfugu is right. There is a distinction to be made between a great model and a great Whiff model, which, btw, is something that gives me personally a hard time when voting during the Whiffies. Because you can have a wonderful idea for a whiff, that takes the kitbashing of 5 kits, an encyclopedic knowledge of aeronautics and the inspiration of a Picasso but due to average modeling skill results in an average model, technically speaking. On the other hand, a modeler of advanced skill could take a Luft 46 kit (which by itself classifies it as a whiff), build it OOB and make a show-stopper out of it. Which do you vote for? Do you reward skill more than creativity or the other way around?

In a whiff contest, besides the subject categories (planes, ships, sci-fi, etc.) there should therefore be at least another two categories (maybe someone else can expand on this and think of even more) to reestablish balance: skill vs talent. The one category, the one that is being proposed here, would be the skill category: regardless of its concept, originality and other whiff-related factors, what is its degree of excellency as a model? Does it look more real than the real thing or is the fuselage seam showing? That would be modeler skill, technical mastery, everything that goes to make a great modeler. To take this to an extreme, the award could even go to the model of something that exists in the real world if it's an absolutely stunning model.

The other category should consist of the most creative whiff: originality, inspiration, research, bright ideas... Even if its execution is not flawless, if the idea is the absolute best, then it deserves the award. 

I think that having these two categories would make me happy. I'm speaking as a voter now. Because it makes me feel free to vote for what I spontaneously find the best in each subject category, knowing that I can reward skill and creativity separately in another two separate categories.

In case others agree with me and we go for something like that, then the skill category should be renamed as 'top gun' would be too absolute. Both the skill and the creativity category should be called in such a way as to set them on an equal footing.

That was my 2 cents. 

M

[Old Wombat]

Try 2 Top Gun categories; Best Conceptual Whif & Best Technical Whif

My ha'penny.



Guy

[PR19_Kit]

When Class 34 at the UK IPMS Nationals (or Scale Model World if you insist....) was called 'The Mushroom Monthly Trophy' some years back, Roger Wallsgrove, who was the trophy donor, always gave more emphasis to the thinking behind the Whiff than he did to the actual modelling. He's still involved with judging Class 34 these days but says he has less influence and the 'normal' judges tend not to understand the thinking processes involved in Whiff modelling and go for the model rather than the thought.

I tend to agree with Roger, but I'm somewhat biased as I have two Mushroom Trophies in my model display case. 

[Dizzyfugu]

There is a distinction to be made between a great model and a great Whiff model, which, btw, is something that gives me personally a hard time when voting during the Whiffies. Because you can have a wonderful idea for a whiff, that takes the kitbashing of 5 kits, an encyclopedic knowledge of aeronautics and the inspiration of a Picasso but due to average modeling skill results in an average model, technically speaking. On the other hand, a modeler of advanced skill could take a Luft 46 kit (which by itself classifies it as a whiff), build it OOB and make a show-stopper out of it. Which do you vote for? Do you reward skill more than creativity or the other way around?

That's the point - and another factor is that a highly modified or even kitbashed thing (probably) won't have the crisp finish of an OOB kit. Even a not-so-perfect kit can be very convincing, if the idea is just good.
Personally, I think the "filter" idea of the Academy is the way to go. It is hard to define standards where to draw the line, and I trust the Academy that there's a way to select those which qualify for the Top Gun/Finish category.

[MichelC]

When Class 34 at the UK IPMS Nationals (or Scale Model World if you insist....) was called 'The Mushroom Monthly Trophy' some years back, Roger Wallsgrove, who was the trophy donor, always gave more emphasis to the thinking behind the Whiff than he did to the actual modelling. He's still involved with judging Class 34 these days but says he has less influence and the 'normal' judges tend not to understand the thinking processes involved in Whiff modelling and go for the model rather than the thought.

I tend to agree with Roger, but I'm somewhat biased as I have two Mushroom Trophies in my model display case. 

Don't know what Class 34 is, never heard of Roger Wallsgrove and don't know what the Mushroom Trophy looks like (is it edible?) but I still get your point. 

You use the word 'biased' and that's exactly how it feels when you have to make a choice between 'model' or 'thought' as you put it. Hence, my reasoning about a second category. But like Dizzy, I trust the Academy (even though I don't know them either ).

BTW, did I ever say Well Done to the Whiffies organizers? Well, I did now. 

Cheers!

M

[tc2324]

Thanks guys for your opinions, it`s been interesting reading through them to gauge members thoughts. 

One point that seems to be repeated is the problem with identifying a well built model and a well thought out whif idea model.

Just to set the matter straight, this new Top Gun category is not replacing the `Whiffie of the Year` category. Probably my thought for not clarifying that in the OP. 

The `Top Gun` category is just like all the other categories, Best Ship, Best Backstory, etc, and is probably defined best by the terms technical/attention to detail.

The Whiffie of the Year award would, as always, cater for the `idea` builds and hopefully will be a bit fairer for some of the modelers, (me included), that are not as technical but may have a great idea even if the executions not perfect.

I think I speak for all those in the Academy when I say we are all pretty open minded about what constitutes a great `whiffie of the year` model and as you look back at the nominees from past years, it`s been a good mix of technical and well thought out whif models.

As with all things, there`s some pro`s and cons to this idea, but it`s a trail to see if it works and not set in stone so to speak.