ANOTHER critic's view...

Posted by Adam from spider-tk031.proxy.aol.com on June 20, 2001 at 20:41:10:

In Reply to: The Full Results of the Art Showcase... posted by the ART kritik on June 20, 2001 at 10:48:30:

: Though I must agree that the layout and stylization of the Best of Show piece is certainly done so in an exceptionally crafted manner, I found myself personally enjoying Paul Shipper's other piece much more for other reasons. First of all, everyone in Paul's other piece looks correctly- unlike the Marion in his winning piece and the "David Hasselhoffish" appearance (as someone else put it) of Indy's hair. The idea of a movie print certainly is admirable, but I could certainly see the difficulty between choosing which one to award since the other piece captures the essense of Raiders moreso, in my opinion.

There WAS difficulty in making some selections this year, but it's not as though Micah and I were up in arms, clueless as to which to choose. For me, I loved BOTH of Mr. Shipper's contributions -- they were both amazing and inspired. But I think your criticism of the former work is a bit harsh. The bruhaha over Indy's "David Hasselhoffish" appearance doesn't stand up in my book -- that IS Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, without question. I actually loved his depiction -- I presume Shipper used a photo of Ford at a somewhat younger age. The fact that it is different from the overused still images we've seen again and again makes it feel fresh.

I strongly disagree with your points about the way Indy and Marion look -- it IS them, period. They might not be perfect, but the essence of a portrait, for me, is to capture the soul of a person, not to carbon copy a photo. It might not be an exact duplicate, but it's the spirit of a thing that matters.

: I still think Austin Power's work should have been a close second to Shipper's, since the design was more encompassing of the Raiders film, and painstakingly exact in its representation.

Again, for me, I felt that all of the faces on Mr. Shipper's poster better captured the high-spirited nature of the film and its characters than any other similar work. Not to put down the other contributors, of course, but simply to pay compliment to work I felt deserved it. Austin Powers' work, while impressive, just didn't excite me the same way -- it seemed a bit clumbsy, cluttered, and the representations little more than attempts to duplicate still photos. It didn't have the style, sophistication, or finesse.

: Personally, I thought the little cartoon with the monkey holding Indy at gunpoint was funnier than the South Park, and certainly more original, though perhaps not nearly as time consuming to create.

Yes, I felt it was extremely funny, too. (I have it taped to my cabinet door.) But in the end, we opted for the South Park due to it's artistic achievement as well as humorous tone.

: The truck piece that was disqualified from the prize winning section was absolutely spectacular. It is truly a shame that something so wonderfully crafted was unable to receive a prize for it. I think the decision to adjust the rules will be a wise one so that pieces like this can be accepted.

As I said, this was an extremely painful omission, and we were BOTH heartbroken it could not be included. We were tempted to be flexible and let it qualify, but in doing so we felt it would not be fair to other entrants. Of course, this work alone is enough to make us consider adjusting the rules in the future. It really bothered me that this work couldn't be honored -- as I said in the commentary, I was ready to give it 1st or 2nd place.

: As stated once before, I think that everyone could benefit from a different format in the judging since it sounded like Adam and Micah had many difficulties and conflicts in determining which of the pieces should be placed in the top six.

Now here is where I feel I must sound a bit defensive, because your comments are extremely presumptuous. You're painting a picture that Micah and I were bickering over the selections, or clueless as to which entries to select, and such was not the case. In fact, we individually ranked what we felt were the best, and both of our set of selections were the same -- it was just a question of the ranking. There were quite a number of prizes to disperse -- I had suggested that we group the prize items up, so that there would be only THREE prize winners, but Micah convinced me to stay with the greater number. Selecting the six was easy -- ranking them is what brought about some debate.

But again, I must explain how the judgement came to be. Micah and I had a DIALOGUE, giving back and forth, until we reached an agreement. The results were mutually agreed upon after some discussion. That's how things work. I don't intend to put words in Micah's mouth, but I feel justified by our slections, and I think he does, too.

:Next time, I would suggest more judges- at least three, but perhaps as many as five or seven simply because it allows a forum to exist in which each judge may state their reasoning for the rank of a certain piece and can ultimately be voted on by a majority- a bit more of a democratic approach than merely two judges who by their numbers are unable to cast a deciding vote.

As this is Micah's webpage, he is the one who has the authority to determine how things should work. Happily, we've worked together in making these things come to life, and I think we've done them with good judgement. If other people should be involved, that's his decision, not mine or yours. I do feel, however, that anyone who donates a prize has earned the right to participate in the judging -- simply by virtue of their generousity, and being able to select who is deserving of their contribution. It didn't occur to me to include the other kind contributors this time around, but maybe that's how it will be done if we have another contest. Frankly, I believe that your suggestion simply results from a distain of our selections. If we were to do it again, knowing then what we know now, I sincerely believe we would have chosen the same works.

Follow Ups:

Taking it a bit too personally, aren't you? the ART kritik 11:43:08 6/21/2001 (1)
- Final comments on my views -- please read Adam 13:07:18 6/21/2001 (0)
Thanks for the thought, but... Michaelson 22:41:39 6/20/2001 (12)
- Thanks for the kind words Adam 00:07:49 6/21/2001 (11)
  - Re: Thanks for the kind words the ART kritik 12:00:57 6/21/2001 (9)
    - Oh, come on now. Michaelson 13:31:31 6/21/2001 (8)
      - A sarcastic stab, nothing more... the ART kritik 16:29:02 6/21/2001 (1)
        
        Understood Michaelson 17:20:03 6/21/2001 (0)
      - My Nazi regime Adam 15:16:25 6/21/2001 (2)
        
        I'm sure it did.. the ART kritik 16:33:42 6/21/2001 (1)
        
        kewl... Adam 17:07:30 6/21/2001 (0)
      - Not to prolong this any further, but.... Austin Powers 15:15:50 6/21/2001 (2)
        
        You're right.... Michaelson 17:22:50 6/21/2001 (1)
        
        Very much appreciated. (nm) Austin Powers 22:50:31 6/21/2001 (0)
  - Adam.... Austin Powers 01:35:48 6/21/2001 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : Though I must agree that the layout and stylization of the Best of Show piece is certainly done so in an exceptionally crafted manner, I found myself personally enjoying Paul Shipper's other piece much more for other reasons.  First of all, everyone in Paul's other piece looks correctly- unlike the Marion in his winning piece and the "David Hasselhoffish" appearance (as someone else put it) of Indy's hair.  The idea of a movie print certainly is admirable, but I could certainly see the difficulty between choosing which one to award since the other piece captures the essense of Raiders moreso, in my opinion.

: There WAS difficulty in making some selections this year, but it's not as though Micah and I were up in arms, clueless as to which to choose.  For me, I loved BOTH of Mr. Shipper's contributions -- they were both amazing and inspired.  But I think your criticism of the former work is a bit harsh.  The bruhaha over Indy's "David Hasselhoffish" appearance doesn't stand up in my book -- that IS Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, without question.  I actually loved his depiction -- I presume Shipper used a photo of Ford at a somewhat younger age.  The fact that it is different from the overused still images we've seen again and again makes it feel fresh.

: I strongly disagree with your points about the way Indy and Marion look -- it IS them, period.  They might not be perfect, but the essence of a portrait, for me, is to capture the soul of a person, not to carbon copy a photo.  It might not be an exact duplicate, but it's the spirit of a thing that matters.

: : I still think Austin Power's work should have been a close second to Shipper's, since the design was more encompassing of the Raiders film, and painstakingly exact in its representation.

: Again, for me, I felt that all of the faces on Mr. Shipper's poster better captured the high-spirited nature of the film and its characters than any other similar work.  Not to put down the other contributors, of course, but simply to pay compliment to work I felt deserved it.  Austin Powers' work, while impressive, just didn't excite me the same way -- it seemed a bit clumbsy, cluttered, and the representations little more than attempts to duplicate still photos.  It didn't have the style, sophistication, or finesse.

: : Personally, I thought the little cartoon with the monkey holding Indy at gunpoint was funnier than the South Park, and certainly more original, though perhaps not nearly as time consuming to create.

: Yes, I felt it was extremely funny, too.  (I have it taped to my cabinet door.) But in the end, we opted for the South Park due to it's artistic achievement as well as humorous tone.

: : The truck piece that was disqualified from the prize winning section was absolutely spectacular.  It is truly a shame that something so wonderfully crafted was unable to receive a prize for it.  I think the decision to adjust the rules will be a wise one so that pieces like this can be accepted.

: As I said, this was an extremely painful omission, and we were BOTH heartbroken it could not be included.  We were tempted to be flexible and let it qualify, but in doing so we felt it would not be fair to other entrants.  Of course, this work alone is enough to make us consider adjusting the rules in the future.  It really bothered me that this work couldn't be honored -- as I said in the commentary, I was ready to give it 1st or 2nd place.

: : As stated once before, I think that everyone could benefit from a different format in the judging since it sounded like Adam and Micah had many difficulties and conflicts in determining which of the pieces should be placed in the top six.

: Now here is where I feel I must sound a bit defensive, because your comments are extremely presumptuous.  You're painting a picture that Micah and I were bickering over the selections, or clueless as to which entries to select, and such was not the case.  In fact, we individually ranked what we felt were the best, and both of our set of selections were the same -- it was just a question of the ranking.  There were quite a number of prizes to disperse -- I had suggested that we group the prize items up, so that there would be only THREE prize winners, but Micah convinced me to stay with the greater number.  Selecting the six was easy -- ranking them is what brought about some debate.

: But again, I must explain how the judgement came to be.  Micah and I had a DIALOGUE, giving back and forth, until we reached an agreement.  The results were mutually agreed upon after some discussion.  That's how things work.  I don't intend to put words in Micah's mouth, but I feel justified by our slections, and I think he does, too.

: :Next time, I would suggest more judges- at least three, but perhaps as many as five or seven simply because it allows a forum to exist in which each judge may state their reasoning for the rank of a certain piece and can ultimately be voted on by a majority- a bit more of a democratic approach than merely two judges who by their numbers are unable to cast a deciding vote.

: As this is Micah's webpage, he is the one who has the authority to determine how things should work.  Happily, we've worked together in making these things come to life, and I think we've done them with good judgement.  If other people should be involved, that's his decision, not mine or yours.  I do feel, however, that anyone who donates a prize has earned the right to participate in the judging -- simply by virtue of their generousity, and being able to select who is deserving of their contribution.  It didn't occur to me to include the other kind contributors this time around, but maybe that's how it will be done if we have another contest.  Frankly, I believe that your suggestion simply results from a distain of our selections.  If we were to do it again, knowing then what we know now, I sincerely believe we would have chosen the same works.

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]