MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Pokemon of the Month Club
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
February Judging - All Judges Report In!
Join to comment
 Group admin 
Ok, here we go. First thing I need is for our three judges to identify themselves. I don't remember who all is judging. Once you've done that, you can get to judging.

The judging criteria is posted in another thread. I have updated it to include an example of how you should format your judgement. Please be sure to follow it. :)

YOUR JUDGEMENTS ARE DUE THIS SATURDAY, THE 6TH.

The entry that scores the most total points from all the judges will win.

Only judges should post in this thread until the winner is declared. After that, anybody may post their reactions, comments, etc in this thread.

One last thing: All the Mantines you guys made are fantastic. I'm really impressed. No matter who wins, you are all awesome.
Permalink
| March 1, 2010, 1:10 pm
 Group moderator 
Yup, I'm a judge. Call me in :)
Permalink
| March 1, 2010, 1:14 pm
 Group admin 
Alrighty. You can go ahead. You don't need to wait for the others.
Permalink
| March 1, 2010, 8:05 pm
Sam told me you guys needed another judge, so I'm the third judge! I'll have my vote up soon.
Permalink
| March 2, 2010, 6:03 am
 Group moderator 
My judging for February (Mantine):

Kevin Pierce:
-presentation: 7 points (the vignette is good and the mantine integrated perfectly)
-cleanness: 8 points (the overall build looks cool, combined with the posing in the vignette, very good)
-parts usage: 7 points ( The antenna is very cool, the tail a little simple)
-originality: 7 points (as I said before, I really like the antenna)
-recognizability: 9 points (who doesn't recognize that, needs to go to the doctor)

38/50


Jeffery Lautenslager:
-presentation: 7 points (cool vig, especially the sunshire city)
-cleannes: 6 points (the black is bothering me a little and a studless design would have made the vig better)
-parts usage: 6 points (the tail is cool, just like the antenna)
-originality: 5 points ( cool antenna, I had this idea too, and it has been also used by the others)
-recognizability: 4 points (the overall build is OK, but the black is really bothering. Even if Mantine is dark blue, the classic blue would have got you one more point)

28/50


Tracy Bowersox:
-presentation: 8 points ( good vig and nice photos)
-cleanness: 6 points (the vig is cool, but a little busy)
-parts usage: 8 points (overall very good for this scale)
-originality: 8 points ( one of two micro-scale ones and still very nice)
-recognizability: 7 points ( you can't put so much detail in micro-scale)

37/50


Sam Ellis:
-presentation: 8 points (good photos and nice vig (although it seems Mantine is flying across a river, not under the sea)
-cleanness: 8 points (very clear build)
-parts usage: 6 points (overall a little simple and blocky)
-originality: 6 points ( I like the antenna)
-recognizability: 9 (very good, especially the face part)

38/50


Mike Bernd:
-presentation: 7 points ( vig is OK, a little simple, good photos)
-cleanness: 5 points (the studs kinda irritate)
-parts usage: 3 points ( quite a simple build, the arms have been used before)
-originality: 4 points (pretty much what I said before)
-recognizability: 6 points (the blue is cool, you might replace the grey by white)

26/50


Permalink
| March 2, 2010, 12:45 pm
 Group admin 
Come on people. You've only got today and tomorrow!
Permalink
| March 5, 2010, 4:03 pm
Mike Bernd
Presentation: 8/10 Nice, simple vig, pictures are good.
Cleanness: 6/10 Studs detract a fair amount at this scale.
Parts Usage: 7/10 The Remoraid part is great, the design overall is very simple.
Originality: 5/10 The antennae were used by others, not too many original ideas.
Recognizability: 9/10 Hard to mistake for any other Pokémon, fantastic job!
Overall: 35/50

Sam Ellis
Presentation: 7/10 Pics are in focus, although it doesn't seem like an underwater scene.
Cleanness: 8/10 Very solid, except a plate is sticking up on the back of the right (left from the front) wing.
Parts Usage: 6/10 Great antennae, although the creation seems very angular.
Originality: 9/10 Like I said, great antennae, and kudos for trying to do a larger scale than anyone else!
Recognizability: 10/10 One of the most recognizable, if not the most, out of the bunch.
Overall: 40/50

Tracy Bowersox
Presentation: 9/10 The vig adds a lot to the MOC, my only gripe is that the second photo is a little dark (my camera's not great, though, so who am I to complain!).
Cleanness: 8/10 The vig is pretty busy, but the MOC is very well-built.
Parts Usage: 9/10 Fantastic, especially in the scenery!
Originality: 7/10 Awesome vig, although the antennae idea is fairly common.
Recognizability: 5/10 Sorry 'bout this, but it just looks like Mantyke to me! However, I understand it's difficult with this scale.
Overall: 38/50

Jeffery Lautenslager
Presentation: 9/10 Love the vig, and the main photo is great!
Cleanness: 7/10 Not bad, although feels a little "studdy".
Parts Usage: 7/10 Nice tail, the eyes don't really fit, though.
Originality: 8/10 Certainly different from the others, although many of the entries share the antennae design.
Recognizability: 4/10 The black bothers me, and the shape's not quite right. Also, I don't feel the use of lever pieces for the eyes was great.
Overall: 35/50

Kevin Pierce
Presentation: 8/10 The one that really "wowed" me this month! The dynamic pose is fantastic, and the vig is great! However, I noticed that in several pictures there are black pieces on Mantine's back, while in others there aren't. Be sure to stay consistent!
Cleanness: 8/10 The studs actually don't detract from this MOC. The gaps in the wings are a slight complaint, though.
Parts Usage: 10/10 The antennae and tail are top-notch! The Remoraid looks great for the scale, too!
Originality: 10/10 Absolutely love it! Yours having been the first, I can see various aspects used in the other entrants' MOCs.
Recognizability: 9/10 Easily recognizable, not much else to say.
Overall: 45/50
Permalink
| March 5, 2010, 5:00 pm
 Group admin 
Ok, since our third judge has not checked in and I don't know who it's supposed to be, the first person who wants to judge that checks in here will have the job. The person obviously cannot be involved in the contest.
Permalink
| March 5, 2010, 10:04 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Mingo S.
I noticed that in several pictures there are black pieces on Mantine's back, while in others there aren't. Be sure to stay consistent!


Yeah, I'm lazy. I took a few pictures before I realized I hadn't added the final touches. I couldn't get any of the pictures after it was done to look as good as the first batch.
Permalink
| March 6, 2010, 5:20 pm
 Group admin 
Well folks, if we don't get another judge by the end of this week, I guess I'll just have to add up the points from the two we have. Come on, people! Somebody step up. It'd be a shame to have our very first contest fizzle out like this.
Permalink
| March 8, 2010, 1:01 am
Hey, I was told to come and judge by Sam.

Mike Bernd
Presentation: 8/10 I love the Staryu down below. It adds a sense of liveliness to the scene.
Cleanness: 6/10 It is a small creation and as a result we have to have our minds fill in the holes.
Parts Usage: 8/10 The antennas and tale are very well done. The wings also caught my attention. Lastly, I love the Remoraid.
Originality: 7/10 Though it does use some original things the arms are a very common technique.
Recognizability: 8/10 I like the overall presentation but the issue, for me, is the black spots on the wings. I think they shouldn't have been added...
Overall: 31/50

Sam Ellis
Presentation: 9/10 I love the trickle of water and the grass on the side. It creates a serene setting.
Cleanness: 7/10 Although the grass and such is nice it creates a bit off untidiness down below. Mantine itself is very clean. The tiles give it a smooth texture like a real manta ray.
Parts Usage: 6/10 The creation is great and all, but I don't see many interesting techniques being used. The antennas and Remoraid are nice but it felt lacking.
Originality: 8/10 I believe yours is the only one where mantine is flying. Very nice.
Recognizability: 9/10 Very clear Mantine and such. I feel as though the Remoraid could have used more details.
Overall: 39/50

Tracy Bowersox
Presentation: 10/10 The scenery takes my breath away. The goldeen is a nice addition too.
Cleanness: 7/10 There are some details lacking on the Mantine but the world beneath seems a bit cluttered.
Parts Usage: 9/10 Your use of the knight's feathers and wrench were amazing.
Originality: 8/10 It's nice but it doesn't necessarily stand out.
Recognizability: 7/10 The Mantine is a bit strange. It seems a bit chubby >_>
Overall: 41/50

Jeffery Lautenslager
Presentation: 10/10 Sunyshore city was a nice place to choose. The solar path was very nice along with all the details along the coast.
Cleanness: 8/10 Not much clutter and a nice amount of details.
Parts Usage: 7/10 I liked the back of the Mantine very much.
Originality: 8/10 Very very original with part of a city to boot.
Recognizability: 6/10 While it does look nice the color scheme is off...
Overall: 39/50

Kevin Pierce
Presentation: 10/10 The positioning and pose of the Mantine are great. I love the little pebbles on the ground.
Cleanness: 8/10 While it is very good, it seemed off at the wings and Remoraid.
Parts Usage: 9/10 The antennas, the Remoraid, the wings, all beautifully done.
Originality: 9/10 I thought the antennas were very very original.
Recognizability: 10/10 The spots were there, but subtle, and the shape was perfect.
Overall: 44/50



I think that Kevin should win, hands down. :D
Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 7:25 pm
 Group admin 
Ok, wonderful! Thank you for filling in!

The totals are in, and the winner is KEVIN! Congrats!

Kevin - 127 points

Sam - 117 points

Tracy - 116 points

Jeffery - 102 points

Mike - 92 points

Feel free to discuss the results. Does the judging system work? I know there are some things I need to adjust in the judging rules to make some things a little more clear. Judges, did you feel like some of the categories were a little redundant? Let us know.

Please keep in mind when commenting about the judging: the judges judged based on their own preferences. Unless they didn't follow the guidelines set up for them (which admittedly need some tweaking), their decisions are perfectly valid. If you disagree about something, you can say so, but please don't act like the judges did something wrong.
Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 8:35 pm
 Group admin 
All right all the rankings are in and the standings are as follows:
1st: Kevin Pierce - 127 points
2nd: Sam Ellis - 117 points
3rd: Tracy Bowersox - 116 points
4th: Jeffrey Lautenslauger - 102 points
5th: Mike Bernd - 92 points

Congratulations to our winner for February, Kevin!

Thank you all for participating, the ideas were excellent, and the creations awesome. I look forward to seeing all of the March creations.

And a special thanks to the judges as well!


Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 8:40 pm
No prob, glad to help! The judging system was easy to use, I definitely think the categories should stay. Maybe the judges should be picked before every contest in the future, though, so we know ahead of time who's gonna be judging. I can't wait for this month!
Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 8:45 pm
 Group admin 
Wow we are on Tracy. We basically posted at the same time. Nice teamwork.
Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 8:45 pm
 Group admin 
Wow. Inefficient teamwork, but teamwork none the less.
Permalink
| March 10, 2010, 10:44 pm
 Group admin 
A couple things I noticed that I think should be remedied:

For each creation, the same things were brought up in both "Parts Usage" and "Originality" making me think that those categories are too similar.

The vigs were taken into account for each category, when I initially thought the vig would only count toward the Presentation category. I think that a vig shouldn't affect the other categories.

Thoughts?
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 4:45 pm
Quoting Tracy Bowersox
A couple things I noticed that I think should be remedied:

For each creation, the same things were brought up in both "Parts Usage" and "Originality" making me think that those categories are too similar.

The vigs were taken into account for each category, when I initially thought the vig would only count toward the Presentation category. I think that a vig shouldn't affect the other categories.

Thoughts?

In my opinion, the creation should be taken as a whole. If someone has an extremely well-built Pokémon but their vig is terrible, that should be taken into consideration. I mean, if their vig is just a bunch of random-colored bricks, shouldn't that affect the Cleanness and Parts Usage categories?
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 4:56 pm
 Group admin 
I agree that the "parts usage" and "originality" judging aspects are also too close together. However, I like originality as a category better, so any ideas for a replacement of "Parts Usage"?
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 5:21 pm
 Group moderator 
I kind of agree with the thought that the vig shouldn't count towards anyothing other than presentation, but in the end it depends on the goal of the contest. Is the goal to see who can make the best moc using the pokemon as the inspiration? Or is it to see who can build the pokemon the best? If it's the latter, the vig really just gets in the way.

As for myself, I wanted to use a vig at first because although mantine is a cool pokemon, I find him a little bit boring to look at. I thought that the vig would really help make what might have been a plain model into an awesome moc. On the other hand, it might not even have occurred to me to make a vig for a pokemon like Raikou. He's interesting and complex enough on his own that he doesn't need anything vying for attention. And in the end, I don't think I will be making a vig for him. If I do it will probably just be some bit of grass for him to be running on. Something very simple and plain.

What I do think is important is that contestants should not feel as though making a vig is a requirement for a good score. A good vig could get you a few points, but you should be able to make up for those points in other ways, such as cleanliness and general style.

But in the end, it's up to Sam and Tracy. Just my two cents.

P.S. Yay I won!
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 6:58 pm
 Group admin 
Couldn't agree with you more Kevin. I was just debating what I would do for a vignette for Raikou, and couldn't come up with anything. I think the vignettes effectiveness will vary from pokemon to pokemon, and should be judged accordingly. Tracy?
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 7:05 pm
 Group admin 
That's what I'm thinking as well. When I have some time, I'll change the judging criteria to match what we've discussed here.
Permalink
| March 11, 2010, 8:48 pm
Other topics



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Pokemon of the Month Club


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use