Stars ... diamonds ... and ? confusion

[Dave Watterson]

Entry forms for the 2008 IAC International Film & Video Competition are now on the main website. See "News of BIAFF 2008 - and competition entry forms." on the front page.

The blue /bronze /silver /gold /international standards (and their more recent cousins "silver plus" and "bronze plus") have gone after decades of service. What we will have now is a star rating like hotels.

They will go from one star to five stars. My guess - and it is only a guess - is that these will equate:

[no award] = blue
* = bronze
** = bronze plus
*** = silver
**** = silver plus
***** = gold

The old "international" awards will become "IAC Diamonds".

There are no limits to the number of awards at each "star" level but there can be no more than 8 "diamonds".

This will make it a little trickier to see whether the standard of your work is going up or down. If you got silver this year and get four stars in 2008 is that really better?

The old "blue" award was really on its way out. In the days of cine and before camera automation there would still be occasional entries that were from absolute beginners who scarcely cut off the processing lab leaders and trailers let alone dreamt of editing, titling etc. These days very, very few entries are at that level.

Is it all getting too complicated?

Dave

[stingman]

Will it catch on? I don`t know. Bronze to Gold seems better then stars People know that Gold is better then Bronze. And having the word Gold on a certificate seems better then a few stars.
But, who am I to question this change. I myself don`t like it, but then, I don`t like change!

I hope people will send in there films and win good stars.
I hope it works out for the IAC!

[Brian Saberton]

In a way it is sad to see the passing of the bronze/silver/gold certificates but I think it was time for a change and I think that the star ratings will be an improvement. Now we shall all have to aspire to being "diamonds" - this sounds much better than "international"!

[Richard Rouillard]

This seems like an adoption of the the old Ten Best Competition when it was run by the Movie Maker Magazine (run by the late lamented Tony Rose, Alan Cleave and co) with the exception that finalists were Gold Star awards (rather than five stars). Personally I don't think it is either better or worse than the IAC system was (prior to the introduction of "plus" to further delineate between the Gold, Silver, and Bronze awards) but it will probably be more easily understood by many who are used to star ratings in film catalogues, equipment tests in magazines etcetera.

Richard Rouillard

[Richard Rouillard]

My apologies for my sloppy use of English in my last post that might have implied that Alan Cleave has passed away. To the best of my knowledge he is happily still with us!

Richard Rouillard

[Willy]

Entry forms for the 2008 IAC International Film & Video Competition are now on the main website. See "News of BIAFF 2008 - and competition entry forms." on the front page.

The blue /bronze /silver /gold /international standards (and their more recent cousins "silver plus" and "bronze plus") have gone after decades of service. What we will have now is a star rating like hotels.

The best coaches are in the stands
It is always easy to criticize a system. You can only (try to) change it when you are a member of the Board, not when you are an ordinary member, just like most of us. Moreover I am an overseas member of the IAC. The best coaches are always in the sands.

Forum is "Speakers' Corner"
However it may be interesting to give our feelings for the good of the IAC. This forum is a bit like the IAC's speakers' corner and I guess that we will not be arrested or punished when we give our own opinion.

Some years ago there were still gold seal awards, silver seal awards, bronze seal awards and blue seal awards. The international awards had a red seal.

Stylish
I think that was excellent. That was stylish. In the UK you can see such framed seal awards in shops for instance. A butcher can show that he is a very good one. He is proud. On the continent you don't see such certificates. They are unique.

Framed gold seal awards
Some time ago I was in the house of a British friend. His red and gold seal awards that he had won at the IAC festivals were framed and they were hanging on the wall in his living room. He seemed to be very happy with his 'trophies' and I felt happy for him. Now the size of the certificates is A5 (much smaller) and the signatures are printed.

Prestigious film festival
BIAFF is the most prestiguous film festival in the world. That's what Christiane Surdiacourt and I myself always tell Flemish filmmakers. The certificates give a "luxurious" (=read prestiguous) appearance and feeling. The filmmakers received 3,4,5, 6 sheets of paper with judges' comments, though it seems that the number of judges comments' has been diminished.

Value for money
The IAC always gives value for money. The entrance fee is higher than anywhere else but you also get more for it and I hope that it will be like that in the future.

Cachet
Believe it or not : I myself take part in the British festivals because I enjoy the atmosphere and I always try to attend these events even when I am not a winner. But I am someone who loves Britain. Maybe he other Belgian friends who take part in BIAFF don't have such a strong feeling I think. My certificates are in a file. They're not hanging on the wall.

After all : BIAFF must stay an international film festival with some "cachet". The "cachet" was also on the certificates some years ago. I am not against stars. As long as we get enough judges comments. But that's my opinion. So we must keep the IAC strong in all its aspects.

We must always pay tribute to the hard workers !
Of course there is one aspect that we must nogt forget. In every organization there are very hard workers. I can imagine that after some time they try to find an easier and also cheaper way to organize their festival. I repeat : the best coaches are in the sands.

[ned c]

I feel that the need to give every film entered in a competition some form of award is unnecessary. First, Second and Third overall and by genre, specialist awards for sound, editing, photography, whatever. There was great deal to be said for the old "Ten Best" approach. Judges comments, yes; but dividing up "the rest" into award categories must be a nightmare and very uncertain so don't bother. Perhaps I would hang a Gold award on a quiet wall but certainly nothing less.

ned c

[Willy]

Judges comments, yes; but dividing up "the rest" into award categories must be a nightmare and very uncertain so don't bother. Perhaps I would hang a Gold award on a quiet wall but certainly nothing less.

ned c

"I would hang a Gold award on a quiet wall, but certainly nothing less."


Me too, Ned. As I told you ... my certificates are in a file, not on the wall in my living-room, but I'm also sure that many other filmmakers don't share our feelings and we must accept that.

My first bronze !
On the other hand I must admit that I was very proud when I received my very first bronze award at the local competition. That was about twenty years ago. Maybe you had the same feeling. An award is also a form of appreciation. In my previous message I also expressed the feelings of other filmmakers. I can imagine that some filmmakers are very proud with their silver awards. And why not ?

All human beings are different !
I am only worried about the following thing : we do our utmost to encourage Belgian friends to take part in the British and other international festivals. I always try to find valid arguments for these friends. In the first place judges comments. But I am also sure that among them there are many potential participants who are sensitive to things like certificates. All human beings are different. Luckily not everybody has the same characteristics as I have.

First, second, third
I also agree with first, second and third, Ned, but then in different categories : fiction films, animation films, documentaries, travelogues, etc... It always feels very strange that a fiction film "is beaten" by a cartoon for instance in a festival. Anyway I think that the participant should get something tangible or formal for the money (s)he has spent on a festival. Enthusing hobbyists is very important ... in any way. A certificate or medal of "remembrance" is sufficient.

In fact I don't see any difference between a star system and a system with gold, silver and bronze. I remember that the star system was used in the Cotswolds Film Festival some years ago, but now it is different. Why did the organizers change it again ?

Having said all this : for me personnally these things are not so important. I've been making a film now for many months. Every week my film is getting better and better thanks to the cooperation and criticism of my clubmates. This improvement is fascinating and makes me happy. Club life is more essential than anything else. Inter club and other competitions are of minor importance but we also need them. We must try to keep them alive and therefore we need participants of all kinds...

[Dave Watterson]

I feel that the need to give every film entered in a competition some form of award is unnecessary.

The IAC comp has always been in two parts: one is a benchmarking exercise so that people can get a relatively objective view of their work from a team of outsiders. It is part of the IAC's educational function, I guess. People could see that they moved from Blue one year to Bronze the next and so on.

The second part only begins with the Golds - and these go into a traditional competition for a handful of awards.

So I see the certificates as more like a school report card - a recognition of your skills and talent each year. Darned few of us will ever stand a chance of even reaching the "competition" part - don't we deserve something?

Dave

[Mike Shaw]

Rather than an overall 'precious metals' or 'star' rated system, wouldn't a comprehensive scoring system be more useful to makers of the films? Scores for 'titling, music/sound, editing, appeal' etc etc - with the highest overall scorers winning the few trophies. (Are there trophies for things like editing? I can't remember - but they wouild still fit into the scoring scheme of things)

OK, that doesn't leave anything to hang on the wall unless you're a top winner. But it would be more useful in terms of improving one's abilities and approach in the various areas of film-making.

The judges comments could then relate to the low scoring areas, suggesting why the score was low or ways for improvement. I think I would find that very useful. More so that a simple piece of paper that says 'Silver' for example, which massages the ego, but little else

[Brian Saberton]

I know that some people favour them but as someone who does a bit of judging I dislike scoring systems for different aspects of a movie and never use them as I think it makes the process too clinical. What weighting would you give to each element? Should technical aspects carry more marks than the artistic elements? Should photography score more highly than sound or editing and, if so, why? We've all seen films that are technically brilliant in every sense yet are dull and uninteresting as a movie.

My interest is in how well the film succeeds as a whole as a movie. Does a drama make you care about the characters and stimulate some emotions in the audience? Does a documentary make you think; or challenge, maybe even change, your opinions? Is there evidence of originality of thought by the author? Does the author have something to say and how well has he or she said it? When judging a competition containing multiple genres each film is assessed as a seperate entity so we are not really drawing comparisons between, say, a piece of animation or a holiday film. When you think about it just about all films tell a story in one way or another. In BIAFF the judges are given clear guidelines of the criteria required for each level of award and great care is taken to ensure that judges are assessing films to a common standard.

Judging and methods of judging are subjects that cause much debate and criticism and I suppose it will ever be thus - the discussion has probably gone on since competitions began and no doubt this thread will generate considerable comment and debate for some time to come!

[Mike Shaw]

All valid points, and I withdraw my suggestion unreservedly! I can see how trying to compare an animation, say, with a travelogue based on a points system would be plain stupid and futile.

However, judging must surely involve a considerable amount of subjectiveness? How does one get round that. Or put another way, an experienced judge would not be prisoner to subjectiveness - but where do they get the experience without it. to become a top quality judge?

[Willy]

[quote="Brian Saberton"]I know that some people favour them but as someone who does a bit of judging I dislike scoring systems for different aspects of a movie and never use them as I think it makes the process too clinical. What weighting would you give to each element? Should technical aspects carry more marks than the artistic elements?

Artistic aspect
Wow, Brian ! Brilliant how you have put the right idea about judging into the right words ! Also Dave and Michael have already told our forum-friends in a clear way how we should evaluate a film. We must not under-estimate the artistic elements of a film. And the power in it is very important. There are certain films that I will never forget even if they didn't get a good result. But in fact these films are the best. On the continent judges focus too much on technical aspects.

To give some good examples : I am happy that the Austrian film about the old man has won the Cotswolds festival. This is an artistic film that I will never forget.

Tomorrow
A few years ago I saw the film "Tomorrow" made by the Belgian filmmaker Claus. It was about an old man who suffered from Alzheimer. I always think about this film when I have a "black out". The film was frightening. Imagine that this will happen to me, I always think ! Perhaps it was not a good film for my own morale, but that's something else.

That's fair, Michael !
I also appreciate Michael Shaw's reply. He said : "I withdraw my suggestion unservedly." That's fair of you, Michael. Of course in your one minute movie the technical aspect was very important. Thanks to it it's a very good one. It was the best of the festival in Tunbridge Wells, but you also agree that a judge must always give priority to the way in which a filmmaker has put his meaning over to the audience. I hope you understand what I mean.

[stingman]

So which system is best? I don`t know. Don`t ask me!
It is best to go with a scoring system or go with the general feel of it! I`m mixed over this.
I feel that a film has to have the basic things done perfect like good clean edits, the sound that is crystal clear, you can hear each word perfectly, all sound effects in time with the actual pictures. The pictures perfectly framed and the horizons straight unless there meant to be wonky. All this is basic. So in my book, ALL THIS has to be perfect to at least get through to the point of `will it win`. Next is the general feel of the film. It`s got to flow right and did you enjoy it or did you fall asleep. Did the film drag on or did time fly?

So which of the two systems of the above is more inportant?
I still don`t know but they both have to be perfect to win!