Grimstonefire:
Over in the staff section we’ve been having a long discussion about the future of the Artisans contest.
For those who have not heard of this before:
The original idea of the competition was that it would cover the things that would be unsuitable for the Golden Hat competition. Things like terrain, objectives, concept design of war machines, maybe even bigger things like ships etc! All these things are part of the Chaos Dwarfs, many of which would have a practical long term use if made into models.
The problem we have had with the competition in the past is been down to a few issues;
The first is exposure.
The Golden Hat competition is an integral feature of the site, and will remain so for a long time to come. The Artisans Contest never had the same hype, and we never quite got it right deciding how exactly it would be organised and what themes it could cover.
The second was the nature of how people entered.
Mini competitions are easy; you just enter photos of a model. The Artisans one is different because there were 3 different forms people could enter; drawings, descriptions, or the model itself. Judging entries when they are coming in all these different forms is asking a lot really, it relies on people being able to compare equally the quality of ideas displayed in several different ways. The temptation is always there to judge how ideas are presented, not the ideas themselves, so that was another problem.
The third was what the themes were.
The first Artisan covered something of immediate practical use (battlefield markers), whereas the second was an abstract concept of limited use (slave wagon). Whilst both may be fun to do, will we get the most entries choosing practical over abstract?? Not necessarily?
The last issue was the scheduling, which is now sorted.
Xander, HB and Willmark have plans for the first issue above. What I proposed was mainly looking at the second and third issues.
As I see it we have 3 options for how people enter and we need to pick only one.
1. Descriptions only.
2. Drawings and models only
3. Drawings only.
I won�?Tt go into all the benefits and problems with each option, but sufficed to say that IMO option 1 would have the most entries, followed by 2, then option 3.
The main things to consider are that if you allow all 3 (drawings, models and descriptions), the visual ones are more likely to win (IMO), and not everyone is keen to draw. However if you only do descriptions it really restricts what themes we can do.
So what feedback can you give on this?
Vexxus:
The main things to consider are that if you allow all 3 (drawings, models and descriptions), the visual ones are more likely to win (IMO), and not everyone is keen to draw. However if you only do descriptions it really restricts what themes we can do.
So what feedback can you give on this?
Grimstonefire
I would have to disagree, in that I think that people aren't necessarily going to vote for the most visual, because this is an IDEA contest, and if nothing is left to the imagination, it is easier to disagree with the artist's conception of the IDEA. Case and point is AC2, whereby straight-up idea versus visual butted heads. The race was tight the entire time the voting was open. For me personally, I voted towards HB's entry, since the other entry's boars to me, didn't represent the daemon engine portrayed in the description, and I liked what HB had described better.
That being said, I would have liked to have read a description alongside the photos of the first entry, to more completely embody their idea, and explain what they set out to do, still wish to do, etc.
I think that if the true goal is to get more people involved in this contest, limitations seem foolhardy. I would much rather see something like the description being mandatory, for example between 50 and 200 words, and the photos or any design works as a bonus if available.
The level playing field is people's imagination, not simply the presentation, and I believe the intelligent voters here at CDO realize this. For this reason I implore you not to limit the outlets of the community's imagination for future Artisans Contests. I do honestly believe that the chief contributing factor is that the deadlines were matched with the already established GH contests, and now that this issue is resolved, why not see how the AC can do on its own, before making major alterations.
Cheers
Vex
Kera foehunter:
well i can’t draw !!! Well the problem i think that the contest are to close together.
i wanted to join in but i did not have time for the other contest .
There should be reminders to tell us like a week to go .
sometimes i forget about it until its to late.
if other people are like me i like to see something!
well being a young site we are having growing pains like these but i have not never seen a site that has done so much in this short time. So we need to get focus maybe only have one contest at a time . or have some one in charge of contest only !!!
i see how you guys stretch your selves thin.
Thommy H:
I’m of the opinion that allowing drawings and descriptions renders the whole thing kind of pointless. I also think it unfairly penalises an entrant who actually goes to the effort of making a model - if I’d built and painted a cart and I lost out in this competition to someone who’d just written about a cart they never could or would build, I’d feel a bit short changed.
If it was just descriptions, or just drawings, or just models then it would be fine, but as it is the former two options are self-evidently much easier ways of winning than the latter. Warhammer is a craft hobby, so let’s make it a craft competition. No one complains that the Golden Hat unfairly penalises people who can’t paint so well.
Xander:
No one complains that the Golden Hat unfairly penalises people who can't paint so well.
Thommy H
Actually, that was exactly the complaint that several people had, which led to the creation of the AC in the first place.
Obsidian:
It’s not all about winning though right?! It’s entering and having fun, plus seeing what others come up with for me! 
I voted drawings and models only. That is what keeps it exiting for me. Reading long pieces of texts, no matter how well written, just don’t do it for me. A picture says more than a thousand words!
Willmark:
Most of the staff is if the same mindset: so far Artisans has gone to the one with the best submitted art, rather then the best submitted description. This was particularily evident in AC1.
It could be argued that the Artisans will simply come down to who the best writers are… There is going to be no way around that.
Obsidian hit the nail on the head: it’s not about winning. It’s about doing something snd getting better. “The journey is the reward”.
cornixt:
Two reference points don’t make a trend, and in AC2 the purely descriptive one only lost by a few votes to a fantastic model. The idea is what people should be voting for, and probably are, so a description of a good idea will beat a professionally drawn bad idea. I don’t see nearly enough evidence that the drawings are what wins it.
Hashut’s Blessing:
Personally, because AC has always been about the idea, I am inclined to have it as writing about how to MAKE the model. This prevents description of how it looks being the winning factor (instead of how it actually looks), prevents it being a second GH (I.E. a modelling and painting competition) and prevents it being about the best artist instead of the best concept (which is what would happen with drawings).
Each time, I tried to make it clear (which it seems I repeatedly failed, despite how much emphasis I put on it) that the competition was about the idea not about how it is put across. Also, I tried to make people realise it wasn’t about how it looked (for example, a model winning over writing because you can see it), but what the thoughts going into it were.
On top of this, I kept asking for words in all entries and in AC2, I only got the blurb for Orclord’s entry after the voting had begun.
I agree with what Vexxus has said about limiting the word count though, but I’m not sure 200 is enough. As for the content of the competition, I think things that are useful will be better (terrain, markers etc), rather than models (as AC2 turned out to be to coincide with BTB’s Mordheim release). Essentially, AC was meant to be VERY different from GH and it was intended for those that wished to be judged on creativity, rather than skill (but even after being pointed to it
Willmark:
One aspect that has never been considered is what HB just mentioned: Terrain. Always useful but rarely done, perhaps that is the key to making Artisans a sucess. Throwing out thoughts here.
Hashut’s Blessing:
Well, Willmark, AC was originally meant to be all about everything that wasn’t a model, ya see (yes, some people may say terrain is a model, but ya’ll understand what I mean). Basically, AC was intended for non-game legal "model"s (such as terrain/dioramas and the like) or things that would aid the battles (markers, measuring instruements etc) or are CD-related in general (maybe a big-hat or mask competition for you to wear etc). However, is that what people want it to continue being or would they prefer something more specific?
Ghrask Dragh:
If the whole point of the contest was to give people who aren’t the best modellers or painters a chance at a medal then surely we should be able to enter just descriptions (including creative writing, short stories) and concept art and drawings of whatever they have thought of, no models allowed!
The comp would be judged on the ideas and thoughts presented, how they fit the theme better than others, how creative and imaginative the ideas are, not the number of words used or quality of the drawings.
Not allowing miniatures would make it a level playing field and would not make it look like some have put more effort into the contest than others.
wallacer:
Perhaps part of the difficulty lies in the name of the contest.
The word Artisan tends to imply the creation of something with one’s hands - a drawing, sculpture, paintjob etc.
If the Artisan’s contest is intended to reward intellectual creativity then perhaps the name should be changed to reflect a contest that focuses on cerebral creativity rather than manual creativity (as with GH).
Grimstonefire:
I knew it would be worth asking this in the forum
You can see now why we’ve been having a long discussion behind the scenes.
Following on from HB’s post above, he basically describes the sorts of physical practical things we could do. The other category of things I had in mind were a lot more abstract but relied more on drawing or description; a temple, a kollossus, a ship etc. Things that people would be unlikely to build, but might plan to one day.
I will follow the poll with interest, if people don’t want it to be a competition focused on drawing (or have one or two contests based on it), we can rule out the abstract stuff and focus only on practical things.
I’m fine with it being that, just as long as we know!
@Wallacer.
I think Xander talked about changing the name, but we didn’t decide on anything.
Hashut’s Blessing:
Ghrask, the word limit is to allow people to actually bother reading the entries. If each person entered a 2,000 word essay on their piece, nobody would want to read through them all, particularly if we get more people. Also, the reason that we originally hadn’t removed the allowance of models was that we expected people to not let the visual aids effect their voting on the idea, not to mention that we didn’t want people who weren’t so good with words to miss out. If you say no models because people will vote on how they look over a description, we should remove drawings for the same reason as well, surely?
wallacer, if the name needs to be changed to help this, that’s fine.
I did consider suggesting a third competition for drawings, but I wondered if it would be best to get this one off the ground a little better first and also if three would perhaps be too many for them all to be done often enough? I guess we could always have the drawing and writing competitions at the same time, but people have complained about not enough time to write when it’s been alongside the GH, so that seems unviable.
Pyro Stick:
Perhaps part of the difficulty lies in the name of the contest.
The word Artisan tends to imply the creation of something with one's hands - a drawing, sculpture, paintjob etc.
If the Artisan's contest is intended to reward intellectual creativity then perhaps the name should be changed to reflect a contest that focuses on cerebral creativity rather than manual creativity (as with GH).
wallacer
I was going to bring up the point about its name as well. With Golden Hat it feels more important solely because of the Golden in the name. Why not rename the Artisans comp the Golden Zigguratt or something?
Thommy H:
Actually, that was exactly the complaint that several people had, which led to the creation of the AC in the first place.
Odd. That seems very strange to me, but okay.
Thommy H: the contest was never about the production. It's always been PURELY about the idea. I emphasised this a LOT in both competitions, moreso in the second after seeing the voting style of the first. Also, the rules specifically stated that it must be able to be made, if not, it wasn't a legal entry. In neither contest did this happen.
And that's fine. But, to me, that makes the competition a bit pointless. Anyone can describe anything with words - the only limit is imagination. That's great if you think an "imagination contest" is something that you can properly judge, but I happen to think that that's an exercise in futility.
Either have a creative writing contest, or have a drawing contest, or have a craft contest, but don't try to judge all three of those things by the same standard in the same competition, because I think it's apples and oranges. How can you compare a model someone has physically made and painted to a mere description of one - remember that the guy who made his had to come up with the idea (and write a description or make a sketch) in the process, so, in a literal, quantitive sense, he has done as much and more as the guy who just wrote/drew his entry. It's not fair for him to lose - and I think the votes have reflected that.
Vexxus:
Most of the staff is if the same mindset: so far Artisans has gone to the one with the best submitted art, rather then the best submitted description. This was particularily evident in AC1.
Willmark
I could not disagree more.
There were very few outside-the-box ideas in the submissions, so since most of the entries had the same ideas, or very similar, of course at that point, the idea taken the furthest, ie/ into great art will then win. Also, as was mentioned above, 2 points don't set a trend. So, to put AC1 as evidence is already weak at best, but then to completely ignore the AC2 which further contradicts the evidence, isn't really a strong argument at all in my eyes.
I will re-iterate, why not try AC3 as already established, just not alongside a GH contest. Run independantly, more accurate levels of interest can be weighed, and at least with 3, trends could more reasonably be pointed to.
wallacer:
If a name change is not on the cards then perhaps a suitable alternative might be to break the Artisan’s Contest up into sections. For example:
Artisan’s Contest - Best Drawing
Artisan’s Contest - Best Model/Conversion
Artisan’s Contest - Best Idea/description/fluff (or whatever)
Essentially, people do their creative thing, and then decide which category they wish to submit their entry into. People would then vote on which they think is best in each category.
This would make it slightly more complex than the current situation (at least in terms of determining results) but it would make the competition a lot more easy to understand.
I still think it would be better if it were called the Creativity Contest or the Golden Pen or something, but what do I know? 
