I would have to say that I am disappointed in the results. I am surprised that the core77 Admin, picked the final concept to be a submission that didn’t even cover the 4 criteria that was set forth from the start
The final definitely was a nice drawing though. This really has nothing to do with melovescookies, more with my disappointment with the admin. Why even put this criteria up if its not going to be factored in judging - Just some thought for next time.
Im not upset or being a sore loser. Just trying to give some advice for the next session.
I’m disappointed because I wanted a Wii. Message to melovescookies: Can I come over sometime to play?
bbarn: They never said what weight was given to those four criteria. Melovescookie’s idea was beautifully presented, the form was nice and the concept was sound. However, it’s true that she didn’t show any form development, but hey, it was only an hour. I think it was probably the presentation quality that tipped it in her favor.
Well, even though there are 4 distinct criteria, I approached this “contest” according to how I think it should be, including picking my favourite design.
I should actually say, I didn’t pick the “design”, but I picked the “concept”.
The water bucket concept is simple to understand. The design itself is also simple to understand. It doesn’t need technology to accomplish the job, and does not create more burden for the users. Most importantly, you can see and physically use the water you’ve “saved”.
I don’t know how original this concept is, but it’s my favourite among the bunch.
I love the concept, and a well deserved win. I honestly had trouble understanding a lot of the others, and thought some were just too complicated for anyone to bother using. This concept is simple to understand, ANYONE can use it, as it will be very cheap to make and simple to install. The form is nice and clean, and presentation is understood almost immediately.
bbarn: Not sure how you can say it doesn’t meet the criteria - unless you are saying it meets them poorly, which you seem to claim is not the case:
Quality of product concept - subjective, but it is either good quality or poor, I would go with good
Quality of form development - Notice it doesn’t say quality of form development process, meaning if all you see is one image, and it shows form, then it’s rate-able. Yes, it the winning concept has a developed form - again, subjective as to good/bad - I would go with decent.
Craftsmanship of presentation - as several of the posts noted, yours included, this is pretty good, meaning the winner must meet this criteria.
Within time limit - unless you know how long she spent, we have to assume she met this one.
My point being, I’m not sure how any of the entries could NOT meet this rather nebulous criteria, so lighten up. Way to throw a wet towel on the winner…oh, and just to let you know I’m not a total ahole, I thought your entry was pretty good!
I know close only counts in horsehoes and hand grenades, Bbarn…but you were in the final 4. Although I contributed over a distance, the debate over who should win was hot. You guys didn’t make it easy. I can’t speak for the rest of the Admin…but I personally thought any of the top four could have taken the prize. Top four after peer voting were:
i am not shitty on anyones concept especially cookies. Im stating that the framework of the challenge may need to be worked out - which is something that has been discussed for the past two weeks.
I am also not relating this to any particular submission. Im talking about this challenge as a whole, so i think people need to relax on asking me why i didnt think the bucket was a good idea - that is not what i am getting at.
Dobie42, I think you are wrong on point (2). Form Development is not shown. If its in the criteria shouldn’t ALL these concepts show that?
Please explain how its a “developed form”. How do we know that about any idea’s? If its not shown, you can only take it for what is submitted. If you have something up that looks like it was modeled or sketched or widdled out of a piece of mahogany for 1hr and you only see that. That is what you have to take it as - a single form with no development. if there was addition form development of an idea, i would take that as breaking criteria and doing development work that would exceed a time limit. I dont think the majority of submissions did this. To me what i see on the screen for each idea (including mine) is what was done in one hour, which to me doesnt show much form development on ANYONE.
Maybe the submissions should show ideation and make it criteria? If it isnt, then you can show whatever you want (final concept or initial concept if that is what you choose)
The idea here is to get creative right? So maybe that is a criteria, some quick ideation to get to a conclusion? This is an ID site, not an inventor idea site. We should show process, ideas, brainstorming…
is that directed to me?
Obviously I was well aware of the childish responses that could come my way as a result of posting. Of course no matter what I wrote about this topic, having not been the winner, would look like im complaining or a sore loser. I tried to make it clear that that is not the case, but obviously it will look that way no matter what i write, so f*k it, im not surprised to see your response. Its just sad that you are now the douche who wrote it. If you have anything to bring to the table that is constructive or debatable, please do. otherwise keep your salt shakers and juvenile comments to yourself.
Im just putting in my ideas to develop this challenge. I think it was a good (and fun) exercise and I enjoyed doing it.
Congratulations melovescookies. Enjoy your Wii! Your presentation sketches were very nice.
Its kind of hard to show much in the way of form development in a one hour contest (I don’t think anyone presented the developmental “stages” of their design) let alone fit it into one posted image of a reasonable size. For the purposes of a FOR FUN, short term, online contest; you could eliminate that as a judging criteria just to avoid controversy.
Anyway, I enjoyed the contest. Thanks ip-wirelessly and whoever else set it up.
Bb, my point was that the hour you describe is “development” in my mind. The act of sketching something, whittling it from mahogany, etc, is development, IMHO. Creation = Development. A sculptor often only has one version to show at the end, b/c they actively change and develop the form as they go along…I don’t think design is necessarily any different, especially in the age of tablet drawing, where work can readily be erased and changed as the sketch progresses.
As to whether that development was sucessful or not, or was refined enough - that’s totally subjective. But the creation is the development.
It sounds to me like perhaps you want a less subjective scale created to evaluate the criteria with…perhaps subcategories of the criteria that help define success.