Art Capture Method

I'm all for any form of an Art Capture Method. On the issue of fairness (compared to stories), I like the idea of Point Prizes, with a certain number of points being equal to a certain level of mon.

I also support the idea of an official choosing the Mon to be won each week; a fair solution under this system would be to only give out Mons of a certain level or lower. So, for example, you may be completely unable to capture a Porygon-Z through Art, given the limited competition and vastly decreased effort/ time compared to Stories.

 

Popular vote's only downside is that people might not be interested in voting or that it would turn into a popularity contest. That being said, it's not necessarily a bad way to go and fairly easy to implement.

But like every major URPG section, we tend to have paid professions and I'm thinking that might be the way to go here.

Think of it this way. To have a few people responsible for a section ensures that the section (at the very least) has someone concerned over it. The Head Ref ensures everything about Battles runs smoothly. The Head Grader checks that stories are being graded and such. The Head Judge worries about section activity. And the professions under them work hard to not only help out the URPG, but also earn a little more on the side. The incentive is two-fold (help the URPG and earn money).

Professionals also have a strong responsibility to be fair, unbiased, and uphold honorable credentials. If they cheat or act improperly, it reflects badly on the URPG as a whole. Thus they carry out their duties with respect.

We could have a similar system in here in which Art Professionals act in a fair manner to determine who wins each contest. For simplicity's sake, let's call these people "jurors". The jurors would have to pass a test (just like every other professional) but it would be one based more on how their thought process works. If they can explain why they like one submission more than the other and what elements strike them. Yes, this will have bias, but jurors will have a greater incentive to be fair than the general public. After all, it's their job. I'm thinking three jurors per an event who award on a 10 or 100 point scale.

They'll also be responsible for ensuring that there is no cheating and that art events will be put up on time.

And of course, like every other professional, they'll work under a Head Juror (or is it Head Jurist?) who will pay them for their work. Thus ensuring responsibility and fairness across the board.

 

Maybe that would be better, a more philosophical test than the others.

The thing is, is that with art, it doesn't only imply paintings, drawings and sprite art. Maybe as this grows older, we could open up a music section, or something similar. It would take a lot of work, but I believe this could happen.

 

The issue of the different types of art has been brought up a lot, so I say make it simple - run competitions for different types of art. Pokemon could be selected in the same way as they are for an event such as an auction, and the art catergory be spriting. Whoever makes the best sprite for that mon, wins it. So on and so forth with drawing, painting, even the more obscure art forms for this purpose such as scuplture. One mon per person too, so some awesome drawer/painter/spriter doesnt win everything.

 

What youre saying by suggesting that there are different competitions for different types of art is that some types of art are inferior to others. I disagree. If one piece of art is better than another, than it is better, regardless of whether it is sprite, drawing etc... The only difficulty is deciding how to judge IF it is better. In come the Jurors ^^ to decide that.

 

I feel like making groupings of the art, would be best. Jurors could easily then judge each contest on the same basic elements. And if each type got it's own turn, that wouldn't really be detrimental to to the value of each form of art. Another added bonus would be that Picasso wouldn't be able to win every contest, because technology confuses him and sprite work would just blow his mind.

 

this idea from hkim

and with this reward method

 

Actually, putting different types of art in different competitions insinuates that different types of art are different.

Which is the case. ie... Objectively comparing sprite art to digital art is impractical. Regardless of the skill of the Jurors, if you have a magnificently shaded piece of sprite art and a pretty awesome piece of digital art, the visual impact of the larger, more elaborate piece is always going to give it the emotional edge--and part of what "makes" art is the reaction. Technical skill can be evaluated with a fair amount of ease, but when you get into the "meaning" and "emotion" and "awesomeness" on the true artistic plane, certain mediums will have disadvantages. And you can't just stick to technique.

 

Exactly, which is why I think rotating the type of art contest would work best. Not to mention that different art styles appeal to different people.

Initially, we can have each contest last two weeks instead of one to get into the swing of things. And if there is a lot of activity, we'll change it to one week.

The big thing about jurists is that we need to start with at least 3 qualified people who understand art and the techniques involved.

 

I mean, all judges are going to be bias in any medium. Heck, if you wanted to, you could argue that rangers or graders could also be bias to one particular style of rping/writing than another (I am NOT arguing that; just using it as an example).

However, I'm still curious to how it's going to work. A decent story for a Demanding Pokemon takes (me, at least) eight to ten hours to write. However, someone could draw really good pictures of the exact same Pokemon in thirty minutes or so, and in the ten hours it takes (me) to write a Demanding story, they could draw twenty pretty good pictures/sprites/whatever of different Pokemon and get themselves a Pokemon. I'm afraid that this system could end up being abused like the National Park was unless we get a good system (which is why we're debating it right now...)

That said, I'm still interested in this. I think the rotating system is a great idea (even though I can't sprite for the life of me), and two weeks does sound a lot better than one.

Also, I'm not familiar to spriting, so correct me if I am wrong- how long/hard is a sprite to do? I've never actually tried it, and I'm not even sure what sprites are being judged here- revamps, recolors, what?

 

Hmmm, you bring up a good point. Save for Calamity, we had not taken into account the varied difficulty of what prize is awarded.

I see two potential solutions here.


Solution 1

The first changes the method slightly. Instead of a Jurist putting up a specific pokemon as a prize, the prize is based on how many people participate. The more entries there are, the better the prize is.

For example:

1 to 2 Entries: Easiest Mon
3 to 4 Entries: Simple Mon
5 to 7 Entries: Medium Mon
8 to 10 Entries: Hard Mon
11 to 14 Entries: Complex Mon
15 to 18 Entries: Demanding Mon
19 to 23 Entries: Merciless Mon
24 or more Entries: Stupefying Mon

The winner chooses a pokemon from the category or a lower category as the prize, giving the winner a choice rather than a specific pokemon like in auctions. This also allows for jurists to choose more creative competition themes like "Happiness" or "Halloween". The numbers above can be adjusted of course.


Solution 2

This idea relates closer to PE2KCalamity's idea of using emblems. I'll quote his post for reference:

As in the mentioned method, a Juror puts up a specific pokemon as the theme and participants compete to win that pokemon.

As before, the winner wins the pokemon in question.

Additionally, each participant receives an Emblem. The Emblem acts sort of like a separate currency like Contest Credits.

The idea is that, if you earn so many Emblems, you can use them to purchase a pokemon of a certain tier. The higher the tier, the most emblems it cost. Obviously this puts the above list a little low.

A new proposed list would be:

1 Emblem -> Easiest
2 Emblems -> Simple
4 Emblems -> Medium
7 Emblems -> Hard
11 Emblems -> Complex
16 Emblems -> Demanding
22 Emblems -> Merciless
29 Emblems -> Stupefying

And of course, the above list can be changed. This system awards members for participating and doing some work. And the juror can decide if a member is abusing the system by submitting a blank piece for example and not award an Emblem. (Honest people are a natural defense against cheating). That way, even if you lose the competition, you still earn something that can eventually be used to catch a pokemon.


Of course, we could combine the above two systems. It's just a matter of what people like.

 

I personally prefer the first method, but I'm not sure how many participants we'll get at first- so far, almost everyone in this thread has been discussing different mediums: drawing, spriting, webcomics, etc. I guess that's to be expected because this idea is still in the works, but it may be a while before this section garners enough interest to get competitions for higher ranked stuff. That said, I don't mind waiting for that to happen; this is for fun, mostly, anyways.

 

I think both could work excellently, but I feel like the second would bring in the most participants. I do believe that it should be that you get an emblem for getting a certain number of points on your submission and that the winner might get an increased amount of emblems. If each contest is two weeks long, that would be pretty equal for the amount of time a person would need to write a story and wait for a grader. This form would give the fairest rewards to everyone who participated and would give the winner the extra boost they deserve.

 

Indeed. Expanding on your idea, we could have the top 25% earn two emblems and the middle 50% earning one emblem. Those who score in the lowest 25% (ie, not try at all) earn no emblems. This rewards people who work hard and participate while accounting for anyone trying to abuse the system.

 

I completely agree with this idea. Bulbagarden Oekaki will be thrilled.

 

The numbers would simply have to be based on a trial participation run. You suggested 24 entries being a minimum for a Stupefying mon. This could be fine, but if suddenly 30 people enter in every art contest thats run, there'll be Porygon-Z's left right and centre. The emblem method is also a good idea, but I would probably suggest there being a limited list, similar to the Mart, for what Pokemon can be won this way.

 

Maybe we could combine both methods, and Monbreys?

We could start off with Harrys idea, where you win a mon depending on the entries, but, lets say you need 7 entrants for the winner to win an Easiest mon. This could be a bit of a side-prize, but the main thing you want to win is an Emblem, which is moving on to my idea. If you get a certain amount of emblems, you can choose from the Art Shop (as Monbrey suggested) as to which Pokémon to buy.

 

I'm not sure how much I agree with a limited list. The mart has a limited list because the pokemon are relatively easy to get (you only pay a small amount of money).

This method requires effort, perhaps even effort over a long period of time. It won't be as fast as Stories, but it awards participation in exchange. So even if you never win a contest, you'll eventually be able to obtain a pokemon. Effort is rewarded.

 

hmm i definatly like both ideas in the top post here,although i think that if there was like 30 entrants then,even if the lowest 25% didn't get the emblem then thats kind of unfair as with that many people it doesnt mean that the lowest 25% didnt try hard enough. I also think that you shouldnt be able to get realy hard mons like porygon z, there should be a limit on what mon, the emblems should also allow you a choice of mons but those mons must be the basic forms no final mons should be able to be bought,like the mart but with all mons available

 

I can see where you're coming from, but the emblems will need to be increased higher if every Pokémon was available, due to how easy it would be to finish in the top 75% of a contest.