When doing workmanship judging, experienced workmanship judges look for some of the same and different techniques. What follows is a discussion by several people on what they look for when they do workmanship judging.
Lisa A Ashton
Actually, when I first started doing Masquerades at cons, and knew I would be going to Workmanship Judging (which was for pretty much every costume) I did exactly what Dany is thinking of: I brought notes. Usually all it consisted of was a list of techniques on that costume (i.e. embroidered beadwork, woven beadwork, finished seams, quilting and piecing, fabric painting, etc...) written on nothing bigger than a file card. I know that I get nervous preceding the Masquerade, and I expect to not think or remember everything clearly. If you do something really unusual, write it down.
For Recreation costumes, visual evidence is important. In general, that might consist of one or two pictures of the costume or character. I was overwhelmed at the amount of documentation I recieved at the SF&F. Pretty much all of it was terrific. If you are submitting something more than the picture for recreation, put the most important things at the beginning.
These days, I do my documentation for myself. Even when I do Historical documentation, I want it to be be readable and at least somewhat entertaining. I did the Lizzie Borden documentation as a scrapbook, covered in the fabric from the dress, and looking sort of Victorian. I included a title page, a map of where she lived, text explaining the costume (On this and on my prior Historical, I kept the actual text down to 2 pages), then photos--some of the stages of building the costume, and some of copies of photos from my resource books showing how I made my design decisions. Photos with captions are great. I also had pages with swatches, practice samples of the ruching and embroidery, and practice samples of how I achieved the bloodstains. For SF&F costumes I do documentation with photos, especially to illustrate techniques that I develop for specific costumes. After the costume (A.C.) I usually will keep the docs in the ziploc bag with my original swatches for memories.
Ricky Dick
This is something I've noticed in the last 5 years or so, and it's everywhere, as I haven't been to an anime contest yet.
Lisa A Ashton
May I offer an answer to this one? Let me say that I agree wholeheartedly with both Marty and Ricky, both of whom have taught me a LOT about evaluating workmanship. Just as money spent doesn't guarantee a killer costume, neither does quantity. I look for the basics first--the garment has to FIT correctly to the body. This means it was patterned and sized and possibly altered (and probably had a mock-up to ascertain these issues). Basic sewing methods have to be consistently good--seams and hems straight, for instance; a zipper is installed neatly and runs smoothly. Armsyces fit and are smooth. Seams aren't lumpy--learn to clip where necessary. A lot of what people fall down on is really the fundamentals.
That is one reason that I always watch the presentations closely--to see how everything moves. If the hem is uneven between sides or back to front, you'll lose a few points for that because it won't drape right.
On the other hand, even if you are using simple or basic techniques and repeating them over and over, if they are consistently gorgeously done--it'll be noticeable.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying and modifying something, if that's the best way to do it for you. I do it all the time. There are many types of things that I cannot manufacture myself. I know how to make lampwork glass beads, but it's not time effective for me to do it. I know how to make certain types of trim, but again, it's not time effective.
Richard Man
I have asked Karisu similar things before: when judging workmanship, where do you draw the line for obsessiveness, dedication, and .... um, boneheadedness? For example, should something be bought and modified if needed or do from scratch? When is something close enough? Should a judge ding someone that only does close enough or is it a case of extra credit for someone doing more than close enough? etc.
Dany Slone
My first instinctual answer is 'it depends on the judge'.
My second one is 'it depends on what you are trying to do'.
My third is 'and how it looks when it's done'.
I will only add that the methods to one's madness are important, but if I'm in the judge's seat, any method is a good method if it creates the correct result.
Carole Parker
Questions:
If someone uses a technique new to them, do you give them special consideration? For example, I'll be using some historical dyeing techniques in the future that *I've* never done before. Does that enter into your considerations?
Why? Why not?
Ricky Dick
I would NEVER give someone more credit because they haven't used a technique before. Good workmanship is just good workmanship. If we are not to consider from the general judges panels anything a costumer has done in the past , and are not to judge them based on their past, then this is a second reason we cannot judge someone on whether they have done a technique before.
While opinions and motivations will always vary, I was under the impression that within ourselves, the desire to try new and different things were a major part of what drive us.
But that is an internal private answer. as a judge I must judge you against an absolute standard, just like every one else, and while I don't question YOUR honesty at all (lets be very clear on that) I do think it would open a HUGE can of worms as to deciding whether or not someone is new to a technique.
I think in scientific method there's some phrase like, " you can't prove a negative" or something. We can never prove what knowledge is NOT in someone's head, or in this case, wasn't in there till recently.
I WOULD however, think a slight little nudge would be given to someone who brings a new technique into the community. You know, one where you have to teach the judge what the hell you're talking about? But it's not because of the part that it's new to you, cause after you teach the judge, it's still up to the judge to decide whether it looks nice or not.
Lisa A Ashton
I personally will ask if someone doesn't let me know, if they are using a first-time technique. That is something I DO want to know. Whether it's pattern-drafting, electronics, various fabric techniques, I want to know about it. It will enter into consideration, to a degree. To me, using and trying new techniques is almost a given. It would get pretty boring, doing the same old thing.
Martin Gear
It would depend upon the technique. If you are dumping some fabric in your washer with a packet of Rit dye, then I would hardly be impressed even if it was the first time for you. On the other hand, the Shibori dying that you did would impress me. The mere fact that the individual has never done it before is much less important than how well the person uses the technique and the difficulty of the technique.
For example, I gave a very high workmanship award to a teenager who had turned her staff on a lathe. I didn't give her the award because it was her first time using a lathe. I gave her the award because she used hard maple, and finished it beautifully. Anybody encountering a lathe for the first time can probably turn out something with soft pine, but maple is a different animal and the glass smooth finish that she got on the wood and the varnish were what did it for me. And yes, it was so good that I talked with her at length, and she convinced me that she had done it all herself albeit with her grandfather looking over her shoulder.
Others may feel differently, but you asked my opinion.
Sue Toker
The time I got to judge workmanship, at the Winnepeg Worldcon, with lots of creativity and great costuming. It was a "big" 50ish entry masquerade and because of the size of some costumes and Green room(s) layout, the workmanship judging required traveling to the dens of some of the costumers.
I judged only the work at hand and the skill division not the technique-history of the costumer.
I was working with the Masquerade Director's request to highlight the new or different. I used my eyes first and sometimes asked leading questions about some specific aspect rather then a confrontational question like "So why do you deserve a Workmanship award".
The "Best in Shows.." were for the totality of the workmanship of the costume(s) in that group. However, for the remaining awards I would look for special techniques or high quality work that deserved recognition, even if the overall costume did not achieve the "Best of Workmanship" rating. Its "long ago" but I still remember some wonderful "Aliens" power loader structure that the costumers could move in and the Imperial Walker that started off the Masquerade. There was a novice who brilliantly cut/painted up standard brown grocery bag paper to create a scaled Dragon. There was some wonderful "Carousel Armour" made from fiberglass. The Boston bid entry had a wonderfully engineered Space Ship floated with helium balloons, even if the covering didn't quite work. The list went on but my brain is fuzzy! I did Google up a brief report of the event from John Hertz. He mentioned a few names still on this list.
IMHO, the workmanship award is an important way to highlight where a costumer is going right, especially in the novice/journeyman levels. It can give people a idea of where they should be taking their work and provide a bit of ego-boo as well. On top of that, I think it is a way of awarding people who find a creative way of solving a problem using the materials/money at hand. In that painted paper bag Dragon would "win" hands down over ordinary beading or ordinary RIT fabric dyeing. It was perfectly executed, used unusual materials, and stands as an illustration of what you can do with a limited budget.
(PS To Carole's question: For me, historically correct fabric dyeing would be of interest, but not necessarily that it was your first time. Home runs can be hit on the first swing!)
See Also:
Contestants
home
Masquerade Running
home
Masquerades home
Page maintained by Carole Parker