Welcome to Gaia! :: View User's Journal | Gaia Journals

Your browser has JavaScript disabled. Enable JavaScript on your browser for most GaiaOnline features to work correctly.

View User's Journal

Report This Entry Subscribe to this Journal

	Secret!
	Secret!

	R1
	R1


First, I'd like each judge to discuss whether or not they believe any contestant appears to deserve elimination. Keep in mind that this is early on in the game and that this currently isn't about winning but rather showing promise for improvement. This means you should be easy on them for now. But if you believe that a certain contestant does not show promise, let us know and we can discuss it. Other judges would have to agree in order for an elimination to take place, and the contestant would get an opportunity to defend themselves and prove themselves first. Second, I'd like each judge to discuss whether or not any contestants seem to need to be tested individually on something from this round. For instance, if you think a contestant did a particularly poor matching entry, you can suggest that we test them on matching and require them to make a new avatar. Testing them does not mean that they will be eliminated if they fail. It just means we're pushing them to do better. Unlike the former, this does not necessarily need to be a lenient judgement (so even mediocre entries can be grounds for a test), but it's probably best not to force the majority of the contestants to prove themselves, so hopefully we can pick a decent place to draw the line. You CAN suggest that a contestant be tested on multiple aspects of this past round if you find it appropriate. Third, if you have suggestions for a near future round, let me know. We're sticking with very basic things for now, which is why I started with a round based on the most vague criteria for labeling an avatar. The next round will be about forward/backward and standing/kneeling, as this is another basic aspect of avatar making. I'm considering doing something about backgrounds in the near future (making them with various partial background items, and/or making an avatar's base fit well with its surrounding background). Not totally sure if that qualifies as basic, though, especially considering it's very specific to scenic and themed avatars (and I'd like to stay general for as long as possible). But I suppose we have to specific at some point, so it'll probably be a round eventually. Sorry for the tl;dr! Please post your discussions as comments. GDNTC · Mon Sep 19, 2011 @ 02:06am · 14 Comments


GDNTC Community Member «Prev \| Next Archive \| Home [12/08/11 08:50pm] [11/06/11 02:39am] [09/19/11 02:06am]

	User Comments: [14]
	User Comments: [14]


	1) Who deserves elimination? No one, in my opinion. 2) Who deserves to be tested? Possibly bluecherry, on clutter, 'cause it seems a little borderline, more so in the middle than on the definitely-clutter side. But if no one else agrees, I'm not gonna argue too strongly for this one. Possibly criniera on nonmatching, not because it isn't nonmatching, 'cause there's no doubt in my mind it is, but because.. it's not very good. I'd like to see it done more successfully. And maybe mixtrix on clutter, because again, I'm not sure if it's cluttered enough to qualify (though I do love that entry actually). And perhaps Quiet Judgments on nonmatching, because his final entry for it ended up matching, even though his first attempt at it did fit nonmatching. But since he did have stages at some point that nonmatched, I'm not sure if it's something we should bother with. Still, not everyone keeps track of all the stages of editing, so I'm not sure we should look back on previous stages to make decisions. Other than them, I think everyone's doing at least decently, sometimes quite well. But there were a couple others I didn't mention that I could be swayed on if anyone brought them up. 3) Future round possibilities: Another idea for a round that I should do soon! Male vs. female base, and possibly crossdressing. Seems basic and general enough (though crossdressing may be left for a later round since strongly conveying a gender is specific to the themed category). If contestants don't have opposite sex mules of their own, I would have to make some just for that purpose and then allow invo search. Offline Sher!ock · Community Member · Mon Sep 19, 2011 @ 08:52pm


	I don't think anyone deserves to be eliminated this round. If I'm honest, I think pretty much everyone, bar one or two, need to be tested more on nonmatching, but hardly any of the nonmatching entries were what I consider to look like nonmatching, nor were they cohesive. Other areas I'd like to see people tested on are: bluecherry on clutter iymcool on clutter clomp on matching jammy on matching (I know jammy can do matching but that entry was poor) I don't have any suggestions. Offline [Techi] · Community Member · Wed Sep 21, 2011 @ 09:08pm


	If we were to test EVERYONE on the same thing, we might as well make it its own round. Which can be done if other judges agree, but I think some people did nonmatching decently enough. I like Gorilla's and Macabeak's, for instance, and Jam's final version turned out somewhat nice. I agree at least that overall, the nonmatching entries were pretty weak. It's as if people can't tell what colors and textures and patterns go together if they aren't an exact match. A nonmatching specific round is a definite possibility, but something that I think I'd do later, since it is specific to a style. But testing people now who did particularly bad entries in that category is fine for now. I personally disagree with making everyone go through a test on it, though. I could maybe agree to iym on clutter. It was kinda bulky and not super appealing, but I didn't think it was thaaat terrible either, I guess. So I think I'm on the fence. I disagree about Clomp needing to be tested on matching. It looks decent enough to me. I'm not fanatical about it, but I don't dislike it. I also don't think Jam particularly needs a test on matching. It was also decent enough, in my opinion. Offline Sher!ock · Community Member · Wed Sep 21, 2011 @ 10:01pm


	1.) None yet. 2.) I think bluecherry could use a round on concrete. Iunno how you define it, but concrete to me is something with a set and determinable theme. While I can tell what she was going for, so many of her item choices do not fit that theme. While I think quite a number of people could use help with nonmatching, criniera is probably the worst offender in that she IS nonmatching but the avatar itself is just... awful. I also agree with Techi that Jamais' matching was poor in comparison to what I know she is capable of. And Lastly QJ with simple. I absolutely love that avatar, but it just seems way to detailed to be simple. 3.) I agree a round on nonmatching would be beneficial. I think a round using visible default eyes and mouth would be cool; I had to do it for niner's contest and found using all but 2-3 mouths hard. lol and you know how I feel about male/female base changes. Definitely on board for that one. Offline tuni fish · Community Member · Thu Sep 22, 2011 @ 07:09am


	1: I don't think anyone deserves to be eliminated yet. 2: Catanaition N. D. should probably be tested on Concrete... It's clear that they know how, but not that they know how to put it where it belongs. -shrug- QJ really needs to be tested on Simple... It doesn't look like he grasps the concept very well. Mixtrix likewise... It doesn't look like she's changed anything since being critiqued though. criniera should be tested on simple. 3: I like your idea for the next round... You should do that. Offline MabTheQueenMTG · Community Member · Sat Sep 24, 2011 @ 02:18am


	♥♥♥♥ RAWR 1) Don't see any to eliminate just yet. 2) bluecherry - her abstract was pretty weak, even in comparison to a somewhat shaky overall submittal. Cinderfae - her matching entry is pretty loose and misses the mark of real matching. CLOMP-a-saurus - This one is borderline, as their non-matching isn't /that/ bad, but it doesn't seem to quite get the point of non-matching and leans more toward theme or simple. criniera - That simple avatar isn't really all that simple, the matching only kind of matches in some areas and the concrete just looks like a random almost sexy almost themed almost a lot of things avatar but nothing especially clear. Jamais Changeant - the matching could use a test, as there are elements that do match but that's only evident if I really look for them. marwolfer - Shaky matching, I'd test on that one. mixtrix - There isn't a lot of difference in detail between the simple and clutter, and I think that's more the fault of the simple, so test on that one. The non-matching looks like a better entry for simple - it doesn't completely match, but it starts to in areas like the legs to hat, and leans more toward a strong theme than non-matching in the sense of an avatar that specifically doesn't match for the sake of not matching, so I'd put that up for testing also. Quiet Judgements - Not feeling the simple, it's pretty detailed and busy. The non-matching matches better than a lot of other contestants' matching entries lol not that I would judge them against each other, I'm just saying that there are a number of matching elements in it and thus I fail to see how it's specifically non-matching. vee jumped - I'm not much of a fan of any of these entries, but no one is bad enough to stand out as needing a test. It just keeps me wary for elimination/testing in future rounds. 3) I like the ideas you have so far. I think it might be a good challenge to pick up on some of the general crutches people use and make them go without for a round - maybe a round of no body mods? Offline Maramas · Community Member · Sat Sep 24, 2011 @ 02:23am


	An overall note to everyone-- Part of what I was trying to show the contestants this round was that these categories are on a spectrum. To be a matching avatar does not necessarily mean to match perfectly. If it's close, then it still counts. Another part was that these categories are not mutually exclusive. To be a matching avatar also does not necessarily mean to not have a theme. [x category] for the sake of [x category] avatars are legit for this round, but they aren't the only legit way to go about doing this round. I think this applies to quite a few of the comments and hopefully this clears some things up and results in fewer tests this round. xD @Tuni :: I could maybe agree with bluecherry and concrete. Not quite for the reason you said, because on the spectrum of concrete, it's very close to perfect. I see few items that don't make sense, if any, personally. But it is kind of a sucky avatar. Eh, I dunno. Definitely agree about criniera and nonmatching. lol As far as QJ goes, I'd still call it simple. I think it's at least closer to simple than clutter on the spectrum. Though perhaps it's close to the middle. @Vee :: I'm not sure what you mean about Catanaition. I don't think mixtrix thought she had time to change any entries after getting critiques. She came into the contest kinda late and I think she didn't even know she was allowed to ask for critiques. Why do you think criniera needs a test on simple? Not that I disagree, or agree. @Mara :: I thought bluecherry's abstract was okay. I didn't think it was terrible enough to merit a test personally. I do agree that the entries overall are kinda weak, though. Looking at Cinder's entries... I don't ever remember seeing that matching entry. o.o Was that the one she originally entered and I just somehow became blind every time I looked at it? Anyway, it looks likes to matches to me. It's got a theme, but nothing wrong with that. I'm not really sure about Clomp's nonmatching... I don't think having a theme is a fault for this, but I'm not sure if it's far enough along the scale of nonmatching to count. I wouldn't really call it a matching avatar, but... it might just be in the middle. So I might agree with you on testing this one... I think criniera's simple is simple, just kinda ugly. And I think her matching matches, even if the colors are distributed perfectly. I agree that her concrete isn't perfectly clear, not aaaall the way up the spectrum, but I think it looks distinguishable enough as a "something" that it should count. I'm kinda surprised to hear so many suggestions for Jam to get tested on matching. I may have been outvoted already. xD I forget how many votes I required. But I never questioned that the entry was matching. It's not... very pretty, but I think it matches, and I wouldn't call it shitty. Hmm, with marwolfer's matching, this is another one where I know it doesn't fit perfectly into the mold, but I think it fits with what I intended for the round. It's far enough along the spectrum of matching, in my opinion, to be called "matching." Or "close enough matching" at least. But I know this is very definitely a subjective estimate. That said, I don't think it's a spectacular avatar anyway. I kinda thought the opposite for mixtrix's simple and cluttered, in that I think the clutter just isn't cluttery enough. xD Man, I just might be getting outvoted on FM's simple, too. xD But yeahhhh, FM's nonmatching entry totally matches. lol Aww, I kinda liked some of vee's entries. Well, half of them. I admit the nonmatching is kind of hideous. lol But I liked the simple, matching, and abstract. Ooo, I like your round idea. I'll definitely have to do that one. Still waiting on Erin to respond and then any retorts and such that you guys find necessary. Offline Sher!ock · Community Member · Mon Sep 26, 2011 @ 04:58am


	Sher: Cat's shown that she can do concrete, as shown by her simple and nonmatching entries... but I don't feel that her concrete entry is very concrete at all... I'm not sure what I'm looking at with it, thus isn't a very good entry for concrete. ESPECIALLY when she's got such good examples of it elsewhere. I'm not sure how you'd test her on her ability to put entries in the right category. As for Crinera, her simple uses a lot of complex patterns and textures that make it look fairly busy even if it doesn't have a lot of items. My eye is drawn in many directions with the avatar, and I feel that this is very counter intuitive if you're making a simple avatar. Simple doesn't just mean less items. Offline MabTheQueenMTG · Community Member · Mon Sep 26, 2011 @ 08:47pm


	Huh, I thought Cat's concrete was a mermaid. It doesn't blend well with the background, but I don't see what else it could be. Crin's simple does have details in it, and I agree that simple isn't just about having less items, but I wouldn't say her's to the point of being busy. Offline Sher!ock · Community Member · Tue Sep 27, 2011 @ 01:21am


	I could see mermaid if it were just waist down, but as it is, the torso looks so strange and the head's got details that really don't seem to mesh with that theme. It's MAINLY the torso that throws me, but as the center of the avatar it throws the whole thing into the same realm as Vee Jumped's abstract. If you're really digging for a concrete theme, it's there, but otherwise it's not. As for Crin's simple... It might be the shape that's also making me think it's not very simple... It's certainly among the least simple of the simple avatars that I've seen put in the simple category. Offline MabTheQueenMTG · Community Member · Tue Sep 27, 2011 @ 09:35pm


	Credit me with some intelligence. If not, just credit me. k, so I'm not seeing my reply on this.. I totally replied yesterday, but I'm not seeing it. Is it there? I'm not used to going through comments on journals. sweatdrop I come in value packs of ten In five varieties. Offline iokia · Community Member · Wed Sep 28, 2011 @ 12:41am


	Nope, I don't see anything, Erin. Offline Sher!ock · Community Member · Wed Sep 28, 2011 @ 06:12am


	Credit me with some intelligence. If not, just credit me. omfg, are you kidding me? gonk Okay, I'll re-look and post here as soon as I'm done. I'm really pissed. Because I saw it after I submitted it DAYS ago. mad k, brb. eff. I come in value packs of ten In five varieties. Offline iokia · Community Member · Thu Sep 29, 2011 @ 12:26am


	Credit me with some intelligence. If not, just credit me. 1: I don't think anyone needs to be cut right now. Crin is borderline, but I'd like to get another round from her before I call anything. 2: I think Cinderfae needs to work on her simple. Yes, hers is simple, but it's SO dull. Her non-matching is also kind of.. dissonant. I think Clomp could use some work on Abstract. I'm still very aware of what I'm looking at. Crin needs to work on her concrete (wtf am I looking at?), and both the matching and non-matching. I just don't see any of those 3 categories when I look at those avatars. I'm very confused as to what iymcool's concrete is... Does anyone get that? It's not very.. concrete. Looking at the example Jam used for "matching", I'd think she doesn't know how to match.. but I know from elsewhere that it shouldn't have been an issue. Squeegee DEFINITELY needs to work on non-matching. It still matches WAY too much. Vee definitely needs to be challenged in the abstract department. Because I'm definitely not looking at an abstract. Head, legs, arms... there's just nothing abstract about this. Sure, it isn't themed, but that doesn't mean it's abstract. I come in value packs of ten In five varieties. Offline iokia · Community Member · Thu Sep 29, 2011 @ 12:40am

	User Comments: [14]
	User Comments: [14]

Offline

More Information

© Copyright 2003 - 2025 Gaia Interactive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.