Sir Rols Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Well, it's Paul! Final results for Round 4: Daveypodmore - 5 Paul - 12 Congratulations Paul, you've managed to achieve a rare double in GamesBids comps - winning both graphics comps in the same year. Well done, again! And thanks for being such a great competitor. And speaking of great competitors, hat's off to Daveypodmore. I really thought it would be a close poll in the final round, considering the results of Round 3. I guess I was surprised to see the margin this morning - and here I was thinking I may have finally got to cast a vote! Thanks so much Davey, and to all our competitors, for taking part. I've enjoyed it, and am in awe of the talent here. And thanks for making my life easier with these recent comps - by and large I think they were carried out in great spirit (and I didn't have any major complaints or scandals to try and solve). And that, my friends, is the end of the Durban 2020 bid comps. I hope everybody enjoyed it. I'll post a bit later on my thoughts on the comp, things I think went well, and things that didn't go so well, and maybe suggestions for future comps. Thanks everyone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Citius Altius Fortius Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Congratulations to all the participants and to Paul... I think it was a very good competition - all entries were "worth" to win!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soaring Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Congrats Paul again on another victory! Davey and the others all did a tremendous job and should be applauded for their efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted April 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Phew, it seems like ages since I first suggested this comp - I suppose it was about two months all up. I think it went generally well, but I'd be naiive to think there weren't any issues or things that can be improved.I tried my best to be fair to all participants - entrants and voters - but I suspect you'd never be able to please everyone 100 per cent. And in hindsight, there WERE some things I'd do differently. Anyway, here's my random thoughts: * It helped a lot that nearly everyone involved, while obviously putting in a lot of work and being very competitive, did seem to play fairly and in good spirits. I can't stress enough how much that helped me. I don't particularly like having to bang heads together and take sides in disputes etc. I think everyone involved approached it in a spirit of fun, rather than be too seriously competitive. In the end, these things don't really mean too much, it's more just to have a bit of fun, and I'm glad most people took it as that. * The voting by publicly viewable polls seemed to work well. I think it's solved the old problem of anonymous polls being too easy to cheat at, yet saved the hassle - and the risks of arguments breaking out - inherent in having to post votes. Not to mention it's far easier to tally up and see the percentages at the end of each round. I'd recommend using public polls in future, but still having a cut-off date for voter eligibility - we did have one voter in the first logo contest I had to discard, and as it transpired, for good reason. These contests may be just for fun, but I'm sure everyone wants them to be as fair as possible. * On a related note, it does seem to work best if someone steps in, takes full control, and sets the rules and guidelines (and it does sem necessary to be very careful in setting out exactly the rules for eligibility, voting etc). A benevolent dictator. I don't like to be too m uch of a stickler for procedures, but at the end of the day, someone has to take charge rather than try to make decisions by committee on the fly. * I didn't want to comment on it while the comp was still alive, but I do take the point that maybe it dragged on a bit long, or that perhaps having the two phases was milking it a bit too thin. I guess I was inspired by Puppy's past few comps where we've had two votes for separate summer and winter logos. And also the fact that when the submissions started rolling in, I really was blown away by how good some of the supporting graphics were. I really did think they deserved to be judged separately from the individual logos. In hindsight, I probably should have suggested that people only post their main "vanilla" logos publicly in the threads, and send the support graphics by PM for me to leave and unveil only at the start of the second phase, so as to have had something "fresh" for everyone to consider in isolation and get excited about. Whatever the case, I guess it was just a particular point about this contest being about the one city. I expect in the future we'll revert back to separate summer-and-winter logo comps. * Probably what I most had trouble wrestling with was the sheer volume of submissions - a dozen in all for the first phase, and nine for the second (is that a record?). There were just far too many to vote on them all (even six finalists in the logo phase was too many - I think five works best). But the trouble was that necessitated a short list, and I didn't feel as comfortable as Puppy seemed to be in making the hard decisions on who to cut. It wasn't such a problem for the "Look" comp - I was able to come up with an objective criteria (quantity of samples) that helped make cutting it back to five easy. But for the logo comp, even with some input from Mo/Rafa, it was too tough a choice, too subject to my own preferences and favourites, and in the end I passed the buck by doing the "semi-final" extra qualifier stage. Maybe in the future, if such a situation arose again, it would be better to have everything in one initial semi-final vote, and then take the top five polling entries from that into a final? * Now, to the issue that Baron raised, that of the hand-drawn versus computer graphics. That was a tough dilemma, and I did sympathise with Baron a lot on that one. There seems to be some good software being used by some members, and good software can inevitably make a design seem more professional and polished than freehand drawings. And it IS hard to step back and try to separate the idea from the execution. I'm not sure if there's an easy solution to that one. I don't know if we'd ever get enough "freehand' entries to justify separate categories. Maybe, as happens sometimes with the full bid comps, those like Baron who prefer freehand might want to team-up with someone with the technical equipment to polish them up? Or maybe someone who is technically proficient can step outside from the comp to "help" entries that might be improved on computer? Or restrict future logo comps to simple, standalone logos with no support graphics. I guess it's an issue for whoever organises the next graphic-based comp to westle with. * And as to the, sigh, originality issue. I don't want to buy too much into it, but really, again, these comps are all only for a bit of fun. I think it's up to individual members to judge, and vote, on whether they think individual designs are too derivative or not and if that's important to them or not. The Moses Madhiba stadium, for example, inspired about 80 per cent of the entries (and at least four entries had zebra-stripe inspiration). One bid poster seemed to me to be inspired by London's similar bid posters. And I think many people (including Paul, I suspect) made use of clip art or googled pics within their submissions. Personally, it's not something that bothers me too much - it's not like anyone's making money or awarding commercial contracts out of all this. Again, it's all just a bit of fun. Anyway, like I said, I'd like to step away from the comps now and have a chance to vote again (until I get bored and look for some distraction from work again). I like the idea of someone doing a Rio mascot comp, though. And one of these days it would be good if we could finally have a successful summer bid comp - but those are hard work. The graphics ones seem to work easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Congratulations to Daveypodmore and all the participants who put time and effort into making their ideas come to life; all the unique creativity was wonderful to see and inspiring. Thanks Sir R for all the time you put into the comp, fantastic and organized job.. Many thanks to the members who chose to vote for my entries, I worked hard for the votes and I was humbled by your support every time I saw a vote. I learned a lot in the comp and I hope my excitement about Durban and Africa came through. Cheers to GB and cheers to Durban, it's going to be an exciting IOC session and beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Tickle Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Congratulations Paul, the work you did was amazing, such a great body of work. You should be very, very proud. Thanks for everyone that voted for my stuff and thanks to everyone that too the time to put their ideas out there to be judged, it was a great competition. Final thanks has to go to Sir Rols (or the organising committee), Im sure it took up a lot of his spare time, It was really well run and lots of fun. See you all at the next one : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 My one comment is: I didn't really see a strong message or urgency in the submissions to promote what I thought was the initial theme: Bring the Games to Africa NOW!! They were mostly pretty swirls and OVER-celebration of an architectural feature that well...is NOT really new, unique or justifiably earned its iconic status. The more famous, more celebrated arches are St. Louis' and Calatrava's additions to the boring Athens stadium. (And that Durban stadium didn't even host the FINALS of RSA 2010. ) My two rands on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soaring Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Baron, I don't think it is worth complaining about the design elements. People should be able to create their own "themes", and just let people judge it for themselves. Even if things seem kind of redundant (e.g. Durban's stadium), it should be up to the voters to decide what they like and do not like. I am sure in any real bid competitions there are redundant themes or design elements. I think this comp was quite fairly, and hand drawn submission should be included. IMO, it would be good to do an initial vote for all entrants (that is open for several days), and the top five move on as "candidates" or "finalists". Each phase of the voting from that point on should last only 24 hrs. I think it is fine to use graphics/photos to assist in the "look of the bid", but all parts of the logo should be original works (but still can be influenced by other things). I don't think it is necessary to hold two separate comps based on logo and look of the bid. I think it would be best for people to submit their logo, and then be allowed to use the "look" graphics in their signatures or campaigning. It kind of dragged on a bit, and it creates double the work for the comp organizer. I also don't think it is necessary to have evaluations written up, as it might sway voters in a certain direction. This is just my opinions, and I am open to other people's thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Soaring, U know what? I AM ENTITLED to my opinions on this comp. This is an OPEN FORUM. DO NOT TELL ME "it's NOT WORTH COMPLAINING..." DO I tell you NOT TO POST? DON'T READ MY POSTS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. You're free to do that...just as I am free to post my own feelings on the comp in which I also participated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 * Now, to the issue that Baron raised, that of the hand-drawn versus computer graphics. That was a tough dilemma, and I did sympathise with Baron a lot on that one. There seems to be some good software being used by some members, and good software can inevitably make a design seem more professional and polished than freehand drawings. And it IS hard to step back and try to separate the idea from the execution. I'm not sure if there's an easy solution to that one. I don't know if we'd ever get enough "freehand' entries to justify separate categories. Maybe, as happens sometimes with the full bid comps, those like Baron who prefer freehand might want to team-up with someone with the technical equipment to polish them up? Or maybe someone who is technically proficient can step outside from the comp to "help" entries that might be improved on computer? Or restrict future logo comps to simple, standalone logos with no support graphics. I guess it's an issue for whoever organises the next graphic-based comp to westle with. I would recommend the following. A maximum of 2 per team, for those who would like to work alongside those with the software availability and skills. Those who are comfortable working alone can remain in 1 team. To deal with the volumes of entries what usually happens in a stadium tender is that some teams may actually combine or a "team" of winners is selected and asked to do the final design. I think that forcing people to team up with at least 1 person creates more competition and makes it more interesting. As for MM stadium, you can't really blame people for the lack of originality. Its an icon built to be an icon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soaring Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Soaring, U know what? I AM ENTITLED to my opinions on this comp. This is an OPEN FORUM. DO NOT TELL ME "it's NOT WORTH COMPLAINING..." DO I tell you NOT TO POST? DON'T READ MY POSTS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. You're free to do that...just as I am free to post my own feelings on the comp in which I also participated. No need to get heated. I guess you didn't read my last sentence... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 These are comps of PASSION!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 One bid poster seemed to me to be inspired by London's similar bid posters. Yeah it was. The Durban Stadium was *screaming* for that treatment though, so sticking a giant gymnast on the arch seemed natural! I was quite pleased with the result anyway. I think there is a line when it comes to originality in these competitions but there is an awful lot of leeway too; I mean it is just a bit of fun. I think the line's only really crossed when someone directly copies an existing logo or design and sticks the words "Ulan Bator 2032" under it, for example. Mirroring concepts done well by real Olympic cities is fair game as far as I'm concerned as it takes a lot of work to get it right. I don't know what other people think. As far as the question of software goes, it's worth pointing out that there is a lot of free software around now which is more than good enough for competitions like this. Inkscape, which is what I've used for the past two competitions, is one such example and it's brilliant. That's not to say going commando and doing it freehand should be ruled out, but I just thought I'd flag up that point. Good software isn't always necessarily expensive now and is often free and open source! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 /\ Rob, tried PM'ing you. What's the free software you used/would recommend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted April 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Yeah it was. The Durban Stadium was *screaming* for that treatment though, so sticking a giant gymnast on the arch seemed natural! I was quite pleased with the result anyway. I think there is a line when it comes to originality in these competitions but there is an awful lot of leeway too; I mean it is just a bit of fun. I think the line's only really crossed when someone directly copies an existing logo or design and sticks the words "Ulan Bator 2032" under it, for example. Mirroring concepts done well by real Olympic cities is fair game as far as I'm concerned as it takes a lot of work to get it right. I don't know what other people think. LOL - I only twigged to it because I have a few London bid posters. And it definitely WASN'T the reason I left it out of the short list (rather, just the one poster wasn't enough, I felt, to get an idea of the overall look). Honestly, I think it's really up to individual voters whether it's important to them whether something is too derivative, or just inspired by other designs - they can vote for or against as is their will. Personally, I've got no problem with clip art and variations on past themes, but I would be disappointed, per your example, if someone just straight out copied and pasted an existing logo, or element of one, and just changed the type. I think what makes the logo comps easier to manage than the full bid comps is that judging graphics is just so totally subjective and up to people's tastes. For a bid technical plan, there comes a whole new level of judging whether it's more important to be technically realistic and achievable or just to present a good looking interesting and compelling bid document - that was what the whole GBOC wars were about. As to Moses Madhiba - I only brought that up as an example that some elements are always more likely to be used than others depending on the task at hand - like flames and cauldrons or runners in an actual games logo. MM was always going to be an obvious subject for a Durban logo - I can't think of any other major landmark of Durban that would so clearly brand it - it's hard to make a beach distinctive. Even my half-hearted attempt early on for a Durban logo played around with the MM arch and rainbows (for the rainbow nation) etc (and yes, it was as lame as it sounds, it would have been embarrasing lined up next to the other logos submitted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingspread Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Congratulations, Paul! Hats off to Davey as well. Your Durban 2020 brand is, for me, one of the best entries ever submitted to any GamesBids contest. Brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Tickle Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Thank you very much. I think the bar gets raised each competition. When will someone create a bid video : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.