Judges - What do you look for?

Basics, Basics, Basics...This cannot be emphasized too much.

95% of models which fail to make a "1st Cut" in a contest do so because of an error in basic construction or finishing. The biggest culprits are seams showing, silvering on any decal, a poorly applied finish, sanding marks, and alignment issues. I could try to list everything judges look at, but if you print out a copy of the IPMS Competition Handbook or the AMPS Judging Criteria (for armor), both give an excellent rundown of just about every item judges look at.

I'm an IPMS-USA National qualified ship judge. 

The first and most important thing we judge is craftsmanship.  Most of what we judge as ship judges are also the things whish are judged in the other genre's

Are the seams filled?  Globs of glue?  Is the thing square?  Fingerprints?  Wavy PE railings?  Raised paint lines between masked areas?  These will knock an entry out of contention fast. 

Notice that we don't judge accuracy.   I'm partial to destroyers, but I don't know much about  Japanese destroyers.   How can I fairly judge whether a model of a Japanese destroyer is accurate or is more accurate than a US destroyer? 

We don't judge paint color.   We do judge paint application (i.e. brush strokes or orange peel).  To say that one model of the Arizona is better than another because it is painted in Sea Blue versus Dark Gray isn't done.   We may draw the line at yellow with purple polka dots.    Have you ever seen the picture of the orange-painted battleship at the Bikini Atoll nuclear tests?

We judge weathering,  as to how well it is done (i.e. craftmanship).  Is it effective?  Is it overdone for what the model represents?  Rust on a wooden PT boat?  Often less is more.

Craftsmanship can knock out most competitors,  but sometimes it comes down to a sitation of the least flaws or least offensive wins.  

You can check out the Judges Handbook at IPMSUSA.ORG for a detailed list of what we do 

Ed and Foster nailed it.

I simply can't judge for accuracy and going nuts with aftermarket and surgery to please a judge is, well, nuts. It is quite common, at every level, to have an out of box model taken even a first place.

It's a fallacy that good judges want to see highlighted panel lines, pre-shading, chipped paint. By the time we get to those issues, the job is done by eliminating the basic errors, poorly applied paint, silvered or unblended decals, seam lines, road wheels that don't all touch the base/table, crocked tracks, glue stains.

I don't care, as a judge, if that King Tiger has a soft or hard edged ambush camo pattern as long as the paint is well applied. If you've attempted something non-traditional, say a tank whose camo was applied with a mop, best to document that with a photo of the original and note what you've done on your entry sheet.

I'm leery of excessive mud and weathering, especially on a tank that is not in a dio or on a base with groundwork. Except in dios or as instructed otherwise by the head judge, groundwork and crew are not judged, but everything else is.

If you're not going to put an interior in  your tank, close the hatches.

On aircraft, one of the big faults is poorly alligned wheels and crooked underwing stores. It's more important that the angle of the landing gear be consistent than if one is at the correct angle and the other not.

All that said, judges often have to give awards to sub-standard builds because they are the least bad or only models in a class. That's one of the reasons I'd love to see the hobby go inthe directin of AMPS and the figure world with fewer classes and awards based on the quality of the build.

I often read complaints that judges are nit-picky, looking for mistakes, using detal mirrors (I don't have one) or flashlights (I have one because very often the lighting in contest rooms is poor to horrible). And you know what? Given the system, we have to be nit picky at time. We have to look for mistakes at atimes, sometimes the least bad mistkes. We are tasked with choosing the best 3 of 4 models in a class. When there are 5 excellent models in a class, we have to eliminate at least one or two of those from the awards. Then we have to come to a concessus of what the order of quality is for the remainders. Is that shadow of a seam more problematic than the tiny dab of glue on the hatch hinge?

Perhaps the best way to find out what judges look for is to help withthe judging. As a new volunteer, you'll be put with more seasoned judges and get to look at stuff a lot closer than as a spectator. You'll also learn a lot more of what makes a good mopdel than you ever will reading a forum. And you'll make new friends.

Excellent information gentlemen, that's exactly what I was looking for. 

Our local club is hosting it's annual model contest in a few weeks (I'm helping to set up etc.) so I'll ask the judges if they would mind if I tagged along so as to learn the ins and outs. 

espins1 wrote:

Agreed, I took this information and am using it to make my models better.  I'm really focusing on straight, square joints, fixing all seams, ejector pin marks, sprue connection points, part alignments, dihedral etc.  Great info.

 Yep, great info.  Sounds easier than it really is though.

If you'll allow me, I'd like to add some additional judging perspective for those modelers who have thought about entering contests, but for whatever reason have hesitated to do so.

The first thing you should realize is that contests are supposed to be FUN. They are NOT intended to demean modelers or their efforts, focus on identifying bad modelers, or discourage modelers from bringing their models to the show floor. The primary purpose of any model show is to provide a venue for modelers to show off their work, check out other modeler's work, and allow people with the same passion to get together and ENJOY the hobby of model building.

Another thing modelers should realize is that judges are first and foremost, modelers. They are no different than anybody else. Judges are simply those individuals who have chosen to volunteer their time and effort to help make a contest successful, assist fellow modelers in learning how to judge, and try to be as objective as possible in performing their task. For the most part, judges are just trying to do the absolute best job they can...in some cases, under adverse conditions and while being subjected to the wrath of other modelers.

Judging a category in a contest is really a fairly simple process - particularly at the local level. While there can be exceptions, it is usually quite easy for a judging team to indentify the top 4 or 5 models within a category containing 10 or 12 models. It's only when the number of models begins to reach the 20+ mark that narrowing the field becomes much more difficult. Once a team has selected the top half-dozen or less, the real work of making the final cut down to the best 3 models and then chosing the finishing order can take place.

I cannot stress this point enough...judging in a 1st, 2nd, 3rd style contest (i.e. IPMS) is based COMPLETELY on the concept of the models on the table and the specific judging team "On That Day". That is, if the exact same models were entered in a new contest location and were judged by a different judging team, the results could be completely different. Therefore, it is not uncommon for a modeler to enter the same model in four different contests and get results such as 1st, 3rd, 1st, and no award. In an "open style" contest (i.e. AMPS) the level of award for a particular model is much more predictable, but there can still be some minor variations because of the different ways judges emphasize certain aspects of a build.

As long as a modeler is attending a contest with no award expectations and is there only to have fun, there is absolutely no reason not to enter a model for judging. Regardless of any errors you may know about, even if (and I stress, IF) the judging team happens to spot the same errors, your model could still be judged as the best model on the table on that day. This is particularly true in some of the smaller categories where not as many models are entered.

While this information doesn't necessarily help with the specific areas judges look at, I hope it helps to clarify the overall process.     

Note that the IPMS standard of judging is not universal. It was quite a shock to me as a former judge in Ireland to find that contests in the US could be based on such a purely subjective (and apparently unaccountable) format. Yet IPMS appears to take pride in this. From the 2002 Competition Handbook:

Because we're rating works of art, the products of a modeler's skills developed over years, we've got to remember that the results are strictly subjective. That's why we don't use scoring sheets. There are no numbers in the universe that will allow anyone to say with assurance that an unfinished seam on that model is worth "x" points, while a silvered decal on that model is worth "y" points

Suffice to say that that is not a universally held proposition. I'm told that there is an American modelling organisation which judges based on more regimented standard, with a structured points system similar to that with which I was familiar. Now, the same basic flaws will still be seen: Seams, gaps, flash, misalignments and so on and so forth, will still detract from your score, but just how much it can detract is governed in advance by the rules. For example, when judging flats, a flaw in construction might still be recoverable if the standard of painting is superior to all other entries as painting is the central point in flats (Indeed, in Ireland painting is worth some 80% of the points in that category) An entry is viewed as a whole, with exceptional skills in one area may be able to balance out slight negatives in another.

My perception is that judging in IPMS is done on a negative basis: Find things wrong with models, and discount them in order of severity with little appreciation for something done right. For example, if a chap came out with a working 1/72 Tiger with a fully complete scratchbuilt interior where the gunner's controls make the turret move when prodded with a toothpick etc, but the tail light was ever so slightly crooked, my understanding is that a simple closed-hatches out-of-the-box model with a lot less work, but the tail light is straight, will beat it, all other things being equal.

Reading the guidelines on the IPMS site,  it seems that absolutely no compensating consideration is to be given to effort, originality or creativity which I think is a bit of a counter-incentive as it provides more opportunity to be penalised for error. Yes, I acknowledge in the first paragraph the guidelines say 'emphasis on the basics', but I wonder if people don't take that a bit too far sometimes. I note that the Handbook quoted earlier has a whole list of things which will detract from a model, but has very little (Indeed, for armour, nothing) to say about things which may increase the 'value' of a model. We should not be building models just for the sake of winning competitions, (At least, I don't, because I know where I stand!) but since that is where we see most models from other builders, avant-garde ideas should at least receive some form of recognition to encourage expansion of the skillsets in the hobby.

NTM

Manic - What you are saying about detail being taken into account is a conundrum that has yet to be solved. How do you propose then that one judges two model airplanes with, for the sake of argument, one added only a resin seat vs one that is all decked out with a resin cockpit, wheel wells and exhausts fairly?

One assumes the increased level of detail involves better 'basic modeling skills' and are judged looking at the same areas. If the two are completely equal in terms of quality, the higher detailed kit should get 'first' over the other. I have seen several highly detailed models with basics like seams showing and silvered decals. At what point then do you take out the level of complexity from judging?

Even using a system based on points, the same basics are judged. The extra level of detail still has to be added properly and is judged on that. That "open" system of points is based on a theoretical 'perfect' model. I have judged shows using both methods and both are surrounded with controversy.

Judges in the IPMS format are not necessarily looking for the 'negative.' They are looking at the quality. In the open format, things are the same. They both look for the seam - is it filled and sanded correctly? does it show?

In the handbook you refer too, the armor section does inform you of exactly what judges look for and for you to improve the quality of your models. Yes, these are the basics and the overall theme in the IPMS handbook is for uniformity. What is not spelled out very clearly is that they look for the same level of detail from front to back. For example: You open the engine hatch and super detail the compartment with etch and resin. Build the turret with the same level of detail, but when it comes to the outside of your tank - you use kit supplied parts instead of using etch ones like on tool brackets, light covers and side skirts as an example. They will point out the detail is not consistent with the level of detail used on the interior. Other organizations will say that the outside is not accurate compared to the detail inside either.

All formats of judging involve the basics first and foremost. Detail and accuracy come into the equation depending on organization.

You question the IPMS format yet agree with it at the same time. As you said, the more detail a modeler uses, the more room for mistakes made. That is true. And that goes a long way to the consistancy that is looked for. A modeler goes to a show in Europe and get's no award, comes back to NA and is awarded first in that catagory. Which format would that modeler calling sujective and unaccounatble?

I can tell you, the judges are accountable and decisions are easily attainable from the judges themselves. It is mandatory for them to be availible to answer questions regarding their decisions.

DrewH wrote:

Manic - What you are saying about detail being taken into account is a conundrum that has yet to be solved. How do you propose then that one judges two model airplanes with, for the sake of argument, one added only a resin seat vs one that is all decked out with a resin cockpit, wheel wells and exhausts fairly?

The solution used is a section of points called "Degree of Difficulty." If I recall, it accounted for some 10% of the points in most categories, though I'd need to see if I can't track down my past sheets. Scoring in this has no reflection at all on how well the attempt was executed. It encourages people to challenge themselves by taking on more difficult tasks by rewarding them for doing so and making the effort, even if they made a dog's dinner out of it.

I have seen several highly detailed models with basics like seams showing and silvered decals. At what point then do you take out the level of complexity from judging?

In this case the points gained from "degree of difficulty" would be counteracted by losses in "construction and assembly" and "Painting and decalling." As these two categories are much more heavily weighted (About 30% and 40% for each) major flaws like that would heavily counteract any increases in points gained by difficulty.

Even using a system based on points, the same basics are judged.

Agreed, and to that extent both are judged subjectively. However, there are set limits on the weights of the subjectivity in one version. The primary difference of opinion lies in what the effects or benefits are of each system. The IPMS system appears to be satisfactory for IPMS persons. But don't expect to go to an IMSS (Irish Model Soldier Society) contest and be judged in the same manner. The Irish seem quite happy with their version, even though the top end are familiar with the IPMS system by going to British contests.

You question the IPMS format yet agree with it at the same time. As you said, the more detail a modeler uses, the more room for mistakes made. That is true. And that goes a long way to the consistancy that is looked for. A modeler goes to a show in Europe and get's no award, comes back to NA and is awarded first in that catagory. Which format would that modeler calling subjective and unaccounatble?

Don't know. At the end of every IMSS contest, photocopies of the scoresheets are handed out so everyone can see "Aha, that's why that tank won, even though it had a slight seam in it. Look, it got marked down for construction, but highly in painting and difficulty." It just seems much more transparent.

The main difficulty with points, as far as I can see, is that of scale. Once you get beyond 15 or so entrants per category, it becomes inconvenient to properly analyse each model for each subset of points. At that point, like IPMS, a 'cut' would be made, wherein you give a cursory glance, scribble down the points, and see which ones don't make it before spending greater time and effort on the remaining entrants.

At any rate, I'm not saying one is more 'right' than the other, I just think as a matter of personal opinion that the one seems to make more sense to me.

NTM

The IMSS system you refer to is interesting. Sounds like most everyone is in agreeing on how a show is to be judged. Great! I agree, judging formats are a personal preference and I am for both for varying reasons. Your experience make this a great discussion and are helping me as a chief judge setting up a new show here with a format beneficial to the hobby. A friend of mine is a great advocate of the, what is called here, the Open format which is based on the points like the IMSS shows you referred to.

There are two reasons that the open format is not widely accepted here. First is that using points, top score (50 out of 50 eg) is based on a perfect model. Even though the points are scaled for flaws etc, your idea of a perfect model is different from mine. We would look at the same model, but score it differently. Judging in the IPMS format, the same is likely to happen. A difference of opinion. No more no less. Second stems from the time availability. Like you referred to, there just isn't enough time to score every model. The advocates for the open format have concluded that we should not make 'cuts' and need to score every model regardless. There is some truth to that. As a judge in the IPMS format, we go around initially and make 'cuts' like you do. However, as the judging progresses, we often tend to go back to those ones that were 'cut' and re-look at the decision. In some cases, those initial cut models have been awarded ribbons.

I view the two formats as similar. While it is not directly called out, the points format is looking for the negative just like the IPMS format. It is just saying you did construction 8/10. In other words, we found 20% flaws in it based out of 10 points. The only difference is they put it on paper in diffrent wording. 

Judging the degree of difficulty a modeler uses is tip toeing through a minefield. Although the IMSS uses it and has no apparent problems the way described, how do you determine the level of difficulty? A set of standards (which here is almost mandatory in writing for any event) would need to be set out. I can see that being just as big an argument. Also scoring the degree of difficulty with no reflection on how well executed it was, we may as well pack a phone booth with modelers and toss in a grenade as things will blow there. Modelers here that enter for shows have the approach where everything has to be in context and written for them to follow. With that mindset already laid out, it is near impossible to change those paradigms.  

Thanks Manic for your views and experiences. It's refreshing and benefits of both are there. Now can we merge the two and make eveyone happy not likely.

I hope I may be forgiven if I take this opportunity to raise an argument I've made (more than once) elsewhere in this Forum.  Those who are sick of reading my viewpoint on the subject are more than welcome to stop here, but I think the view deserves to be kept on the table.

I've been building models for slightly more than fifty years, and I've participated in more contests than I can count.  I've also judged quite a few of them, most recently the Scale Ship Model Competition at the Mariners' Museum in 1990.  (When I was working as a curator at that museum I wrote most of the rules that it used for several of those contests, which had quite a reputation in the ship modeling world until they were discontinued a few years back.)  That experience has convinced me, quite firmly, that model competitions in general do far more damage to the hobby than they do good.  I'll never judge another one.

For one thing, as the posts in this thread have established, no amount of organization and prior planning can ever completely eliminate personal opinion and bias from the judging process.  Give the judges every rule and standard you can think of, and you'll still never get two judges to agree completely.  Some judges are more familiar with certain modeling subjects than with others; some judges like certain modes of presentation better than others. 

An organization that does draw up precise standards for competition judges gives modelers a choice:  build models the way they want to build them (which I always thought was the purpose of the hobby), or build to the organization's standards in the hope of winning a prize.  I know of one extremely prestigious ship modeling organization that, as I understand it, categorically bans weathering from models entered into the competitions it sponsors.  I have no use for an organization like that.  I've seen weathered and un-weathered models that have equally impressed me; surely the "whether to weather" decision belongs in the hands of the individual modeler, not some club.  (I'm aware of at least one veteran modeler who's come right out and said that he doesn't weather his models because "if I want to be competitive [in that organization's contests], I don't have any choice."  That strikes me as a pretty clear case of screwed-up priorities.)

Even the best, most thorough, most reputable set of judges and the most precise judging standards can do no more than establish which model, in the opinion of the judges, was "best" among the ones that were entered in that particular contest on that particular day.   If one of my ships wins a gold medal in a contest, I know full well that it won because Donald McNarry, Harold Hahn, and at least a dozen other modelers whom I could name (and, I'm sure, dozens whom I couldn't) didn't show up.  If there are twenty models on a table, I don't need a judge to tell me where mine stacks up against the others.  I'm perfectly capable of figuring that out for myself - and if the judge disagrees with me, it's rather unlikely that I'll care much.  He's entitled to his opinion, and I'm entitled to mine.  I certainly want to hear his opinion, but I'm not going to devote any effort to making him change it.

Model competitions seem to have an almost supernatural ability to bring out the worst in their participants.  I have never seen so many displays of stupid, adolescent behavior as I've seen exhibited by sore losers in model contests.  (I plead guilty to having, in my younger years, made a fool of myself more than once in such contexts; I'm still embarrassed about it.)  I used to umpire Little League baseball games; I'd rather contend with a herd of screaming mothers and fathers over a blown safe or out call (and I got plenty of such experiences, especially before the optometrist told me I needed glasses) than a model builder who's just found out he didn't win a prize in a contest.  I've seen modelers get into fist fights; I've seen competitors and judges get into such snits that they won't speak to each other.  I've seen model clubs fall apart because of arguments over contests.  After that 1990 Mariners' Museum contest, one modeler bombarded the museum organizers with nasty letters for several months, attacking the integrity of the museum, the judges, and everybody who'd gotten the medals that he didn't get.  He eventually threatened to report the museum and the judges to the authorities.  (He said those judges - who included me - should never be permitted to judge another ship model contest.)  The correspondence came to an abrupt halt when he discovered that no such authorities exist.

I get a tremendous amount of pleasure, and knowledge, from looking at other people's models.  I don't think I've ever spent any time in a room full of models without seeing something I enjoyed looking at, and learning something I hadn't known.  But I don't see why competition has to be part of the equation. 

I'm a big believer in model exhibitions.  Some years ago, Mystic Seaport Maritime Museum sponsored one that I thought was on the right track.  Modelers were invited to bring their models to the museum; a jury of experts (appointed by the museum) examined all the models meticulously, and all the ones that came up to a certain high standard were placed on public display for several months.  The result was an exhibition of excellent models.  Nobody thought it necessary to rank them, or decree that one was "better" than another.

On a slightly less exalted level, the club of which I'm currently a member, the Carolina Maritime Modelers' Society (meetings at the NC Maritime Museum in Beaufort at 2:00 on the last Saturday of the month; new members and visitors always more than welcome) holds an exhibition each May in conjunction with the NC Maritime Museum's annual Wooden Boat Show.  The members bring in their models, which range from RC tugboats to half-models to sailing frigates to 1/700 warships built from plastic and resin kits.  At the club meeting prior to the show, we set up a couple of tables and a big paper photographic backdrop; I use my DSLR to take pictures of the models, and later put the pictures on CDs that I pass out to anybody who wants them.  On the weekend of the show, the museum turns over a big auditorium to the exhibition, and the modelers who are free on the weekend in question stand beside their creations and answer visitors' questions about them.  The guys in the boat repair shop make up simple wood kits that enable a kid, under the supervision of a club member, to build a miniature fishing trawler.  (Price:  $3.00.  Average time expended building the model:  20 minutes.  Most enthusiastic participants:  Girl Scout troops.  Typical reaction to the experience:  ecstasy.  One year we ran out of kits, because the shop had only made 50 of them.)  I've come to think of the first weekend in May as one of my favorite weekends of the year.  Everybody invariably has a great time, and the public gets some exposure to what ship modeling is about.  Nobody worries that "my model isn't good enough," nobody takes home a trophy or any other award (other than a Beaufort Wooden Boat Show T-shirt, which every participant gets) - and nobody gets mad at anybody.  (Exception:  one year I almost committed homicide on a kid who, right before my eyes, yanked a radar screen off a club member's RC Aegis cruiser and went running around the room with it.  You really need a case for that model, Jim.) 

I've been in that club since its inception, about ten years ago, and I can't recall hearing anybody in it address an uncivil word to anybody else.  The biggest reason:  there's no competition whatsoever in any form.  We started out with about ten members; nowadays typical meeting attendance is between twenty and thirty.  That's my kind of model club.  (My biggest concern about it is that I, at age 56, am one of the youngest members.  That's kind of scary.)

I know a lot of people get a good deal of satisfaction from taking part in model competitions, and it's certainly not for me to tell them they shouldn't.  To each his (or her) own.  And I suppose it's conceivable that, if the time, place, and awards structure are right, I might enter a model in another competition some day.  If the grand prize is a new Porsche, and the honorable mention awards are new Corvettes, I just may be tempted.  (And if I don't win anything, the judges better watch out.)  Otherwise - no more contests for me.

Feel free to disagree with all of the above.  But please think about it.

Ruddratt - I know where you're coming from.  I visited the IPMS Nationals the last two times they were held at Virginia Beach (which is within driving distance), and had a ball in the vendor room.  And there were some downright inspirational models on display; the opportunity to look at them was well worth the three-hour drive.  But I had no inclination to hang around and find out who won, for the simple reason that I don't care.

Again - if somebody enjoys staying up till 4:00 getting a model ready for a competition, that's his or her business.  Such behavior has no appeal whatever to me personally, but enjoyment, as far as I'm concerned, is what the hobby is about.  More depressing to me is the modeler who stays away from a model contest/exhibition because he/she thinks his/her models "aren't good enough."  When that happens, the competition has damaged the hobby.

JT -

You raise some interesting points and have stated your postition extremely well. While there are some elements in your postition with which I happen to agree - nearly completely - I personally think you're overall conclusion that "model competitions in general do far more damage to the hobby than they do good" is very broad in scope...far too broad for me. I have no doubt if I had been exposed to the types of downright uncivilized behaviors you've cited, I might have a different outlook. However, I've never seen a fist-fight, shouting match, or heated argument during any of the contests I've attended. Needless to say, at the contests I've attended, if ANYONE (judge, contestant, or visitor) had engaged in this type of behavior, they would have been immediately escorted from the venue and politely - well maybe not very politely - told they were no longer welcome...ever!

The same holds true in my affiliated model clubs. In none of them is anti-social behavior accepted or tolerated. Thankfully, I've only witnessed one instance of verbal "conflict between members" and both members were told, essentially, "knock it off or leave." Those two members are now extremely cordial - at least during our club activities.

Back to contests in general. Are modelers ever disappointed because they didn't "win" an award? Certainly, but the primary reason for this disappointment is far more a result of the modeler's own, preconceived expectations than because of the contest itself. I would venture to guess that more than 90% of modelers who enter contests and do not expect to win an award, go away from the contests with absolutely no bruising of their ego and feeling just as good about themselves as they did before attending the event. If the majority of these modelers happen to earn an award, they are appreciative of the recognition, but don't let it "go to their heads".

I've also seen the shear joy on the face of a 7 or 8 year old modeler who gets their first award in a competition. (Note: I personally cannot stand the entire movement to not keep the score of youth sports, but then I guess I'm just "old-school") Before anyone asks, "What about the kids who didn't win?", my answer is every kid wins. At the contests I've attended - without exception - EVERY pre-teen modeler who entered the contest gets some type of recognition. Whether it's a Certificate of Recognition, a medal, or a plaque, every single child got something to mark their participation. Locally, we also run Make-n-Take model building classes for kids during our contests and throughout the year. While ours costs $4.00, every child walks away with a completed model, some new skills to develop, and an extremely positive experience.

While I completely understand why some people would choose never to compete, I also understand that "friendly competition" can be an extremely positive experience, sparking a desire for excellence and serving as an external motivation for personal improvement. Contests are not for everyone, but for some people contests can be extremely fun!

Oh, and if you ever find that contest with the Corvette or Porsche as prizes, please let me know!!! I'll be there in a heartbeat...but I'm not holding my breath.

Regards,

I agree totally with the good Doctor - the last show that I entered was back in the mid 70's.  It was simply a contest for the members held in conjunction w/the monthly meeting.  Everything went well untill two of the three judges (a neurosurgeon @ the KU Med Center and a senior TWA pilot) got into an argument over whether the blue on the underside of a FW 190 model was the proper shade.  The disagreement continued until the club members had to physically restrain the two.  I did two things, 1. Never went back to the club (I apparently wasn't the only one as I found out later the club folded a couple of months later), and  2.  I haven't entered a contest since (and don't plan to in the foreseeable future).

I won't get into the political part of the judging process. The first few posters nailed it. Most models can be cut  away with just the basices. The basics are well know and already covered. Ones this is out of the way comes  the hard part. Since you asked "what judges look for?"  I'm going to stick just with that part of it.

  First off All entries must ber judged by the same criteria (level playing field). Other things judges look for are consistency. An example of this would be a super detailed cockpit but the landing gears wheel wells and other items are left lacking. Another example a heavly weathered paint with marking that look like they were just applied. basically does all the areas of the subject look like it all belongs together.

  Next degree of difficulty, How much work did it take to build the subject. If I have 2 models sitting there and ones a tamiya out of box and the other a dragon with alot of extras and the dragon is every bit as well built as the tamiya then the edge is given to the dragon kit. Weathering falls under this catagory. It take alot more time and skill the weather a model then to stop at the it's painted good point. On the con side if weathering is done poorly of over done it can also hurt the model.

  The basices, consistency, and degree of difficulty are the three big judging tools. Most all contest entries can be put into perspective using these. If you are an IPMS member or are entering a IPMS contest all the info can be found in the competition handbook. It no secret, all is spelled out in black and white.  Also If you ask the judge to explain how they came to there decision they sould be able to give a strait forward answer. More often than not once you hear and see what the judges line of thought was you will understand how they came to there decision.

Ok as far as accuracy goes  unless you a spitfire painted hot pink with green polk a dots and have no way to prove it  judges do not use accuracy as a means of judgeing. Now if you are reproducing an error made on the real deal for example a US star up side down (seen this on a P-61 at a show) or some other odd thing it's a good idea to bring this to the judges attention as they know you are copying a mistake intentionally and not making one yourself.

BTW the P-61 did have the star on the left side painted up side down he had a pic of it under the model. Someone was not paying attention that day.  

Two guys fighting over what shade of color the bottom of an aircraft is just stupid. But you will always have them so you just got to deal with it. I've actually had people threaten to kick my butt because they didn't like the outcome. If you want to hear them I can tell you same real zinngers.

Scott

My advice: to become a better builder, regardless of whatever your personal level of building experience is, at the next contest you go to, ask to be a judge and let them know you are a new judge and want to learn.  I recently volunteered at the Nationals (my first National event, hence my first time judging at that level) and learned a few things. 

I never actually volunteered my first time out. One of the host clubs' elder members (I did not belong to that club) needed another person to round out a team. I was standing nearby and was drafted on the spot for the "Misc."catagory . As head judge and as someone who knew both me and my building level, he felt confident in drafting me on the spot. Now I help judge at most of the contests I attend, largely because you get a better view of many of the models (espeically if it is not really your "thing"  that you are judging) and you learn a lot about how problems either present themselves or can be corrected. I believe in basics first, complexity second and presentation third (if applicable). I do not care for the IPMS rules system, but use the Virginia Beach 2001 rules as my basis in my own local contest since we are working within the IPMS framework. I find that the negativity system cuts out kits that many find really nice to look at, but the core essence of the competition is to find those that have the higher fidelity of finish in the end. This may be an Acamiyagawa kit,or this may be a Mach2 that has a tube of putty applied and polished out.

If you have a question about a certian outcome, do not hesitate to ask the head judge. Usually just a couple of minutes looking at a particular kit (from an experiened eye) can find that little thing that put a kit on the "also ran" list.   I have a LOT of "also rans" enjoy seeing them being photographed by others just as much as getting any plaque or medallion.

Another reason to judge is normally the club feeds you lunch at the judges meeting! :-)

David