Films Submitted for Judging in UWOL #15 under the rules.
 

In analyzing this competition I am curious about what films may have been submitted for judging, and which may also have been disqualified for rule violation reasons. We never hear about this, and I am curious how it is handled.


4. Production - Submissions should be 2-3 minutes in length. Entries exceeding the 3 minute limit can be posted on the site but will be disqualified from the judging. Credits are excluded from the 3-minute limit.

9. Judging - A new guest judge will be enlisted to help with the judging each month. The Challenge coordinator will forward the top 8-10 videos to the guest judge, who will be invited to select the final winner. The guest judge will also have the opportunity to select additional finalists and honourable mentions at his or her discretion. At least once a year, we will have one round of play which is self-judged by the players, to ensure that everyone appreciates the difficult task of judging this contest.


One of the things these competitions offer is a learning experience, but it is hard to discern what lesson is to be learned if you don't know if your film was even seen by the judge. So from that stand point, I think it would be only fair to those who take time to submit films to the competition to know if there film actually made it to the judging round.

Good thoughts, Chris...

Any feedback I can get is good information, even if I'm not in the running.

Wow! You scared me Chris! I never even looked at how long my film was. I just liked the music and cut till I reached the end. Glad to know it was only 3:05 with credits. :)
Can't believe I didn't check to see the running length this round.

Kevin:

I wondered about my length at about 3:18, because I had credits at the front and back, thus raising the question there, as well as whether the film was even considered because of weeding out as provided in Rule 9.

I understood the 3 minutes to exclude credits, as mentioned on uwolchallenge.com.

So, if you had 2 mins 55 secs of content, 10 seconds of credits on the start and 20 seconds on the ends, it still counts as under 3 minutes, even though it is 3 mins 25 in total length.

Of course, my film had credits over the footage. Which would be a whole new grey area if you thought about it too much...

Mike:

I guess thats my point. Mine was similar to yours. Credits at end over static video. Seems like it should satisfy. But as it stands, I would like to know what films actually made it before the judge, and for what reason mine may or may not have.

No, it wasn't...

Typically, I send on about half the films for further evaluation. This is based 50% on how the player hit the theme and 50% on other factors, cinematography, lighting, story, audio - all the technical, artistic and aesthetic components.

Half is a guideline - it also has to do with how many submissions we receive...

As far as disclosing who made it to the judging round, and who didn't, that is not going to happen. That is what your feedback thread is for - to get feedback on where your work needs work. That, and the other way to improve your craft is to measure your entry against the winners to see what you can learn and how it held up - don't bother measuring it against any but the top two or three, in my opinion, because by the time we get past the 3rd runner up, a much higher degree of subjectivity enters...

I don't always agree with judge's decisions, and I think that is a good thing. And I always throw in 2 or more entries that would never make anywhere near my top choice of entries, to be sure that my opinion does not overly influence the mix...to make sure that the judge has an adequate mix to judge, but they still have to hit the 50/50 criteria. This is not part of the official guidelines, it is just something that I do, to keep the mix honest.

if you think it is too secretive or subjective, we'll just shift it to the DVC model, where you can all do the judging. i'm happy to do that, after 3 years of soliciting my industry contacts and perfect strangers for favors, i'm more than willing to let you all judge yourselves. no one ever complains about it or calls the results into question, so i'm willing to concur that it is a better, more open system. since we are done with short-form contests for the year, it will be an easy transition into next year.

Meryem,

I know why I did not make the cut and I am just curious for future entries:

9. Judging - A new guest judge will be enlisted to help with the judging each month. The Challenge coordinator will forward the top 8-10 videos to the guest judge, who will be invited to select the final winner.

Does this mean the first 8-10 videos submitted or does this mean the top 8-10 videos submitted and if it is the top 8-10 videos who makes that determination?

Thanks

the Challenge coordinator, to this point, has been me.

but, as we usually do, we'll be making major changes into next year, so it likely won't be me... we'll probably move it to self-judging, since no one ever second-guesses that system, as i said.

at that point, it will be you deciding the winners.

so this discussion is somewhat moot.

Thank you. Now at least I know my film didn't past muster in your judgment. And I am not complaining about your method of selection, or the passing of films into the judging round. You are the one who has built this competition, dedicated yourself to making this thing a go, and most film competition have that kind of selection process.

But most competitions also say who the finalist are. so why would it be so terrrible for us to know what films did qualify for the judging round, so we as future contestants could understand what passes muster with the selection process and what doesn't.

I didn't say that, so please don't put words in my mouth, Chris. You are free to make all the inferences that you want, but don't state them as fact.

No one has ever asked me before to post the list of names that I pass on to the outside judge. Had anyone actually asked, I would have entertained the suggestion and solicited the opinion of the group.

In my view, having access to this information is a bit like opening up the corner of your Christmas present before Christmas. But I know this group well enough to know that not everyone will share my view. Or yours, either. But I would ask, and I would listen...

The process is clearly stated in the rules how this works. Somewhere on this site, I have even re-printed the contents of the letter that I send to the outside judges regarding judging criteria. We have at least one meta-discussion each year, a free-for-all exchange of how to make things better, and you have participated in these. So I find these not-so- veiled accusations that this process is secretive or mystifying or tightly held by autocratic moi somewhat insulting and definitely misleading.

I'm not going to change how things are done retroactively, but I'm certainly happy to move forward with changes, and I am happy to change the process as the contest evolves.

Also, keep in mind that this is not true. Most film festivals put up a schedule and you're either on it, or you're not.

I tell the judge that he or she is required to post a winner plus two runners-up and they are also free to mention others, at their discretion. In fact, I strongly encourage them to mention others because you all enjoy it. But it isn't a requirement of the judges. Some do it, some don't. If you look back through the judge threads, there is a range.

"Also, keep in mind that this is not true. Most film festivals put up a schedule and you're either on it, or you're not."

And I guess that is what I was likening your selection list to go to the judge, as being accepted to be played at the film festival--- and knowing it, but still knowing that you havent won a prize, only been accepted to be up for best of the festival, or winner of one of the other categories.

ok, but I'm not really seeing the analogy holding up...

Most film festivals don't open up their procedures for public discussion every year -- which we do -- and in the 3 years that we have been massaging this Challenge, to make it a good experience for the participants, this particular subject hasn't once been raised, during our annual discussion and feedback thread.

What I'm really taking issue with is, that this process has been characterized as some kind of subterfuge or power grab, when in fact, the process has been open and subject to re-inspection and revision every year since its inception.

And if I had to confess to one quibble about *not* being the early screening judge - it would be this: I like having this as my motivation for watching and enjoying all of your films. The big reward -- let's go so far as to say, the *only* reward -- for me running this thing is how inspired I feel when I sit down with the pack of films, at the end of the round, and see the satisfaction of watching the growth and development of the players and the films you produce.

If I wasn't the primary screening judge, quite honestly, I'd be hard-pressed to find the motivation and time. I love it. I love seeing the players' artistry and commitment and growth and development. I really don't have any other reason or motivation to do this....

Mereym,

I for one am perfectly content with the way the contest is run. I don't think there's a lot of ill feeling about it. Only one person is taking issue with it.

I can't speak for everyone, but I would imagine that most of us have no complaints. You do a great job, for free, and it is very much appreciated by us.

Heck, if this stopped I'd have no reason to ever get my camera out of its bag!