Op/Ed: Time for a Change

Time for a Change: Overhauling the ISCA Convention Voting System

Author	Jordan Martin
Subject	ISCAcon, Caricaturist of the Year
Genre	Op/Ed, Editorial
Published	EF Issue 2019.2
Publication date	Spring 2019
Media type	Digital
Pages	8-10
Website	caricature.org
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of ISCA or ISCAcon.

This Op/Ed piece was written by Jordan Martin. It appears in Exaggerated Features issue 2019.2 on pages 8-10.

Article Transcript

Change for the sake of change is bad, but the core problem that I see here is that the current system does not work for ISCA anymore. Voting has changed quite a lot over the years, and I simply think it’s time for another one of these changes. With more than 160 artists doing somewhere around an average of 10 pieces, the members have around 1,600 pieces of artwork to compare to every other piece. Since artists do not submit pieces to specific categories, you are comparing every piece you see to every other piece in every category. This is already a daunting task, and if the convention has any desire to grow and be more professional, this must change.

If this is to change, the board will need to be upfront and open about the change. It shouldn’t come out of nowhere. The last thing to keep in mind, and possibly the most important, is that there is no such thing as a perfect voting system. You need to choose the one that you are most comfortable with despite its flaws.

What follows here is my suggestion for change based on research, talking to other ISCA members, and talks with similar industries like body art and experienced game designers.

Panel of Judges

Voting should change from a popular vote to a large panel of qualified judges scoring each artist wall in each category on a scale from one to one hundred. Not only do almost all creative organizations judge contests by jury, but there are good reasons for it. It would be fine to leave some of the categories as a popular vote, but most of them should be changed.

This is more effective because it means that every wall is judged by its own merit, and not compared to everything else. The main problem with comparing everything to everything is that it is simply impossible to do without people being missed or things becoming some form of popularity contest. If the convention is to grow, this will become exponentially worse. I have not seen anyone win who was only popular, and not actually a good artist, but I have seen good artists lose to equally good artists who are more outgoing.

Most importantly, artists would receive their scores after voting (like at major body art conventions), and that would absolutely raise the value of the convention. It would mean that competing at ISCA includes evaluations from a large panel of the top caricature artists out there. Many artists would jump at the opportunity to get an evaluation of their work from Stephen Silver, Tom Richmond, or even Golden Nosey winners.

Currently, you either win or don’t win. You don’t know where you stand, you don’t know what you need to work on, or how you can improve. Even winning only tells you that people like your work more than other artists attending, but it doesn’t tell you why your work is good.

Jury Selection Suggestions:

Fairly large group of people that are NOT competing. The larger the group the less bias influences the final results.

• All of the guest speakers that aren’t competing.

• One outside artist from a similar field like comics or animation.

• At least one master.

• At least one well-known caricature artist.

• Someone attending the majority of the convention so that they are familiar with the faces of the members attending.

• Possibly the board members (It’s slightly problematic that currently the people counting the votes are also competing. It’s never been a problem, but it’s playing with fire.)

Winners

Caricature Artist of the Year

The strangest part of our current system is the fact that we vote for “best of the year” separate from the other categories; this is decidedly ridiculous. This means that it would be possible for someone to win every category, but not be in the top 10. More importantly, it means that votes can be so spread out that some of the winners may only have received a few votes. It also means that it’s mathematically possible for someone to get more votes than anyone else but not win a single award. It would make much more sense to use a system that is more similar to the Miss America Pageant. In the pageant, scores are given by a panel of judges in the categories, and then the overall winners are the ones with the highest total combined scores.

The top 3 people with the highest combined scores are the winners, but they do not win any categories. Since they are taken out of the running for categories, it can then leave room for more people to have an opportunity to win a category. Right now, a handful of artists take all of the awards. It makes it feel like you don’t really have a chance. This elevates placing as a top artist because those people have won the show: they have the most votes out of everyone, they are the best, and everyone one else who won is second place to the true winners.

The particulars of this would have to be worked out. Taking the top 10 out of the running for the categories might be too much. Perhaps you take the top 3 out of the running, but the top 4-10 are still in the running for categories. This would mean that tension is building as the categories are announced. Not winning each category means that you might have won in the top 3, and winning means maybe you still placed in the top 10. This may not be the right answer, but it is a good direction to be thinking in.

In contrast, I would keep Caricature of the Year as a popular vote. It would be much too much to ask the judges to evaluate each individual piece. This would be a great place to see what pieces were the members’ favorite pieces.

Categories

Categories have not been updated in way too long. Some categories have come and gone over the years, but by and large, they have not changed much. Many of them, like black and white, are holdovers from the retail world, and while that is a part of caricatures, it is not representative of all caricatures. Categories are not well defined, and while some are artistic principles, some of them are types of art. It seems strange to me that some categories cross over while others do not.

One strategy to win is simply to do one of the smaller categories like black and white or 3D. On the flip side, winning in these smaller categories almost always cuts people off from winning any other award. I would choose categories that all pieces can be judged by. When some categories cross over and others do not, this creates strange borders between artists and awards. It means that one artist could qualify for more awards than another artist, simply because of the type of work they do. Yes, much of this is self selecting, like the fact that 3D rarely wins other categories.

Below, I have suggestions, these are just suggestions, and the key is that they are striving to be universal. This is my proposal for categories and how winners could be selected:

Panel Scores

• Color – best use of color (not just brightest color, and could be black and white)

• Humor – funniest exaggeration or gag

• Theme – encompasses both body situation and theme throughout the wall as a whole

• Creativity – interesting mediums, presentations, or ideas

• Party – competition run as it has been, but judged by

1. Number of passable drawings
2. Quality of party sketch
3. Theme

• Guest of honor (Handpicked by guest of honor)Winners calculated from panel scores

• Rookie (Rookie who gets the highest overall score)

• Caricature Artist of the Year (Artist with highest total overall score when adding all category scores together)

• Speed – Derived from the party competition as it currently is

Public Vote

• Art fight

• Best studio piece

• Best portfolio

• Caricature of the year

Because there is a score, some categories like Most Improved could be considered in the future.

An important note on likeness. I would not make likeness an award. A caricature by definition should have likeness. In a caricature competition, every piece should be judged first by likeness, then by everything else. No one should ever win Humorous because they have awesome jokes, but it doesn’t look like the person. The Likeness Award is like giving out an award at the Super Bowl to the team that played the most like a football team.

Other advantages

There are several other advantages to this system. For example, I know that many people do not like voting. It is a really stressful and long process for many of us. It’s like you never really get to just enjoy the artwork. We spend all week hunched over creating great works of art, and then at the last minute we put them up on the wall and then in a daze we try to vote before running out to eat and celebrate being done.

Voting also takes quite a bit of time. And that is time that might be better spent in another way, such as opening up the hall for a one-night gallery show.

Gallery Show

If a jury was doing the judging, that would free up the evening, and we could use that time for a gallery show. Have a cocktail hour, with drinks and appetizers, and allow the public to pay to attend. We can be advertising and reaching out to locals to attend the event to get a taste of what we do. We can also reach out to local party planners, wedding organizers, publishers, and those sorts of outlets to help open up opportunity for those competing and for the sponsors.

This would be a great time to simply enjoy the artwork and relax after the long week. Having it open to the public also encourages people to be introduced to our world and to see the amazing things that we do. For local artists who did not attend the whole convention, it would be a nice way for them to get a peek at what we do, and maybe inspire them to join us the following year. A small fee would be a great opportunity for the organization to make some more money that can go into making our organization even better.

We could even offer artists to leave their business cards at their wall, or make some simple way, like QR codes, to promote themselves to the public. Once again adding value to attending. Yes, this particular event may be relatively more valuable for local artists, but it does open up opportunities for all artists to get commissions, and possibly even freelance work. Maybe members who are competing could even be given the option to set up and draw the public for tips… if they still have the energy to draw.

Let’s do this

It’s hard to change things that are so interconnected with so many aspects of the convention, but I think it’s worth it. As you can see, the value add of changing our voting system could be far reaching. I honestly don’t know how else voting could be done if the convention grew even a little bit, let alone by a lot. The current system has served us well, but we have outgrown it. Not only could this make the convention more enjoyable, but it would also raise our status as an organization.

Navigation Box

This Navigation box may not show up on mobile browsers. Please see Exaggerated Features Issue 2019.2 for the full contents of this issue if the navigation box does not display.