Aquascaping Contest Scandal

[Wolf6]

I am not convinced about the use of the word 'natural' in the case of even normal nature style. Most of the plants are found in nature but some are not found submerged (some are only emersed) and together with species from all over the world. I think we are stretching the word natural..... Natural systems often contain much more algae and don't have foreign fish swimming in harmony. 99% natural systems are murky.

True. So it would be 'trying to achieve what we perceive to be a perfect natural scene' even when it isnt. Much like a garden, you know the plants you see dont grow together in nature or in the place/soil they grow in your garden, but still you may try to place them so that it at least appears as if you could find it that way in nature. Even when you tie up your plants to not flop over their neighbours, cut off the dead flowers or ugly overhanging branch, and so on. Nothing truely natural about it really. But its all about what we perceive as natural. But start adding gnomes or over the top rock formations and you know you have passed that station and went a few stops further into fantasy town, giving up all pretense that it could be natural (for the eye).

 

[glasscanvasart]

Sorry, but I find the idea of novice and professional categories silly and I’m not even going to address the idea that shop owners should be barred from entry.

Personally, I think there are two problems with the competition (IAPLC).

The first and gravest is cheating through photoshop. There are multiple ways to address this, but I think the most successful and clear cut would be to ONLY accept RAW files. The competition asks for RAW files, but its clear that anything goes, as shown by our friend at world rank 4.

The second problem concerns the judging. The criteria and points allocation doesn’t add up to me and I know others share my opinion. The solution to this is less clear to me, but it’s something the competition must work on and decide on for themselves. Personally, I think impact, composition, sense of nature (not a natural habitat for fish, but a feeling / an essence of nature), skill, originality and longterm maintenance should be the criteria in order of importance. This is a similar breakdown to the EAPLC and I’d suggest that some of you might find this competition more favourable. It’s also compatible with the IAPLC.

 

[Siege]

Sorry, but I find the idea of novice and professional categories silly and I’m not even going to address the idea that shop owners should be barred from entry.

Personally, I think there are two problems with the competition (IAPLC).

The first and gravest is cheating through photoshop. There are multiple ways to address this, but I think the most successful and clear cut would be to ONLY accept RAW files. The competition asks for RAW files, but its clear that anything goes, as shown by our friend at world rank 4.

The second problem concerns the judging. The criteria and points allocation doesn’t add up to me and I know others share my opinion. The solution to this is less clear to me, but it’s something the competition must work on and decide on for themselves. Personally, I think impact, composition, sense of nature (not a natural habitat for fish, but a feeling / an essence of nature), skill, originality and longterm maintenance should be the criteria in order of importance. This is a similar breakdown to the EAPLC and I’d suggest that some of you might find this competition more favourable. It’s also compatible with the IAPLC.

wot JM said!

👏 👍😃

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

Sorry, but I find the idea of novice and professional categories silly and I’m not even going to address the idea that shop owners should be barred from entry.

Agree that it is a ridiculous idea. There are no agreed upon boundaries for novice and professional’s in aquascaping for starters. In other circles professionals would be considered people who are sponsored and it’s their full time occupation for tax purposes. If you applied this notion to Sim or Fukada, they both have day jobs and wouldn’t even be considered ‘professionals’. Is it fair they are entered into the novice category? 😂

Beyond this, the pursuit and outcry for equal chances by non-participants to the comp game attempts to create an arbitrary measuring stick that is based on the scaper, not the aquascape. Last time I checked this was about judging aquascapes, not trying to categorise somebody’s life chances.

The first and gravest is cheating through photoshop. There are multiple ways to address this

Big fan of the nuclear option as a deterrent; you get caught cheating you are finished, never to enter ever again and the competition owners have the right to publicise their evidence of a fraudulent entry. Dare say this photoshop incident has done everyone a huge favour as it brings attention to consequences. There will always be cheats and going down the ‘overseer’ approach is simply not feasible. 2358 entries to the IAPLC in 2020 and it is free to enter; wanting judges to fly out to view every entry multiple times on ADA’s bill isn’t going to happen. Reacting this way also casts doubt on the other 2357 entrants and ADA’s competence with no evidence other than one person cheating.

Don’t worry, nearly done 😂

As for wanting to see their work in video form... Hidekazu’s #118 ranking scape from 2020:

 

[glasscanvasart]

wot JM said!

👏 👍😃

Sorry, what who said? I don’t recognise the tag.

Beyond this, the pursuit and outcry for equal chances by non-participants to the comp game attempts to create an arbitrary measuring stick that is based on the scaper, not the aquascape. Last time I checked this was about judging aquascapes, not trying to categorise somebody’s life chances.

Well said.

Big fan of the nuclear option as a deterrent; you get caught cheating you are finished, never to enter ever again and the competition owners have the right to publicise their evidence of a fraudulent entry. Dare say this photoshop incident has done everyone a huge favour as it brings attention to consequences.

I’m reluctant to say ban the cheat and all future cheaters permanently, but it would be nice to see an apology from him and to cough up the prize money. Though he has caused a lot of damage to the competition and screwed over a fair few people, banning him would lead to a ‘witch-hunt’ of past competitors, and make no mistake there will be cheats that have slipped through, dragging the competition down further and for what?

I think the most appropriate course of action is retrospective disqualification with equal punishment to disqualifications before the rankings, and most importantly changing the competition to prevent any further scandals. Having said this, I don’t suppose the cheat has got the confidence to enter the competition or any other competition again having been caught so publicly.

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

I’m reluctant to say ban the cheat and all future cheaters permanently

If they did and this thread is to be believed there would only be four entrants left apparently 😂

We’ll see what is in 2021 off the back of this but I’m willing to bet ADA just want this to go away and will treat it as a one off.

On a funnier note, if this were the scape to bring you down in the IAPLC it’s rather humorous that it sort of looks like a flushing toilet:

 

[Tim Harrison]

but I think the most successful and clear cut would be to ONLY accept RAW files

I'm not sure that would work very well. RAW files are much larger resulting in increased workflow time; might be an issue opening and sorting through 2000 images. There's no standard RAW format meaning more software is needed to open different RAW files.

The skill needed to produce a decent minimally processed RAW image would probably exclude a lot of folk and turn the IAPLC in to a photographic competition rather than an aquascaping contest. However, let's be honest it's clearly become as much about the image as the actual aquascape.

I'm not sure what the answer is, or if it'd make any difference anyway. I think this has exposed a fundamental flaw in online competitions and maybe such competitions will never be taken as seriously again.

 

[zozo]

maybe such competitions will never be taken as seriously again.

I'm afraid so... The taste is set... A hard pill to swallow for all trustworthy legit players.

And as said, could be the scaper in question is a victim himself from a befriended foolishly photographer trying to fix his mistakes.

Can't believe he's that stupid to have done this on purpose.

 

[castle]

I'm not sure that would work very well. RAW files are much larger resulting in increased workflow time; might be an issue opening and sorting through 2000 images. There's no standard RAW format meaning more software is needed to open different RAW files.

You're right, but something like imagemagick will do this all in a relative flash with a couple of terminal commands.

 

[glasscanvasart]

I'm not sure that would work very well. RAW files are much larger resulting in increased workflow time; might be an issue opening and sorting through 2000 images. There's no standard RAW format meaning more software is needed to open different RAW files.

I decided to check up on the entrance criteria and it states

I realise I was wrong when I said they request RAW files.

Perhaps, a better solution is to demand RAW data or video of the winning works. However, this would then mean that the winners would know before the public announcements or letters came through. If someone then says they’ve lost the files or not retained them then what would you do, disqualify them? I don’t particularly like this idea.

Another, solution could be to check over the highest ranking entries for photoshop, maybe hiring some experts. It would be impossible to detect lighting and colour alterations at least without checking data and even then I’m not sure that’s plausible. However the kind of cheating that are friend has employed is visible to the naked, albeit discerning, eye. This is the most heinous type of cheating and I don’t think it would be awful to miss the lighting and colour alterations, if we could catch the fabrications. I would also note, as others have said, it may not be possible to detect photoshop from a more skilled hand, and I have no solution to that.

Having said all this, I definitely don’t have all (perhaps any) of the answers and I suspect -given the lack of response from the IAPLC to ‘he who shall not be named’s’ disqualification- that the IAPLC and ADA are going to stick their head in the sand and not acknowledge or address the issue. Though I may and hope to be wrong.

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

such competitions will never be taken as seriously again.

I'm afraid so... The taste is set... A hard pill to swallow for all trustworthy legit players.

Just for posterity... one person found cheating out of two thousand three hundred and fifty eight. If this is an evidence based community - it’s getting away from itself without further evidence of people breaching the rules.

I realise I was wrong when I said they request RAW files.

Yes and noticed folk on here also not correctly referring to the rules as they’ve not yet applied or thoroughly checked before commenting. It’s not a pop at anyone as most won’t have unless they want to enter.

The file size for IAPLC entry is 5MB:

It isn’t much and almost bizarre. Most bridge cameras will approach that on a mediocre shot with good lighting. EALPC allows for 10MB. Either doesn’t allow for much detail when zooming in, label this point in defence of the judges ‘not noticing’ and this is not including time restrictions judging each entry. A DSLR shooting in RAW format will push 20MB plus.

Falling back on my original argument; make it a career ender to go against the most basic rules of a competition and you’ll get a reduced frequency of fraudulent entries. Oversight would be better but not possible in this scenario. Either way I doubt any further attention will be drawn towards this photoshop incident by the competition owner/sponsor if it can be avoided.

A big theme on this thread I think is people dislike dioramas now and want to get back to NA style scapes. This recent upset may be a good push in that direction.

 

[zozo]

The problem is "smart", very smart and getting smarter and digitally smarter day by day.

It actually kinda surprised me that it took so long for someone to throw a spanner in the works.

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

The problem is "smart", very smart and getting smarter and digitally smarter day by day.

Very much true. Outside of scaping, having to look at research that entails varying visual salience across time in video to predict and control eye tracking. Suffice to say when you equate for specific demographic info and manipulate via locational change in visual salience using software, you get a high accuracy rate of where and when you will attend to information on screen. Plainly, knowing where you’ll look and when dependably. All of this outside of the participants conscious awareness. Add AI to operate this process and it’s brown trouser time. You’re a puppet on a string.

It is certainly not lost on me how terrifying the world is becoming. Software is so much more than I ever imagined as a kid, frighteningly so. I completely agree:

It actually kinda surprised me that it took so long for someone to throw a spanner in the works.

It really is a shambles how bad a photoshop job the entry is 😂 For that reason alone it sort of feels like it maybe, just maybe, might be a deliberate protest entry. Plus the theme... going down the pan. Wanting to cheat to the top is more probable though but in defence of fairness it is worth waiting to see what’s said. Maybe it is the fault of a third party, who knows until he comes forward about it. If it was a friend that helped for example it would make it very difficult to publicly state that.

As for the IAPLC I genuinely believe a hard sell route back to honesty is the path forward. How you feel about a piece of art is far more provoking and long lasting compared to anything that it is. To control where you look is possible now, but not how you feel about what you’ve seen.

 

[Tim Harrison]

... one person found cheating out of two thousand three hundred and fifty eight. If this is an evidence based community - it’s getting away from itself without further evidence of people breaching the rules.

I think it'd also come as no surprise to discover it's the thin end of the wedge and that it's fairly common place. But I don't really think we'll ever know for sure. Which is kind of the point.

Yes and noticed folk on here also not correctly referring to the rules as they’ve not yet applied or thoroughly checked before commenting. It’s not a pop at anyone as most won’t have unless they want to enter.

The file size for IAPLC entry is 5MB:

Funny you should mention that, I was going to post the exact same extract from the IAPLC rule book, but I guess the rules can be altered in future if needs be.

I suppose it is what it is now. Like most things you can take it or leave it. It's not like it's doping in international athletics, or US election voting fraud. It's just aquascaping...

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

I suppose it is what it is now. Like most things you can take it or leave it. It's not like it's doping in international athletics, or US election voting fraud. It's just aquascaping...

It’s important to us though right? The direction of the top works presented feel wrong don’t they? The judging criteria keep coming up as a sore point over and over don’t they? It’s a shared experience amongst the community on UKAPS who have viewed thousands of works? It is an international community so despite its limitation in numbers, it is internationally subscribed to.

The nerve that’s being pressed is about the validity of the IAPLC to assess work even before the cheating argument I would suspect. It’s been brewing for at least the last three years.

My two cents are dioramas win out as they’re easier to assess, less cognitive effort needed to validate them. They either are or aren’t a good representation of what they attempt to depict. Amano sold a ‘sense of nature’ and it feels like we’ve wandered into miniature wonderland. Reckon he would have several counts of assault against the judging panel if he were still with us 😂

 

[sparkyweasel]

I find the idea of novice and professional categories silly

Well, that's told me.

 

[glasscanvasart]

Well, that's told me.

Sorry, blunt but honest.

 

[glasscanvasart]

It’s important to us though right? The direction of the top works presented feel wrong don’t they? The judging criteria keep coming up as a sore point over and over don’t they? It’s a shared experience amongst the community on UKAPS who have viewed thousands of works? It is an international community so despite its limitation in numbers, it is internationally subscribed to.

The nerve that’s being pressed is about the validity of the IAPLC to assess work even before the cheating argument I would suspect. It’s been brewing for at least the last three years.

My two cents are dioramas win out as they’re easier to assess, less cognitive effort needed to validate them. They either are or aren’t a good representation of what they attempt to depict. Amano sold a ‘sense of nature’ and it feels like we’ve wandered into miniature wonderland. Reckon he would have several counts of assault against the judging panel if he were still with us 😂

Amano has responded to the prevalence of ‘Diorama‘ in the IAPLC before if I remember correctly. I might be wrong, but I believe he grudgingly said that the IAPLC is not a ’Nature Aquarium‘ contest.

I like the top works in all honesty and mostly support the rankings of the past years. However, I don’t appreciate the judging criteria, as it doesn’t seem to match the rankings.

I’ve said it before, but I don’t think that people’s preferences should be imposed on the contest. However there should be a wide panel of judges so that preferences are averaged out and I’d like to see more IAPLC judges who are Aquascapers themselves.

 

[Geoffrey Rea]

Well, that's told me.

Not sure if that was comedic or serious @sparkyweasel but just spat out my beer 😂

UKAPS could run an annual comp that would be far more fun and far more inclusive. Phone pictures only. Just some suggestions but categories could include:

- Forget about the rest, you know I’m the best
- I thought it would be great... WTF happened to my scape (before and after with biggest disaster being the winner)
- Three rocks, two wood
- First scape
- Self proclaimed professional
- Best photoshopped/convincing composition from stitched tank shots from members photos (with their permission)

No prize money, no ego trip. A mascot for each category that you get to hold onto for the year to show in journal photo’s etc to hold your status on the forum... fun... enjoyable... light.

As for the IALPC:

I’d like to see more IAPLC judges who are Aquascapers themselves.

Couldn’t agree more.

 

[glasscanvasart]

To anyone wondering how far our friend has fabricated his layout I checked out the IAPLC winners video and took these screenshots. It’s not as bad as I thought it might be, which leaves me thinking was it really worth it. Because of how poor a job it was and the changes that have been made (namely the rock work on the left), I believe it’s not the doings of a photographer.

I believe the first three are unlikely to have been edited, but some honest changes might have happened between photos 3 and 4. As far as the layout goes, all I’m sure that has been edited is the top left area which in photo 3 was negative space. In addition, I suspect a lot of the planting has been duplicated over the rock work. Other edits include the majority of fish being duplicated. Finally, the colour has been made more bluish and the yellows minimised. I’m sure there’s more, but I haven’t spotted them.

Edit. I forgot to mention the sideways cropping, which is against the rules.