Javascript DHTML Drop Down Menu Powered by dhtml-menu-builder.com  
 

Judging guidelines and procedures for ILDA Awards

If you are an ILDA Awards judge, congratulations! You will find it a fun and fascinating process. And we genuinely appreciate your time and effort in helping pick the best shows, technology and people of the laser industry.

This page includes guidelines and procedures for judging. Feel free to write with suggestions for improvement, based on your own experiences.

Click here to jump to the:

• ILDA Artistic Awards

• Fenning Awards for Technical Achievement

• ILDA Career Achievement Award

If you need to refer to the original ILDA entry forms and rules, click here for the 2011 Entry Forms. For lists of past award winners, use the "ILDA Awards" menu in the left hand column. You can see winners for any particular year, plus some specialized charts such as a table listing all past winners.

ILDA Artistic Awards

The purpose of the awards:

1. Recognize and encourage creative achievement in laser display.

2. Promote and publicize ILDA

3. Establish credibility for the medium

Entries should be judged by the following criteria:

1. Professionalism

2. Creative application of the medium

3. Uniqueness of the application to the entry category

(For more detailed criteria, see the list of suggested judging criteria developed by Malcolm Hignett for Thames Valley University's laser program.)

The judges will be composed of at least three people who represent distinguished experience in one or more of the following fields:

1. Laser technical experience

2. Practical application of laser display

3. Artistic or cultural background

Laser documentation limitations

The judges should be made aware of the quality limitations of video and photographic representations of lasers. Laser display is impossible to accurately reproduce in other media. The conflicting scan rates of laser scanning and video raster scanning can create annoying flickering on video.

Entries should not be judged on quality of documentation. We are judging the laser artistry as depicted in the videos and photos, not whether one camera produces a better image than another.

Impartial Judging Coordinator

The Judging Coordinator will limit his or her comments to the written entry descriptions, and may also clarify entry categories, procedures or laser display processes as required by the judges. The Judging Coordinator must remain impartial and never make comments about the quality of entries, give a personal opinion of an entry, or in any way influence the judges' decisions.

Anonymous entries

The entries will remain anonymous. The Judging Coordinator should make no reference to the name of an entrant and should not allow a company's name from a video entry to be displayed. [Note: A company name is allowed if it is an inherent part of the laser entry that cannot be easily edited out; for example, if the entry is for a laser show done for a company's trade show stand.] The judges must remain impartial should they recognize the work of a particular company or an entry with which they may be familiar.

Viewing entries

Because of the large number of entries, each entry has a time limit [currently 4 minutes]. However, the judges may at any time request the Judging Coordinator to proceed to the next entry or to scan forward through the video clip. It is suggested that a minimum of one minute of each entry be viewed and then, if the judges request, the Coordinator will scan forward or will move to the next entry. The Judging Coordinator, who has viewed every entry in its entirety, may point out relevant sections of an entry that the judges have asked to skip over. They may then decide to view these sections before moving on.

The Judging Coordinator should have all entries efficiently coordinated and estimate the viewing time for each category so that the judges can move quickly and have quality time to discuss, debate, review and award each category.

Photography entries

Photography entries are submitted both as JPEG files and as prints. Both types should be viewed by judges. It is suggested to create a simple slideshow of each JPEG that can run on the video screen(s) while the prints are simultaneously examined.

In cases where an entrant submits only one of the two entry types, this is the entrant's responsibility. The Judging Coordinator should inform the judges that there is only a JPEG version (or only a print version), but the judges do not have to take any special steps to ensure the entry is examined.

Moving entries to different categories

The judges may move entries from one category to another if they feel that a particular entry is better-suited to another category.

Statements of Intent

Entrants usually prepare Statements of Intent in order to describe their entries to the judges. Often these are lengthy.

In the interests of time, the Judging Coordinator should review the Statements in advance, and highlight the most important points. Judges should always be given some Statement information but they do not have to be read the entire Statement. At any time, judges can ask to hear more or all of the Statement if they desire.

While finalizing their decisions (the First, Second, and Third placements), judges may ask to review certain pieces again.

What awards are to be given

ILDA normally gives out First, Second and Third places in each category. In addition, an Honorable Mention may be given for "fourth place" or a work worthy of special mention. By direction of the ILDA Board, there may NOT be ties -- there can only be one winner per place (e.g., one First Place, one Second Place, one Third Place and one optional Honorable Mention).

Situations where no award is given

The judges may decide to award no prizes for a place if they feel no entry has sufficient quality for the place. For example, if judges feel there is a large gap between a First Place winner and the next-best entry, they may decide not to award Second Place.

If there is any question, judges should err on the side of awarding a prize. This is for two reasons:
     1) In general, entries should be judged relative to each other rather than to an absolute standard, and
     2) the Awards are an important Member benefit which we do not want to limit unless there really are no satisfactory-quality entries for a certain placement.

Fenning Awards for Technical Achievement

Fenning Awards-winning technology can be found in many forms, such as a laser, projector, components, software, procedures, and processes. The technical achievement does not have to be a stupendous breakthrough. It should be something that helps laserists do better shows in one or more ways; for example, more easily, with higher quality, at lower cost, etc.

Report any potential conflicts of interest

ILDA cannot know about all the various relationships between members. If you are a judge, and you may have a potential conflict of interest with one or more of the entries, please notify the Awards Committee and/or the Executive Director as soon as possible. Your particular situation can then be assessed to see if there could be a problem.

An actual or potential conflict of interest includes:

• If you might be perceived as wanting to help an entrant (perhaps you previously worked with the company, or you do a lot of business with them)
• If  you might be perceived as wanting to lessen an entrant's chances of winning (perhaps you are a competitor, or do a lot of business with a competitor).

ILDA recognizes that the laser display industry is small, and thus "everybody knows everybody else". It is expected that judges may have had some dealings with entrants. The guidelines above are intended to help in situations where these dealings are significant and might be perceived by others as unduly influencing your decision. Therefore, please let us know of any potential conflict of interest.

Coordinating judge

One judge will be the Coordinator, in charge of the judging process. He or she is responsible to keep the judging on schedule and for coordination between the other judges and with ILDA.

For 2011, ILDA is initiating a fixed date by which the decision must be made.

Evaluation and judging procedure

About 2-4 weeks before this date, each judge is sent a packet with the entries. This may be by postal mail, or via downloaded files.

Go through the packet on your own to make a preliminary evaluation. Form your own opinion before contacting the other judges. Write down your choices.

Judges may review past ILDA Fenning technology winners, to get an idea of what types of entries have won. To do this, look at the menu in the left-hand margin of this webpage. Find "The ILDA Awards" section, and the "Past winners" menu. From the fly-out submenu, select various years. Towards the bottom of each year will be the Fenning technology award winners for that year. For example, here are the 2007 tech winners.

Then, discuss your choices with the other judges.

• How to discuss on a conference call: It is probably fastest and most efficient to make your final deliberations by voice. Many ILDA Members can easily conduct a 3-way conference call with their own equipment; for example, the iPhone allows adding a third person to an existing call. Internet VOIP applications such as Skype also have conferencing capabilities. If you do not have this capability, contact ILDA and we will provide instructions and access to our conference calling system.
   
• How to discuss via email: Email can also be used for the discussions. Each judge would "reply to all" so that the other two judges can see his or her message.

The discussion may help answer questions, clarify issues and solve problems.

• If you feel an entry may be unclear or incorrect, you may contact the entrant or other people to verify claims. Certainly you would not want to give the award based on wrong information furnished to ILDA. On the other hand, ILDA judges are not investigators, so you do not have to double-check every fact on the entry form.

At the end of the discussion, hopefully all judges are in agreement about the order placement (who gets 1st, 2nd, 3rd and any Honorable Mentions). If full agreement is not possible, then a vote should be taken after a suitable discussion period.
 

Placements

You may award First Place, Second Place, Third Place and (optionally) Honorable Mentions.

You do not have to give awards in all places. For example, if you feel there is one excellent entry and a couple of OK ones, you can give one First Place, skip Second Place, and award a Third Place and an Honorable Mention.

• But do not be too restrictive. The Awards are a significant benefit of ILDA Membership. Be sure to have at least two award places. Remember that entries do not have to be perfect or earth-shattering. This is not an award meant only for breakthrough ideas. It is fine to give awards to good solid products that have some degree of technical achievement, and that help make laser shows better-looking or easier to make.

• Entries are judged against each other, for the year in which they are entered. In some years there may be no entries which measure up to past winners. However, rank the current year's entries against each other to choose First Place, Second, etc. (This is similar to the Oscars. Not every year can have a Gone With the Wind, or Godfather II, or Titanic. Some years are simply Oliver!, or Crash, or The Hurt Locker.)

By direction of the ILDA Board, there may NOT be ties -- there can only be one winner per place (e.g., one First Place, one Second Place, one Third Place and one optional Honorable Mention).

Suggested judging factors

Some of the key factors to consider are already in the Tech Awards entry form. Entrants are supposed to discuss these areas. They include:

• How the entry is unique or improved. It should be "the first of its kind" or be substantially improved from previous products or versions.

• How the entry differs from previous or similar methods used in the industry to accomplish the same function. A Tech Award winner should not be a me-too product which wins only because it was entered and its competitor was not. It should have something different, new, or substantially improved when compared to other products/technologies.

• How useful the entry is. An excellent entry would be able to be used by most laserists. This is why ILDA asks the entrant to list any negative factors which might restrict its impact on users and the industry, such as:

  • Only works with certain equipment

  • Laser power must be below a certain level

  • Requires special training or knowledge

  • Has a high cost
     

• The entry should be a product, or a useful and demonstrated technology. Concepts and basic research do not qualify.

• The more an entry is widely available to laserists, the higher this aspect should be scored. For example, a free or low-priced product is better than an equivalent product with a higher price. However, note that it is perfectly acceptable if an entry is restricted in use to only one company (e.g., is proprietary) or is for rental only. Ultimately, cost and availability are just two of many factors to be considered.

• The entry should be new or substantially improved in the Awards year (from the previous Awards deadline to the current one). Because some products may take a year or longer to develop, and because some products have significant enhancements added, in general do not throw out an entry unless it truly is "old news" that has been around for a few years.

• If an entry was previously entered for a Fenning Award, it cannot be re-entered unless the submission primarily focuses on new and improved elements. Do not take into account the older elements since these were previously judged when submitted in previous years.

Perhaps the two most important factors are (1) technical innovation and sophistication, and (2) usefulness in advancing laser displays. This means that a winning entry should have "technical achievement" as stated in the name of the Fenning Award. And it also should have a useful impact on laser displays, helping to make shows better looking, easier to create, less costly, etc.

ILDA Career Achievement Award

This award honors "an exceptional individual with a distinguished history of achievement in the laser display industry." The nominee does not have to be a past or present ILDA Member -- he or she can be anyone who worked or achieved in the industry.

Evaluation and judging procedure

There are two main steps in selecting a Career Achievement Award recipient:

• Nomination -- ILDA issues a call for CAA nominees each year. The deadline is the same as for the ILDA Artistic and Fenning Technical Awards. The call for nominees in 2011 is here. A nomination is valid for five years, so it does not have to be resubmitted every year.

• Voting -- Sometime after nominations are received, ILDA Members receive an e-mail asking them to vote. The voting period is usually at least 14 days. Each ILDA Member (company or individual) can send in an e-mail with their selected nominee. Details on the voting procedures are here (link requires ILDA Member username and password).

Types of winners

Past winners of the CAA can be divided into one or more of these categories:

• those who helped build significant laser display-related businesses,
• those who made artistic and technical achievements, and
• those who worked to improve ILDA and the laser display industry.

In whatever area(s) they worked, the person should have made significant and lasting achievements in the field of laser display.

Suggested CAA judging factors

Here are six suggested factors to consider, for the Career Achievement Award recipient:

1) How well the person did their "day job". For example, if someone ran a laser show company, it is expected that the company did various shows in various market segments (concerts, corporate, theme parks, ships, etc.). That is a given.

A CAA candidate has to have done a good or outstanding job on their "day job". The clients should be at a high level, such as famous rock groups, national and international corporations, major theme parks, etc. And, the laser shows should be of high quality. Many ILDA or related awards (LDI "Best Laser Show") would be a good indicator here.

2) New innovations invented, or pioneered, or made widespread by the person. This is a key factor that helps separate CAA nominees from people who just did their "day job" well.

A CAA candidate helps pioneer new technologies or markets:

• One question is "if Candidate X didn't come up with Innovation Y, how would the laser industry be different?"
• Another question is "if Candidate X didn't come up with Innovation Y, would Innovation Y eventually come out anyway (was Y inevitable) or did they make a true breakthrough?"

3) Service to the industry. This can be service through ILDA -- doing work on various committees, coming up with standards, helping with awards, etc. This can also be outside ILDA, such as writing articles or books, providing useful products or services to the industry, etc. Again, a good question might be "how would ILDA and/or the laser industry be different without Candidate X's involvement?"

4) Longevity. It is the "Career" Achievement Award, so they have to be involved with the industry for a while.

5) Quality. Their work should be of high standards.

6) Integrity. The person (and their company) should be trustworthy and fair in their dealings with other people and companies: "A person of their word."