A new year meant a new postcard contest, where the worlds most amateur artists would once again render a selection of topics and have them judged. Things were mixed up this time, and the rules were as follows:
- The subjects are all animals
- We would paint each using watercolors
- There are twelve animals in total: Five judges pick two each, and mum picks the first and last
Six are done and the judging is complete. Let’s see the standing at the halfway point…
Panda
Mum’s first pick was a real surprise, but I won’t say what I thought she’d pick since she’s got one more coming. The watercolor nature of the contest immediately made it more difficult than the portraits! We’re both using watercolor pencils, and in the early weeks I drew a pencil drawing then wet it to achieve the paint effect, which meant detail was extremely difficult. However… Bernard ignored the rules and didn’t even create a watercolor!
Mine (on the right) was given the win by the judges with a score of 4.7-0.3 (Bernard got a tiny nod due to cuteness).
Here’s a comment from one judge about mine:
“Movement and emotion are conveyed and one can almost hear the panda munching away on his bamboo.”
Eagle
Mine is on the right and Bernard’s on the left and once again (sigh) we see he failed to add water and therefore didn’t create an actual watercolor. He feigned ignorance of the rules at this point, but it was clear he was exploiting the fact the judges themselves were ignoring the rules since he won this one 3-2. One judge even said “Left doesn’t look like an eagle but it has more detail so it gets my vote“! Imagine that: giving your vote to the non-watercolor that doesn’t even look like the topic!
It was at this point that the truth of this contest was becoming clear: the judges are inscrutable and whimsy and emotion factors as much into their decisions as artistic merit. This would have to be carefully considered by the artists…
Betta (Siamese Fighting Fish)
A salute to the judge that picked this, since it allowed liberal use of color! The strong difference between each approach made this a harder choice for the judges. Ultimately Bernard (on the right) won 3-2 but I sensed it was very close.
Some judges comments:
“Left is the first one that actually looks like a watercolor“
“Right looks like a goldfish!”
“Right is more three-dimensional with a beautiful impression of fluidity“
Incidentally I was very happy with the shading on my fish (the light spot on the upper back), which wasn’t easy for me to obtain. I don’t think any judges noticed it 🙂
Cute Domestic Housecat
This one was unusual since the judge added a condition: cuteness was key, and an image of a plain cat would be valued less than a cute cat. No judge had done this previously (or since), but as artists both B and I accepted the condition without comment. I took it very seriously and my creation is on the right, with Bernard’s on the left. Which one is cuter?
Ultimately the win was mine 3-2, but three judges split their votes, with the biggest being 0.3/0.7! Two judges commented that they gave me more points despite the technical skill shown in Bernard’s being greater since they assumed/understood that mine was in accordance with the criteria.
One judge decided Bernard’s was technically better and cuter with this comment:
“The definition of cuteness I will follow is ‘attractiveness that is pretty and endearing’. Left displays considerable skill in the choice of colors and the minimal application. The shadows on the face convey the soft shape and are extremely well done; the cat peeks out of the page with a perfect expression of indifference. The soft pink of the ears and subtle grey shadows lend strength to the brilliant blue/green eyes which make this exceedingly pretty and irresistably endearing. The cuteness factor is off the chart!“
Isn’t it interesting that we both chose white cats with grey shadows and both used pink as a secondary colour?
Gorilla
Another surprise choice, from a judge who I expected would have picked any number of other animals. Mine is on the left, and Bernard’s on the right. The judges wasted no time in their deliberation, and awarded Bernard the win 3.3-1.7 (yes, more split votes).
I went with bombast in my depiction, intending to evoke Kong silhouetted against the sun. But my intention exceeded my ability, and some of the finer detail of my pencil drawing was lost when wetted (see below).
Here are some judges comments:
“I can’t get over the expression of left“
“I’ll pick the silverback on the right; I like the use of light“
“Left is a tortured gorilla’s cream on behalf of all gorillas killed by selfish and greedy humans to satisfy a rich mans ego. The bold lines and dramatic colors evoke deep trauma and injustice. A world in which this typically peaceful giant is hunted and abused is an ugly world indeed and this artwork reminds me to be angry and sad and to do something to make the world better for all the beautiful creatures that live in it before human stupidity destroys all of it. Right is peaceful and gentle by comparison. The colors are soft and natural. A gorilla going about his day bored of any human observer. It is a fine artwork but the indifferent beauty depicted serves to intensify the impact of the emotion portrayed by left.“
Snake
Two judges are impossible to predict, one likes bold color, and two respond to dramatic imagery. This was my conclusion by this point, so to win I had to use bold colors and do more than a simple depiction of the subject. When Snake was chosen, the obvious choice therefore was Lucifer and his apple, and my depiction is on the left. I had been impressed by Bernard’s gorilla and queried him about his techniques. As a result this was the first time I didn’t simply draw a pencil illustration and wet it: I also applied the pencils directly to the wet postcard and mixed paints on a palette and applied them using a super-fine brush I cut down just to show the scales. As this one went into the mail, I was confident.
As it turns out the judges agreed and gave me the unanimous win: 5-0. I can see flaws in mine, but I think B had a few missteps here, not the least of being a lack of ‘mouth definition’ (which three judges cited).
Here’s some of the comments:
“Right looks like a cross between a snake and an alligator!”
“Left makes me think of a hidden danger in a gamebook, where the critter on the right is a tad eel-ish for my money.”
“Great texture in snake and apple”
“Use of the apple in left is very clever… The colors contrast and compliment to a lovely effect… The eye is odd but suits the supposedly friendly nature of the snake to tempt a sweet virgin to taste forbidden fruit!” (This was the only judge that commented on the biblical theme.)
And so, after six animals, the tally is: we are currently tied with 3 wins each! This is good for the contest, but hard for us. I was hoping for an early lead to I could ‘get experimental’, but with the competition as tight as it is every card matters and I must always think of the judges as I decide what to create.
Here’s some behind-the-scenes photos of some of my creations before I added water:
And here’s my cute cat in pencils:
One aspect of the contest invisible to judges are that we are both using an identical set of twelve postcards. This was an arbitrary decision of mine (I printed two copies of a 12-card set several months back) and only after we decided this did I realize this added an extra wrinkle: we couldn’t discard a picture and start again since we wouldn’t have enough postcards! So if we want to practice we need to use other cards. Bernard has done just that a few times, and he has also been sending me his practice arts, none of which were intended for judge submission. Here’s his alternate ‘cute domestic housecat’ and ‘betta’. He won Betta but I won Cat, do you think he could have won had he submitted this one:
As usual in about six weeks I’ll follow up with the final results. As of right now, this is anyone’s game 🙂
