Anime Expo 2012 AMV Contest Thread - WINNERS ANNOUNCED!!!

[MisterFurious]

But how many wins is enough to justify newer videos getting knocked out for 4 year old winning videos?

If I remember correctly, one year, there was this one Fate Stay Night AMV that made it into the action category and it was a winner as it was a winner in other cons 4 years prior. Doesn't that hurt the competition a little bit as well? Not only does it hurt the competition, but it also tells the creator of the newer AMVs that "AX only wants winning videos, why bother sending at all?"

I agree with that. If a video is four years old, it needs to stay out. Check out my earlier agreement with Castor's "freshness" rule.

Also, to add to this, the "best" of the "best" is very opinionated. I was told that some of my AMVs were the best they have seen...while others said that they were crap and unwatchable.

Exactly. Audiences are different, so there is no reason to prevent a video that has previously won from competing. One audience may think it's awesome, another audience may think it sucks.

So the whole "the best of what hasn't won yet" seems kind of an insult. Are you saying that if a video hasn't won something, it doesn't even deserve to be in a "best" overall title, regardless if it's in a category of winners or against videos that haven't won yet?

See my previous argument regarding Kevin Caldwell. He powned AX before the term existed, but I didn't take it as an indication that my videos were bad. Instead, I accepted the challenge and stepped up my game. This is why, IMHO, trolling rules do not encourage us to improve as editors.

This is also kinda subjective... Every rule has its flaws. Sure, it may be the "best", but it's only a matter of opinion of the judges. Everyone's video is under the opinion of what the judges think are the "best." If one truly wants to be "fair and square", why not just let the audience pick from the entire mass of entries as the best ones? But that's impossible, isn't it? It'll tire the audience out. No matter what, nothing can really be "fair and square."

"Fair and square" doesn't mean the audience has to watch all the videos. Time constraints make that impossible, and that's why judges choose finalists. However, it should mean that the contest must be open to all comers, including those who have won previously. And if, as you say, it's only a matter of opinion, then perhaps that video won't make the finals, either because they didn't agree with the other convention, or other editors actually made better videos. It's been known to happen.

I can't tell you how many times (no offense to Shin, as I do love this AMV) I've seen Safety Dance. I can only stand seeing that AMV so many times before getting bored of it. And that goes for the audience as well.

Then wouldn't the audience's boredom with that video give others a chance to win?

The one year I went to Anime LA, Fanime and AX in the same year...I saw the same AMV get in at all three times.More than likely, if I can go to these same cons, so can audience. And if they go to one AMV contest, what makes you think they do not go to others? And I also know there are fanatic con-goers who go to other cons as well, in different states. How do you think they feel to pay a plane ticket to see the same lineup again and again in not one state, but several?

With the cost of airfare, I sincerely doubt the average con-goer can afford to go to multiple cons these days. Note that in your case, all three of the conventions you went to were in California. I can only afford to go to AX these days, and even then, I can't afford to stay in the hotel. So I only get to see one contest. If I'm lucky, I get to go to FanimeCon, which has some overlap, but I don't let it get to me, as there are sufficient different AMV's to keep me entertained, and the results are almost always different.

The creator knows what kind of cons they're submitting to. If they want their videos to be at a big-name convention and contest, they can hold off on submitting to smaller conventions, or send their older winning videos to those conventions instead. After all, this is what Akross does and I don't see anyone having a problem with it.

Indirectly, this was the point I was trying to get at. If Otakon is to be 100% fair about the trolling rule, it needs to disqualify ALL videos that have won best-in-show at previous conventions, including those that were awarded after its submission deadline. Otherwise, you get what happened in 2010, where "And Now A Word from Out Sponsors" won best-in-show at AX and Otakon. Not a successful result of the trolling rule, was it (the video's awesomeness notwithstanding)? If a creator has a problem with the possibility that their video may get DQ'ed without any opportunity for submitting another video, then they should do as you suggest - hold off on submitting to smaller conventions where they have a better chance of winning, or perhaps submit a different video.

[MisterFurious]

This. We need anti-trolling rules, just like the mortgage and banking industries need regulations. You cannot depend upon people being ethical, or doing the right thing. I can guarantee you, without anti-trolling rules, we would see the exact same contest at every con for years to come. You need at least a "freshness date" to keep this from happening. Now, who wins, might not always be the same, but the lineup will be ...

I'm all for freshness rules. I was actually surprised in 2010 when Tim Park (Doki Doki) submitted his track from one of the old DDR projects to replace one that had been DQed for content. I had wondered if Michael knew how old the video was, then I realized that AX has no rule preventing old videos from being submitted, just ones that had been previously submitted to AX. I completely agree that this needs to change (although I had considered submitting some of my old videos from the 90's to see if any of them would make finals, just for laughs...)

[Cyrix]

But wouldn't you want AX to have that kind of cachet? If AX wants their AMV contest to be a high standard among conventions, it must welcome all comers.

There's a difference between welcoming all contestants and welcoming all entries. I still think it is pointless to compare the Academy Awards to AX unless we hire a panel of industry-level judges and there is no audience vote.

So my film festival analogy still stands. Films are static entities, too, and tour from festival to festival, like some AMV's. They do well at some festivals, and not so well at others, so no one sees a need to prevent those that have won too many awards from competing.

I don't think the Academy Awards are a valid analogy; I don't know how Sundance operates at all and it's surprisingly not easy to find that information. Still, I think it's too different of a setting. A film is generally a very long and expensive process with dozens to thousands of participants. An AMV lasts a few minutes and maybe is occasionally a joint project between two or three people. That doesn't mean I don't respect AMVs, I think they are outstanding and I love them and I value them highly. I just don't want to apply an awards show format designed for film to them.

Signal was also 29 seconds over the maximum video length for AX, wasn't it?

The version I submitted to AX ran six minutes and fifty-eight seconds, two seconds under the limit. It didn't have titles.

Oh, really? I thought the version I saw online (which doesn't have titles ) was the same as the one at the show but my memory isn't that great. Anyway, it was definitely the best in the show and I voted for it, I just felt bad later when I "found out" it was "too long" >_<

Why would we want to cater to audience members who don't care about AMVs or the contest enough to watch more than five videos?

Because if AMV's are to expand their reach at AX, they must expand their audience.

If they care so little about AMVs they won't watch the whole show and haven't already seen finalists from other contests, they won't know what they're arguably missing. Personally I'd rather have a tighter but more committed audience than a bunch of casually interested people. Enough people talk through the show as it is.

Actually, on that topic again: xstylus, for future reference, can we flag down staff to deal with other creators if they are yakking through the show?

[MisterFurious]

There's a difference between welcoming all contestants and welcoming all entries. I still think it is pointless to compare the Academy Awards to AX unless we hire a panel of industry-level judges and there is no audience vote.

I thought Troy had said that some professional editors did have input into the finalists. I could be wrong...

Oh, really? I thought the version I saw online (which doesn't have titles ) was the same as the one at the show but my memory isn't that great. Anyway, it was definitely the best in the show and I voted for it, I just felt bad later when I "found out" it was "too long" >_<

Don't feel bad, because it wasn't too long. The version I submitted really was 6 minutes and 58 seconds. It is not the same version as on YouTube, because the AX version has only ever existed at AX.

If they care so little about AMVs they won't watch the whole show and haven't already seen finalists from other contests, they won't know what they're arguably missing. Personally I'd rather have a tighter but more committed audience than a bunch of casually interested people. Enough people talk through the show as it is.

Now that is an excellent point...

[Hagaren Viper]

I can't help but be amused that all the AX drama started AFTER the con this year. Way to mix it up, guys!

Buuut I do feel like everyone is thinking too hard about this? Personally I think the 12-month freshness rule is just fine. Any rule that would require us to premier at AX first would hurt though, as that could mean either sitting on an entry for a good year, or nor having many entries to send [Admittedly, the past couple of years Ive tried to premier an AMV in the contest, which hasn't worked out so far, but to have to wait to release the 3 I sent last year would be kinda...].

I'm surprised about the potential removal of video game entries, since we've had a few finalists using game footage and made such a huge deal about Dead Fantasy being played in the preshow a while back. Any particular reason for this?

And can we...not have MLP in the AMV contest? I dont mind the show at all but...yeah.

[Castor Troy]

I can't help but be amused that all the AX drama started AFTER the con this year. Way to mix it up, guys!

Will we surpass the page counts of the previous AX threads?!

Spoiler :

drama

[Seijin_Dinger]

with you wanting to disallow MLP, would that be 100% not allowed, or allowed up to whatever possible ratio of non-anime footage may be allowable in the rules?

[XStylus]

I can't help but be amused that all the AX drama started AFTER the con this year. Way to mix it up, guys!

Will we surpass the page counts of the previous AX threads?!

Spoiler :

drama

Be sure to add in the post count from DP's previous thread.

[TrufflePigStudios]

[NOT FINAL NOT FINAL NOT FINAL NOT FINAL!!!]
#) Freshness Rule
No “stale” entries. A “stale” entry is considered any of the following:
a) An entry whereby AX would be the fourth (or more) live event that the entry would be exhibited at.
b) Any entry that is publicly viewable online. Any public download links must be pulled and remain offline until after the competition.
c) Any entry that was shown at any live event prior to July 1st, 2012.

I'm all for changing things that need to be changed- (especially if its that "Anime Expo® prizes will be awarded only to those in attendance at the convention. Anime Expo® will not ship prizes," rule...I don't think has ever been followed in my time going to the AX AMV contest)...but if it's not broken...don't fix it. It seems like a lot of the changes (like not allowing video game content entries) wouldn't really benefit anyone by changing.

I agree that stale entries (over a year) shouldn't be allowed to be entered, but I think the possible rule "b" is a bit much. AMV creating is a hobby that relies heavily on the creators desire to share their work with others...and to discount their work from being shown at a contest just because it is on the org or on youtube seems really unfair. It would also drop the amount of entries received for the contest which could possibly limit the quality of the contest. Just because it is viewable online doesn't necessarily mean that it has been viewed by a lot of people, or that it will be "old" by the time it reaches the contest. There were many amvs in the contest that I hadn't seen before...and there were a few amvs that I had seen in previous contests or on my computer. I was actually really excited to see some of the entries that I'd only seen on my puny monitor screen in the contest...Seeing something on a big screen with blaring speakers is a totally different experience!

Every person has a threshold for how many times they can watch something and still find enjoyment in it...so the rules really have to be as even as possible to the entrants. (anti-trolling rules: yes---exclusive ax rule: a little too much imo). I personally love re-watching videos from editors I respect because I can catch more details that I may have missed, or analyze the way they use certain effects etc...and if I have to re-watch a couple videos I'm not too fond of...oh well! I can learn from those too! For many people in the audience it may be there first time viewing it! Despite what a couple people have said- the audience is important...if there isn't an audience beyond the creators and contestants then AX will see AMVs as a less important event and the extra amv-related events that have been a long time coming may start diminishing again! AX is consumer-driven just like the stores at your local shopping mall- if the demand for amvs decreases so will the amount and quality of amv events at AX. They make you take those surveys when you buy your badges for a reason!

On a side note- I'd like to say good job on delaying the comedy category this year and the rule of refusing to take ballots if you leave early. Too many AX's have I seen half the audience pile out after the comedy section and it's quite depressing.

[XStylus]

I agree with that. If a video is four years old, it needs to stay out. Check out my earlier agreement with Castor's "freshness" rule.

I think we can move on from the age debate. Please consider the 12-month freshness rule to be solid. It will be in the AX2013 rules. As for the other rules, those are about as solid as yogurt, and continue to be up for discussion.

Let's talk about Rule B.

I like Rule B. A lot. It's the next best thing to an exclusivity rule without actually being one. I don't like exclusivity rules because they cause harm to other events. However, if there's a "no downloads" rule, the onus is entirely on the creator. They can still send to other events, they just can't post it online until after AX. In fact, all the other events the AMV is sent to prior to AX even get an indirect exclusivity benefit. So yes, I like the rule a lot. It's way more friendly to the convention community than an exclusivity rule.

What's holding me back is, quite frankly, we need to build more clout. Running an awesome AMV event one year is one thing. I need to build a track record of it. And heck, this year it wasn't even my event, it was DP's event with more glitz. There's quite a bit more that's changing. In any case, once we've got a reputation for awesomeness, then I can start doing things that'd work the prestige level.

For now, I will probably change rule B to a "request" since it has come to my attention that a video cannot be pulled from the .org once uploaded. I will have to talk to the admins about adding a "download hiatus for competition" function or something, but that's a different topic for another time.

But one day this rule may be back. It just likely won't be this year.

As for rule A, I'm mulling over a different version of it. Some of you were right, in its old form it would have been way too damn much work, and it casts too wide a net. I've changed it, and it's been relaxed very significantly. In any case, I welcome opinions.

Here's the current form of the Freshness Rule section:

[NOT FINAL NOT FINAL NOT FINAL NOT FINAL!!!]
#) Freshness Rule
No “stale” entries. A “stale” entry is considered any of the following:
a) Any AMV that has already played at any combination of three out of the five west coast events listed below:
SakuraCon, Fanime, Anime Los Angeles, Anime Vegas, PMX.
b) [REMOVED. Rule C will become Rule B.]
c) Any entry that was shown at any live event prior to July 1st, 2012. (FINALIZED)
NOTE: If your AMV is presently available for public viewing or download, we request that you temporarily remove it (where possible) until after the event.


Once we come up a happy medium regarding the Freshness Rule, I'll be announcing the new category structure next.