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

[Hagaren Viper]

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?

I'm perfectly fine with the current 70/30 rule, or if someone wants to be the next Castor and have Ponies fight Naruto or something so I dont mind if that kinda thing pops up in vids, I just don't think pure non-anime vids have a place in an anime music video contest? I mean, for the preshow or if they magically got their own category/contest, sure. I wouldn't mind Avatar/Korra in the actual contest since its anime without being anime, but yeah.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree, as I'm of the complete opposite opinion. I think it's harmful and disrespectful to the event and the at-con audience (and damaging to the reaction to your video) to post the video online in advance of an event you plan to show your video at (regardless of the event, be it ours or others).

I'd like to point out that Shin's 'Safety Dance' vid has been online for quite a bit and Im pretty sure it has made its way through different cons...and it still won the Fun category. Being on Youtube etc. didn't really hurt him...heck personally, I was pretty excited to see it on the big screen.

I do see the case *for* premiering AMVs at AX, but I think that should be the creator's choice to do so or not.

[Pwolf]

I'm only going to post once cause we all know what happened last year when I had a problem with the rules and such... don't need a repeat. If anyone wishes to reply to me on what I have to say, please PM me.

First off, I think adding a "Freshness" rule is awesome. Almost every other contest has one and its about time IMO. That said, I think the notion that it's disrespectful and rude to either not release a video before it premieres or not release it after it premieres is just ridiculous. You only think it's disrespectful and rude because they don't do it they way you do. For me, I don't premiere videos at cons. I have a few times in the past but 99% of the time, I release it when I'm finished. I send to cons because I want people to see my work when they otherwise might not be able to. The vast majority of a contests audiences don't come to the org. For editors like myself who do not use any other means to show their work, it's a great way to get a couple thousand people to see something I made when I may only get a few hundred views in a year here. The only people who really complain about seeing the same video over and over at different cons are the editors. We are the minority. While these are indeed contests, they are also for entertainment purposes. Contests need to be fair for all who participate but ultimately it's for the people who attend the convention to enjoy. You need to find the balance between getting quality entries/pissing editors off and making sure you have a good show.

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.

You were already hard pressed for entries this year, why make it more difficult for editors to enter in the future? Exclusivity is fine but you need to look at actually getting entries in first before you can start limiting them. If you had this rule in place this year, do you honestly believe you would've received as much entries as you did? This doesn't make any sense for a general admission contest but works perfectly fine for contests like AWA Masters.

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.

Awesome, you removed Rule B but why the sub note? You're going to complicate things when it really doesn't need to be. Just tell us what the rules are and leave out any "optional" text. There's already a wall of text we have to read through, lets keep it shorter if you can please.

Finally I'd like to add that I think you're trying to do too much too fast (and you've only posted one portion of the rules!). AX has generated a bad reputation over the past several years. You've just taken over. The most sensible route would be to try and build it back up and introduce changes gradually. Big changes, like Rule A and the now removed Rule B, will only cause problems, like they have already. Fix the problems that plagued the contest in the past. I think a 1 year rules fixes at least one of those problems, no need to add on top of it for the sake of "saving other contests". You also have to consider how much work rules like this are going to add. You are going to HAVE to research EVERY video that is entered into AX to make sure they haven't been to more than 4 other contest. It doesn't matter what other contests are doing. Other AMV contests that have rules like this have a margin of error. If Otakon accidentally let a video in that won Best in Show somewhere else, they can write it off as an "oops" and do better next year (Otakon also has a unique finalists selection processes that helps facilitate these errors which makes it more forgivable if EVERYONE involved didn't know). AX has no margin for error. If ANY video gets into the contest next year that doesn't follow that requirement, you're going to get crap for it. And it's not going to make things look better for you or the AX contest.

Look at what the problems are and attempt to fix them by introducing small changes over time.

That's my two cents.

[Sephiroth]

If AX had required exclusivity most of the better vids i saw this year wouldn't have made it into the contest and the contest quality overall would have suffered.

Even AWA with its several hundred entries only has its masters every two years, and they still get few entries into it. If you want exclusive video then make a category for them. That the only way i can see it remotely working and even then you wont get that many entries. Over all its a bad idea.

[Seijin_Dinger]

I think the part of the freshness rule where it lists off other northwest cons is a bit region specific and could also hurt those other contests.
Also remember, with your rules rewrite other cons rules should only be a reference and possible ideas, what works for them may not work for your con

[Cyrix]

I find it incredibly disrespectful of editors to enter contest with a video that they don't intend to release until after a bigger contest. It's advertising a product you refuse to deliver.

Look up the definition of a word before you argue about it.

prod·uct   [prod-uhkt, -uhkt]
noun
1.
a thing produced by labor: products of farm and factory; the product of his thought.

That is not a rebuttal, unless you're trying to be Clintonesque. Everything I said still applies.

To be more specific: When you talk about advertising a product, you are using "product" in the sense of some type of good. Typically, but not always, you advertise a product that is for sale. Obviously a product can also be free, although usually a free product is a form of marketing. Calling a piece of art that is not sold, cannot legally be sold, a "product" is playing loose with the definition of product, but whatever. Furthermore, even if you somehow consider an AMV an advertisement, think about these things. An advertisement exists for the purpose of letting a consumer base know a product exists and they should expect to be able to obtain it in some way, usually by purchase. An AMV is a piece of art. The Statue of Liberty is not an advertisement for statues of liberty. I do not expect to be able to purchase that one or any exact copy of it, nor to be able to obtain one for free. There is obviously no guarantee of delivery to me expressed or implied in its existence.

It is a commonly accepted (and rightly so!) idea that creators should and will post their AMVs online, but it is their perogative to do so and they are under no obligation whatsoever. I liked an AMV at the AX show a few years ago. It wasn't very good, and maybe it shouldn't have been in the show, but I liked it anyway. The creator has never posted it online. I asked him to post it, several times, because I enjoyed it in spite of its flaws, but he never did, maybe from being embarassed about it or something. I have no objection whatsoever that he does not post it. It's his decision to do so or not do so.

An AMV is not a commercial product, nor an advertisement for anything except possibly the music and anime that went into creating it. If you are using a looser definition of product, such as "product of thought", it doesn't make sense to apply commercial terms such as "advertise" and "refuse to deliver" to it. It is not a good or commodity in the sense you imply when you call playing it "advertising for a product you refuse to deliver". Thus the entire strain of logic is fundementally flawed.

If you are in a state where, instead of appreciating each and every creator who releases his or her videos online, you are only getting angry at any creator who doesn't, you might want to take a step back and a deep breath and think about your attitude about the whole AMV game.

[XStylus]

The Freshness matter shall continue to be worked on (I'm rather surprised by the amount of pushback on it overall), but for now let's move on.

Here's the planned categories for 2013:

---
The Categories:
• Drama & Horror
• Romance & Sentimental
• Action & Adventure
• Comedy & Humor
• Fun, Dance, & Experimental
• Trailer & Parody (Non AMV)

Maximum Submissions Rule:
Entrants may submit a maximum of three AMVs plus one Trailer/Parody. No two videos may be for the same category.
---

This should be relatively controversy free. The intent was simplicity. I wanted every category to be obvious and self explanatory.

[Shin-AMV]

Awesome, you removed Rule B but why the sub note? You're going to complicate things when it really doesn't need to be. Just tell us what the rules are and leave out any "optional" text. There's already a wall of text we have to read through, lets keep it shorter if you can please.

Finally I'd like to add that I think you're trying to do too much too fast (and you've only posted one portion of the rules!). AX has generated a bad reputation over the past several years. You've just taken over. The most sensible route would be to try and build it back up and introduce changes gradually. Big changes, like Rule A and the now removed Rule B, will only cause problems, like they have already. Fix the problems that plagued the contest in the past. I think a 1 year rules fixes at least one of those problems, no need to add on top of it for the sake of "saving other contests". You also have to consider how much work rules like this are going to add. You are going to HAVE to research EVERY video that is entered into AX to make sure they haven't been to more than 4 other contest. It doesn't matter what other contests are doing. Other AMV contests that have rules like this have a margin of error. If Otakon accidentally let a video in that won Best in Show somewhere else, they can write it off as an "oops" and do better next year (Otakon also has a unique finalists selection processes that helps facilitate these errors which makes it more forgivable if EVERYONE involved didn't know). AX has no margin for error. If ANY video gets into the contest next year that doesn't follow that requirement, you're going to get crap for it. And it's not going to make things look better for you or the AX contest.

Look at what the problems are and attempt to fix them by introducing small changes over time.

That's my two cents.

Pretty much this sums it up. If you can't fit a anti-troll or freshness rule in one or two sentences, its probably way too complicated for what its trying to achieve.

I find it incredibly disrespectful of editors to enter contest with a video that they don't intend to release until after a bigger contest. It's advertising a product you refuse to deliver.

Look up the definition of a word before you argue about it.

prod·uct   [prod-uhkt, -uhkt]
noun
1.
a thing produced by labor: products of farm and factory; the product of his thought.

That is not a rebuttal, unless you're trying to be Clintonesque. Everything I said still applies.

To be more specific: When you talk about advertising a product, you are using "product" in the sense of some type of good. Typically, but not always, you advertise a product that is for sale. Obviously a product can also be free, although usually a free product is a form of marketing. Calling a piece of art that is not sold, cannot legally be sold, a "product" is playing loose with the definition of product, but whatever. Furthermore, even if you somehow consider an AMV an advertisement, think about these things. An advertisement exists for the purpose of letting a consumer base know a product exists and they should expect to be able to obtain it in some way, usually by purchase. An AMV is a piece of art. The Statue of Liberty is not an advertisement for statues of liberty. I do not expect to be able to purchase that one or any exact copy of it, nor to be able to obtain one for free. There is obviously no guarantee of delivery to me expressed or implied in its existence.

It is a commonly accepted (and rightly so!) idea that creators should and will post their AMVs online, but it is their perogative to do so and they are under no obligation whatsoever. I liked an AMV at the AX show a few years ago. It wasn't very good, and maybe it shouldn't have been in the show, but I liked it anyway. The creator has never posted it online. I asked him to post it, several times, because I enjoyed it in spite of its flaws, but he never did, maybe from being embarassed about it or something. I have no objection whatsoever that he does not post it. It's his decision to do so or not do so.

An AMV is not a commercial product, nor an advertisement for anything except possibly the music and anime that went into creating it. If you are using a looser definition of product, such as "product of thought", it doesn't make sense to apply commercial terms such as "advertise" and "refuse to deliver" to it. It is not a good or commodity in the sense you imply when you call playing it "advertising for a product you refuse to deliver". Thus the entire strain of logic is fundementally flawed.

If you are in a state where, instead of appreciating each and every creator who releases his or her videos online, are only getting angry at any creator who doesn't, you might want to take a step back and a deep breath and think about your attitude about the whole AMV game.

All I'm seeing here is a really silly strawman argument regarding how AMVs either are or aren't products depending on the definition in either a very narrow sense or very overbroad sense, to to try to refute the core of what was meant by "advertising for a product you refuse to deliver." Reductio is fun an all, but it doesn't really hit the point that is when X audience member sees Y AMV at Z contest and can't find it online it makes X audience member sadface and thats why some people will find that it is common courtesy to have it posted publicly after a public showing. Nitpicking over the exact language on how it was expressed is absurdly silly and misses the point.

While it may be an editor's prerogative not to release an AMV shown at any contest ever, it doesn't change the fact that some people may find it rude or in the very least mildly inconvienent for one reason or another. That People have the prerogative to act in a way that some people might find rude isn't really telling us anything.

Your closing statement is an ad hominem suggesting the possibility of an attitude problem, which is a bit of a stretch to infer, and doesn't strengthen the position of your own argument. The use of italics does make it look classy though.

• Fun, Dance, & Experimental
This should be relatively controversy free.

[rageface]
It needs to say upbeat in there!!!
[/rageface]

[DriftRoot]

[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.

The note under the rules is going to KILL the contests. Not that I don't appreciate the want for new videos, but the audience is the one that is going to suffer here.

Yeah, I mean, with that note you're basically taking the stance that "AX audience members are more important than anyone else on the planet. We want you to put AX's desire for a 'fresh' contest ahead of everyone else's desire to watch AMVs." WHAT???

DRAMA

You want me to pull down a video being enjoyed by thousands of other people, most of whom will probably never attend AX, just in case a random handful of AX goers wants to watch my AMV before the contest? I'm supposed to screw over all the AMV fans out there, just so AX audience members get some kind of special treatment? (Treatment AX goers themselves probably will not like.) Anyone has the right to view my video, anytime they wish once it's online. I'm not going to put it up and then pull it down for a select group because someone else tells me it's in their best interest. That's ridiculous. What about what's in everyone else's best interest?

Plus, do you honestly think that's good PR for AX, to have editors who pull a video put out a statement like "AX told me to take it down because they don't want it shown before their contest. Sorry. Everyone's just going to have to wait a couple of months before they can watch my video on YouTube again." Yeah, I'm sure those unhappy viewers will go running back to that AX-related video/editor after a couple of months has gone by...not.

That "note" has the potential to cause far more harm than good. On top of that, if no one follows it (I certainly wouldn't), or if even only a few follow it, it's basically useless and is just encouraging negativity. If someone felt in danger of getting even the slightest slap on the wrist for leaving their video online, that is probably going to make them unhappy with your contest and possibly unwilling to enter it at all. How is that a positive outcome?

And why not be fair, if it's such a big concern? Go tell AX goers the same thing you're telling us: "AX would really prefer you not watch the AMVs online before the show. We wouldn't want the contest spoiled by you...er, we mean for you."

[Scintilla]

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.

So, not dignifying AM² with an acknowledgement here?

(To be fair, I can't find any information about their contest entrants or winners, since their forum is currently down, so maybe it's not worth trying to check.)


As far as my own experience goes with timing an AMV's distribution release:

Two years ago, I sent my Burger Dance video to Anime Expo, Japan Expo International, and Otakon as its first three conventions. Since it was a dance/comedy video, my plan was to refrain from releasing it online until after Otakon (the latest of the three and also the one I cared most about, since I attend every year), for maximum effect at the contests (it's at its best the first time you watch it -- though as has been already pointed out, I have no idea how many of the attendees of Otakon's contest actively keep up with new video releases online).

I never thought anything of it, as I'd seen plenty of people take this approach before: let the AMV run the contest circuit first, because they're always better on the big screen (esp. comedy/dance), then release it online when it's done. I wanted to encourage viewers to attend the AMV contests by offering something they hadn't seen before and couldn't yet get any other way -- or put another way, to make fans who attend the cons (esp. Otakon) feel like they're getting something special compared to those who just watch online.
Just like how movies aren't released for home video until well after the theatrical run is over.

Now what I discovered from a practical standpoint is that a lot of AX and JXI attendees were interested in watching the video again immediately after those cons, but they weren't able to for another month. This almost certainly lost me some potential viewers: I will never know how many of those fans never saw the video again because they forgot about it in that intervening month and never checked back.

I mean, it's a good problem to have -- on the other end of the scale, I think there may have been *one* instance of somebody interested in re-watching my AWA Masters video from 2009 that went everywhere but almost never broke.

Is this going to change my strategy for the next time I have a video done in time to send it to both AX and Otakon? Not sure. I still like the idea of keeping AMVs contest-exclusive for a while and the idea that I'm encouraging contest traffic by so doing, and I have to decide if that's worth losing potential hits.

[Castor Troy]

I'm perfectly fine with the current 70/30 rule, or if someone wants to be the next Castor and have Ponies fight Naruto or something so I dont mind if that kinda thing pops up in vids, I just don't think pure non-anime vids have a place in an anime music video contest?

Someone should take up the mantle and do this.

---------

Also, work with the IT department or have someone volunteer an FTP for submissions. I guarantee that the amount of entries will skyrocket.