Here is how I would judge the paintings:
A. Judgment system:[/b] Look for the flats at the following evaluations
a. Quality of painting : accuracy of painting, of the details, neat, precise, sharp, presence of dark lines separating colours for distinct view; eyes, face, foldings, treatment of horse, legs and feet, quality of hair painting, …. Score = on 5 points
b. Colours balance = harmonized or not, desaturated when needed for subject, treatment of shadows with black or tones, use of single colours or nuances Score = on 3 points
c. Light source : visible and clear to viewer or multiple, all directions making unrealistic or uncontrolled Score on 3 points
d. Lighting and Shadows: in line with light source or not, use of thrown shadow, reflected lights or not, on the face, in clothes, on the horse. Maximum effect for 3D space feeling lige a figurine Score = 5 points
e. Tone transition and tone melting : smooth, acute, juxtaposed, unexperienced, absent Score = 3 points
f. Free hands (if any) : accurate, detailed, repetitive motives the same or at random, inaccurate, … Score= 3 points (or none assigned)
g. Enhancing or downgradings : these things making the piece better or poorly handled = points additional (positive) or removed (negative); examples
i. Additional features for decoration
ii. Partial conversion of the flat to enhance its quality and design
iii. Very original treatment of light or colours (outside standards was copying others, special lightening unusual, like from the back, from a candle, …)
iv. Poorly prepare flat, residual visible defects holes, poor gluing (if any), which downgrades the final effect from an excellent painter
Can be + or - 05, 1 or 2 points on total or none if no remark
Sum-up maximum score, sum up points given and recalculate on 20; gold is 18, 19, 20; silver is 17, 16, 15 bronze is 14, 13, 12 (merit) is above 10.
B. Flats or Not ?? to me resin flats are flats, just instead of casting with metal, it is reproduced from a master also but with resin as we do for figurines also. The material is not the issue, it is the technique of creating a flat two dimensional sculpturing of the subject instead of ronde-bosse (3D), painted n all sides. The ‘demi-ronde bosse’ are flats too.
1. Is a resin flat initially engraved and reproduced
2. Is a flat
3. Is a flat; engraving is done on a flat resin surface (Yvan Durand), and the piece is copied = there are more “flat” surfaces than a classical casted flat, but to be treated for tromp-l’oeil effect as 3D
4. Is a classical casted metallic flat
5. Is a flat, but I am not sure the character at the centre is not a figurine?
6. Is not a flat, but composed of 2 or three thin flat surfaces on which drawing was made without engraving = like a “Miniature” painting even if two surface are juxtaposed. Most of these works are unique pieces classified also as “Creations” in Europe. You seem to consider them as “Miscellaneous” They are similar to canvas painting but on other flat material wood, plastic, metal, box cover, … cardboard ….
C. Judgments
I transposed the pics on PC to enlarge them a bit for some details as I would look with my eyes at short distance, but no more enlargement than actual flat size !!! on the screen; I also lightened the French riders flat usually saved underexposed to have a fair judgment with a normal light source.
No 1:
• 5/5 for painting quality, accurate, precise, detailed, lining present
• 3/3 for colour tones
• 3/3 for light source = unique, clearly defined
• 4.5/5 for lightening and shadows, perhaps the decorations on back of hat, and horse bag on back of soldier are a bit too bright
• No free hands
• 3/3 for excellent tone transitions
• Enhancing = no comments
So 18.5/19 = 19.5/20= gold
For historical flats, one could add also a rating for correctness of the colours used, but I am not sure people still consider this, or are themselves sufficiently acknowledgeable except in specific areas to be able to consider it at 100% without request a certification of uniformology to each judge and all period of the History.
Perhaps consider visible mistakes in the Enhancement section as (negative 1 or 2 points ) downgrading obvious mistakes !!
No 2:
• 5/5 for painting quality, accurate, precise, detailed, lining present
• 3/3 for colour tones desaturated ad good balance is given
• 3/3 for light source = appears unique and visible clearly defined as front upwards to the right in front of flat .
• 4/5 for lightening and shadows, good, present, visible, generally OK, two remarks = the lighening of the left hand is from the left instead of facing to right; and the character behind the others is still too bright for its gun and left hand, and the left shoulder and arm of soldier on his knee of the central character should be more in the shadow of the central body, left side of boot of the central character could be more in the shadow.
• No free hands
• 3/3 for excellent tone transitions
• Enhancing = no comments
So 18/19 = 19/20= gold
No 3:
• 4.5/5 for painting quality, accurate, precise, detailed, lining sometimes weak confusing sometimes adjacent colours for distinct separation
• 3/3 for colour tones with some colour spots
• 1.5/3 for light source = appears multiple and very weak, indication either an artistic intention to have no light source, only environmental, or no good control of what and where is the source of the light
• 2/5 for lightening and shadows, weak almost absent on the face, not consistent on the arms, on the masks, neck , best perhaps is he bustier, but not very visible; general feeling is a cartoon rather a 3 dimensional character sculplted by the light .
• 3/3 for free hands = accurate, regular, nice control : remark on the spot on the face = spot? A tattoo? A flewing rimmel ?
• 1/3 for tone transitions = weak on clothes folding, on hair and masks
• Enhancing = no comments
So 15/22 = 13.6/20= bronze
No 4: (darkness enhanced on PC)
• 5/5 Painting : neat, accurate, readable even at distance, details well given and rich, details on the flag , faces, clothes
• 3/3 Colours : good balance, realistic with the subject
• 3/3 Light: zenithal to left in front of plan, and contrary at bottom
• 3/3 Transition, melting of tones : hardly visible here on 30mm except on horse
• No visible Free hands work
• 4/5 Lightings and shadows = good overall consistency includes thrown shadows from swords, reins, …visible and consistent also for the horses and their legs, drum . However the horses have very correct shaping of the muscles, but a bit lack of shadow, although a thrown shadow is painted for tools external to their surface (if grey weather, those would be non visible) so small inconsistency, white horses look too ; same for the flag , red coat (officer); fro the hats, lightening not totally consistent with ‘almost’ zenithal
• Enhances particular:
(+ 1) for the decoration of the grass added on the ground
(- 1) two swords could have been pointed before painting for such swords
Rating = 18/19 = 19/20 GOLD
No 5: Flats perhaps with a figurine in front?
• 1.5/5 Painting: rather rough and primary, single colours no nuance, short in details neat, despite some in the face and the legs, not lining between tones, no distinction between hat and feather on top.
• 1/3 Colours : could have been brighter for that period; the metal is rather poorly represented by a grey, with some white spots
• 1/3 Light : unclear, not understood (spots on weapon from right, face from left, none on clothes, ..
• 1/3 Tones transition, melting (fondus): quiet primary on the legs or none
• Free hands painting (not used)
• 1.5/5 Lightnings and shadows: some on faces, legs, hands, but not elsewhere, more cartoon painting, some shadows on bottom of hands, clothes, hat, hair, but very shy, top hands in the light
• Enhances : no
Rating = 6/19 or 6.5/20 = NONE
No 6:
• 5/5 Painting: excellent achievement, detailed, accurate, neat, in particular on the face to attract attention on it, outstanding painting of the skin and face.
• 3/3 Colours : globally well selected for a good effect
• 3/3 Light : clear direction high right in front of figure
• 3/3 Tones transition, melting (fondus): excellent, very smooth, no defect, even skin mark done to render it realistic
• 3/3 It is all free hands painting here as no engraving was done …..
• 4.5/5 Lightning and shadows: overall well achieved, perhaps the left side of the hand too bright for the orientation given to the light and orientation of the fan, in the shadow towards the left, making the hand more remote than actually painted.
• Enhances : --
Total = 21.5/22 = 19.5/20 = GOLD
This looks complex, but after some training, mutually exchanged, cotation is faster, logged in a column sheet, and if like in Lyon last year, all is loaded on a tablet, calculatikon is not automatically .... and summarized, compared, averaged, ... even used for training purpose to exercise judges agsints experienced judges or painters.
Of course subject toreview and changes, only how I would do after two erercises in real compétitions but sideways.
The last step is automatically in the head .... but details alow to defend rating and explain to the painters the rationales and rooms for improvement, min purpose of these hobby activities...
