I’m not sure to what degree the download or print metrics play into the decisions. My first upload and first contest entry was for the Mother’s Day contest. I didn’t place in any of the positions but still had more downloads and prints than the first place winner. The second place winner smoked us all several times over. (I had no expectations, mind you, this was my first try at any of this.)
Perhaps the metrics play some role, but the metrics alone didn’t drive the winners list. If they had any significant bearing, the second place winner would have taken first.
Maybe if you gathered ten people in a room with a table of 50 pre-printed entries and without foreknowledge of who designed what and what was trending… maybe they chose their favorites and that was that. I have no idea.
But I do believe the judging process is more personal than just sorting in favorites order.
While metrics like downloads and likes can be helpful indicators of success, they are not the only factors to consider.
I experienced this firsthand with a model of mine that was uploaded just a month ago, at the beginning of a contest (openscad).
Despite having impressive download and engagement numbers, it “only” won 40$.
At least you got a mention in the openscad contest.
2 of my 5 entries where place in the trending first place for over a week each, even for some of them I found out that some 3d content creators where using the customizer in therir youtube/tiktok videos.
And in the end I didn’t get a single mention. I’m not gonna lie, I’m kind of dissapointed, speacially when you see that 4 of the 12 winners are “boxes”
I was bummed about the results too, but like many others, I know it’s part of the process I’m not giving up on my 3D modeling passion. I’ll keep creating and maybe even enter some contests down the road. Who knows, maybe one day I’ll even make it to the top!
I was also a bit disappointed with the OpenSCAD contest. I wasn’t expecting to be one of the winners, and to be honest, I didn’t even expect to be in the “Excellent Participation” mentioned models.
(and none of the above happened )
I designed a “box” and a soapbox for this contest, and I created them from scratch.
What I don’t understand is, if one of the key points to be awarded is
Be creative and original! The judges will be looking for models that are unique and eye-catching,
how is a rework of a Gridfinity box considered original?
I haven’t been involved with 3D printing for very long, and it’s not my main focus, but I’ve seen Gridfinity boxes (created with OpenSCAD) long before the beginning of this contest.
Okay, that’s my daily rant. I can go to sleep now.
…And not only as someone said, some model got, get and will get featured model status during competition, but even get the “POPULAR model” status and EVEN IN MAKER’S SUPPLY they put models actually enrolled in the contest!!! That’s not only UNFAIR… it is something worse, even indescribable.
I wrote to bambu, I said it’s unfair that some models are continously shown in the home page, at the first places, while they are enrolled in a contest and now… look at what happens in Halloween contest 2024, i share a screenshot…
I also respond to those of you who say that a model should not be penalized by the fact that it is entered in a contest: Well, “being entered in a competition” should instead entail restrictions in terms of visibility at least until registration closes. and participants just should agree!! Partcipating in contests it is a choice that is made in complete freedom , not a forced one and therefore good rules of “sportsmanship” should be followed.
Yes, because increasing the views of just a few models is like DOPING in sport. Neither more nor less. It is said that the judges do not allow themselves to be influenced, that they favor certain aspects that are not downloads, likes etc. But we all have eyes and brains and know how to use them. I will continue to maintain (and this is clearly valid for ANY SITE where this happens and not just bambulab) that when you are in a competition you should NOT in ANY way be advantaged (or disadvantaged) even by using the smallest of details to do so and even if this happens involuntarily.
Bambulab does great machines but their makerworld site ( and now shop also) turned out to be wrong and should absolutely be corrected.
Am I alone in thinking judging in contests could be improved. In the recent Puzzle competition, I have no issue with the winner, but the criteria of original puzzle does not seem to fit a copy of a Davinci Cryptex (many all over the web) an optical illusion, a skill game of topping cats (a game and far from original) and a copy of a commerical MB Games toy (Downfall).
I understand where you’re coming from regarding originality. The theme of both puzzles and brain teasers broadened the scope quite a bit more than what you might be thinking. The game I entered does share mechanics with Downfall, but I spent considerable time redesigning it with a fresh theme to align with the brainteaser and puzzle theme of the competition as well making something that just looked nice to print. Downfall has been out of production for 20 years, and I believe its unique challenge and brain-teasing aspect fit the contest’s criteria well. I always try to enter contests with designs I feel are in line with the theme, and I thought this one brought a fresh take on a forgotten classic. Thanks and have a wonderful day!
I would side with dictionary definitions and pose the question, is chess or even connect 4 a strategy game or a puzzle/brain teaser.
To be fair I think your model is really good and I like the theme, but my point is that it is not an original puzzle, its not something you came up with. It is a really good remake, remix, rebrand of an existing thing. The competition clear stated original puzzle.
Just to be clear, this is not a critisim of your model, I think you did a great job and I really like what you did.
I stopped your quote there as I have no interest in negativity picking on specific entries.
That said, the contest itself let in far too broad of a definition of models to be considered qualified to the subject matter.
During the contest period, so many fidget toys were added that it was a joke when MW originally chose nit to remove them despite constant reports by myself and others. So many unrelated models were allowed to enter and stay for long periods of time before MW would eventually agree something so unrelated to the contest needed to be removed.
I have no problem with entries not being original or based on something with a new take. Coming up with a truly original something and then giving that up to the world in a contest with a strong likelihood of zero reward is daft at best.
Chess definitely not
Connect 4 definitely not
It isn’t a remake as it is different p. It isn’t a remix as that requires being based on someone else’s model and more specifically, its parts, this isn’t, not a rebrand either as that requires substantial parts of the original to be included with minor changes and a new name.
The phrase your likely meant was ‘reimagined’. A reimagined something is a new way of an existing thing. The source model or up remains intact, instead you get something new with its history from something. Think of American Football and Australian rules football vs the source football, which itself has been reimagined since its original inspired the others.
@ozarkexpeditions When I saw your design I immediately thought “ that’s the winner”.
As usual you added in far too much effort (than most people would) a trait you can’t stop repeating (to be commended). I loved it , I have a narrow view of what qualifies and I reported around 100 models I think that didn’t. Yours most certainly qualified, his it didn’t win is beyond me.
My prize-winning entry was based on an existing model, it comprised of three different parts, one of which was duplicated 54 times. We went to very different levels of effort.
LOL
You are the oracle you know best and I am as you say “daft at best”
As I mentioned the rules stated “Original puzzle”
If you are going to call yourself the Oracle, perhaps make sure you understand the meaning of words like ‘remake’ and “re-imagined”
OK Auzzie rules football is not simply American football with differnt shirts on so yes its re-imagined. A blue cybertruck is not a re-imagined cybertruck.
Educating the oracle for free and not getting anything for it … darn I must be daft LOL.
Just to make sure I understand you points correctly. The competition definition (original puzzle) was too broad. Fidget spinners are not Original puzzles, but games are and even if not original. You decided over 100 models did not qualify because you also have a narrow view of what qualifies … what was the criteria again … “engaging and original puzzle”
Someone will always complain about the winning entries, or irrelevant entries.
Remember the whole argument we had about what constitutes a kit card?
At the end of the day, the Judges will judge based on their own interpretation of the rules, and their own likes and dislikes. Nothing else matters. Us bicketing about the rules doesn’t matter. The contest aren’t judged by the community, and I doubt the popularity of a given model weighs that much on the mind of the judges.
People may try and jam entries into contest that don’t fit or stretch the definition of the rules, but it’s irrelevant at the end of the day. The judges will put aside those that don’t fit, and will focus on the ones they feel fits the criteria of the contest.
I did NOT say you were daft at best, reread what I wrote.
I suggested that anyone who comes up with something truly unique shouldn’t enter it into a contest with a poor statistical chance of winning (based on numbers) would be daft.
The moment you enter a contest in public, your art is no longer yours, you just made it public, no licence you stick on it will win in a court if someone takes the base idea and makes it their own. The licence you add is for THAT SINGLE variant of the model.
Remake, remix etc have very specific meanings in 3D models. You may wish to be apprised of those.
For reference, I was given that moniker at an awards ceremony that I couldn’t attend as my brain tumour had almost killed me and I was laid up in the hospital and almost died. It was awarded to me for my significant help towards a community of developers. I like it, it shows others appreciate my help.
I think others here do as well. I may be wrong, ask a few if you wish.
Excellent example no one gave but you.
This requires that you actually include anything of value, being a troll isn’t adding value.
You may not like the outcome or the opinions of others, but this does not mean you are right, it doesn’t mean others are right, but telling everyone else their views are irrelevant but yours are perfect is troll behaviour.
Hmmm, so I posted a question/view and you were the one attacking each point and trying to dish them and push your way of thinking. Saying what others do is daft. Your view of fidget spinners not being eligible but games are oh and how you know the meaning of words better. You do see the irony here right?
Not sure if you are attacking my example, I thought it was quite apt but each to their own.
To be fair I did not know your history or where your handle came from, all I had to go on was the name and the attitude. I commend the helping and encouraging of others in the maker community. I also support the ability for all to share views, thought and ideas without ridacule.
The reason I focused on a differnt view of original is that I find it disappointing that 3D printers are an amazing tool for creativity and ingenuity and so many people just copy and remix existing things. It would be nice to see creativity and ingenuity encouraged and rewarded more. The popular copies, remixes etc get rewarded with the download points, whereas the competitions could be a vehicle to encourage creativity and ingenuity.
The way the theme was worded I suspect MakerWorld might be planning a separate games competition
I do agree with you it would be nice to see, it’s more aligned with my own value/goals.
But let’s face it that’s not the goals of MW right now. It’s a young platform and they need to grow their model catalog and attract new customers and creators.
If they wanted very unique models, the contest rules would be very different :
higher price
longer submission period
less entries. only one per designer
reveal the models to the public at the end of the submission period.
taking more time to select the winners (double checking the uniqueness of a model)
For example, now the Halloween contest has 3800+ entries. Honestly, I wouldn’t like to be a judge on this contest, that’s insane!
But that shows they are clearly prioritising quantity over originality
I’m not giving up on my 3D modeling passion. I’ll keep creating and maybe even enter some contests down the road. Who knows, maybe one day I’ll even make it to the top!
)
that’s the winner”.