Link International Aquatic Plant Layout Contest (IAPLC)

[Art]

This thread is for the general discussion of the link International Aquatic Plant Layout Contest (IAPLC). Please add to the discussion here.

 

[ElleDee]

"You may not agree on the winning works nor on how they are judged, but you will almost always be in awe of the incredible works of art that are created by people from all over the world."

Ain't that the truth! I sort of love the conceit where they rank every entry, but it also turns me into a bit of a hater. I'm just a random internet lady whose opinion was sought out by not a single person, but I feel mad when certain works are ranked too high and others too low! How could they?!

For real though, I'm so tired of how same-y many of the entries are. It's not that they aren't well executed or beautiful - they are! But there're, like, 10 ideas here remixed 1000 times. I wish there was more variety and risk taking, though I suspect it's not well rewarded. I'd love to pick over the bottom half of the rankings - I bet there are some good ideas that just don't fit the rubric.

Still, my two favorites of these 10 ideas is "it's fall on the side of a mountain" and "whimsical lotus leaves for contrast", the latter having a particularly big year this year. Conversely I'm completely exhausted with "the forest, but if it was just made of green and brown stripes." They are so detailed and take so much work to make, but I don't need to see any more ever again. I am all full up for the rest of my life. I am happy to see fewer tidy little sand paths that lead to nowhere this year, so hopefully those will continue to fall out of favor.

In the interest in not being just a hater, here are some ones I responded to in the top 300, bolded ones I liked quite a lot:

7, 11, 25 (best of the green-and-brown, redeemed by contrasting textures and lack of stripes), 28, 34, 44, 45, 59, 63, 65, 67, 81, 83, 84 (this one doesn't quite work for me, but it takes a big swing and I love to see it), 93, 97, 111, 122, 129, 165, 166, 170 (bold lack of plants here), 171, 172, 177, 183, 192, 240, 242, 249

 

[Art]

Wow @ElleDee, thanks for your thoughtful post that many of us will not doubt relate to.

My Brazilian friend, and really nice guy, Luca Galarraga won this year which is truly amazing if you know the story of Brazilian aquascaping and AquaBase, his company. It's special to me and I haven't felt that way in a LONG time with the IAPLC.

I also feel like a little bit of a hater and am completely speaking critically without having the talent that most of the contestants in the IAPLC have. That said, the contest has disappointed me for years with the style trends it has taken. Originally, Amano started this to popularize using aquatic plants to create a work of art based on the concept of the Nature Aquarium. This is why he called it the International Aquatic Plants Layout Contest. The intent was to create an aquascape that captured the essence of nature using aquatic plants as the main protagonists.

Somehow, over the years, the contest became about who can create the most detailed mountainscape. The diorama became the main protagonist with aquatic plants as secondary or even tertiary players. They felt like an afterthought or just there to highlight some aspect of the mountainscape. While clearly "mountains" of work to achieve this look, it loses the original intent - to capture the essence of Mother Nature with aquatic plants as the centerpiece.

Thankfully, I think there is a trend away from this diorama style and back to more focus on the plants. Definitely not there yet as many nature aquarium style scapes are placing far outside the top 10 but, IMO, things are going in the right direction.

Let's take your highlighted one, Repose by Dmitriy Noskov of Russia. Beautiful and a much better representation of a nature aquarium. Plants star the show here with hardscape forming the skeleton and supporting.



Let's compare this with Luca Galarraga's winning work, the Great Wave.



Amazing work, for sure, and a great name that captures what we are seeing. Also a big departure from what I thought was Brazilian style. However, the plants seem to be fillers with the rockscape being the protagonist here. Is it capturing the essence of nature or is this more a majestic landscape that you may see of a mountain range somewhere? Are the fish representing birds?

Maybe, but it doesn't match in an "aquatic plants layout" contest, with all due respect to my friend. This is just my opinion.

And by the way, let's not lose sight that our friend, Tommy Ferragamo, scored the top USA place of 111. Congrats to him!

 

[Bolbi]

I believe the biggest issue with the IAPLC lies in the disconnect between the judging criteria clearly outlined on their website under "Judging Criteria" and the actual results we see in the final rankings.

For example, 50% of points are awarded to:

Recreation of natural habitat for fish
- Creation of a healthy fish habitat
- Expression of the underwater environment
- General condition of the fish and aquatic plants
- Blending the fish type, size, and ecology within the layout

However, when we look at the top-ranked aquascapes, many of them do not resemble natural fish habitats at all. Instead, they often depict terrestrial landscapes, which raises the question: what are the judges actually evaluating, and by what standards?

It’s clear that the judges are not adhering to these rules or guidelines.

 

[ElleDee]

I believe the biggest issue with the IAPLC lies in the disconnect between the judging criteria clearly outlined on their website under "Judging Criteria" and the actual results we see in the final rankings.

For example, 50% of points are awarded to:

Recreation of natural habitat for fish
- Creation of a healthy fish habitat
- Expression of the underwater environment
- General condition of the fish and aquatic plants
- Blending the fish type, size, and ecology within the layout

However, when we look at the top-ranked aquascapes, many of them do not resemble natural fish habitats at all. Instead, they often depict terrestrial landscapes, which raises the question: what are the judges actually evaluating, and by what standards?

It’s clear that the judges are not adhering to these rules or guidelines.
View attachment 6151

There's a really interesting current thread at UKAPS started by Tom Ryan, who ranked 22 this year, including some commentary on the judging rubric. It's nice and insider baseball-y for those who like that sort of thing.

I agree there seems to be a lot of unspoken values in the judging and there's a disconnect between what they say they want and what gets rewarded. The judges seem to be after a very specific kind of idealized, naturalistic vibe rather than a real connection to what natural aquatic environments actually look like. Figuring out what it takes to get a very high ranking seems to require a ton of knowlege way, way beyond the scope of the rubric. I guess that's just how the game is played. From the outside it seems like there's a lot of luck involved, but perhaps I'm just ignorant of the metagame.

Does anyone know if the judging done blind where the creator is kept secret until after judging? I would hope so, but I have wondered.

 

[Bolbi]

There's a really interesting current thread at UKAPS started by Tom Ryan, who ranked 22 this year, including some commentary on the judging rubric. It's nice and insider baseball-y for those who like that sort of thing.

Thanks for the link @ElleDee !

Does anyone know if the judging done blind where the creator is kept secret until after judging? I would hope so, but I have wondered.

Yes, only aquascape photos without the author's name are given to the judges. At least, that's how it should be, although I’m convinced that some judges recognize the work of certain aquascapers. I won't name names, but that's not the point—I don't want to believe in any bias during the judging process. If a work is good, it shouldn't matter whether you know the creator or not. When the results are announced, you can see which judge gave the highest scores to a particular entry, and their booklet publishes all the points for each of the top 100 aquascapes.

I'm glad to see that ADA has responded to last year's criticism and decided to involve all the judges in the selection of the top 100 works. However, despite this, the selection of some works in the top 100 is still incomprehensible.