Top 200 IAPLC

Well look at all those Asian professional aquascapers what they do. Scape after scape after scape, because is their business and lively income. So what now, the owners of those aquariums should not enter, because the same guy made them? Is that moraly right? One of the BG entries is a 30L nano that I have made for a friend (it is published in this forum to) and I said so all over the world. The guy is looking after that aquarium for almost a year now. Is he not to enter, becase I made the scape in the first place?
The guys that enter only one aquarium or just make one each year have to realise and accept that out there plenty of others are simply more productive and create more scapes for one reason or another.
I am not sure that will be good idea to disregard all of that work, just because folks with one aquarium will object.

In BG we have a family of aquascapers, both the lady and the gentleman. They have been participating in our local contests as separate entrants and I know them personally. Are they not to enter because someone will say the same guy enters twice?

Before raising moral dilemas one should look from many different angles. Above all from the angle of supporting the development of this hobby. Is it better to have less entries or more?

 

The rules of competition are clear. ONE entry. If people want to find ways to get around that rule, is that moraly right? Should business and lively income be a part of the equation? Do they have advantages because of that?

If you made scapes for other people, they compete, receive the price and get the credit, that's fine with me, although they are just the owner, not the scaper. But if I see the same last name on three different high ranking scapes, with a different surname and I know for sure these surnames are from the wife and the two year old son, that's something else.

Now they are in fact different people, but come on, who's kidding who?

 

Those are somewhat extreme case, but ADA seems to close eyes, because of that.
Last year Micheal Wong had few scapes in the top 100 and they all were with surrname Wong. I said it many times, it's business, not a contest with an ideal purpose.

 

The fake landscape ones that appear to be exact replications with clouds and fake little trees kill me. I really REALLY don't like those. They look like bad special effect sets before CGI came into use, I half expect to see a claymation dinosaur walking about. Their attempt to exactly replicate nature make them look unnatural. They are not to my taste, but someone out there likes them to reach top 200.

 

All I do there is play in their contest by their rules, written and un written. If they let so many people do the same then they don't really mind that and those rules haven't much meaning.
Hell last year ADA put upfront in the top 27 scapes without fish and then made big time silly explanation, excuse and justification of why. Their decision was based on imaginitive reasoning, imagination.
As I said earlier, it's their contest and if it's all ok with them then there is simply no rule braking.

I'v come to realise that this is the way most Asian based competitions work like.

I'm not gona pounder much on AGA 2011 where they had a judge that was contestant as well and was 1st place in one of the categories. The excuse was that he didn't vote in that category, rubbish. So what morals are we talking about here?

 

+1 on this one from me.

 

How on Earth did the artist get those rocks to appear to be floating in #98?