• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

AGA 2008 results...

I was surprised how some of the aquascapes were scored and I'm sure other judges thought the same about some of my scores...

That's the nature of the beast.

Interestingly, my scores were similar to Mr Amano's in most cases, so I guess we have similar taste. Or more likely, my aquascaping taste has been influenced by his work.

It's worth re-iterating that Mr Amano personally scored Peter's Mountainscape V2 above EVERYTHING else in the ADA. Think about that for a minute. It's a HUGE acheivement. He mentioned this to me in an email whilst we were discussing The Best of Show for the AGA.

The questions begs - what next from Peter?! No pressure... 😉
 
George Farmer said:
I was surprised how some of the aquascapes were scored and I'm sure other judges thought the same about some of my scores...
Click to expand...
How long did it take you to go through every entry? Just curious
 
I think the appeal of Peter's tanks are the simplicity of appearance of them.

Whereas most Iwagumis have a rock formation in them with several rocks pointing this way or that way Peter's give the appearance that under the surface they are in fact joined just like mountains really are.

Add to that he has basically used just 1 type of plant makes the sense of scale incredible. I remember commenting when I first saw them that it reminded me of Lord of the rings....as in I could picture the scapes being photos of mountains in NZ with forests climbing them. Superb.

Coming from someone who constantly criticises nature/Iwagumi style for its 'samey samey' productions it means I am giving a huge compliment to him that I like them so much. Fresh, new, original, different and beautiful.

A lot of the 'nature' ones are starting to look like model railway scenery which is a pity because the 'gimmick' is starting to overtake the art here in my opinion.

AC
 
I was a bit surprised there werent more UK entries to be honest, There have been some great scapes posted on this forum that were worthy of an entry. I guess its a bit daunting going public like that and perhaps there is a temptation to wait as 'My next scape will be better' or 'this scape is not good enough' but I cant help feeling there is so much to gain from the constructive criticism of the judges that it has to be worth entering. I counted 9 UK entries from only 3 aquascapers ? (did I count right?) , would be great to see a few more in there next year. get your thinking caps on people!
 
I was going to submit my tank this year, but time got the better of me. I kept holding on so it would look better, but in the end life got in the way, I couldn't do as much maintenance as I wanted and the tank started to deteriorate. It's on the way up again now, but of course it's too late. When I see some tanks in there though, I still think mine is better!

I didn't think I would achieve any kind of status but I wanted to bolster the numbers a bit. Maybe next year.

One area I would really love to contribute to is the biotope. It's seems very....abused!
 
beeky said:
I was going to submit my tank this year, but time got the better of me. I kept holding on so it would look better, but in the end life got in the way, I couldn't do as much maintenance as I wanted and the tank started to deteriorate. It's on the way up again now, but of course it's too late. When I see some tanks in there though, I still think mine is better!

I didn't think I would achieve any kind of status but I wanted to bolster the numbers a bit. Maybe next year.

One area I would really love to contribute to is the biotope. It's seems very....abused!
Click to expand...

Just photograph it and save it for next year! Theres one UK entry all ready 😀
I noticed the biotope section was a little lack lustre too .... but I was keeping that one to myself :lol: perhaps an Oppurtunity for a UK winner ??
 
Just imagine if someone did a biotope of the Thames with those Seahorses that were documented as breeding.
Oh wait, AGA is freshwater only isn't it..
 
That mountainscape was superb and everyone knew it was as soon as they saw it.A bit like Luis' tank.I agree about the third place tank.Could have been superb,fantastic piece of wood.....if,it had been clearer,and,the planting was imo,a little off.Don't get me wrong,if it had been spot on it would have been superb,you could see that,but it wasn't spot on.
BUT,it was a bit more out there than some of the others,dya think they give marks for vision?Even if it doesn't quite hit the mark?
 
planter said:
I noticed the biotope section was a little lack lustre too .... but I was keeping that one to myself :lol: perhaps an Oppurtunity for a UK winner ??
Click to expand...

Maybe it could be a UK speciality?!

I agree with some of the comments on that third place tank, but the comment on the fern being too central for a focal point I think isn't quite true as, for me, it's the moss at the front that is the focal point and the eye is led upwards. That's the thing about art though isn't it? Everything is very subjective.
 
planter said:
I counted 9 UK entries from only 3 aquascapers ? (did I count right?) , would be great to see a few more in there next year. get your thinking caps on people!
Click to expand...

You, Dan and Tom entered from the UK - that was it, yes. Don't know about 9 aquascapes though, as Dan entered just the one.

There were 12 UK entrants in the ADA...
 
Sorry to drag this old thread back from the dead but this has been bothering me for the past year!! 😀

Anyway it turns out that the guidelines issued by AGA are misleading, I knew I wasnt imagining things, they took down the guidelines once last years contest was over so I could not verify what the actual guidelines were. Now I know they use the word "may" but I still find this quite misleading, it caught me out badly anyway.

In the guidelines it gives the impression that the small tank catagory is for tanks under 100l but in reality the small tank catagory is for tanks under 70l.

Anyway thats what I read last year and presumed that that was the case, small tank catagory <100l of which both of my entries would have qualified for the same catagory, 54l and 97l.

Guidelines are here

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org/2009.cgi?&op=showpage&name=guidelines-entrance

Reality here:- Aquatic garden small < 70L

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org/2008.cgi?&op=ishowcase&category=0&vol=0

Just wanted to clear that up, personal thing really.
 
very misleading that zig. small is <70L and medium is 70L ~ 200L according to the indexes in the links. I expect they probably copied the guidelines from a previous year and forgot to change it. Did it disadvantage you at all with your entries?
 
stuworrall said:
very misleading that zig. small is <70L and medium is 70L ~ 200L according to the indexes in the links. I expect they probably copied the guidelines from a previous year and forgot to change it. Did it disadvantage you at all with your entries?
Click to expand...

Hiya Stu, well it depends on how you look at it, that could be a loaded question.

It disadvantaged me insofar as I didnt want to enter the medium tank catagory and certainly didnt expect to win! anyway just wanted to set the record straight on my behalf.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top