> the artwork was all from artists Bahu was watching on FurAffinity and favourited.
This is reflective of methodology, not inherent bias. Whenever I see a piece of artwork that reflects excellence, I follow the artist and favorite the art, as I'd like to think most users of online art sites do!
People send me links to great art, and if I think it's excellent, I follow and favorite. FurAffinity is -not- the only site in consideration; but with cross-posting being so common I have yet to have a piece of art reach Contender status that was exclusively available on a non-FurAffinity site. If that situation ever arose, it'd be a non-issue; being on FurAffinity is -not- a pre-condition of nomination. :)
> The second problem is that it the initial selection is heavily biased by what Bahu likes.
Yep. Art isn't objective, it's subjective. It's my money, and it's my selection of artworks. That being said, long before artwork reaches the Contender stage, I run the pieces by my other judges. Nothing has made it to Contender stage without unanimous consensus that the piece was excellent and worthy of consideration and promotion. Also, the other Judges forward me images they think are worth consideration.
Likewise, none of the winners are chosen without input from fellow judges. We spend a lot of time on those conversations; I think 4 hours is the -shortest- conversation we ever had regarding a Finalist, and the decision, for example, between Hriscia's "Lio" and Simul's "Into Ashes" back in 2017 really was a *months* long conversation between me and three other judges, all of us waffling back and forth, coming back to the pieces weeks or months later, talking about how our love and perception of the images changed over time, etc.
> but that doesn't really feel like it's a good way to do a fandom award.
This isn't a fandom award, it's an art award. It's not the Best Furry Artwork Award, it's the Best Anthropomorphic Artwork Award. This means that consideration extends beyond just furry artists and fans, but extends to include professional illustrators and their works from beyond the furry fandom, including commercial artists and products.
Our goal here is to recognize excellence, not just popularity. As such, general public nominations were never considered for this award (though, really, we'll probably still sit up and take notice if y'all send us a link to something great).
As technical excellence is one of the three main criteria of the award, that's going to rule out some commonly-popular-within-furry aesthetics and styles. Pop appeal *is* considered (and is, in fact, why we have an Audience Choice award at all, which originally was a last-minute for-fun addition that we decided should stay). But pop-appeal alone is not nearly a strong enough criteria for our award.
> If its going to be based on a vote by other furs
It won't, beyond the Audience Choice award. There's no formal nomination procedure; if you see something you think is exceptional and outstanding, send a link our way. If we agree, maybe it becomes a Contender!
> It would probably also make sense then to have donations
This is something we are tentatively looking into; I would really, really like to offer a larger and more prestigious cash prize for this, but at this time I'm limited to what I can afford to pay out of pocket.
But the instant the money starts flowing in any other direction than out from my own pocket, things get a LOT hairier financially, legally, and ethically.
> and more of these awards should help showcase good art that might be overlooked otherwise.
I would be overjoyed to see a dozen similar prizes arise. I hope we'll see people rise to the occasion soon, and recognize excellence not only with exposure, but with financial reward befitting the talent.
> the artwork was all from artists Bahu was watching on FurAffinity and favourited.
This is reflective of methodology, not inherent bias. Whenever I see a piece of artwork that reflects excellence, I follow the artist and favorite the art, as I'd like to think most users of online art sites do!
People send me links to great art, and if I think it's excellent, I follow and favorite. FurAffinity is -not- the only site in consideration; but with cross-posting being so common I have yet to have a piece of art reach Contender status that was exclusively available on a non-FurAffinity site. If that situation ever arose, it'd be a non-issue; being on FurAffinity is -not- a pre-condition of nomination. :)
> The second problem is that it the initial selection is heavily biased by what Bahu likes.
Yep. Art isn't objective, it's subjective. It's my money, and it's my selection of artworks. That being said, long before artwork reaches the Contender stage, I run the pieces by my other judges. Nothing has made it to Contender stage without unanimous consensus that the piece was excellent and worthy of consideration and promotion. Also, the other Judges forward me images they think are worth consideration.
Likewise, none of the winners are chosen without input from fellow judges. We spend a lot of time on those conversations; I think 4 hours is the -shortest- conversation we ever had regarding a Finalist, and the decision, for example, between Hriscia's "Lio" and Simul's "Into Ashes" back in 2017 really was a *months* long conversation between me and three other judges, all of us waffling back and forth, coming back to the pieces weeks or months later, talking about how our love and perception of the images changed over time, etc.
> but that doesn't really feel like it's a good way to do a fandom award.
This isn't a fandom award, it's an art award. It's not the Best Furry Artwork Award, it's the Best Anthropomorphic Artwork Award. This means that consideration extends beyond just furry artists and fans, but extends to include professional illustrators and their works from beyond the furry fandom, including commercial artists and products.
Our goal here is to recognize excellence, not just popularity. As such, general public nominations were never considered for this award (though, really, we'll probably still sit up and take notice if y'all send us a link to something great).
As technical excellence is one of the three main criteria of the award, that's going to rule out some commonly-popular-within-furry aesthetics and styles. Pop appeal *is* considered (and is, in fact, why we have an Audience Choice award at all, which originally was a last-minute for-fun addition that we decided should stay). But pop-appeal alone is not nearly a strong enough criteria for our award.
> If its going to be based on a vote by other furs
It won't, beyond the Audience Choice award. There's no formal nomination procedure; if you see something you think is exceptional and outstanding, send a link our way. If we agree, maybe it becomes a Contender!
> It would probably also make sense then to have donations
This is something we are tentatively looking into; I would really, really like to offer a larger and more prestigious cash prize for this, but at this time I'm limited to what I can afford to pay out of pocket.
But the instant the money starts flowing in any other direction than out from my own pocket, things get a LOT hairier financially, legally, and ethically.
> and more of these awards should help showcase good art that might be overlooked otherwise.
I would be overjoyed to see a dozen similar prizes arise. I hope we'll see people rise to the occasion soon, and recognize excellence not only with exposure, but with financial reward befitting the talent.