Official Arbitration Thread

[Alikh]

I would like to submit the following video gfx for arbitration.

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46019

It received a 15/18

First, I am not sure where the three points were deducted, as it was simply listed as 15/18.

1. Videos will receive a base pay for the following requirements
    -Content (Relevant, Informative, Unique) /6
    -Video (Unique, Professional, Stylized, Clean) /5
    -Audio (Clear, Appropriate, Mix between VO/Music) /4
    -Pacing (Too slow? Too Fast? Too long? Too short?) /3

On the content side, it was relevant (most recent ultimus), informative (discussed the philly curse and in-character reasons for team rebranding), and, if I daresay, a.... unique video.
Video- maybe there were points taken here?  I'm not sure.  Again, unique (picture in picture), I use professional software to design it, clean transitions, etc.  Stylized I used two different background with two different font colors to reflect the philly/ctc team in the video.
Audio-  Maybe points were lost here because the rubric calls for a mix between VO and Music?  Does this mean speaking?  I have a hard time believing a complete rewriting of a song to make it about the ISFL would fall short in the audio section.
Pacing- It was song length.  People way smarter than me have decided what the perfect length for a pop song is in terms of audience engagement.

I'd also like to point out that this video got an 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=42668

Similar in style- it was a charity vid that Crunk had me reword a real song into a diss track on seb.  It was 1:41 to the above vid's 3:43, and I only reworded a few verses and a chorus instead of the entire song like above.

This video also got a 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=40572

way more of a meme than my CTC vid.

This video also got a 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=42719

Significantly less work than my CTC vid, clips and highlights plus player names.

Hell, THIS vid got me a 16/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=39573


I'm not mad about the grade per se, I'm honestly trying to figure out what an 18/18 would look like, so I can strive for that.

[Alikh]

I would like to submit the following video gfx for arbitration.

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46019

It received a 15/18

First, I am not sure where the three points were deducted, as it was simply listed as 15/18.

1. Videos will receive a base pay for the following requirements
    -Content (Relevant, Informative, Unique) /6
    -Video (Unique, Professional, Stylized, Clean) /5
    -Audio (Clear, Appropriate, Mix between VO/Music) /4
    -Pacing (Too slow? Too Fast? Too long? Too short?) /3

On the content side, it was relevant (most recent ultimus), informative (discussed the philly curse and in-character reasons for team rebranding), and, if I daresay, a.... unique video.
Video- maybe there were points taken here?  I'm not sure.  Again, unique (picture in picture), I use professional software to design it, clean transitions, etc.  Stylized I used two different background with two different font colors to reflect the philly/ctc team in the video.
Audio-  Maybe points were lost here because the rubric calls for a mix between VO and Music?  Does this mean speaking?  I have a hard time believing a complete rewriting of a song to make it about the ISFL would fall short in the audio section.
Pacing- It was song length.  People way smarter than me have decided what the perfect length for a pop song is in terms of audience engagement.

I'd also like to point out that this video got an 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=42668

Similar in style- it was a charity vid that Crunk had me reword a real song into a diss track on seb.  It was 1:41 to the above vid's 3:43, and I only reworded a few verses and a chorus instead of the entire song like above.

This video also got a 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=40572

way more of a meme than my CTC vid.

This video also got a 17/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=42719

Significantly less work than my CTC vid, clips and highlights plus player names.

Hell, THIS vid got me a 16/18

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=39573


I'm not mad about the grade per se, I'm honestly trying to figure out what an 18/18 would look like, so I can strive for that.

@zeagle1 @.simo  Tagging for visibility

[CeeKay]

Submission date: 07-08-2023

Submission link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46248

Contested Sig(s): 2. It is very similar to another graphic i did but not exactly the same as https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...#pid709771

[jdc4654]

Submission Date: 7/17/23

Submission Link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46351

Contested Sig: #1

I believe this should have been graded on the scale out of 7 similar to #2 on this thread (https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=45427).

The contested submission is a playoff graphic for KCC where if we won our game against Tijuana, we were in the playoffs. The text for "WIN AND IN" featured KCC players within the lettering. This is very similar to the aforementioned submission graded out of 7 for Honolulu which was a graphic commemorating our #1 seed and featured multiple Hahalua players.

I believe I have a case for #2 as well in this submission that I won't pursue, but I feel that graphic #1 should be graded out of 7 based on the previous comparable submission provided. Thanks for all your team's work!

@zeagle1 @DREAMSLOTH

[DREAMSLOTH]

Submission Date: 7/17/23

Submission Link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46351

Contested Sig: #1

I believe this should have been graded on the scale out of 7 similar to #2 on this thread (https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=45427).

The contested submission is a playoff graphic for KCC where if we won our game against Tijuana, we were in the playoffs. The text for "WIN AND IN" featured KCC players within the lettering. This is very similar to the aforementioned submission graded out of 7 for Honolulu which was a graphic commemorating our #1 seed and featured multiple Hahalua players.

I believe I have a case for #2 as well in this submission that I won't pursue, but I feel that graphic #1 should be graded out of 7 based on the previous comparable submission provided. Thanks for all your team's work!

@zeagle1 @DREAMSLOTH

Yo JDC, appreciate the submission. Neither felt like a sig to me compared to a league graphic because your submitted graphics are centered on broader team messaging/marketing and don't include specific players. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, though in my view it's not a matter of style so much as it is content, if that makes sense.

[jdc4654]

Submission Date: 7/17/23

Submission Link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46351

Contested Sig: #1

I believe this should have been graded on the scale out of 7 similar to #2 on this thread (https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=45427).

The contested submission is a playoff graphic for KCC where if we won our game against Tijuana, we were in the playoffs. The text for "WIN AND IN" featured KCC players within the lettering. This is very similar to the aforementioned submission graded out of 7 for Honolulu which was a graphic commemorating our #1 seed and featured multiple Hahalua players.

I believe I have a case for #2 as well in this submission that I won't pursue, but I feel that graphic #1 should be graded out of 7 based on the previous comparable submission provided. Thanks for all your team's work!

@zeagle1 @DREAMSLOTH

Yo JDC, appreciate the submission. Neither felt like a sig to me compared to a league graphic because your submitted graphics are centered on broader team messaging/marketing and don't include specific players. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, though in my view it's not a matter of style so much as it is content, if that makes sense.

Thanks for the quick response, @DREAMSLOTH!

The basis for my arbitration request is that graphic #1 in the submission contains comparable content to the example provided which was graded out of 7.

The submission in question:
Kansas City playoff-inspired graphic features 5 KCC specific players (left to right): Anakin Skywalker (WR), Jake Jefferson (QB), Josh Gibson (S), Steven Universe (K/P), and Gaius Gleel (LB).

The comparable example graded out of 7 by @zeagle1 is a Honolulu playoff-inspired graphic which features 6 HON specific players (left to right starting at top): Luigi Lanikai (CB), Waluigi Gronkowski (TE), Maxwell Jacob Friedman (LB), Ray Baker (K/P), Nova Montagne (QB), Bean Delphine (RB).

Thanks for your consideration and review

[DREAMSLOTH]

Submission Date: 7/17/23

Submission Link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46351

Contested Sig: #1

I believe this should have been graded on the scale out of 7 similar to #2 on this thread (https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=45427).

The contested submission is a playoff graphic for KCC where if we won our game against Tijuana, we were in the playoffs. The text for "WIN AND IN" featured KCC players within the lettering. This is very similar to the aforementioned submission graded out of 7 for Honolulu which was a graphic commemorating our #1 seed and featured multiple Hahalua players.

I believe I have a case for #2 as well in this submission that I won't pursue, but I feel that graphic #1 should be graded out of 7 based on the previous comparable submission provided. Thanks for all your team's work!

@zeagle1 @DREAMSLOTH

Yo JDC, appreciate the submission. Neither felt like a sig to me compared to a league graphic because your submitted graphics are centered on broader team messaging/marketing and don't include specific players. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, though in my view it's not a matter of style so much as it is content, if that makes sense.

Thanks for the quick response, @DREAMSLOTH!

The basis for my arbitration request is that graphic #1 in the submission contains comparable content to the example provided which was graded out of 7.

The submission in question:
Kansas City playoff-inspired graphic features 5 KCC specific players (left to right): Anakin Skywalker (WR), Jake Jefferson (QB), Josh Gibson (S), Steven Universe (K/P), and Gaius Gleel (LB).

The comparable example graded out of 7 by @zeagle1 is a Honolulu playoff-inspired graphic which features 6 HON specific players (left to right starting at top): Luigi Lanikai (CB), Waluigi Gronkowski (TE), Maxwell Jacob Friedman (LB), Ray Baker (K/P), Nova Montagne (QB), Bean Delphine (RB).

Thanks for your consideration and review

I hear you, just not sure I agree even if previous grading may have been inconsistent. The difference in precedent between something like HO rules and graphics is that graphics are entirely subjective. Doesn't mean the right or wrong call was made in the past, just that my methodology is based on my own grading interpretation in the moment and our rubric.

Might be best to let @zeagle1 have final say on this one.

[Scrizz]

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...1]Graphics[/url
Contested Sigs:
#1
#2
I think that my 1st sig should be upped as 0 logos are showing, I changed the background, and I think the render is well cut out. As for my 2nd sig I feel as that if my plain jersey swaps were 2/8s this sig with text, cutouts, and a somewhat edited background with the same type of swap deserves a grade higher than my swaps which were just swaps. Thanks!

[Sizz]

I'd like to put this up for arbitration. I don't think it's as simple as the grader believes it to be as this effect can't be achieved with a simple filter after a jersey swap. 

https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=46882

Thanks for your work, graphics group.

[Chicken Lips]

Submission Date: 8-19/8-22

Submission Link: https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=47080


https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=47144

Contested Sig(s): Both.

Comparatively was paid way more for previous gif edits. These take awhile to make. For reference
https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=45981