Brandon Yuchasz
Well-known member
that would be a really neat thing to see.
contemporary carver collector challenge..where do we go from here?
- Thread starter uncle mike pierce
- Start date
that would be a really neat thing to see.
BillS
Well-known member
I like this line of thinking, I would up to 10 hunts, No slotted decoy bag used, birds must have line wrapped around the decoy, must be one pellet hole or grazing identified. Documented proof ducks where killed over the decoy. I have actually entered birds I hunted over the season before.
I quess my question to the folks that have posted about these gunning class decoys getting to fancy, like Ohio, why continue to support them. lets start our own show middle of the country with rules and catogories for everyone. Everyone can still get together, be run by people who care. Open minded people the can accept there are different classes of carving and should be judged accordingy. heck have a class for duckboats as well.
I quess my question to the folks that have posted about these gunning class decoys getting to fancy, like Ohio, why continue to support them. lets start our own show middle of the country with rules and catogories for everyone. Everyone can still get together, be run by people who care. Open minded people the can accept there are different classes of carving and should be judged accordingy. heck have a class for duckboats as well.
that would be a really neat thing to see. [/quote]
Ya, Say 25 percent of the possible score would be for "Character points". Scuff marks worth x number of points, pellet holes =x number of points, new puppy chews on the bill= bonus points (Hitch, you around :>) ? )
uncle mike pierce
Active member
Hey Stef:
I loved your comments. No need to apologize for your English skills. I think you communicated very well what many of us have felt at one time, or maybe often during our growth as carvers, painters, and artists. We can take pride in what we do, and for that reason, we get tempted to put it out to be judged, but the act of being judged can cause us to take a safer, or less creative path.
One of the things that comes through loud and clear to me from a lot of the replies is that there are many decoy carvers out there who are very "comfotable in their own skin" as decoy carvers, and for that reason have found it easy to live without the reinforcement of contests and ribbons.
Like you Stef, I found that contests actually hurt my decoys and my expressions. I know that allowing contests to affect me adversely and make me want to not carve came from my failings, but those frustrations were enough that I quit carving for 14 years, and only started again to make decoys to give away at Christmas. I am glad I started again, as that has led me to carving a few more decoys than just the "Christmas flock", and it has led me to feel very comfortable with the limitations I put on the type of decoys I produce. It has also given me an opportunity to share what little I know and what little decoy vision I have with aspiring carvers. I like being able to pass on what I have learned, and to be able to take pride in seeing those I have taught doing better work than I ever could do myself.
For those who want to contest, "God bless you!", but realize the limitations of decoy contests, decoy contest rules, and decoy contest judges:
1. Decoy contests are "beauty contests" and as such, there is seldom complete harmony and agreement as to the fairness or propriety of the outcomes. Contests were started as a way of resolving the age old question of "Who carves the best wooden decoy?" I am sure the many times written about contest won by Shang Wheeler was disputed over whiskey in the bar afterward......but it started a ball rolling that has sold a lot of beer, whiskey, and bar thumping since then. (Oh yeah, it has also sold a lot of foredoms, DVD's, seminars, books, airbrushes, and "trick" brushes).
2. Decoy contest rules were not handed down on tablets from Mt. Sinai. They were written, imperfectly, by contest organizers to try and define the standards for judging and by reference, the standards for a good decoy. They have morphed over the years as factions have tried to steer certain contests or divisions to produce, and judge true hunting decoys or to produce some other, predictable result. The will to win and the ingenuity of competitive carvers will overcome and outmanuever a committee of event organizers every time. Just as most managers have learned, rules beget more rules, as those being "ruled" can find ways around any rule. When the rules get to a certain "bulk" no one enforcing the rules can even remember the rules, and a lot of rules stay on the books unenforced, only being trotted out when someone feels wronged and points out the rule. The opposite of this legalistic rules scenario is the "values" and "guidelines" scenario, where "rules" are so nebulous they can be twisted and interpreted multiple ways. When I started carving, the rules for one of the contests said something to the effect, "Our standard is the living duck. Decoys will be judged according to how well they portray the living duck." You can imagine how well that one worked out........we are still arguing today over what that means
3. Decoy judges are human beings, and as such, can be manipulated by visual sleight of hand. Jim Foote was a master of that trick. He produced decoys that had painting or anatomical errors, but did so with such panache that he could convince most judges that that was the way the duck looked, or the way the duck should look. I have never known a judge who didn't want the best decoy to win best of show. Similarly I have never known a judge who "threw" or manipulated results to favor a friend, a style, or to overlook certain rules. BUT, I have seen judges overwhelmed by a decoy, or a set of decoys to the point of overlooking the rules or overlooking obvious errors in a magnificently done piece of art. Conversely, I have seen judges who knocked out well done decoys for too many tail feathers, too short a set of tail feathers, etc. and elevated non descript decoys that had no errors, but also had little or no artistic vison to them. None of the judges intended to do these things, it just happens because we cannot help being subjective when looking at art...........
What am I trying to say???? Like the Dalai Lama said, "When you lose, don't lose the lesson." There are a lot of lessons we can take from a less than Best of Show at a decoy contest. Some take the lesson that they have to work harder and perfect their craft, and eventually do win Best of Show. Others take the lesson that decoy contests are not the way for them to become the best artist they can be. Both are good............ Quitting carving for 14 years? I would say the poor fool who took that lesson out of his decoy contesting experience "lost the lesson" It is good he finally found it.....
I loved your comments. No need to apologize for your English skills. I think you communicated very well what many of us have felt at one time, or maybe often during our growth as carvers, painters, and artists. We can take pride in what we do, and for that reason, we get tempted to put it out to be judged, but the act of being judged can cause us to take a safer, or less creative path.
One of the things that comes through loud and clear to me from a lot of the replies is that there are many decoy carvers out there who are very "comfotable in their own skin" as decoy carvers, and for that reason have found it easy to live without the reinforcement of contests and ribbons.
Like you Stef, I found that contests actually hurt my decoys and my expressions. I know that allowing contests to affect me adversely and make me want to not carve came from my failings, but those frustrations were enough that I quit carving for 14 years, and only started again to make decoys to give away at Christmas. I am glad I started again, as that has led me to carving a few more decoys than just the "Christmas flock", and it has led me to feel very comfortable with the limitations I put on the type of decoys I produce. It has also given me an opportunity to share what little I know and what little decoy vision I have with aspiring carvers. I like being able to pass on what I have learned, and to be able to take pride in seeing those I have taught doing better work than I ever could do myself.
For those who want to contest, "God bless you!", but realize the limitations of decoy contests, decoy contest rules, and decoy contest judges:
1. Decoy contests are "beauty contests" and as such, there is seldom complete harmony and agreement as to the fairness or propriety of the outcomes. Contests were started as a way of resolving the age old question of "Who carves the best wooden decoy?" I am sure the many times written about contest won by Shang Wheeler was disputed over whiskey in the bar afterward......but it started a ball rolling that has sold a lot of beer, whiskey, and bar thumping since then. (Oh yeah, it has also sold a lot of foredoms, DVD's, seminars, books, airbrushes, and "trick" brushes).
2. Decoy contest rules were not handed down on tablets from Mt. Sinai. They were written, imperfectly, by contest organizers to try and define the standards for judging and by reference, the standards for a good decoy. They have morphed over the years as factions have tried to steer certain contests or divisions to produce, and judge true hunting decoys or to produce some other, predictable result. The will to win and the ingenuity of competitive carvers will overcome and outmanuever a committee of event organizers every time. Just as most managers have learned, rules beget more rules, as those being "ruled" can find ways around any rule. When the rules get to a certain "bulk" no one enforcing the rules can even remember the rules, and a lot of rules stay on the books unenforced, only being trotted out when someone feels wronged and points out the rule. The opposite of this legalistic rules scenario is the "values" and "guidelines" scenario, where "rules" are so nebulous they can be twisted and interpreted multiple ways. When I started carving, the rules for one of the contests said something to the effect, "Our standard is the living duck. Decoys will be judged according to how well they portray the living duck." You can imagine how well that one worked out........we are still arguing today over what that means
3. Decoy judges are human beings, and as such, can be manipulated by visual sleight of hand. Jim Foote was a master of that trick. He produced decoys that had painting or anatomical errors, but did so with such panache that he could convince most judges that that was the way the duck looked, or the way the duck should look. I have never known a judge who didn't want the best decoy to win best of show. Similarly I have never known a judge who "threw" or manipulated results to favor a friend, a style, or to overlook certain rules. BUT, I have seen judges overwhelmed by a decoy, or a set of decoys to the point of overlooking the rules or overlooking obvious errors in a magnificently done piece of art. Conversely, I have seen judges who knocked out well done decoys for too many tail feathers, too short a set of tail feathers, etc. and elevated non descript decoys that had no errors, but also had little or no artistic vison to them. None of the judges intended to do these things, it just happens because we cannot help being subjective when looking at art...........
What am I trying to say???? Like the Dalai Lama said, "When you lose, don't lose the lesson." There are a lot of lessons we can take from a less than Best of Show at a decoy contest. Some take the lesson that they have to work harder and perfect their craft, and eventually do win Best of Show. Others take the lesson that decoy contests are not the way for them to become the best artist they can be. Both are good............ Quitting carving for 14 years? I would say the poor fool who took that lesson out of his decoy contesting experience "lost the lesson" It is good he finally found it.....
Rick, Interesting thread. I must be slightly above average. I HAVE repainted my Flamboobs! Years ago when I was about has rich as I am now I found that red oxide primer, flat black auto primer, gray auto primer, flat white and Toyota Green metallic made a pretty nice looking Mallard drake. Or I could make some nice Redheads or Canvasbacks If you didn't mind that they were made from mallard decoys). The problem was my portion of the rig was a little over weight with Drakes. I never found a hardware store paint that was good for hens.....hehe. My family started hunting after WWII to supplement the dinner table. They fumbled around until they discovered waterfowl hunting. No carvers, boat builders or call makers. Still it's something I learned to love to do and I'll keep doing it until can't. I do appreciate seeing the great carvers, boat builders and call makers on this site as well as others. In my little corner of the world growing up I never had any idea the traditions of boat building and decoy carving were practiced that much. We hunted over paper decoys until my dad and uncle one year bought 6 doz Herters decoys. I really thought we were rich until I heard my dad telling someone how many hours of overtime to took to buy those decoys.
Chuck J
Well-known member
Pictured front left and back right (behind the silly) are 2 of my rig that took 2nd BOS a few years back, still in service, this pic if from last fall on Gun Lake MI. They have some "authentic battle damage" too. The best part was, mine were second to George's rig...which you know darn sure those were hunted too!
uncle mike pierce
Active member
WOW! Now those are gunners, and I love 'em. Love the pic too.
Toung jedi bill--The majority of the sb's i show have already been gunned-Exceptions are the argentine 6 rigs, which are taken south when we go, used and left. Two from ohio were used--one suffered a bill check when we put it overboard and was given a prosthetic -Found a way to do rebuilds on checked bills and dog chewed ones--Virtually impossible to detect!!
A lot of what most of us take to h de g for the river has had a season.
It's not advisable to shoot stuff for the halibut, but if it happens, mine retain pellets--The mallard rig from westlake 2010 contained a few pellets-good remarquing!
Perhaps it would be a fun thing to just send or take stuff to at least one show in used condition..I intend doing so in the summer.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is what sepatates hunting decoys from decor!!
A lot of what most of us take to h de g for the river has had a season.
It's not advisable to shoot stuff for the halibut, but if it happens, mine retain pellets--The mallard rig from westlake 2010 contained a few pellets-good remarquing!
Perhaps it would be a fun thing to just send or take stuff to at least one show in used condition..I intend doing so in the summer.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is what sepatates hunting decoys from decor!!
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
Actually, I think a lot of the issue over paint and detail works itself out IF you can judge the decoys on the water from a minimum distance.
The heavy detail fades out at 20 yards...a bird that looks average in hand suddenly just pops on the water, and one that looks great up close looks muddy and awkward....maybe...
That was one of the things I liked about the show in alabama that was part of a larger wildlife art show...it was out on a body of water...the decoys had to contend with whatever conditions the weather decided...flat calm, breeze, or chop...the judges didn't handle the birds up close...they saw them from a distance of 30-40 feet minimum...
The heavy detail fades out at 20 yards...a bird that looks average in hand suddenly just pops on the water, and one that looks great up close looks muddy and awkward....maybe...
That was one of the things I liked about the show in alabama that was part of a larger wildlife art show...it was out on a body of water...the decoys had to contend with whatever conditions the weather decided...flat calm, breeze, or chop...the judges didn't handle the birds up close...they saw them from a distance of 30-40 feet minimum...
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
You are above average.
I've repainted them too...in the basement of my parents house in Moline. The old One Shot flat sign paint (with lead) and other oil based stuff.
But I think you are the exception, not the rule...
I've repainted them too...in the basement of my parents house in Moline. The old One Shot flat sign paint (with lead) and other oil based stuff.
But I think you are the exception, not the rule...
Chuck J
Well-known member
Great point Rick, and that was one of the big gripes about the pool...last year I swear many decoys weren't more than 5 feet from the judges. At least this year they made them sit back from the edge of the pool, but if it were up to me, they would be at the far end of the pool from the decoys.
My gripe with the pool is not that the rules should change (except for that stupid replacement rule they added last year) but that they need to follow the rules and guidelines they already have in place.
Chuck
Stef
Active member
We come from all , duck carver from the old style ... but just some little different .. ( not tell better ) , Thanks all old carver ... for begin it like you made it .. and so funnt to hunt and kill ducks over what we made by hand ...
i never win a competition with a hunting decoy, gunner .... because i never know where to stop detail ... but remember Godin tell to me.. for make gunner , you just need to put few hours on a decoy not by x100 hours ... , last time i made one, it in 2000, a pintail drake , very stock , not a fancy pose , no detail in feathers, not wing undercut .. nothing .. just a very good shape .... I try to paint it as fast as i can ... paint .... put on remover ...... repaint again ..... remover again .... 3x ......... put on table and forget it for 1-2y. And surprise one day i check it again, and ask to me .. well , i have enough place to put all feathers in there , the block of wood keep enough wood .. so come back to carving , carve all feather like i normally made + texture + all ....... and the bird finish like a full detailed but simple pose ... take 2-3 week only and ship to gallery ... it take few months to resell it ..
So i like to see decoys, true hunting decoys here , i like that and know he have a lot of magician here ... and every one can do the best with what he know the best ... so dont stop
i never win a competition with a hunting decoy, gunner .... because i never know where to stop detail ... but remember Godin tell to me.. for make gunner , you just need to put few hours on a decoy not by x100 hours ... , last time i made one, it in 2000, a pintail drake , very stock , not a fancy pose , no detail in feathers, not wing undercut .. nothing .. just a very good shape .... I try to paint it as fast as i can ... paint .... put on remover ...... repaint again ..... remover again .... 3x ......... put on table and forget it for 1-2y. And surprise one day i check it again, and ask to me .. well , i have enough place to put all feathers in there , the block of wood keep enough wood .. so come back to carving , carve all feather like i normally made + texture + all ....... and the bird finish like a full detailed but simple pose ... take 2-3 week only and ship to gallery ... it take few months to resell it ..
So i like to see decoys, true hunting decoys here , i like that and know he have a lot of magician here ... and every one can do the best with what he know the best ... so dont stop
Last edited:
Vince Pagliaroli
Well-known member
Years ago Mr. Clif Kastl birthed the POOL contest at Westlake, for the/we "Upstairs Contest" underachievers. He and his wife, partner & soul mate Audrey, made the POOL "The Contest" at the ODCCA show. More and more "Upstairs Guys" came down to hang with us, and the POOL blew up - Big Time.
For me, it was a honor to help when asked, to enter my decoys (and get DQ'd sometimes), sometimes get a ribbon, and to be asked to be a judge of a very tough contest.
Prior to judging Clif always talked with his judges. His point was: "This is the POOL. Here are the rules. Please have the stones to keep this contest what it is".
We also knew we all had Bullseyes on our backs as judges, and we would take lots of flack and even damage friendships, but we did our job as best we could.
All things change and evolve. Folks adjust, and decide if they want to partake, or not. For me the POOL was unique for what it was...... My March Maddness!
It was my decision to retire from entering it, one year after my good friends Clif & Audrey retired from running it. I felt I had also completed my run of Crazy Fun.
My prize possession from that long run, besides the lasting frinedships. Is the 2006 Judge hat, from the ODCCA POOL Contest. Not many of those around, and I wear it proudly.
I wish the ODCCA, and the POOL all the best at their new venue, and all who enjoy it. Have Fun! My time poolside has passed.
For me, it was a honor to help when asked, to enter my decoys (and get DQ'd sometimes), sometimes get a ribbon, and to be asked to be a judge of a very tough contest.
Prior to judging Clif always talked with his judges. His point was: "This is the POOL. Here are the rules. Please have the stones to keep this contest what it is".
We also knew we all had Bullseyes on our backs as judges, and we would take lots of flack and even damage friendships, but we did our job as best we could.
All things change and evolve. Folks adjust, and decide if they want to partake, or not. For me the POOL was unique for what it was...... My March Maddness!
It was my decision to retire from entering it, one year after my good friends Clif & Audrey retired from running it. I felt I had also completed my run of Crazy Fun.
My prize possession from that long run, besides the lasting frinedships. Is the 2006 Judge hat, from the ODCCA POOL Contest. Not many of those around, and I wear it proudly.
I wish the ODCCA, and the POOL all the best at their new venue, and all who enjoy it. Have Fun! My time poolside has passed.
Rich Hohler
Active member
These two "contemporary carver" threads have been excellent and have led to a lot of good discussion and really got me thinking. This is one of the reasons I like this site so much. I have really been bogged down lately struggling with my painting techniques and the result of them when these posts came up. Sort of an artist's block though I am no artist. I surround myself with dozens of reference pics while painting and more times than not find myself trying to paint every little feather visible and end up not pleased with the outcome and repainting. The last few days I have been searching posts extensively by putting "favorite decoy" in the search string which has brought up threads from the last couple years on what peoples favorite decoys are with a lot of pics. I like George's take on the definition of a decoy as opposed to decor. I prefer to make decoys that will be hunted over. One thing I noticed in most of these decoys and something that really appeals to me in a decoy is a lack of individual feather detail. Maybe the primaries and the tertials are painted in but thats about it. When I look at a Schmeidlin decoy, which is one of my favorites, for the most part the side pockets have a lot of depth in color and contrast without the presence of individual feathers. Pat Gregory is another of my favorites and though he has a much different style, I believe the same holds true for him as far as what I see when I look at his decoys. Through all of this research I have done as a result of these discussions over the past week or so, I find myself excited about getting back out in the shop and what my next decoys will look like when I'm done with them if I can just keep myself from getting bogged down with too much detail. Thank you for this thread!
BillS
Well-known member
I would agree, I have entered and judged at HDG show; there the birds are thrown in the Chesapeake Bay and judged from an elevated boardwalk at maybe 20-30 yards, detail does disappear. However, the common complaint about the detail in the decoys has more to do with time spent on it. It the deception of the carvers in what they enter, they will enter a clean line decoy, no frills but will spend hours and hours on it. To me rules about simple and repainting to average hunter are guidelines for basically saying "little time spent". When a disingenuous carver spends hours upon hours adding detail, getting form and colors just right it violates the rules intent. Even at 20-30ft or yards that decoy the carver has all the hours on is probably going to show up nicer even at those longer distances. Thus doing better in the competition. These competitions can't impose or enforce "time spent" so they come up with guidelines that try to cover that. I would love to see a gunner competition say no more than 3 hours spent on the decoy, but that will never happen.
I was looking on another site the pics from Ohio, I had no idea what were gunners and what IWCA birds. It reminded me when I used to race motocross. We used to have a term “sandbaggers” for guys who would race a lower level class so they could get higher finishes. That to me is what’s going on; guys who have the talent and artistic ability to compete at the higher level but choose to carve to a lower class so they can place well. In my opinion there is absolutely no reason why they can't expand the classes to accommodate everyone. The only reason it is not being done is some of those people won't place as high, that’s a shame. I feel these shows should not be supported.
For me I don't need a high place or enter shows for validation, I enter for fun and to attend shows with friends. I would support more shows by entering my birds if I felt they were getting a fair shot. Unfortunately those shows are few and far between, so I choose enter in certain shows and let the ducks decide.
I was looking on another site the pics from Ohio, I had no idea what were gunners and what IWCA birds. It reminded me when I used to race motocross. We used to have a term “sandbaggers” for guys who would race a lower level class so they could get higher finishes. That to me is what’s going on; guys who have the talent and artistic ability to compete at the higher level but choose to carve to a lower class so they can place well. In my opinion there is absolutely no reason why they can't expand the classes to accommodate everyone. The only reason it is not being done is some of those people won't place as high, that’s a shame. I feel these shows should not be supported.
For me I don't need a high place or enter shows for validation, I enter for fun and to attend shows with friends. I would support more shows by entering my birds if I felt they were getting a fair shot. Unfortunately those shows are few and far between, so I choose enter in certain shows and let the ducks decide.
Last edited:
YOu hit the nail--It's all about intention, and not necessarily about usage. I have never, nor would i spend more than three hours messing about with something that is going to be used in hunting conditions by someone--The point is the intent.
Chuck, perhaps the judges are unable to read, or are overwhelmed by decorous things. Methinks the odcca pool thing is coming under the thrall of the iwca, and that, folks will be the demise of it.
Chuck, perhaps the judges are unable to read, or are overwhelmed by decorous things. Methinks the odcca pool thing is coming under the thrall of the iwca, and that, folks will be the demise of it.
Vince Pagliaroli
Well-known member
Man am I in Big Trouble then. Cuz the decoys I hunt over take Forver for me to hand carve. As I don't use a Foredom, and they ain't pretty. All these years I had BAD Intentions, and I thought it was ADD............. Proof positive that To Much Duck Huntin' - Does cause Brain Damage!