The IMI Awards exhibition represents its members’ best work from the past year and winning entries on display demonstrate an extraordinary level of achievement and excellence in a broad range of subject matter and a mastery of different medical illustration media.
The process starts just after the IMI conference at which time a report is presented to Council detailing any suggestions or recommendations resulting from that year's awards process. Although the format has remained unchanged for a number of years and on the whole works very well, it is felt important to re-visit and review the process, as each year tends to bring out at least one issue that needs attention.
The entry criteria and forms are then revised as appropriate, ready to be sent out with the initial conference announcement.
In springtime a date is set for judging and the closing date for entries finalised. The judges are informed, and then sit back and wait.
When entries are received by the awards co-ordinator, each one is opened and the contents checked the details being entered into a spreadsheet and an email sent out acknowledging receipt. They are then sorted into the three different specialties ready for the judging.
There are three judging panels, one each for photographic, art/graphic, and video/DVD entries. Each panel comprises IMI members, who are all experienced practitioners, and at least one external judge who is a specialist in that particular field.
On judging day, the panel members each go to separate areas. Video/DVD and graphics/art entries are assessed one by one, with ongoing discussion between the judges.
The photographic entries follow a different process. Entries from student members are separated from those from full professional members. The entries in each category are then laid out together with the entry form out of sight beneath them to ensure anonymity. Entries that do not fulfil the entry criteria or which demonstrate basic technical faults such as, for example, poor focusing, are quickly eliminated. Consensus decision is then made as to which entries should receive awards, and at which level – bronze, silver or gold.
At the end of the day, the judges all come together to discuss the Gold award winners from each specialty and decide on the Platinum award winner - the best of the golds.
Afterwards, a new spreadsheet of award winners is created and all recipients of awards are notified by email. All the photographic entries, plus some graphic/art entries, are collated for mounting onto foam board in preparation for exhibiting.
All the hard work culminates in the final awards exhibition, which is a fitting tribute to the skills and attributes of our members.
In 2011 there was a total of 295 entries, comprising 230 photographic, 49 graphics/art, 16 DVD/video, and 32 student entries. There were an additional 9 affiliate entries, from AIMBI and AMI members.
136 awards were made, namely:
88 Bronze, 40 Silver, and 8 Gold awards
Included amongst these were the Wellcome, John Corney Video, IMI Photographic, IMI Graphic, and Platinum awards
There was also 1 Affiliate award.
FAQS
Why do I need send so many copies of the entry form and submission?
There was a problem a few years ago when some of the mounted photographs became muddled up and incorrect titles were attributed to some entries.
Since then, during the mounting process, the original form has been attached to the back of the mounted photograph so the person doing the mounting has one of the copies showing them back-to-back for reference.
The second copy is held by the Awards co-ordinator; this is also used for reference, and when putting up the exhibition.
How does judging take place?
There are no written standards or marking criteria other than those included in the description of the individual award standards – what the judges are looking for are submissions that demonstrate the best work produced by our profession, and therefore worthy of exhibiting.
Regarding the photographic entries, the first simple premise is that while the entry is possibly a perfectly good clinical or non-clinical image, is it worthy of public exhibition as representing the best of what IMI can do? Then the following questions arise: Is it more than just a routine image? Would you put it in a portfolio? Does it show the condition particularly well? Is there anything there that shouldn't be? Are there any distracting artefacts in the background? Does the lighting show what is needed, in the best possible way? Is it sharp, good colour and not over-processed? Is there any advanced lighting being used or interesting approach to composition? These factors form the basis of the Bronze award.
Is the lighting, framing or composition standing out from the general Bronze level? Is there anything outstanding in terms of technique or degree of difficulty? Is it an unusual case that has been expertly interpreted? Such entries are picked out to form the Silver awards.
Then the real standouts, the Gold awards, are images in which the judges feel the photographer has brought their creative interpretation of the brief together with their photographic skill, to produce technically and aesthetically outstanding images
The video/DVD judges look at each video individually, taking into account camerawork, sound, editing, graphics, etc., together with background information such as intended audience, aims and objectives of the video, how it will be shown and any other supporting material.
The graphics/art judges look at accuracy of artwork and suitability of purpose as explained by the brief, also quality of design, cohesive use of type, layout, white space, colour choices, use of photographs and general graphic design principles.
Do the judges always agree with one another?
Not always initially, and there are often interesting discussions over some entries about the degree of creativity on display (in all the specialties). When this happens, the judges discuss the entry in more detail and come to a consensus. (Any judge will withhold their opinion when looking at work known to come from their own department)
What are the common pitfalls?
These tend to be minor and easily overcome:
Orientation is not always marked, either on all or some copies.
The correct number of copies is not supplied
The A4 dimension (one way at least) for the photographic entry is not adhered to
Uneven or unbalanced margins
The CD is not included in the original submission