Meet Our Judges

Industry Professionals

Experienced creators who evaluate your work with expertise and care. Each judge brings years of professional experience in motion design, animation, and visual effects.

More judges coming soon.

How It Works

Transparent criteria. Qualified evaluators. Process counts for 40% of your total score.

A structured, blind review built for fairness with precise criteria and averaged scores.

Judging is planned for this summer. Many competition details are still being finalized, so timing updates and rubric changes will be published on the Updates page.

Judge Overview

The jury workflow is built to stay fair at scale, with clear coverage targets and a final category vote.

01

Coverage targets

Finalist shortlists aim for two independent reviews per submission, with top-100 coverage per category.

02

Category re-evaluation

Top five finalists in each category are re-reviewed by all judges in that category before voting.

03

Final category vote

Category judges select the winner from the top five, then confirm the overall best of the category.

Two-Stage Review

Every submission goes through rigorous evaluation.

Stage 1

Screening Committee

All submissions reviewed by a dedicated committee to select finalists.

  • Verifies eligibility and compliance
  • Evaluates baseline quality
  • Selects finalists for full jury review

Stage 2

Creator Jury

Finalists scored by a jury of working creators (18+) using our detailed rubric.

  • Multiple judges per submission
  • Scores automatically averaged
  • Blind scoring (judges can't see each other)

Scoring Rubric

Each criterion is scored 1-10. Process-related criteria account for 40% of the total.

Process (40%)Craft (60%)
25%

Process Quality

Process

Creative methodology, iteration, how the work evolved

15%

Decision Clarity

Process

Articulation of creative choices

25%

Craft Execution

Technical skill, polish, attention to detail

20%

Originality

Distinctive voice and fresh approaches

15%

Constraint Handling

Problem-solving within limitations

Integrity Measures

Built-in safeguards to ensure fair and unbiased evaluation.

01

Anonymous Scoring

Judges cannot see each other's scores until evaluation is complete. This prevents bias and groupthink.

02

Conflict of Interest

Judges must recuse themselves from submissions where personal or professional relationships exist.

03

Sponsor Independence

Sponsor relationships do not influence judging outcomes. Sponsors have no access to scores or rankings.

Audience Choice: A separate award determined by community voting. This is entirely independent of judged results and does not influence official winners.