# ADA 4th International Aquatic Plants Layout Contest Result



## Pigheaddd (Feb 27, 2004)

if you attened, you should received your result now. i got mine today. lol... total 791 applications (732 applicants) from 26 countries. im still proud it was my first real planted tank, even though my ranking really sxxks, but at least my pix will be on the booklet. :lol: top 600 rankers' pix will be complied as a booklet. who wants to order booklet? im going to get one.  

Tim


----------



## Pigheaddd (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: ADA 4th International Aquatic Plants Layout Contest Resu*



Pigheaddd said:


> if you attened, you should received your result now. i got mine today. lol... total 791 applications (732 applicants) from 26 countries. im still proud it was my first real planted tank, even though my ranking really sxxks, but at least my pix will be on the booklet. :lol: top 600 rankers' pix will be complied as a booklet. who wants to order booklet? im going to get one.
> 
> Tim


ooppps! if you are in 600. you dont need to buy booklet. you will receive one for free. :lol:

Tim


----------



## Daemonfly (Mar 21, 2004)

So, what was your ranking?


----------



## Pigheaddd (Feb 27, 2004)

my ranking? lol... 589... almost the last one. ... so... im the only one who receive result? come on guys. im sure most of you are better than me. hesitate to post or? :lol: :lol: :lol: 

i remember read a topic about who entrance ADA 2004 Contest raise your hand and post pix something like that couple months ago! or i have bad memory? :roll: 

Tim


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

353 here...


----------



## Pigheaddd (Feb 27, 2004)

Roy Deki said:


> 353 here...


not bad man. congratulations! c ya next year. :wink:

Tim


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

180 here


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

Gomer said:


> 180 here


Well deserved Tony...Congratulations!!!


----------



## Pigheaddd (Feb 27, 2004)

Gomer said:


> 180 here


congratulations!! nice man...

Tim


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

I haven't recieved any results yet, but then again I haven't had much luck with correspondance of any kind from ADA. Where can I find the results? I've checked their home site and it's not up yet.

Best,
Phil


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

I haven't received my set of results, either. By this time last year, the ADA had a list of rankings on their site but not so this year.

Frustrating...

Can't wait to see the top 27 tanks for this year.

Carlos


----------



## MarcinB (Apr 16, 2004)

217th place here. 
Gomer, Your tank is great. I'm really surprised it didn't make to hit the top 100. The competition had to be very tough.


----------



## Navarro (Feb 12, 2004)

102 place here


----------



## HarryPlanter (Apr 30, 2004)

I think the judges only take serious on the top 100 ~150 tank. I also feel sorry for some of my friend's beautiful tank cannot get a higher rank.
Gomer's tank is great and surely be within 100 in normal. 

ADA's ranking always have jokes. Last year 2003, same tank by the same person submitted twice and get two different ranking, it's it rediculous :lol: 

My tank "Aquarium Passion" luckily got 57


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Well, that might be the same tank, but it sure is in different condition.
I also think the first pic is better than the second.
However, interestingly enough that same tank wouldn't even get to top 200 in this year's competition. That's a great improvement in aquascaping worldwide.

Cheers,
Pedro


----------



## Ricky Cain (Jan 23, 2004)

*ADA*

Congratulations to all who had the courage to enter. It is not an easy thing to do, to put something you've created "out there" and let someone critque you.

There should be at least one aquascaping contest somewhere in the world where the people, the hobbyists, you and I decide who rocks and who doesn't. The AGA people's choice gets there but that is only awarded to one layout. To me that would be have a more accurate pulse of what appeals on a much larger scale. There also should be more feedback for entrants in any type of competition. A take on what they are doing that is impressive and what they need to work on. Or a guess we all could hire aquascaping coaches.

BTW, I came in at 126 and think they just switched my numbers another with a computer. Last year I was 162.

One day I will catch Luis.


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

Has anyone seen the result list yet? Yet again, I'm having communication problems with ADA and even wonder if my entry made it in. 

Best,
Phil


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

I finally got mine.

344th.  

Carlos


----------



## Ricky Cain (Jan 23, 2004)

*ADA and Phil*

Phil, just accept that they don't like you.


----------



## cS (Jan 27, 2004)

It would be nice if, along with the ranking, you guys/gals could perhaps edit your posts to include the submitted tank image as well. My eyes have a sweet tooth. :biggrin:

Thanks.


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Well, ok... 434  maybe next year :twisted:
I guess I earned plenty of [-X on fish selection :lol:










Cheers
Pedro


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Great idea, cS. We should compile all our results with photos! Hopefully, others will follow suite.

Here is what 344th looked like:










Carlos


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Man 344!!!! there are a lot uglier layouts in the top 77 :evil:
I have to figure out this ADA taste for aquascapes, it just misses me...

Cheers
Pedro


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

tsunami said:


> Here is what 344th looked like:


I really don't get that.

Very well planned scape with the red solitaire and eyecatcher (pretty much) in the golden ratio of the tank and dead right in the golden ratio compared to the greens behind it. Very nice rock+wood composition with perfect perspective usage creating depth in an otherwise convex layout (thats pure magic), perhaps lacking a bit to the right (somewhat empty). Plant health A+, Glossomat growth and condition A+, very well balanced colors, good fish selection. But the nicest thing about this scape I think is the proportions of the green cluster on the left and right of the solitaire. Squint your eyes or do a Gaussian blur on the picture and you will directly notice an artist feel for proportions.


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

Here's 353: I'm very proud of that ranking, considering it's my first planted tank.


----------



## RedBaron (May 16, 2004)

I’m a little embarrassed showing my tank which got 150th position  . At AB contest I guess it was far behind the Carlos’ tank but this time the ranking was slightly different. Maybe because a printed image looked much better than digital one... I have no idea.


----------



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

MrPCB said:


> I have to figure out this ADA taste for aquascapes, it just misses me...


I think the Nature Aquarium style has a bias against visible/obvious intent. It gives high marks to an illusion of chaos and grandeur that makes an aquascape breathtakingly sublime. This can be seen in the 2002 ADA grand prize winner. If it were not for the visable confines of a glass box and the unnaturally clean forground (also related to glass box enclosure) we might easily be convinced this picture depicted God's hand rather than Man's.

Carlos' entry attempts little illusory deception and reflects clearly visable gardening intent. As defdac outilined in his critique, his aquascape falls easily into relatively common concepts of design like the golden ratio. Carlos meets our expectations of good gardening with his excellent plant health and accomplished pruning while providing a picture that is determinately human. Knowledge of the gardening process substantially enhances appreciation of Carlos' scape and I think the Nature Aquarium style goes out of its way to play down that process.

If we look at the entries placing below Carlos we see design factors that are increasingly common. Generally speaking, they show less illusory ambition than higher ranked entries. 
___
Jeff


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

I think you're right Ricky. 

Good job to all who entered!!!!

Best,
Phil


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Yeah Jeff, I think you got it, but did you have the chance to analyse the top 77 works for this years judging? There are plenty of them which show that style, indeed the Nature style, but there are some... that simply don't and simply are U G L Y (a few, that's a fact, but still on the top 77 preselection)

Cheers,
Pedro


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Pedro,

Is there any way for you to show us the top 77 entries? I have yet to any of the top 77 tanks for this year.

Excellent explanation and analysis, Jeff. I will keep that in mind in future layouts I create. Does that explanation hold though with Tony's entry (180th)? I feel that the intent he shows in his aquascape is obvious --that the strength of his scape was the stunning plant health and excellent photographic presentation. Otherwise, it bears a striking similarity to Roy Deki's aquascape.

Hope Tony and Roy don't mind having their layouts picked at as well.  

Carlos


----------



## Magnus (Feb 4, 2004)

Red Baron, you should be very proud of your scape. I really think it's among the best in the AB contest. Why you didn't win anything is beyond me. Roy's tank was also among the better ones out there, and you should keep it up, Roy!


tsunami said:


> Pedro,
> 
> Is there any way for you to show us the top 77 entries?


I would like to see the top 77 as well.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Dam (Magnus), you forgot your entry!

He got 332nd:










Carlos


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

pick on me all you want Carlos *L*

180


----------



## waynesham (Apr 26, 2004)

Magnus said:


> I would like to see the top 77 as well.


Here is the 77 place from Dave Chow (Hong Kong). 

http://aquariumfarm.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=88524&highlight=#88524


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

I really like Jeff's analysis. After judging a couple contests myself one thing I have to point out is that many, many entries look similar. If you follow "the rules" -- no matter how well you follow them -- your entry will look much like the one before or after it. Nothing stands out. We get cookie-cutter aquascapes. 

I think the really good entries embrace the concepts needed for a good layout but don't follow patterns in lock-step discipline. It is the aquascaper's creativity that gives an entry value -- that (to echo Jeff's words) raise it to the level of the sublime and make it look like it was shaped by the hand of god and not by the hand of man.


Roger Miller


----------



## HarryPlanter (Apr 30, 2004)

Mine 57

Why you don't post your tank Wayne ????


----------



## waynesham (Apr 26, 2004)

HarryPlanter said:


> Mine 57
> 
> Why you don't post your tank Wayne ????


Yes sir, 43 place here !!


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

Jeff Kropp said:


> MrPCB said:
> 
> 
> > I think the Nature Aquarium style has a bias against visible/obvious intent.
> ...


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

> Hope Tony and Roy don't mind having their layouts picked at as well.


Not at all...i'm here to learn as much as i can from you folks.


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

Magnus said:


> Red Baron, you should be very proud of your scape. I really think it's among the best in the AB contest. Why you didn't win anything is beyond me. Roy's tank was also among the better ones out there, and you should keep it up, Roy!
> 
> 
> tsunami said:
> ...


----------



## plantella (Feb 5, 2004)

Hy there,

I was very impressed to see so many nice tanks who are taking part at the ADA contest this year. To judge this tanks it must be very difficult and I don't want do this job.

For me each tank is a winning tank. I can find in every tank something interesting...independence of the place. (It is only a number :wink

You can see it... there's so much work behind each tank...small work of arts. Congratulation ! 
*
Information:
The contest result list will be published at beginning of next month on the ADA web site.
*

Many greetings and best regards,

Oliver Knott
Aquarium Picture Gallery


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

Oliver, What is the ADA's web-site address? Thanks Roy


----------



## jerseyjay (Jan 25, 2004)

Roy Deki said:


> Oliver, What is the ADA's web-site address? Thanks Roy


http://www.adana.co.jp


----------



## Roy Deki (Apr 7, 2004)

Thanks Jay


----------



## Jeff Kropp (Apr 25, 2004)

defdac said:


> I think you're *very* wrong there.


Well isn't that the joy of making a generalized statment based on limited knowledge? Please tell me more, explain why I am wrong and provide some examples. It is true that I have not read much in Aqua Journal and that I lack a sort of mind that enjoys mathematically sublime revelation. Because of these factors I am very interested in your thoughts.

It has been my understanding that ADA advocates aquascaping values that seem spiritually connected. As a result of my assumtions about this connection, I would expect them to be less receptive to the mathematically based golden ratio.

One thing about your post confuses me. In your post you stated that the 2002 ADA grand prize winner, "has Golden ratio written all over it" and later that it was "like a schoolbook-(Aqua Journal)-example". Are these statements oppositional? Or does this aquascape just satisfy all the rules and expectations of both camps?

One point, which I was heading to in my post, was the idea of cloaking human intent with chaos. It can be observed that given enough time the chaos of entropy gradually erases the order created by human intent. This factor becomes evident in mature aquascapes. On the first day of planting the hand of an aquascaper is obvious and the Nature Aquarium style doesn't tend to hold this appearance in high regard. As time passes the plants grow and slowly erase the gardening impacts of the aquascaper while revealing life's character. Nature Aquarium style values very highly the character of life's revelation. A tank that disguises its most recent pruning well to elevate this character of life will be held in higher regard than one who's pruning is evident.

Now looking at the additional entries shown since my last post, I would have to agree whole heartedly that this set of judges have a strong predilection for redness.
___
Jeff


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Hi all,

Sorry, the ADA people have requested that it'd be kept private so not to ruin the impact of the results. I'll have to agree and make it their own way, sorry... I'd be more than happy to show them to you after results are out, but I guess then ther'll be no point right?
I can tell you this, as a personal opinion, there is one entry that shows no landscape whatsoever with tall plants all around (even in foreground) and holding a single stryking blood red betta splendens  I don't know about you, but... you'll see.
However there are some of extraordinary efect as one particular long one with simple planting careful rocks and woods and a beautiful huge pack of killifish topdwelling... these are the farthest extremes on the preselection I got... you'll see them after results are out.

Cheers,
Pedro


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

Jeff Kropp said:


> It is true that I have not read much in Aqua Journal and that I lack a sort of mind that enjoys mathematically sublime revelation. Because of these factors I am very interested in your thoughts.


I've only read the three books "Nature Aquarium World" and the six English numbers of Aqua Journal, and they all discuss phi in terms of relating proportions of stones and driftwood.

Perhaps not as much as "the" way of designing, but at least try to mimic nature and not make everything symmetrical.



> It has been my understanding that ADA advocates aquascaping values that seem spiritually connected. As a result of my assumtions about this connection, I would expect them to be less receptive to the mathematically based golden ratio.


Phi *is* random. And beautiful. Every human and plant have been constructed with the phi relation, so it's nature too - and very understandable that Amano is fond of it. All artist are, concious or not.



> One thing about your post confuses me. In your post you stated that the 2002 ADA grand prize winner, "has Golden ratio written all over it" and later that it was "like a schoolbook-(Aqua Journal)-example". Are these statements oppositional? Or does this aquascape just satisfy all the rules and expectations of both camps?


Hmm.. I meant ADA 2003 winner (all green aquascape with blurry neons?) and yes, it was constructed with phi and thereby a schoolbook example of a ADA-design.



> One point, which I was heading to in my post, was the idea of cloaking human intent with chaos.


Well then. Phi is for you. It's not symmetric, it's kindof an odd measure - but very strikingly beutiful.
http://goldennumber.net/plants.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38278000/gif/_38278935_zen_garden_inf_300.gif
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2283398.stm#map



> It can be observed that given enough time the chaos of entropy gradually erases the order created by human intent. This factor becomes evident in mature aquascapes. On the first day of planting the hand of an aquascaper is obvious and the Nature Aquarium style doesn't tend to hold this appearance in high regard. As time passes the plants grow and slowly erase the gardening impacts of the aquascaper while revealing life's character. Nature Aquarium style values very highly the character of life's revelation. A tank that disguises its most recent pruning well to elevate this character of life will be held in higher regard than one who's pruning is evident.


This was a very good explanation.

You usually doesn't arrange driftwood or stones exactly symmetrical - but slightly off center and you usually select stones and driftwood with slightly different sizes and shapes. And when you do this you will get phi. Perhaps not dead right as many paintings, buildings, cars, photographs and sculptures by great artists. But almost.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

defdac said:


> And when you do this you will get phi.


Is that like getting a cold?

What do you mean by "phi"?

Phi is a Greek letter used to symbolize a lot of different things in different fields of study. In my profession it is commonly used to symbolize porosity. I think in mechanics I've seen it used to symbolize strain and maybe angular momentum. I'm not sure what you are talking about, but I'm pretty sure it isn't porosity. At times you seem to be talking about the golden ratio -- a simple compositional tool -- while at other times you seem to be talking about something more complex -- some sort of spiritual qualilty.

Roger Miller


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

Roger Miller said:


> What do you mean by "phi"?


The Golden Ratio.

Google shows you the ratio if you google on it:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=phi

There are as many resources you can dig up, here is one:
http://www.infinitetechnologies.co.za/articles/geometry1.html
http://tlc.discovery.com/convergence/humanface/articles/mask2.html

I must underline carefully I don't think you should construct every piece of art with the Golden ratio. It is a help though for the ones wondering why certain rock/wood-placements "feels" better or more beautiful.

And as everything, the truly amazing pieces of work are those that carefully breaks the rules. But to be able to break them, you need to know them.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

defdac said:


> There are as many resources you can dig up, .


Sorry, Daniel. I know what the golden ratio is, I just didnt follow through enough on your links to identify phi as symbolizing the golden ratio..

I think you're assigning too much importance to the golden ratio. It is a compositional tool and nothing more. Using the ratio to lay out your composition is probably a step in the right direction for some learning aquascapers, but that alone does nothing toward making a great aquascape. If you go through the AB results (or through the NBAT, AGA or ADA results) then you will see aquascapes both good and not-so-good that are laid out in the golden ratio.

Jeff's comments go beyond composition to technique amd expression. An aquascape with enough chaos to hide the gardener's obvious intent can still be well proportioned. A photograph of a natural scene can be composed even with no gardening intent at all. Laying out a well-composed scene is only the first step toward an outstanding aquascape. Success in any of the contests requires that the aquascaper must work at details that go far beyond questions of composition.

Roger Miller


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

Roger Miller said:


> I think you're assigning too much importance to the golden ratio.


No I don't. Please read more carefully or try to not misinterpret me 8) I quote myself:


> I must underline carefully I don't think you should construct every piece of art with the Golden ratio. It is a help though for the ones wondering why certain rock/wood-placements "feels" better or more beautiful.


So you basically just repeat what I said when you write:


> It is a compositional tool and nothing more. Using the ratio to lay out your composition is probably a step in the right direction for some learning aquascapers, but that alone does nothing toward making a great aquascape.





> If you go through the AB results (or through the NBAT, AGA or ADA results) then you will see aquascapes both good and not-so-good that are laid out in the golden ratio.


Yes you can mess upp things in many many many many ways. Crappy looking plants, to much red, ugly fishcomposition etc etc.

But with some basic understanding of proportions the plants will often grow in nicely into proportions that feels natural.

Compare Wayne Shams phi-triangle:
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forum/cms_view_article.php?aid=44
with
http://www.adana.co.kr/images/e/24.jpg



> Jeff's comments go beyond composition to technique amd expression. An aquascape with enough chaos to hide the gardener's obvious intent can still be well proportioned.


I know AND aknowledged that in Jeffs well put message. Please read more carefully. We're striving towards the same goal here 8)


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

defdac said:


> Please read more carefully or try to not misinterpret me 8)


Lest I continue to misinterpret you, perhaps you can explain these statements more fully:

"The thing is the golden ratio sees to that the scape never gets symmetrical and shows any visible/obvious intent."

and

"Phi *Is* random. And beautiful."

Certainly I'll agree that using the golden ratio to compose an aquascape helps avoid symmetry. So will most anything else. Photographers use the rule of thirds, for instance. I don't think that simply using the golden ratio will do anything at all to hide a visible or obvious intent. In fact, many aquascapes built to use the golden ratio in one way or another have clearly visible and obvious intent.

And phi is random? I submit that using phi is precisely *not* random. Using it forces a very regular order on the composition. When everyone uses it and uses it in the same way then we see the same order over and over.

I'm not sure where you see the beauty in phi. It looks like most any other string of digits to me. Some of the things built with "golden" proportions in mind are beautiful. Some are not.

I'm glad that you agree in your most recent post that the golden ratio is nothing but a compositional tool. That seems to be at odds with your eariler statiements.

Using the golden ratio or something similar is step one in composing an aquascape. If you want to do much else with aquascaping then you need to apply appropriate emphasis elsewhere. If you want beauty, then you will need to get it from something other than the golden ratio. If you want randomness then you will need to avoid structure -- including structure imposed by using the golden ratio. If you want to hide visible and obvious intent then certainly you will need to avoid using the same small set of constructs used by every other aquascaper.

Rules are useful, but the value in an aquascape originates in the aquascaper's creativity, not in an ability to follow rules.

Roger Miller


----------



## defdac (May 10, 2004)

Roger Miller said:


> Lest I continue to misinterpret you, perhaps you can explain these statements more fully:
> 
> "The thing is the golden ratio sees to that the scape never gets symmetrical and shows any visible/obvious intent."
> 
> ...


"Phi is random" was somewhat of a mathematical joke 



> Certainly I'll agree that using the golden ratio to compose an aquascape helps avoid symmetry. So will most anything else. Photographers use the rule of thirds, for instance. I don't think that simply using the golden ratio will do anything at all to hide a visible or obvious intent. In fact, many aquascapes built to use the golden ratio in one way or another have clearly visible and obvious intent.


Yeah, like all Amanoscapes. Of course sticking blindly to the *exact* proportion of Phi down to every mm is not what it's all about. 5/3 works fine, rule of thirds - sure.



> Using it forces a very regular order on the composition. When everyone uses it and uses it in the same way then we see the same order over and over.


It's not like you can avoid it 

It's easy to find it everywhere, even in symmetrical compositions (just look at the leaves of the plants)



> I'm not sure where you see the beauty in phi. It looks like most any other string of digits to me. Some of the things built with "golden" proportions in mind are beautiful. Some are not.


You still think I'm a phi-evangelist or something?  It's a tool and noobs like myself finds it easy with numbers and tricks.



> I'm glad that you agree in your most recent post that the golden ratio is nothing but a compositional tool. That seems to be at odds with your eariler statiements.


Which ones?



> Using the golden ratio or something similar is step one in composing an aquascape.


Exactly.



> If you want to do much else with aquascaping then you need to apply appropriate emphasis elsewhere. If you want beauty, then you will need to get it from something other than the golden ratio. If you want randomness then you will need to avoid structure -- including structure imposed by using the golden ratio. If you want to hide visible and obvious intent then certainly you will need to avoid using the same small set of constructs used by every other aquascaper.


Couldn't agree more. Or use background colors no aquascapers has used before . Or use odd fishes. Or use.. And so on.



> Rules are useful, but the value in an aquascape originates in the aquascaper's creativity, not in an ability to follow rules.


Rules are also good to know exactly what to break, but just so careful. Like in graphical design. You need to know why not mixing ten different fonts are good or why the golden ratio is good generally speaking when laying out things. When you know this, you also know how to use ten different fonts and not use the golden ratio.

I think it's good to analyze why YOU think some aquascapes are greater than others, and then you need the lingo - and there are plenty more than the golden ratio (I guess?). Hope to hear more of it here, but I havn't so I just thought I would start some deeper analyzes of why some Aquascapes are plain boring and some are fantastic. Bad idea?


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

> Hope to hear more of it here, but I havn't so I just thought I would start some deeper analyzes of why some Aquascapes are plain boring and some are fantastic. Bad idea?


Not at all. I think its a good discussion.

Roger Miller


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Everyone, I've been pondering over aquarium critiques for some time. 

I've decided to experiment with something a little more advanced in the aquascaping section --weekly critiques of individual layouts. What makes them work? What faults do they have? etc.

I really do enjoy this type of discussion.

Hopefully, we'll get enough participation for it to work.

For everyone else, please keep posting your ADA entries and placement number!

Carlos


----------



## MrPCB (Mar 4, 2004)

Great idea tsunami, this is being a very interesting discussion, yet it's a bit out of topic.
Get it going, I'll put my head on the guillotine...errr my aquarium on line of fire. And am more than happy to give my personal opinion of everyone else's.

Cheers,
Pedro


----------



## plantbrain (Jan 23, 2004)

I think many of the top contenders need something more than a design that has been done often. Healthy plants etc and a nice tank alone will not do if you hope to go beyond into the top designs.

Innovation ranks high. It can be with color, usage of wood, rock, fish, techniques, plants/algae, layout etc.

Not just layout alone.

Nor does the layout need be confined to the tank itself.
Do not place barriers in your design ideas.

Got a feeling you want to convey? There are many paths to do it. 

Ecotypes, places designs have not yet gone........., a design with a message whether subtle of blatent, SW, Brackish, peculiar fish, native fish/biotopes, uage of a certain technique, wood, rock, gravel/sand/scree, background color etc.
Tank shape, photographic ability(remember Amano is a very good photographer and takes it very serious) it takes patience for a good shot also. 

I like the notion of taking a design to edge, then when it's about to fall apart, some aspect pulls it all back in. 

I don't listen and am hard headed, so this extends into my designs also. Some feel good, some don't. 

Some people wish to be rigid in their approach, but these seldom lead to innovation. you will get a nice looking tank though and that is the goal of many, not winning. 

Seeing the tall rocks Amano uses and replacing them with Cypress knees for example is a simple concept but adds a distinct local flavor to a design that would get extra points.

If I saw a tank with all Japanese, or all SA plants and fish etc, local woods, scenery etc, this would win favor.

Risk are certainly needed with designs to place highly.
You will get much farther trying as many designs as you can and this will allow you to also make mistakes and this is how we learn and become better.

While many may place well in some contest, you have something to aspire to further next year in the ADA contest. 

I'd highly suggest not to judge the contest or placing but rather did the tank achieve your own personal goal?? That is the most important element of aquascaping.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------

