# BAN Berlin International Film Scoring Competition (BIFSC)



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

This is why the Berlin International Film Scoring Competition (BIFSC) should be banned.

1. For 30 Euro you should get 30 words of feedback no matter if you got in the finalist or not.
2. Because the above does not happen, there is Zero transparency they are even watching all the entries.
3. They demonstrate zero respect from their silence when you raise questions after the competition, even to individuals that have won previous competitions!
4. This competition has got some reputation from just a nice web page and few names of people nobody knows. I wonder if I make a competition (Transparent Awards), and I give ALL FEES RECEIVED, with full transparency, to the 10 first winners and have a panel of University Professors and Artists, with the condition the participants never use BIFSC again, if that would be a good idea (stay tuned).
5. I wonder if there is any trace of the monies they receive, and if they declare all to the related tax office. We have the right to know, so does the Tax Service.
6. They seem to have no face (there is really no name, just guest panel of judges), nobody knows who the BIFSC are, it is just a page that looks nice with gold wings, but in the end, it looks like only for the purpose for cutting a giant profit for unknown people and purposes, and you are the sugar daddy! I don't know, we have tried to get in touch with them and they don't reply, so I start making my own conclusions.
7. They refuse to make any comment to journalists that have attempted to contact them (upcoming documentary that includes BIFSC and the likes of them coming soon).

Stay tuned on your favourite stream service, this is an investigative documentary for all similar organisations and not jusat BIFSC. It is time few people come together and take some action. Lot of great artists have to say a lot, and we did already but will try again to get the BIFSC side to comment.

We are replying to most comments here, but this is beacuse your comments are constructive and the production team feels this is the right thing to do (this is a forum after all). If you can help us in any direction please do by leaving a comment or sending us a private message.

Two valid questions have been asked to the production, as we are approached by, and we approach more people.
1. Will the documentary happen if BIFSC and any other organisation presented in the film prove to be legit? The answer is YES. We took the decision to finance this production given some concerns we have, and we feel under the freedom of speech, we have the right to know if something is wrong in this world. But while we have strong evidence that something is wrong here, we will not be biased, and if we prove the otherwise, we will encourage people to the right direction, any direction that might be.
2. What about the earning from this production? It will only pay the costs of production, minimum hourly wage for everyone that has worked (according to their country law, as our crew is international for some operations), and any profits will be given to a charity related to Film and Music Education.
3. Is there really a plan for the TransparentCompetition? Yes. A seperate production is organising this as it has been explained above.


@BIFSC: You can still comment and appear on the documentary. We emailed and will email you again, because you know, there is no phone to call!

Update: For those who asked about the .org name please read this article, that explains that the .org domain can be used from people that only seek profit and it is "not related exclusively" to non-profit, charity or other noble cause. BIFSC seems so far to be a money-making page (which is not illegal) with a bad design and no real people, but we are here to confirm the truth one way or the other. We have no feeling one way or the other, we are here to find the truth (if people pay money for the wrong reason, those running the page people give zero hours into it, and participants get nothing in return).

This is the link about .org: https://charitycheck101.org/a-dot-org-website-doesnt-mean-its-a-charity/

Further to this matter, we have sent emails and are in contact with several Tax Offices including Greece (particular interest to the people appearing from this country in the panel, as Greece has a very strong Tax invasion system).

We also want to thank all the people who are investing time to trace and confirm leads to support the production investigation, as well as for their help to locate the government bodies to reach out about this matter for the involved countries and their contact details.


----------



## Manfred (Oct 10, 2021)

One thing I noticed about the current BIFSC sound design competition is that two of the top three winning scores added their own dialogue to the film…which is not in keeping with the “official rules” of the contest, which states that ”only foley and SXF” should be added to the film. Dialogue is a separate (often most important) aspect of films. Dialogue is not SFX! The dialogue added by the entrie’s was very good and added immensely to the telling of the story, however, I’m sure if we were all given clearance to add dialogue if we wanted to add that element, most would have given that the lack of dialogue weakened the original film. Clearly the contest judges found the dialogue a plus in the winner’s, given that both the #1 and #3 spots had added it (all else aside, such dialogue helped their sound design by making the film’s story clear). I emailed BIFSC about my observation and they have yet to reply. The quesation is: How does breaking the contest rules still make a entry eligible? (Nothing against the winning entries, their sound design work was very impressive, my observations are with how BIFSC is running their contest and upholding their own rules).


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> One thing I noticed about the current BIFSC sound design competition is that two of the top three winning scores added their own dialogue to the film…which is not in keeping with the “official rules” of the contest, which states that ”only foley and SXF” should be added to the film. Dialogue is a separate (often most important) aspect of films. Dialogue is not SFX! The dialogue added by the entrie’s was very good and added immensely to the telling of the story, however, I’m sure if we were all given clearance to add dialogue if we wanted to add that element, most would have given that the lack of dialogue weakened the original film. Clearly the contest judges found the dialogue a plus in the winner’s, given that both the #1 and #3 spots had added it (all else aside, such dialogue helped their sound design by making the film’s story clear). I emailed BIFSC about my observation and they have yet to reply. The quesation is: How does breaking the contest rules still make a entry eligible? (Nothing against the winning entries, their sound design work was very impressive, my observations are with how BIFSC is running their contest and upholding their own rules).


Thank you for the comment, we will add this to the list of questions for BIFSC and a specific panel of professionals that will be featured in the documentary. If you wish to be credited on the closing titles please send a private message with your name.


----------



## Manfred (Oct 10, 2021)

DanniDo said:


> Thank you for the comment, we will add this to the list of questions for BIFSC and a specific panel of professionals that will be featured in the documentary. If you wish to be credited on the closing titles please send a private message with your name.


No need to credit me. Just sharing my observations with the vi control community and the general music/sound design community. I look forward to your documentary.


----------



## wlinart (Oct 10, 2021)

2 years ago i entered, and made my score for it. It was a really nice video to work with. And that was worth €30 for me personally. I really liked the experience. Did i win? Not even close. But i don't care. It's a nice way to practice scoring a high quality video, and i can use it on my reel. And after the competition i just asked for feedback and got a 114 word written feedback, which was actually really useable.


----------



## Manfred (Oct 10, 2021)

wlinart said:


> 2 years ago i entered, and made my score for it. It was a really nice video to work with. And that was worth €30 for me personally. I really liked the experience. Did i win? Not even close. But i don't care. It's a nice way to practice scoring a high quality video, and i can use it on my reel. And after the competition i just asked for feedback and got a 114 word written feedback, which was actually really useable.


I agree that the videos BIFSC use are exceptional and a fantastic way to score to picture (and have them for ones reel). Easily worth the $30 to have them. Getting the personal feedback sounds great, I’ll try to do the same.


----------



## Loïc D (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> I agree that the videos BIFSC use are exceptional and a fantastic way to score to picture (and have them for ones reel).


I tend to disagree : for years, all movies are about scifi plants-covering-planet stuff.
I stopped entering this competition not because of fees but because the movies are boring (to my tastes).

Some other competitions have far more interesting material.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> I agree that the videos BIFSC use are exceptional and a fantastic way to score to picture (and have them for ones reel). Easily worth the $30 to have them. Getting the personal feedback sounds great, I’ll try to do the same.


Sadly, paragraph 3.4 of the rules, state:"BIFSC does not grant any further permission to composers to distribute the film with or without their added work."

You cannot use the video for your reel, only your composition. This is what the rule state, what we have been told from 5 (so far) previous participants who asked this permission (reel, youtube channel etc) and they were referenced to the rules.

Just to make it clear, you cannot use it with the video we have been told, and we have confirmed that with people who have their composition on Youtube, Vimeo, mention the competition but have no video. But that defeats the purpose of a reel, having just sound and telling people you did it for something they cannot see but only hear.

This happens to be a question for BIFSC, but its common practise for most competitions. Winners are allowed to share the whole work, in few cases the finalists too, certainly not those who won’t make it within the finalists.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> I agree that the videos BIFSC use are exceptional and a fantastic way to score to picture (and have them for ones reel). Easily worth the $30 to have them. Getting the personal feedback sounds great, I’ll try to do the same.


Please see reply above, you can not use it for your reel. You can confirm it with BIFSC.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Loïc D said:


> I tend to disagree : for years, all movies are about scifi plants-covering-planet stuff.
> I stopped entering this competition not because of fees but because the movies are boring (to my tastes).
> 
> Some other competitions have far more interesting material


This is true. The whole thing lacks anything refreshing. And paying $30 to get the video sounds like it is a statement not well thought: you can get the video from anywhere after published and remove the sound. Because you cannot use it in your reel anyway. Also, there are lot of animations available to purchase and use for you reel, equal and above the quality that BIFSC provides.

If you are kind enough, please mention the other competitions, we are curious to compare the organiser behaviour with as many as possible. It would help the investigation to have as many suggestions as possible from people who take part is such events.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> I agree that the videos BIFSC use are exceptional and a fantastic way to score to picture (and have them for ones reel). Easily worth the $30 to have them. Getting the personal feedback sounds great, I’ll try to do the same.





wlinart said:


> 2 years ago i entered, and made my score for it. It was a really nice video to work with. And that was worth €30 for me personally. I really liked the experience. Did i win? Not even close. But i don't care. It's a nice way to practice scoring a high quality video, and i can use it on my reel. And after the competition i just asked for feedback and got a 114 word written feedback, which was actually really useable.


Nobody has got feedback from the people who have provided us with statements. Most people can not get any kind of contact after the competition. At this point your claim is not a fact but hearsay. We will however pass this comment to people who have asked for feedback, to provide us with evidence when they asked for it and we will pass this to BIFSC for comment. We will keep this comment for our production notes. Thank you.


----------



## Manfred (Oct 10, 2021)

It would be interesting to inquire if using (any) rescored video for your reel/website/YT/etc. is permitted, and the “non-use” is with regards to distributing for $$$profit or claiming that you are the original composer/sound designer(?). Giving credit to the original creative team of course. So many of entries to a lot of different competitions seem to end up on YT and Venmo (often required to do so as part of their advertising goals). Not sure how to interpret the word “distribute“, does that indicate monetary gain or simply sharing your rescored efforts to attract potential colleagues for future work?


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Manfred said:


> It would be interesting to inquire if using (any) rescored video for your reel/website/YT/etc. is permitted, and the “non-use” is with regards to distributing for $$$profit or claiming that you are the original composer/sound designer(?). Giving credit to the original creative team of course. So many of entries to a lot of different competitions seem to end up on YT and Venmo (often required to do so as part of their advertising goals). Not sure how to interpret the word “distribute“, does that indicate monetary gain or simply sharing your rescored efforts to attract potential colleagues for future work


All the things you said above is what everyone would have thought. However, we have seen replies to participants that they can not use the video, only the composition or sound design. However, the text is NOT clear and can be interpreted either way as you correctly said it above. This is part of our questions to BIFSC to clarify. Having said all that, yes people do put their work online, in fact in too many places, but, are they safe doing it? or one day you will get an email about it with a demand fee? The bottom line is, do you want to know if you break the agreed terms or you just hope you don’t?

A good example of clear terms for competition are the one for the FilmSupply.com competition (we choose to use an example that is not rival of BIFSC, as FilmSupply is about VideoEdit). If you read their terms, you will realise that BIFSC terms is like something done on a coffee table at best.

Hopefully, this and many more answers will come.


----------



## Macrawn (Oct 10, 2021)

I would never "pay" to enter a contest. Art galleries do that kind of thing all of the time. It's just a way for them to raise money. In my opinion any "contest" that requires an entry is bogus. But people can do what they want. The winner gets some benefit from entering but mostly the organizers get the benefit of the $$$$.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 10, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> I would never "pay" to enter a contest. Art galleries do that kind of thing all of the time. It's just a way for them to raise money. In my opinion any "contest" that requires an entry is bogus. But people can do what they want. The winner gets some benefit from entering but mostly the organizers get the benefit of the $$$$.


True, the amount the organisers are getting is so high, but also invisible to the untrained eye. Or to someone that wants to get something out of this, but what is this competition in question really has to offer to anyone, except from making a ridiculous profit for few people in the BIFSC?
That is why as part of our investigation we are seeking access to tax records. And more records that will prove how many applicants paid a fee, and if the two records (tax and received applications ) match! 
And sure, all participants are adults to make their own choices (or are they?), sure. But who are the winners really? Are they somehow connected with BIFSC? And who are BIFSC? Maybe the same people from the panel of jury?
We have the right to know. In those times, those BIFSC people are making hundreds of thousands, with what looks like false promises to composers and sound designers who struggle, even to pay the 30 euro for a chance to be discovered. And it seems, the number of entries is not possible to be evaluated in the time frames they give. 
The people who take part in that event, and they are rejected with a thanks, no feedback and a “come back next year” have the right to know. And they will.


----------



## Scalms (Oct 10, 2021)

wlinart said:


> 2 years ago i entered, and made my score for it. It was a really nice video to work with. And that was worth €30 for me personally. I really liked the experience. Did i win? Not even close. But i don't care. It's a nice way to practice scoring a high quality video, and i can use it on my reel. And after the competition i just asked for feedback and got a 114 word written feedback, which was actually really useable.


Same experience for me. A couple years ago I did the same, asked for feedback and got meaningful reply. Now did they listen to my score before I asked for it? who knows, but they took the time to give me valuable feedback and I appreciated it


----------



## Pappaus (Oct 10, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> I would never "pay" to enter a contest. Art galleries do that kind of thing all of the time. It's just a way for them to raise money. In my opinion any "contest" that requires an entry is bogus. But people can do what they want. The winner gets some benefit from entering but mostly the organizers get the benefit of the $$$$.


I completely respect your opinions on this matter. I have a few differing ones. One benefit I get from a contest is listening to the other entries. There are plenty of ways to skin a score and it is nice and often informative to see how others think and handle a score. Also I think there are some expenses involved even if it is only download bandwidth. I go into the few contests I have entered with the full expectation that the only things I’ll get out of it is what I put in. So I never enter anything with a major entry fee (for me that’s capped at about 20-30 dollars and for that I think twice). But I do agree with you that there are some major scams and cash grabs out there. But that Is music for you. When I was younger and played in at lower tier rock cover bands it was the same thing. The lower tier bar owners hired bands knowing that you would bring your friends and coworkers in to see you. And if you didn’t deliver, that was the end of your gigs at that bar.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 11, 2021)

Pappaus said:


> I completely respect your opinions on this matter. I have a few differing ones. One benefit I get from a contest is listening to the other entries. There are plenty of ways to skin a score and it is nice and often informative to see how others think and handle a score. Also I think there are some expenses involved even if it is only download bandwidth. I go into the few contests I have entered with the full expectation that the only things I’ll get out of it is what I put in. So I never enter anything with a major entry fee (for me that’s capped at about 20-30 dollars and for that I think twice). But I do agree with you that there are some major scams and cash grabs out there. But that Is music for you. When I was younger and played in at lower tier rock cover bands it was the same thing. The lower tier bar owners hired bands knowing that you would bring your friends and coworkers in to see you. And if you didn’t deliver, that was the end of your gigs at that bar.


All opinions are respected and we should not expect to hear our own thoughts reflected back to us. However, I would argue that Art is subjective, there is no right or wrong, and having this kind of no-feedback rejection, it puts you in a place that someone else is good and you are bad at what you just did, which is not what Art is. No composer will tell you they listen to others work, including Hans Zimmer, John Powel and every single composer out there. Again, if that is the way you operate, nobody will say it is right or wrong.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 11, 2021)

Scalms said:


> Same experience for me. A couple years ago I did the same, asked for feedback and got meaningful reply. Now did they listen to my score before I asked for it? who knows, but they took the time to give me valuable feedback and I appreciated it


Just to say again, we have evidence (emails and on camera statements) that people did ask for feedback and got no reply. This includes a winner of a previous year for a later entry. Having evidence and statements from people who won is enough for the production to believe BIFSC does not reply to requests for feedback for those who did not make it to the finalists.

For all we know at this point you could be someone from BIFSC just spreading hearsay, but if you want to back this with evidence and be part of the documentary you are welcome. We have several people who are positive toward BIFSC and have offered themselves for an interview, anyone can do the same, we will shortly make a webpage available with details to get in touch with the production.

We investigate on the basis of facts and critical thinking and we are actively trying to get in touch with BIFSC to comment on that and other serious claims.

The bottom line here is, if your work was seen, and your 30 euro taken gave you a fair chance to win? From your reply you stand where all people we have spoken so far do: if they were not in the finalists, they simply dont know.


----------



## Axilleys (Oct 11, 2021)

Although I follow the forum posts regularly, I have registeered today to reply. First of, the dialogues for the last sound design compeition are totally unacceptable and break the rules. if you ask me this was the way to make winners their own buddies. second i have asked for feedback and got the silence treatment. i read here people say they asked and got feeedback, with all respect i do not believe you and you sound like someone who is related to that organization. i gave 40 euros [late enttry] to get nothing back and on top of that i read here and other places that we can not use the film for our social media pages or reel. looking forward for hte documentary.


----------



## Scalms (Oct 11, 2021)

well, sorry some don't believe me here. I speak the truth. I guess it's your prerogative to not believe me. I don't have any affiliation with that organization. I don't have any affiliation with anyone really, lol. And if people are adamant that they asked for feedback and didn't get, I don't have any reason to not believe it. Sorry that happened to you, they sound frustrated. Actually, when I requested feedback I wasn't expecting any reply and figured it was just a shot in the dark, but was impressed they took the time to get back to me.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 11, 2021)

Axilleys said:


> Although I follow the forum posts regularly, I have registeered today to reply. First of, the dialogues for the last sound design compeition are totally unacceptable and break the rules. if you ask me this was the way to make winners their own buddies. second i have asked for feedback and got the silence treatment. i read here people say they asked and got feeedback, with all respect i do not believe you and you sound like someone who is related to that organization. i gave 40 euros [late enttry] to get nothing back and on top of that i read here and other places that we can not use the film for our social media pages or reel. looking forward for hte documentary.


Sorry to hear all that, but as I have mentioned above you are not alone and we have seen the evidence of people being ignored. Thank you for your comments which add to the bigger picture.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 11, 2021)

Scalms said:


> well, sorry some don't believe me here. I speak the truth. I guess it's your prerogative to not believe me. I don't have any affiliation with that organization. I don't have any affiliation with anyone really, lol. And if people are adamant that they asked for feedback and didn't get, I don't have any reason to not believe it. Sorry that happened to you, they sound frustrated. Actually, when I requested feedback I wasn't expecting any reply and figured it was just a shot in the dark, but was impressed they took the time to get back to me.


I did not say we do not believe you; I said your comment is without evidence. If you want, you can submit the evidence and it will be in support for BIFSC, but nobody said you have to. But until we see that evidence, your claim is hearsay, and we work on the basis of critical thinking and facts. You are aware of people saying this or that and have no evidence in this time of human history, right? Having said all that, we have no reason to not believe you as a person in any case, and saying "you could be affiliated" was to make a point an anonymous claim means nothing to an investigation and could be coming from anywhere. Don't take it personally please, this is not what this is about. On the contrary this is about protecting you and others from taking your hard earned money and just giving it to someone who all they did was to make a webpage.

Still, if you are happy what you paid form, this is you. People pay money for lot of things and have different opinion about it, as not everyone likes the same level of service. Someone here said they are happy they buy a 3 minutes footage for 30 euro, if that makes them happy, cool. The problem here is the illusion those web events create and the zero work they do. If you were to get 300k euro, to only make a list of 10 people nobody can get in touch with and then just give feedback here and there so few people say they got something, I afraid this is a scam, and while we want to investigate this practise with BIFSC (because that is what started it when we were approached), it is part of a wider issue with online competitions that needs a crack down of some sort.

The point on feedback should stay on the fact you pay, you get feedback. How long would it take to write a note of few wrds after watching a 3 minutes video? It would take no time at all, few seconds, lets say a minute, but it would offer respect for someone who paid you to watch it. Our point is, the feedback should be provided without having to chase for it, and it would act as some form of evidence they watched you film.

For what is worth, the fact even an anonymous (or two or three etc) person does claim they got feedback, will be mentioned in the film, but will me marked as just anonymous claim. it wont be left off though. Hope that makes it fair for everyone.

But again, please keep in mind, anything that bring something to light, is for the greater good. There many many stories that had happy individuals, and behind it was a terrible truth.


----------



## Axilleys (Oct 11, 2021)

Scalms said:


> well, sorry some don't believe me here. I speak the truth. I guess it's your prerogative to not believe me. I don't have any affiliation with that organization. I don't have any affiliation with anyone really, lol. And if people are adamant that they asked for feedback and didn't get, I don't have any reason to not believe it. Sorry that happened to you, they sound frustrated. Actually, when I requested feedback I wasn't expecting any reply and figured it was just a shot in the dark, but was impressed they took the time to get back to me.


I have sent 3 emails to them for feedback and a forth to one of the people that appear to be part of the panel that make the evaluation. nobody has replied to me and I am happy to provide the evidence of those emails and messages to the producers. I am not calling you a liar, but I am not one either and I can prove my own claim. Nothing against you, I am just very upset with this silence from those people. If I had the reply you had, it would be fine I guess.


----------



## Scalms (Oct 11, 2021)

Axilleys said:


> I have sent 3 emails to them for feedback and a forth to one of the people that appear to be part of the panel that make the evaluation. nobody has replied to me and I am happy to provide the evidence of those emails and messages to the producers. I am not calling you a liar, but I am not one either and I can prove my own claim. Nothing against you, I am just very upset with this silence from those people. If I had the reply you had, it would be fine I guess.





DanniDo said:


> I did not say we do not believe you; I said your comment is without evidence. If you want, you can submit the evidence and it will be in support for BIFSC, but nobody said you have to. But until we see that evidence, your claim is hearsay, and we work on the basis of critical thinking and facts. You are aware of people saying this or that and have no evidence in this time of human history, right? Having said all that, we have no reason to not believe you as a person in any case, and saying "you could be affiliated" was to make a point an anonymous claim means nothing to an investigation and could be coming from anywhere. Don't take it personally please, this is not what this is about. On the contrary this is about protecting you and others from taking your hard earned money and just giving it to someone who all they did was to make a webpage.
> 
> Still, if you are happy what you paid form, this is you. People pay money for lot of things and have different opinion about it, as not everyone likes the same level of service. Someone here said they are happy they buy a 3 minutes footage for 30 euro, if that makes them happy, cool. The problem here is the illusion those web events create and the zero work they do. If you were to get 300k euro, to only make a list of 10 people nobody can get in touch with and then just give feedback here and there so few people say they got something, I afraid this is a scam, and while we want to investigate this practise with BIFSC (because that is what started it when we were approached), it is part of a wider issue with online competitions that needs a crack down of some sort.
> 
> ...


no worries. I had to dig up the comment they sent since it was a couple years ago. I'm not supporting BIFSC, I only offered my experience for what it's worth. But I am curious the result of your endeavor here, as I feel any kind of search for truth is warranted, whether they are legit or not. I often wonder during competitions whether my piece ever gets listened too. I've learned to have really low expectations. But I appreciate your pursuit to weed out any possible fraud.


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Oct 19, 2021)

Even though I was the first winner of this competition back in 2018, making part of 2 of the three subsequent contests has been very frustrating to me.
I wasn't selected as a finalist for the following couple of scores that I consider the same standard as the winning one from 2018.
When they announced the 2022 competition a few days ago I asked them if past winners are considered for future competitions and here is their reply:

_"Previous Finalists of the same competition (film Scoring) can take part again and be considered for receiving Awards and be named in the 10 finalists.
Previous Award Winners of the same competition (Film Scoring) will not be considered for receiving Awards and be named in the 10 finalists."_

My bad for not having asked it before, but this information should be on their set of rules right from their second competition.
I also think it is strange for any competition to be secretive regarding judgment. However, sometimes, it's even weirder when they expose their feedback.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 19, 2021)

leogardini said:


> Even though I was the first winner of this competition back in 2018, making part of 2 of the three subsequent contests has been very frustrating to me.
> I wasn't selected as a finalist for the following couple of scores that I consider the same standard as the winning one from 2018.
> When they announced the 2022 competition a few days ago I asked them if past winners are considered for future competitions and here is their reply:
> 
> ...


Hi Leo,
we have confirmed your experience is the same with five other winners (within the first 3) of both Scoring and Sound Design competitions of BIFSC. we have gathered evidence that the rules mentioned what you wrote here (which is their reply) but this is only in their Sound Design Rules. This is yet another example of the coffee table, let's make a quick euro.

Since my last message here, my production has got serious evidence in their hands about BIFSC, we have been in contact with other organisations that the name of BIFSC attempts to confuse participants that BIFSC is related to these organisations.

We are bringing up a portal for the production, where a timeline will be public, so people can get in touch and offer comments and experiences. If you wish to share your experience, including what benefits you got (real-life benefits not the pitty award they offer), we would be very happy to organise an interview with you. As previously stated, while this whole thing is looking like a scam, we need the side of BIFSC and we welcome positive comments as our goal is the truth.

Having said all that, at this point, this is just an anonymous group, people send their monies to, there is some kind of judges who will only say "yeah, I was contracted to make a review of some videos they sent me, but I know nothing past that blah blah".
They may be hiding. But the answers are coming.


----------



## rfrancian (Oct 19, 2021)

I'm sorry I wasn't aware of any of this before I applied. I do have a question though. After reading all this I went back and read the rules and am wondering what it means when the say I retain ownership of my work but have to assign my copyright to them? Any ideas?


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 20, 2021)

rfrancian said:


> I'm sorry I wasn't aware of any of this before I applied. I do have a question though. After reading all this I went back and read the rules and am wondering what it means when the say I retain ownership of my work but have to assign my copyright to them? Any ideas?


I am explaining here what our production has been explaned from a legal source who specialise on such copyright issues: It means you can use of course your score for whatever reason you want (not the video though, you can not use the video with your score for a reel, or make it available online etc). On the other hand, they can do anything they want with your score, meaning they can even sell it to someone and make money. This and many more is part of our ongoing investigation. Watch this space, big updates to follow in the upcoming months.


----------



## Axilleys (Oct 21, 2021)

leogardini said:


> Even though I was the first winner of this competition back in 2018, making part of 2 of the three subsequent contests has been very frustrating to me.
> I wasn't selected as a finalist for the following couple of scores that I consider the same standard as the winning one from 2018.
> When they announced the 2022 competition a few days ago I asked them if past winners are considered for future competitions and here is their reply:
> 
> ...


"weirder when they expose their feedback" what that means? Feedback suppose to be the most important part of any competition, to make transparent why you won (or didnt), instead of being favoured.

It adds value and putting few words together costs (timewise) nothing when you have watched a 3 to 5 minutes video (e,g, "not synchornized", "not ideal coupling of instruments on the higher register", e.t.c.), its part of fair play.

Did you at least get feedback when you won? And I have seen your YouTube stuff, and read that they were ignoring you for a long time when you were trying to get in touch with them of why you were never in the finallists again. Up to recently you were excanging messages on your channel being in total dark why you were paying them and never even getting in the finallists since you last win, stating yourself the ruiles for Scoring were not stating anything about past winners. This was only stated for sound design and still does. Because they are a mess, and just take money from people.

I think that anotherweird thing is that, ignoring your past winner for a simple question, that conviniently brings you money from him every year.


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Oct 21, 2021)

Axilleys said:


> "weirder when they expose their feedback" what that means? Feedback suppose to be the most important part of any competition, to make transparent why you won (or didnt), instead of being favoured.
> 
> It adds value and putting few words together costs (timewise) nothing when you have watched a 3 to 5 minutes video (e,g, "not synchornized", "not ideal coupling of instruments on the higher register", e.t.c.), its part of fair play.
> 
> ...


In my experience, I've got much better feedback from laymen than from competition judges. Spitfire's justification of why they chose the winner of Westworld is one classic example of what I mean. You may disagree with me though. But I am just elaborating my point.
Truth be told, I've never been ignored by BIFSC. They have replied to all my messages as far as I can remember. However, they never stated that past winners won't be considered for future contests until a few days ago in my email. 
If I knew I wouldn't be considered I would probably have passed the other competitions because I'm not very keen on judges' feedback.


----------



## Axilleys (Oct 21, 2021)

leogardini said:


> In my experience, I've got much better feedback from laymen than from competition judges. Spitfire's justification of why they chose the winner of Westworld is one classic example of what I mean. You may disagree with me though. But I am just elaborating my point.
> Truth be told, I've never been ignored by BIFSC. They have replied to all my messages as far as I can remember. However, they never stated that past winners won't be considered for future contests until a few days ago in my email.
> If I knew I wouldn't be considered I would probably have passed the other competitions because I'm not very keen on judges' feedback.


If they were replying to you, what were they saying and forgot to tell you "dont pay for entry, we wont consider you". But you have said it yourself, in your post "I'm out - Berlin International Film Scoring Competition 2020" : "But it can be very frustrating when you are not even among the 10 finalists and when the winners come out you start to wonder what were their criteria for judging." and further below where other people were complaining : "No comments nor feedback came from them so far."

There are no creteria Leo. HTey are a well staged money trap. 

And what they feedback or winning their competition did for you? You did not answer that. Nothing. You are good as you were, you didnt gain anything from them.

To close this matter, as I did my part giving my interview about them, and hope to see some justice, you Leo, your music, is just beautiful. All the best.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 23, 2021)

Update: For those who asked about the .org name please read this article, that explains that the .org domain can be used from people that only seek profit and it is "not related exclusively" to non-profit, charity or other noble cause. BIFSC seems so far to be a money-making page (which is not illegal) with a bad design and no real people, but we are here to confirm the truth one way or the other. We have no feeling one way or the other, we are here to find the truth (if people pay money for the wrong reason, those running the page people give zero hours into it, and participants get nothing in return).

This is the link about .org: https://charitycheck101.org/a-dot-org-website-doesnt-mean-its-a-charity/

Further to this matter, we have sent emails and are in contact with several Tax Offices including Greece (particular interest to the people appearing from this country in the panel, as Greece has a very strong Tax invasion system).

We also want to thank all the people who are investing time to trace and confirm leads to support the production investigation, as well as for their help to locate the government bodies to reach out about this matter for the involved countries and their contact details.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 23, 2021)

leogardini said:


> In my experience, I've got much better feedback from laymen than from competition judges. Spitfire's justification of why they chose the winner of Westworld is one classic example of what I mean. You may disagree with me though. But I am just elaborating my point.
> Truth be told, I've never been ignored by BIFSC. They have replied to all my messages as far as I can remember. However, they never stated that past winners won't be considered for future contests until a few days ago in my email.
> If I knew I wouldn't be considered I would probably have passed the other competitions because I'm not very keen on judges' feedback.


If you had been in contact with them about not being selected, what were they wirting to you if they didn't tell you that you can not participate (and subsequently you kept trying and paying) if you were the winner before? Very confusing post, but we understand where you are coming from.

For someone of your status, with students and clients (re your posts), I wonder why you participated in this competition with practically zero gain for you? You seem to be out of place there, and your posts demonstrate someone well established.


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Oct 23, 2021)

DanniDo said:


> If you had been in contact with them about not being selected, what were they wirting to you if they didn't tell you that you can not participate (and subsequently you kept trying and paying) if you were the winner before? Very confusing post, but we understand where you are coming from.
> 
> For someone of your status, with students and clients (re your posts), I wonder why you participated in this competition with practically zero gain for you? You seem to be out of place there, and your posts demonstrate someone well established.


I did receive feedback from them on my second trial. They told me that the reason for not putting me on the finals is that my music didn't connect with the character. That is why I wrote above that I don't care about weird judges' feedback.
It's worth mentioning again that only last week after asking them, they let me know about the impossibility of past winners being considered in the competition. I was treated very unfairly!
I don't know what makes you believe I am a well-established composer. I decided to participate in those competitions because I didn't have any paid work at that time, and it was a chance to develop my career further.


----------



## DanniDo (Oct 23, 2021)

leogardini said:


> I did receive feedback from them on my second trial. They told me that the reason for not putting me on the finals is that my music didn't connect with the character.


That is more confusing, so it was this reason, or becuase you were a previous winner? That doesnt make sense (not you saying it, them messing you about).

What seems it has happened to you (as with 2 other past winners), is that they just send you a random reply "didnt connect with the character". They copy paste replies, we have confirmed that by examing the text/font.



leogardini said:


> That is why I wrote above that I don't care about weird judges' feedback.
> It's worth mentioning again that only last week after asking them, they let me know about the impossibility of past winners being considered in the competition. I was treated very unfairly!


So they told you one thing before (it didnt connect with the character) and two weeks ago they told you about the impossibility of past winners. That contradiction speaks volumes.

I think everyone now starts to see what is happening here. And keep in mind, we have other people stating the same problem, in one case being even more weird than your case.

But yes, you were really treated unfairly because it seems you have submited 2 or 3 times before you found out it was in vain.



leogardini said:


> I don't know what makes you believe I am a well-established composer. I decided to participate in those competitions because I didn't have any paid work at that time, and it was a chance to develop my career further.


Leo, we didnt use the word established in this message (but you are very well established anyway), but having students and making tutorials, plus a honestly good work submited to them, and anything the production has listend from your work, you are not an amature, not an intermediate composer, but rather on a pro level.

And to make this more clear, this is your message from the post "Composing for live performance with minimal instantaneous feedback from VI's":

"Not at all. I've been "composing for musicians while working solely with samples" for many years before I first had a chance to listen to my orchestration with a real orchestra.
I've been criticized for having this approach but it paid off. I've never had to change a note while recording with orchestras."

So, based on your own words (and we have no doubt about it) you are an established composer. And having worked with composers, I know you did not get from your award to that level in 2 years, you had to have experience in the first place.

You didn't need them or the fake award, which you admit, did nothing to you, as you don't pay attention to such awards. They needed you.

All those money-grabing schemes, use some good composers to make the first award and then go on auto.

Evidence flow in rapidly, everyone stay tuned.


----------

