I see it as a method of creating things within the realm of a
computers calculated display. Whether it be the abstract or the
photoreal, to see something onscreen which has the ability to invoke a
thought of realism (notice I said abstract too) is what I like about
it most. Frankly, when the image becomes more 2D than 3D I start to
lose interest except for the sake it is a computed scene.

Bob

Remco de Korte <rem### [at] xs4allnl> wrote in message
news:37B7414E.FE76C7E1@xs4all.nl...
> Actually I was thinking along similar lines the other day. I
wouldn't exactly
> have called it camps, but I also noted that you could "group"
pictures in some
> ways. I was mainly thinking about the images posted in these
newsgroups because
> I've seen wildly different things in other places, not only in the
IRTC.
> In stead of camps I was more thinking about goals one has:
experiments, realism,
> learning, entertainment/storytelling, technics.
> I know most people have more then one interest in POV and the
subjects seem to
> come in waves, probably because of people reacting on each other.
It's a pity
> some of the contributions are a bit ignored, simply because they
seem to fall
> too far outside the mainstream of interest. The occasional "cool!"
and that's
> it. Most of the times those are the pictures that seem to be most
interesting (I
> still have a very weird picture, Coton, by Fabien Mosen if I'm not
mistaken).
> As in most artforms it's about technicality and creativity and the
combination
> and balance of those.
> POV, because of it's flexibility and low-level adaptability is a
great tool for
> that.
>
> Regards,
>
> Remco
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~remcodek/

Post a reply to this message