|
|
Tom Melly wrote:
>
> "J Charter" <jrc### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
> news:3A65C43A.7933F141@aol.com...
> >
> > Can you elaborate?
>
> Tom Dahl wrote his own raytracer - therefore rightly scored very high in the
> Oceans round for his entry.
>
> However, to keep on giving him v. high technical scores seems to me
> counter-intuitive.
I did what was mentioned here before, if you don't know the program
used, you can't very well judge the difficulty of achieving good
results. I know POV, a little bit of Blender and even less 3DS,
therefore gave 10's to everyone who used something other than what I
knew, unless it was blatantly easy or unseemingly complex.
While this method might show my bias towards POV, I think it's better
this way than giving high (or low) technical marks to a picture based on
the complexity of achieving the same results with POV. For example,
reflections are child's play in POV, whereas - from what I understand -
are nightmarishly complicated with scanline renderers.
--
Francois Labreque | In the future, performance will be measured
flabreque | by the size of your pipe.
@ | - Dogbert, on networking
videotron.ca
Post a reply to this message
|
|