"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:3f735b33@news.povray.org...

|Shay:
| I am almost strictly 2.5D,

|Steve:
| You're into 2D as well?

Not 2D, 2.5D. What I mean by that is that most of my pictures have
*much* larger x and y than z dimensions, basically showing the patterns
and details of something without bothering to show the shape of that
thing or its relation to its surroundings.

|Steve:
| And 3D too?!   ;)

Well, my IRTC entry is the closest I've gotten to 3D in a while, but the
ship would of course be 3D.

|Steve:
|    Give it a go, and post a 'taster'. I'd be glad to help
| if I can.

Give it a go with us! I'd like to see what you come up with. We still
haven't come up with a good way to choose the winner, but will likely
try to find some sci-fi fans to decide.

|Steve:
| My kind of image.

It really isn't mine and I'm not even a Star Trek fan. BUT, a friend who
is started talking about what a good design the original Klingon D7s
were and how poorly they were developed in the movies. He gave me an
interest in seeing if I could come up with an "alternate evolution" of
the ship. We'll be keeping the original configuration (which was only
ever shown from a distance on TV) and working on our ideas of how the
ships *should* have looked up close.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message