Jeremy M. Praay wrote:

> "gonzo" <rgo### [at] lansetcom> wrote in message news:3fcc35d5@news.povray.org...
> 
>>A great take on the topic. Reminds me of some fall walks along the river
>>where I grew up.  The treestump is superbly modelled and textured and the
>>moss realistically patched over it. The lighting has a nice feel of
>>filtering down through overhanging trees, giving the image much more of an
>>environment than it actually contains.  Good job.
>>
> 
> 
> I was impressed with all of the different types of fungus/mushrooms.   In
> fact, there are even some morels over on the right side.  (Hunting for
> morels is one of my favorite spring-time activities.)  Those look like some
> sort of "inkies" in the middle, under the stump.  Very well done, and very
> realistic.  The moss is outstanding as well.  It appears that the artist was
> very careful to use very realistic models.
> 
> Being that I love nature scenes in general, this was certainly a favorite of
> mine.
> 
Yes I think that is the key to how the picture might reach a 
transcendent statement.  It touches on ideas about complexity and 
biodiversity in the context of the process of decomposition.  There is 
of course a long tradition of art as observation.  Especially 
observation of the natural world. By recording the agents, or evidence, 
of a process, do we record the process?  Is "decay" a complex process? 
Or is it underneath just a matter of a few chemical reactions, not very 
interesting at all?  Is it indistinquishable from life?

By settling on this approach, Nate gave himself the license to keep 
enrichening his picture and only improve it more.  But it was important 
to its success that each new element he put into the picture be done 
convincingly, be secured for us to observe.  This is not a study in 
illusion or the nature of perception.  The more tactile and the more 
various the plants and their textures, the better.

-Jim

Post a reply to this message