A couple of the entries are simply too realistic looking to me. 
Granted, there are some artists who can easily fool my eyes!

But, I noticed that the "holsten.jpg" file contains the text strings:
     Adobe Photoshop 7.0
     2003:10:29 10:36:07

Can anyone tell me how that string could occur in a new JPG file? (Of 
course the clock could have been off by about 6 months when the file was 
created.)

Curious,
Marvin

Fernando G. del Cueto wrote:
> I agree... specially because their text files are almost empty. It gives me
> the impression that they just took some pre-made model and rendered the
> image with no effort or creativity whatsoever.
> 
> I hope the judges will really take that into account.
> 
> F
> 

> news:4097223f$1@news.povray.org...
> 
>>Looks like we got several "not-made-for-IRTC" entries.  You know the ones
>>created by some commercial package that look nice, but have absolutely
>>nothing to do with the topic and have no text file description whatsoever.
>>A few examples are the sports car entries and the light beer.  Now, the
>>light beer would be a serious competitor IF maybe they took the time to
>>explain why its a great invention and how they created the image.  The
>>sports cars are neat but generic.  How is that a great invention, its like
>>any other car..  For all we know, the image could have come from anywhere
>>and taken months to create.  It irritates me that people submit these
>>entries.  Yes they are good but NO they don't deserve to compete because
>>they weren't made for the IRTC.  I feel as if they should be disqualified,
>>but alas I know that could never be or IRTC would lose integrity and there
>>would be huge debates on what should stay and what shouldn't.
>>
>>Skip Talbot
> 
> 
>

Post a reply to this message