"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:412cedfb$1@news.povray.org...
>
>    (I know!)   ;)  Seriously though, do you think so? My image at the
> moment is so different to what I would normally do, but I do wonder...
>

I, personally, would have to review all of your images before noticing
certain similiarities, I suppose.  There are only a handful (a small
handful) of artists that I MIGHT be able to recognize.

>       Well, to be honest, like I always am, I'm a little perplexed
> about the 'zoom-in' side of things. I mean, what if your image shows
> the *artistic* side of your mind, and these things show badly in PoV
> when zooming in?

Then you're judged poorly on the technical end-of-the-stick, I suppose.  I'm
still in shock over producing a 1280x960 "zoom-in".  If the entire image
were rendered at that resolution, it would be 12,800x9,600 (at least) or
about 123 megapixels.  Zazzle wouldn't even have a poster size large enough.

I guess you find 2 good spots and add extra detail?  That's sort of
disregarding the intent, perhaps, but on the other hand, a person would not
want to zoom-in on any obvious (major) flaws, either.  "Gee, there are lots
of exposed triangles on that cloth, I think I'll zoom-in and make myself
look bad."

> > as someone else has stated),
>    I think that was me...  ;)

(Laughing at self ) :-)

>    I think this comp will carry on for some time to come. We haven't
> quite got into it yet (I think) - like it's a dream or something...
> But, this is the way forward, and you/we will see some amazing images
> that can possibly push normal* people to the limit...  :)
>
>  *What's that?
>

The idea of "real prizes" (beyond peer recognition) is a big incentive, and
possibly the reason that the IRTC has been losing some appeal.  I'm very
impressed with the sponsorship.  I'm not sure what was involved in getting
those sponsors, but my hat is off to Chris and the other organizers.

-- 
Jeremy (without a hat)
www.beantoad.com