It's funny how many images there are in each round with almost the same
idea, although nobody can sue each other for copying...
  For example, in this round there are three (!) images with a cat meeting
its own reflection on a mirror, and one robot and one human doing the same
thing.
  If I counted right, there is about 12 images of human-meeting-alien
or vice-versa. This was of course more expectable, but those three cats was
a surprise.
  There are about 5 images about some kind of plane or planes, 4 images
about cars and about 7 images with flying saucers in it.

  I think that the image I liked the most for its "feeling" was 1stmiss.jpg.
I almost got a lump in my throat (I don't know if this is the right
expression, just copied what the finnish-english dictionary said...). I
would give it full 20 for interpretation of theme. Never had time to vote,
though...

-- 
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
>   It's funny how many images there are in each round with almost the same
> idea, although nobody can sue each other for copying...
>   For example, in this round there are three (!) images with a cat meeting
> its own reflection on a mirror, and one robot and one human doing the same
> thing.
>   If I counted right, there is about 12 images of human-meeting-alien
> or vice-versa. This was of course more expectable, but those three cats was
> a surprise.
>   There are about 5 images about some kind of plane or planes, 4 images
> about cars and about 7 images with flying saucers in it.
 
Well, when I thought, what I could do for this entry, then I thought at
first about aliens as well; but as always, I said: not this time, maybe
next time....

Most impressive picture at my point of view was "strike". Sure, it has
some shortages (e.g. landscape could be textured/modelled better), but 
it stroke me: only for the flames and smoke I would give 20 pts, not to
mention about ship models, planes, etc.

Post a reply to this message

Vahur Krouverk wrote:
>
> Most impressive picture at my point of view was "strike". Sure, it has
> some shortages (e.g. landscape could be textured/modelled better), but
> it stroke me: only for the flames and smoke I would give 20 pts, not to
> mention about ship models, planes, etc.

I think this illustrates why 20s should be extremely rare votes.....
if there was a similar image with just flames and smoke, would it
be fair to give both comparable tech scores?

BTW I think discussion of particular images here is best avoided
until voting is over for the round, for obvious reasons.

But I will encourage voters to read the .txt files before voting....
some entries are more than "skin deep" in their content.  Additionally,
some images have more originality than others (downloaded versus
original models, for example).  

This will be an interesting round... I regret I was unable to enter
this time.

Dan

-- 
http://www.flash.net/~djconnel/

Post a reply to this message

Funny thing about the cat idea...I haven't looked at the images yet, but
that's not something I would have thought of, but I guess would be
obvious to a cat owner perhaps.  If one of them was done really well I
might give that some credit.

But I didn't enter this round and there's no votes coming from me.  I
just think that the images should be judged on there merits.  

I agree with Dan that it's kind of awkward to comment on certain images
during the voting period.  Then again, I suppose it's hard not to.

No moral from me here...

-Mike


Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
>   It's funny how many images there are in each round with almost the same
> idea, although nobody can sue each other for copying...
>   For example, in this round there are three (!) images with a cat meeting
> its own reflection on a mirror, and one robot and one human doing the same
> thing.
>   If I counted right, there is about 12 images of human-meeting-alien
> or vice-versa. This was of course more expectable, but those three cats was
> a surprise.
>   There are about 5 images about some kind of plane or planes, 4 images
> about cars and about 7 images with flying saucers in it.
> 
>   I think that the image I liked the most for its "feeling" was 1stmiss.jpg.
> I almost got a lump in my throat (I don't know if this is the right
> expression, just copied what the finnish-english dictionary said...). I
> would give it full 20 for interpretation of theme. Never had time to vote,
> though...
> 
> --
> main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
> *_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message

The identity of the person whose alleged responsibility for this
hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion, is NOT
shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous
disclosures may have led to assume, but not to put too fine a point on
it, the individual in question is one whom present writer is in the
habit of identifying by means of the perpendicular pronoun.

This person sincerely apologizes for commenting  entries of Internet
RayTracing Competition (a.k.a. IRTC) during voting period and makes
promise to not to perform such reckless statements in the future in
order to be politically correct. It is to be hoped that expressions,
published in this newsgroup by above mentioned person do not provide any
ground for reviewers final judgements.

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:

>   It's funny how many images there are in each round with almost the same
> idea, although nobody can sue each other for copying...

I'll comment on a specific image, but only because it is my own :)

I made the Mars pic (with the reflecting helmet). I was briwsing through the
pics, when I discovered, in thumbnails, a nearly identical pic! Was I ever
surprised... luckily, in the full sized image, it is apparant that they are quite
different...

FOr such a wide open topic, I was also surprised at the similarity.. I tihnk I
like this.. facinating. What does it tell us about the minds of tracers? :)

Simon
http://home.istar.ca/~sdevet

Post a reply to this message

Simon de Vet wrote:

> Nieminen Mika wrote:
>
> >   It's funny how many images there are in each round with almost the same
> > idea, although nobody can sue each other for copying...
>
> I'll comment on a specific image, but only because it is my own :)
>
> I made the Mars pic (with the reflecting helmet). I was briwsing through the
> pics, when I discovered, in thumbnails, a nearly identical pic! Was I ever
> surprised... luckily, in the full sized image, it is apparant that they are quite
> different...
>
> FOr such a wide open topic, I was also surprised at the similarity.. I tihnk I
> like this.. facinating. What does it tell us about the minds of tracers? :)
>
> Simon
> http://home.istar.ca/~sdevet

I noticed that too and thought how strange.

Nice eyebrows by the way. <g>

--
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message

Vahur Krouverk <vah### [at] fvaetecee> wrote:
: The identity of the person whose alleged responsibility for this
: hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion, is NOT
: shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous
: disclosures may have led to assume, but not to put too fine a point on
: it, the individual in question is one whom present writer is in the
: habit of identifying by means of the perpendicular pronoun.

  Can you speak english, please? Thanks. :)

-- 
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Vahur Krouverk <vah### [at] fvaetecee> wrote:
> : the individual in question is one whom present writer is in the
> : habit of identifying by means of the perpendicular pronoun.

Excellent!  Do you write Clinton's stuff ? :)

Dan

P.S. Followups to rec.games.obfuscation ....

-- 
http://www.flash.net/~djconnel/

Post a reply to this message

Depends.  What do you mean by do?

Dan Connelly wrote:

> Excellent!  Do you write Clinton's stuff ? :)

Post a reply to this message