I did a quick count of the programs people used for creating their entries
for this round, and here are the results.  I wonder where the person who was
using POV-Ray 3.2 got their copy....

POV 3.1 -- 19
MegaPOV -- 14
3DS Max -- 14
Vue d'Espirit -- 6
Bryce -- 6
Generic POV-Ray -- 4
3D Studio -- 2
Raydream Studio -- 2
Terragen -- 2
POV-ray 3.2 -- 1
POV-ray 3 -- 1
SkyPOV -- 1
SoftCAD.3D Lite -- 1
TrueSpace -- 1
BMRT -- 1
Cinema4DXL -- 1
Lightwave -- 1
Blender -- 1

Photograph -- 1
Unknown -- 1

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner wrote:
> 
> I did a quick count of the programs people used for creating their entries
> for this round, and here are the results.  I wonder where the person who was
> using POV-Ray 3.2 got their copy....

Compiled own version? Or most probably it was 3.02...

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner wrote:
> 
> I did a quick count of the programs people used for creating their entries
> for this round, and here are the results.  I wonder where the person who was
> using POV-Ray 3.2 got their copy....

I think s(he) was meaning 3.02 or a patched-enough version
to consider it 3.2... As long as it does not confuse too
many people, it doesn't matter. And having a sudden rush
on povray.org in quest of a how-did-i-manage-to-miss-it
new version is funny.

Anyway, it is great to see there's variety in the tools
used, and that this competition isn't too POV-Ray specific,
as some people used to complain about.


				Adrien Beau

Post a reply to this message

> TrueSpace -- 1

Just for the record:  I didn't use TrueSpace to do the
rendering, only to do part of the modelling... and the model was converted
to POV format through NuGraf/PolyTrans.

-Doug Eichenberg

Post a reply to this message

The big challenge I have when voting (which I can't do this round, but I ran
into it when I could) is that I have no idea how challenging a piece was to do
in Bryce (I still have 1.0 around and I rarely use it) or Terragan or basically
anything non-POV. I can look at a scene that seems that POV is a tough challenge
to get to work, but antoher program might do this in a pinch.

Does anyone else have this dilemma when voting?

Josh


Mark Wagner wrote:

> I did a quick count of the programs people used for creating their entries
> for this round, and here are the results.  I wonder where the person who was
> using POV-Ray 3.2 got their copy....
>
> POV 3.1 -- 19
> MegaPOV -- 14
> 3DS Max -- 14
> Vue d'Espirit -- 6
> Bryce -- 6
> Generic POV-Ray -- 4
> 3D Studio -- 2
> Raydream Studio -- 2
> Terragen -- 2
> POV-ray 3.2 -- 1
> POV-ray 3 -- 1
> SkyPOV -- 1
> SoftCAD.3D Lite -- 1
> TrueSpace -- 1
> BMRT -- 1
> Cinema4DXL -- 1
> Lightwave -- 1
> Blender -- 1
>
> Photograph -- 1
> Unknown -- 1

--
Josh English
eng### [at] spiritonecom
"May your hopes, dreams, and plans not be destroyed by a few zeros."

Post a reply to this message

"Josh English" <eng### [at] spiritonecom> wrote in message
news:396116CE.8BBA20D7@spiritone.com...
> The big challenge I have when voting (which I can't do this round, but I
ran
> into it when I could) is that I have no idea how challenging a piece was
to do
> in Bryce (I still have 1.0 around and I rarely use it) or Terragan or
basically
> anything non-POV. I can look at a scene that seems that POV is a tough
challenge
> to get to work, but antoher program might do this in a pinch.
>
> Does anyone else have this dilemma when voting?
>

Yep, and I've even raised it in the ng before. There are two ways to deal
with it - either give everyone the same vote for "technical" or (Gilles's
advice) take a look at a few gallery sites using the program your in the
dark about.

IMHO, in general things are as hard as they look, particularily complex
modelling and good textures.

I wouldn't worry too much - "technical" is the least subjective of the
catagories and consequently the one most prone to errors. Accept it.

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote...

> MegaPOV -- 14

This is a great showing for MegaPov (with it being unofficial) and makes me
happy!  :-)

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message

MegaPOV truly raises the bar

Nathan Kopp wrote:

> Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote...
>
> > MegaPOV -- 14
>
> This is a great showing for MegaPov (with it being unofficial) and makes me
> happy!  :-)
>
> -Nathan

Post a reply to this message