 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi there,
just wanted to say that I'll be entering the competition this round
for Architecture. I never entered the IRTC competition, though I have a
great interest in POV-Ray since some 5 years... I'm not very good at
povray and my work will probably look simple (compared to some winners
I've seen!). But yet, my project is of an extreme architecture and I'm
developping my own programs to interactively control the parameters that
will lead to the final object that is the center of my scene.
I found out about the current round 2 days ago and I decided
instantly that I Had to submit something. Even though I don't have too
much time a day to put on this work and that there is only 8 days left!
But I wrote down everthing I wanted to be in my scene and they all
seem very possible, and I should be able to complete the scene.
I was wondering (I haven't found it on the IRTC website) what were
the judging criterias?
Thanks and good luck to all other participants!
Xilo
--
Dedicated to audio/visual and interactive artwork.
Author of The Primary Colors of CSound:
http://www.geocities.com/simonlemieux/PCCS/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Xilo Musimene wrote:
> I was wondering (I haven't found it on the IRTC website) what were
>the judging criterias?
The FAQ includes a few comments on the judging criteria, here:
http://www.irtc.org/stills/faq.html#q3.1
Basically, rate each category 1 thru 20:
Rate for artistic merit
Rate for technical merit
Rate for concept, originality, interpretation of theme
Browsing the comments from past entries might give you a better idea of what
some of the judges are looking for.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Xilo Musimene wrote:
>
> I was wondering (I haven't found it on the IRTC website) what were the
> judging criterias?
>
I don't think there are any documented judging criteria. The works are
judged by the others who have entered plus a few others who are familiar
with the contest. As you may have observed the scoring is broken into
three categories: artistic, concept, and technical which are averaged to
create an overall score for each work. This overall score is then used
to rank the work.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Browsing the comments from past entries might give you a better idea of what
> some of the judges are looking for.
The comments are available? Wow, I just stared at the winners and tried
to analyse what they had in common! =)
Thanks!
Xilo
--
Dedicated to audio/visual and interactive artwork.
Author of The Primary Colors of CSound:
http://www.geocities.com/simonlemieux/PCCS/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I don't think there are any documented judging criteria. The works are
> judged by the others who have entered plus a few others who are familiar
> with the contest. As you may have observed the scoring is broken into
> three categories: artistic, concept, and technical which are averaged to
> create an overall score for each work. This overall score is then used
> to rank the work.
Yes, I see, ok, so I believe my image should be good in concept surely.
About technical, if I have thousands of objects, all placed in a very
strong algorythm (and you will be able to see it on the image) does that
makes for a good technical score?
As for artistic, I believe it has to do with taste and that nobody can
be sure... I guess... Plato might be of help, but even then...
Thanks! =)
Xilo
--
Dedicated to audio/visual and interactive artwork.
Author of The Primary Colors of CSound:
http://www.geocities.com/simonlemieux/PCCS/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Xilo Musimene wrote:
> Yes, I see, ok, so I believe my image should be good in concept surely.
> About technical, if I have thousands of objects, all placed in a very
> strong algorythm (and you will be able to see it on the image) does that
> makes for a good technical score?
>
Possibly, but a high score usually requires a high degree of technical
mastery throughout. As it has been repeated in these groups many times,
it's usually the textures that make or break the image.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The method I use is as follows: First, I look at every entry without
voting to get a feel for the caliber of entries this round. Then I go
through them again and vote, bringing up each image again and at the
same time reading the text file. For the scores, I consider 10 to be
my baseline, what I consider to be exactly average or what I would
expect for the given category. I'll then add or subtract points based
on the particulars of the image, generally keeping in the range of 5
to 15 unless I want to really reward an exceptional entry, or punish
a poor one. When I'm done, I'll sort the entries by my score and go
through them one last time, adjusting any values that seem out of
place. I take my time and the whole voting process for me takes
several nights to finish.
For artistic merit, I look for the aesthetic properties of the entry.
I'm looking for color, lighting, textures, modeling, composition, and
generally "does it look good". For technical score I consider what
tools and techniques were used, and how well they were utilized. This
one is often the biggest judgment call because nobody has a working
knowledge of every single tool out there. I base my opinion on what
I've seen in other works. For example, I've never used Bryce but from
what I've seen I know it does good landscapes, so I'd expect any
landscape from Bryce to be a notch above. I must admit that I also go
by the cost of the software used (I would expect more from an
expensive modeler like Maya than from freeware Spatch, for example).
This is also where I would "punish" an entry without any description
in the readme because I have no way to judge the Tech score without
some hint of what went into it's creation. For the concept score I
look at the subject of the image and how it fits into the round's
theme. If an idea was used a lot by others (such as the dozen water
wheels from the 'Old Technology' round) then that will rank a bit
lower, while a unique and clever idea will rank higher. This is where
I'd take off for "gray area" off-topic images.
I only "disqualify" images by giving them 1,1,1 if they have blatant
rules violations, such as 2D Photoshop images or grossly off-topic
entries where the artist clearly had no intention of following the
topic. Honest mistakes get taken off in the most appropriate
category. For example, if the artist didn't know adding a lens flare
in Photoshop was illegal post processing, this would get a few points
off the tech score because there are ways to do this legally in the
renderer.
As far as comments go, I probably don't leave as many as a lot of
other voters. I'll generally only leave a comment if I think I have
something specific and useful to say to the artist that will help them
on future works. For example "Nice work!" really says nothing, but
something like "Nice work, but the wood textures should be aligned
with the long axis of the objects." gives specific advice on how to
improve an aspect of the work. I try not to be too negative however,
so I'll try to temper what may be taken as a harsh criticism with
something positive as well.
To get a feel for the kinds of things judges look for, check out the
comments from some past rounds. Bring up the tabulated voting results
in one window and the viewing page in the other and start at the
bottom of the list and work your way up. The lowest-ranked images
tend to make the same specific mistakes that keep them at the bottom.
Also be sure to check out some mid-pack entries and compare them to
the winners to see what differences separate the two groups.
Finally, I recommend using Winvote if you can. It helps organize the
voting process and guarantees you won't miss anything.
---
Jet Jaguar
Visit my crappy home page at http://home.att.net/~chmilnir/
MSTie #54297
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Welcome aboard!
Xilo Musimene <xil### [at] hotpop com> wrote in message
news:3EA### [at] hotpopcom...
>
> Yes, I see, ok, so I believe my image should be good in concept surely.
Concept is good! I've noticed that often the images that score high in
concept are ones that approach the topic from a humorous or unusual
perspective.
> About technical, if I have thousands of objects, all placed in a very
> strong algorythm (and you will be able to see it on the image) does that
> makes for a good technical score?
If they look good!
> As for artistic, I believe it has to do with taste and that nobody can
> be sure... I guess... Plato might be of help, but even then...
Yep, it's a coin flip... just keep in mind that Plato has never won a round
;-)
> Thanks! =)
> Xilo
Good luck! Look forward to seeing your entry!
RG
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Possibly, but a high score usually requires a high degree of technical
> mastery throughout. As it has been repeated in these groups many times,
> it's usually the textures that make or break the image.
Hmmm, I see... I'll try to do my best then!
Thanks,
Xilo
--
Dedicated to audio/visual and interactive artwork.
Author of The Primary Colors of CSound:
http://www.geocities.com/simonlemieux/PCCS/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Welcome aboard!
Hey thanks!
> Concept is good! I've noticed that often the images that score high in
> concept are ones that approach the topic from a humorous or unusual
> perspective.
I believe I have an unusual perspective... And possibly a bit humorous
and twisted (actually twisted might be the best qualificative!)
>> About technical, if I have thousands of objects, all placed in a very
>>strong algorythm (and you will be able to see it on the image) does that
>>makes for a good technical score?
>
>
> If they look good!
Yes of course, every winner must look good!
>>As for artistic, I believe it has to do with taste and that nobody can
>>be sure... I guess... Plato might be of help, but even then...
>
>
> Yep, it's a coin flip... just keep in mind that Plato has never won a round
> ;-)
You are right, anyway, I'm not a Plato follower... I'm just a
programmer and a POV-User!
> Good luck! Look forward to seeing your entry!
Thanks, actually, I'm looking forward to see it too! There's not much
time left and it's pretty hard for me to organise all I have to do for
this project in so little time... anyway, even if the picture is not
perfect or finished, I'll post it that way so you guys can see what I
was up to...!
Thanks,
Xilo
--
Dedicated to audio/visual and interactive artwork.
Author of The Primary Colors of CSound:
http://www.geocities.com/simonlemieux/PCCS/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
