First of all, thanks to all for your input.
I think I should explain my point of view, the following
is only my opinion and maybe is a wrong opinion, decide
by yourself:

IRTC is a nice contest (or it was), but this round shows
a dangerous movement that can ruin the competition.
Because this is a competition, isn't it?.
I mean, at least you expect a little of justice.
If I enter my image and get a 35th position and
someone sends one image with ladybugs and
stairs and get the 16th position, my conclusion
is that something is going wrong for me. (I don't
want to offend anybody, but if someone can
explain me this, I would like to hear about it).

IMHO the winner image has nothing to do with
the topic (and I don't want to talk about the link given by
Gonzo in a previous post in this thread, it talks by itself).

So what is the result?.
That the Internet Raytracing Competition is
becoming only the Internet Raytracing, a place
where you can show your images; you don't need
to care about the results 'cos they mean nothing.
If that's the case, I prefer p.b.i.

Because on the other side there are (at least in my case)
a lot of hours invested in an image, time that you have to
steal from other activities (sleep, family, work...)
to get it before the last day.

If the final goal is to make an image, I prefer to have
the time I need and not only 2 months.
I sincerely think that this has nothing to do with
egos. The important thing is not to win but to
enter. Yes, but to enter in what?

PD: I've talked only about my entry, but imo
there are a lot of images that deserve a better
position than the one they have obtained.

Hoping I haven't started a flame war...
Bye.

Txemi Jendrix
http://www.txemijendrix.com

Post a reply to this message

Txemi Jendrix wrote:

> 
> So what is the result?.
> That the Internet Raytracing Competition is
> becoming only the Internet Raytracing, a place
> where you can show your images; you don't need
> to care about the results 'cos they mean nothing.
> If that's the case, I prefer p.b.i.
> 

I think the contest definitely offers the opportunity to become 
intellectually involved with a topic and enjoy a shared experience with 
others that entered the same round. And if the effort to respond to the 
topic isn't sincere, then the experience is diminished. So you are 
right, the contest must be credible to work.  But the application of 
numbers to aesthetic and intellectual experience can be deceptive 
because they suggest more accuracy than may actually have meaning. 
Usually the artist's intellectual involvement with the topic is 
recognized and rewarded but not always.  The tool of assigning scores 
and averaging them all is a common sense way to do it but is capable of 
only so much discrimination.  This is one reason that I have tried to 
give some attention in these newsgroups to the content side of the works 
being produced, but I can only even attempt it because of the presence 
of a topic and the assumption of people's sincere involvement.  So I 
think that when you enter the contest you do take some risk.  You are 
hoping to have your idea rewarded in the ranking and it may not be.
The results don't mean nothing, but they are not the only judgement on 
your work either. It's tough.  Unless you make yourself vulnerable there 
can be no reward. But at the same time you are responsible for your own 
feelings.

-Jim

Post a reply to this message

> If the final goal is to make an image, I prefer to have
> the time I need and not only 2 months.
> I sincerely think that this has nothing to do with
> egos. The important thing is not to win but to
> enter. Yes, but to enter in what?

> Hoping I haven't started a flame war...
> Txemi Jendrix

I'll be on your side
Philippe Gibone

Post a reply to this message

>
> I think the contest definitely offers the opportunity to become
> intellectually involved with a topic

That's the point, and to see images definitely off-topic, being rewarded and
even at the first place is disappointing (consider this as an
understatement)

Philippe Gibone

Post a reply to this message

Txemi Jendrix <tji### [at] euskalnetnet> wrote in message
news:3f7395a1@news.povray.org...
> First of all, thanks to all for your input.
> I think I should explain my point of view, the following
> is only my opinion and maybe is a wrong opinion, decide
> by yourself:
>
> IRTC is a nice contest (or it was), but this round shows
> a dangerous movement that can ruin the competition.
> Because this is a competition, isn't it?.
> I mean, at least you expect a little of justice.
> If I enter my image and get a 35th position and
> someone sends one image with ladybugs and
> stairs and get the 16th position, my conclusion
> is that something is going wrong for me. (I don't
> want to offend anybody, but if someone can
> explain me this, I would like to hear about it).

I agree that this round showed up some negative aspects in the voting. I was
pretty blown away when I saw the tabulated scores, but I was willing to
believe that they were just a more-extreme-than-usual variation which the
variety of entries says was likely.

But after I had time to read all the comments I was pissed. In past rounds
there is usually some correlation between the score and the number and
caliber of the comments. High scoring images get a lot of comments, and
those comments tend to be very emphatic and positive. Low scoring images
tend to get less comments, and the comments are usually not negative, but
more passively worded. So when I see an image garner 15 comments out of only
28 voters, and those comments are almost all emphatically positive and the
image ends up 11th place, there is something wrong. And that one wasn't the
only one, there were several where the scoring was just way out of whack.

And yes, it is a competition, so yes the scores should mean something,
regardless of whether you are trying to win or not. That's what a
competition is, you may not go for the win, but you are going for a score,
so it leaves a bad feeling when the scoring is bad.   I enter mainly because
having a topic makes me create things that I otherwise would probably never
create, and I don't worry about winning (good thing, since I've never
won...) but I do like to think my scores mean something, if nothing else
than to compare to my earliest scores to see if I've gotten any better, but
even that is meaningless if I feel the scoring is meaningless.

So I don't think your opinion is wrong, besides, its yours and you are
entitled to it. But I do think (hope) that you are wrong as far as it being
a movement. The scoring is not usually like this, I think that it is just a
temporary detour. The IRTC is usually a positive experience, largely because
of artists like yourself who share their artistic perspectives and
experience, and their comments and knowledge.  And the scoring isn't
everything. I know that in the time I've been entering, my own images have
improved from the feedback, and often the best feedback has come with not so
good scores.  You should do what your feelings tell you to do, but I hope
you will remember all the good rounds, and the good images and positive
comments, and not let them be buried by one bad round.  And my best wishes,
whatever you decide.


> Hoping I haven't started a flame war...

Well, if there is a war, I won't blame it on you.

This is my last rant on the subject, I've said what I think and that was
really more than I started to, but I've had 2 shots of Corazon Anejo now, so
I'm feeling better.

RG - another day, another shot and I'll be ok.

P.S. Ok, 1 rant addendum...  I do not think any of the top 3 were bad, they
are all fine images, I just feel that there were better, and that I find it
odd that so many excellent images received such poor scores.

Post a reply to this message

> P.S. Ok, 1 rant addendum...  I do not think any of the top 3 were bad,
they
> are all fine images, I just feel that there were better, and that I find
it
> odd that so many excellent images received such poor scores.

After having thought about this whole issue, and after having slept on it.
I think the biggest problem is that most of us IRTC folks aren't actually
artists, and have had no formal art training.  "Surrealism" is a very artful
topic, being voted on by largely non-artists who may know nothing of the
surrealist movement other than seeing a few of Dali's soft-watches.

This round is "Decay".  Art is not a major component of the topic itself.  I
personally expect judging to be more normal.  This round seemed to be the
exception rather than the rule.

-- 
Jeremy

Post a reply to this message

Why don't we change the rules for voting? Can we have a "jury" winner and a
"popular" winner?

I think that the winning entries should be chosen by a jury of 12 people,
formed by 6 permanent judges, and the 6 winners of the previous round (or
perhaps 6 - 3 permanent, and 3 winners of the previous round). What do you
think? Is that feasible?

The "popular" jury would be the present mode of voting.

BTW, I vote for Gilles Tran, Jaime Vives, Txemi Jendrix and Jim Charter for
the permanent board. :-)

Regards,

Roberto

Post a reply to this message

"Roberto A." <wol### [at] hot-mailcom> wrote in message
news:3f74532c@news.povray.org...
|
| Why don't we change the rules for voting?

Here's a much better idea: Start your own competition. The shortest-code
competition was popular enough and was IIRC not an official competition.
Just select a topic and a jury, find a little web space to post the
images, and then announce your competition in p.gen. I'm sure you can
get enough takers if the topic is good. You might try looking on the
IRTC topic suggestion list for ideas.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

I don't think we're taking into account the core problem with the voting.  Voting on
other images that are competing against yours
is a conflict of interest.  Now most of us I'm sure do try and be objective, and rate
fairly, but that doesn't mean everyone does.
The short-term desire to win can overshadow the long-term goal of a fun and fair
competition.  As the number of voters decreases the
conflict of interest will tend to make the results chaotic.  I can even think of one
way to cheat and put almost any image near the
top, although I would never do it, unless I wanted to prove it could be done.  My
point is, at core the IRTC really is more of a
community event than a competition.  The only way to get truly consistent results
would be a panel of impartial judges.  I'm not
suggesting we change the voting, just realize that it is what it is.

Andrew Wilcox

Post a reply to this message

The "Surrealism" topic certainly intimidated me, and I didn't vote
this round (panel judge) because I didn't trust my ability to judge
the topic. While I enjoy Dali's work, most surrealistic works don't
interest me. I'm thinking the judging will improve next round (not
just because I plan to vote! :-) as many others may have had the
same feeling.

That said, there are always entries that finish in the 10-20 range
that I thought should be top 3, maybe even the winner. Entrants/
artists/programmers should always be prepared for their work not
to be understood or appreciated. Nature of the game?

By the way, I toyed with entering the Surrealism round with a
warped/stretched lama. Title to be...The Dali Lama

One thought (from someone who spends most of his Spring and
Summer on a bicycle) is the voting would be easier if the images
were made available for voting as they are posted.

Post a reply to this message