Looks like we got several "not-made-for-IRTC" entries.  You know the ones
created by some commercial package that look nice, but have absolutely
nothing to do with the topic and have no text file description whatsoever.
A few examples are the sports car entries and the light beer.  Now, the
light beer would be a serious competitor IF maybe they took the time to
explain why its a great invention and how they created the image.  The
sports cars are neat but generic.  How is that a great invention, its like
any other car..  For all we know, the image could have come from anywhere
and taken months to create.  It irritates me that people submit these
entries.  Yes they are good but NO they don't deserve to compete because
they weren't made for the IRTC.  I feel as if they should be disqualified,
but alas I know that could never be or IRTC would lose integrity and there
would be huge debates on what should stay and what shouldn't.

Skip Talbot

Post a reply to this message

Well,

Commercial packages offers a baseline in qualities that requires a fair
amount of skill to match using do-it yourself, free software tactics. It
makes me a bit sad to see textures that look so good consistently coming out
of 3D studio pictures while I spend litterally hours to get a texture that
is about right on povray.

However, this is not the point I want to make.

The IRTC is an "open" competition, entried that are submitted without an
archive and without a comment should be dealt with accordingly at the
judging phase, whatever is the tool used. The IRTC folks could make the
rules more strick on the "openness" if they want but I think the weigth is
largely in the hands of the judges, us. Specifically, ther is one entry (for
which no comments are provided) in this round that is most likely a
composite of a real picture and a model, visiting the web-site of the
creator should help the judges to make their own mind.

Cheers,

Christian



The raytracing page is in the making: www.cs.dal.ca/~cblouin/Blouin/

Post a reply to this message

"bongotastic" <cbl### [at] csdalca> wrote in message
news:409adf8a$1@news.povray.org...
[snip]
> The IRTC is an "open" competition, entried that are submitted without an
> archive and without a comment should be dealt with accordingly at the
> judging phase, whatever is the tool used. The IRTC folks could make the
> rules more strick on the "openness" if they want but I think the weigth is
> largely in the hands of the judges, us.

That's exactly the point, those entries have a vote too.


Marjorie Graterol

Post a reply to this message

I agree... specially because their text files are almost empty. It gives me
the impression that they just took some pre-made model and rendered the
image with no effort or creativity whatsoever.

I hope the judges will really take that into account.

F


news:4097223f$1@news.povray.org...
> Looks like we got several "not-made-for-IRTC" entries.  You know the ones
> created by some commercial package that look nice, but have absolutely
> nothing to do with the topic and have no text file description whatsoever.
> A few examples are the sports car entries and the light beer.  Now, the
> light beer would be a serious competitor IF maybe they took the time to
> explain why its a great invention and how they created the image.  The
> sports cars are neat but generic.  How is that a great invention, its like
> any other car..  For all we know, the image could have come from anywhere
> and taken months to create.  It irritates me that people submit these
> entries.  Yes they are good but NO they don't deserve to compete because
> they weren't made for the IRTC.  I feel as if they should be disqualified,
> but alas I know that could never be or IRTC would lose integrity and there
> would be huge debates on what should stay and what shouldn't.
>
> Skip Talbot

Post a reply to this message

A couple of the entries are simply too realistic looking to me. 
Granted, there are some artists who can easily fool my eyes!

But, I noticed that the "holsten.jpg" file contains the text strings:
     Adobe Photoshop 7.0
     2003:10:29 10:36:07

Can anyone tell me how that string could occur in a new JPG file? (Of 
course the clock could have been off by about 6 months when the file was 
created.)

Curious,
Marvin

Fernando G. del Cueto wrote:
> I agree... specially because their text files are almost empty. It gives me
> the impression that they just took some pre-made model and rendered the
> image with no effort or creativity whatsoever.
> 
> I hope the judges will really take that into account.
> 
> F
> 

> news:4097223f$1@news.povray.org...
> 
>>Looks like we got several "not-made-for-IRTC" entries.  You know the ones
>>created by some commercial package that look nice, but have absolutely
>>nothing to do with the topic and have no text file description whatsoever.
>>A few examples are the sports car entries and the light beer.  Now, the
>>light beer would be a serious competitor IF maybe they took the time to
>>explain why its a great invention and how they created the image.  The
>>sports cars are neat but generic.  How is that a great invention, its like
>>any other car..  For all we know, the image could have come from anywhere
>>and taken months to create.  It irritates me that people submit these
>>entries.  Yes they are good but NO they don't deserve to compete because
>>they weren't made for the IRTC.  I feel as if they should be disqualified,
>>but alas I know that could never be or IRTC would lose integrity and there
>>would be huge debates on what should stay and what shouldn't.
>>
>>Skip Talbot
> 
> 
>

Post a reply to this message

The time stamp just confirms the suspicions.  In my opinion, however, the
lack of description or relevance to the topic is enough to argue that the
image was created before the round began.

Skip

Post a reply to this message