But what am I going to do with the 10,000 lawyers I have on retainer to
swoop in and file suits alleging fraud and/or disenfranchisement?  I can't
afford to keep them around until January.

Well, for me, personally, thank you.  By next week all the bandages will be
removed from my right hand, and the pins will be out of my finger, and I
should be POVing ahead full steam.  (Not that my submission would have
altered the committee's opinion about overall quality.)

And I do think that it is very important to get submissions from more of the
really great POVers, especially since you and Christoph and some of the
other experts exempted yourselves in order to organize the competition.
Not to name names, but it would be nice to get entries from the likes of
Tor Olav, Shay, Tek, St. (Steve), etc.  Just off the top of my head, I can
think of 50 regular contributors to p.b.i. who are capable of some very
impressive stuff, and there must be at least twice that many more who only
lurk, or don't bother visiting the newsgroups at all, who are of a similar
caliber.

Let me also add my voice of support and thanks to all of you for the
tremendous amount of work you put into making POVRay and the POVRay
community such a success.

Dave Matthews

web.417d11adb45fa19e497bbfc0@news.povray.org...

> Thanks for the response and the clarifications.  I apologize if I was a 
> bit
> crabby.

Thanks. No harm done. Well, bad news are bad news, no matter how they are 
delivered.

> 1) Add the explanation about copyright to the official rules.  You might
> also explain that any other information in the image that can be used to
> identify the entrant should be removed.  For instance, I noticed that in 
> my
> image, there is a directory path in part of the image that has my name in
> it.  I also have a picture of myself included, but I'm pretty sure that
> none of the judges know who I am based on my picture....

Well, putting some identifying items (other than a signature) in the image 
can be an artistic choice and I'm of the opinion that this should not be 
regulated. If you want to put a picture of yourself in the image, or a 
directory path, because it adds artistic value to the image, this is your 
choice and I think that it has to be accepted as such.

In any case, total anonymity is close to impossible. People can have 
recognisable styles, use favourite objects, topics or textures etc. But 
since most of the judges won't be familiar with the community, this 
shouldn't be a problem. I'd say that we should trust the judges to do their 
best to ignore the names of the entrants (for instance, they won't do 
intensive searches to discover who is who...), and that entrants should do 
their best to keep to the guidelines as they are written now. Let's have 
common sense and good manners prevail.

> 2) Set a lower limit on the number of images that need to be submitted
> before judging can go forward.

I have no prior experience in organising contests, so it's difficult for me 
to comment on that. I'd be willing to know how the sort of issues we're 
facing right now are taken into consideration in other competitions (though 
it's too late now).

> 3) Continue to try to get publicity for the contest and encourage all
> current entrants to encourage others to get involved.

We'll certainly try to do that in the weeks to come. I'm glad that a good 
number of people have already declared their interest in participating.

> 4) Perhaps someone could set up an IRC channel #povcomp2004, where artists
> can waste time and talk about new ways to procrastinate.
> 5) Provide some kind of acknowledgement, perhaps a t-shirt or some bit of
> inexpensive swag, to the people who met the first deadline.

I'll run this with the organisers. I'm not sure about the "inexpensive swag" 
thing, as it could be perceived as condescending by some folks.

> 6) Upon discussing this contest with a friend of mine, he pointed out what
> might be part of the problem.  Since you have explicitely stated that
> artists will be given more credit for self-made models than ones borrowed
> from someone else or created using 3rd party tools, you may have narrowed
> the pool of participants to POV-Ray artists who are very good at creating
> models and in creating impressive images using those models.

(note that the guidelines do not say "3rd party tools", but "3rd party 
models", but your point remains valid)

Part of POV-Ray's greatness and specificity is the use of code to create 
models. I've been a mesh user for years, a promoter of mesh and image maps 
in POV-Ray, and a big user of 3rd party objects and tools but if I had 
entered the competition, I would certainly have made sure that some 
prominent models in the scene would have been both original and hand-coded. 
This being a POV-Ray competition, asking people to show off their POV-Ray 
skills is somehow mandatory. Can this turn off people? Perhaps, but the best 
POV-Ray images should be intrinsically POV-Ray made, just like Poser 
contests, for instance, have the use of Poser models as a central point. 
This would be different if the competition was open to other renderers (like 
the IRTC).

> If, as I expect, you don't have any problem with an artist using/adapting
> models they created in the past in this image, then it might be best to 
> say
> so explicitly.

This could be made more explicit. On a side note, writing guidelines (and 
contracts) is always a "damned-if-you-do, damned if you don't" exercise. 
Write too much of it, and a sizeable number of people will misread it or 
fail to read it. Write not enough of it, and a equally sizeable number of 
people will be confused by the lack of guidance and start seeing things 
where there's nothing to see. Finding the right balance is tough.

> I hope this is of some help.

Your help is welcome !

Gilles


-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Dave Matthews wrote:
> And I do think that it is very important to get submissions from more of the
> really great POVers, especially since you and Christoph and some of the
> other experts exempted yourselves in order to organize the competition.

I think everybody can participate now including organizers. Why not?

Gena.

"Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Hello
>
> Disclaimer: this is not an official statement. An official announcement from
> the POVCOMP organizers will follow (some details are still being worked on)
> and participants will be emailed privately.
>
> There are 56 entries. Among these, there are exceptional images, that would
> be worthy of the main prizes. People have been working hard, and these
> images are a good testimony of what can be achieved with POV-Ray.
>
> However, these exceptional images are too few. The competition was all about
> getting the best out of POV-Ray, and while most entries are very good, they
> are on the whole not up to the standard that can be observed in current 3D
> contests. It's not an easy thing to say and we understand that this may be
> offending to some. Be sure that we fully realise the amount of work that was
> put in all entries: it's just that the bar has been raised very high in 3D
> these days. The feedback on the new hall of fame was extremely positive:
> this newfound reputation should not be squandered. We all know that POV-Ray
> is an exceptional piece of software, so we need lots of exceptional artworks
> to prove it.
>
> One major reason for the lack of exceptional pieces may have been that the
> time period of two and a half months was too short. POVCOMP is of an order
> of magnitude harder than the IRTC, and the organisers underestimated the
> time needed to create this sort of work without giving up on real life.
> People couldn't find the time to complete their entries, and among those
> submitted, we feel that many can be improved.
>
> Accordingly, it has been decided to postpone the deadline until January 31,
> 2005. That's almost 3 additional months for people to resume or complete
> their work, or submit new ones.
> In a nutshell:
> - Those of you who have submitted an image will be given the opportunity to
> unsubmit it and resume work.
> - Those of you who did not submit due to lack of time are encouraged to
> resume work on their creation.
> - For those who are happy with what they have submitted already, their image
> will remain in its 'submitted' state. Of course, you can always create a new
> work.
>
> The precise procedures to do so will be explained later.
>
> Again, this was not an easy decision to take. I'm painfully aware of how
> difficult this must be for the POVCOMP participants. We hope, however, that
> these 3 extra months will result in many exceptional pictures.
>
> Gilles Tran
>
> --
> **********************
> http://www.oyonale.com
> **********************
> - Graphic experiments
> - POV-Ray and Poser computer images
> - Posters

First of all I would have to say I am disappointed. There where rules for
this competition that we all had to follow. If the level of art was not up
to standard there was no prevision in the rules to cover this. In such
there could be legal issues involved. I do not want to stop any further
competitions by scaring the organizers away. I do however believe more
respect to those that did make the deadline should be shown. Could my image
be better? Yes but I made the dead line with the best I could make. I have
heard here many times how the pov team must balance their time and life
with writing povray and I agree but now when we push and work to produce
with in the given required timeline we get blasted for not producing well
enough.

The idea of a competition was great. The execution was fair given that it
was a first run. It is time to complete this one, award the prizes, state
the improvements for later and go again with the improvements. If the
companies that donated the prizes expected this competition to be perfect
then perhaps new sponsors are needed anyway. I am sure everyone has learned
something from this.

If the deadline is moved officially I will put more time in to my image. I
am glad to be able to do so. But, this is not the normal way to handle
these problems in normal competition. Like I said before; there could be
legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
I would encourage some counseling.

m1j wrote:
> the improvements for later and go again with the improvements. If the
> companies that donated the prizes expected this competition to be perfect
> then perhaps new sponsors are needed anyway. 
Dumbo.

> legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
> I would encourage some counseling.
> 
Suggesting to sue a bunch of VOLUNTEERS working hard to make an OPEN 
competition for a FREEWARE product a success, isn't mine style. And 
neither should be yours.

-Em

emkaah <emkaah@yahoodotcom> wrote:
> m1j wrote:
> > the improvements for later and go again with the improvements. If the
> > companies that donated the prizes expected this competition to be perfect
> > then perhaps new sponsors are needed anyway.
> Dumbo.
>
> > legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
> > I would encourage some counseling.
> >
> Suggesting to sue a bunch of VOLUNTEERS working hard to make an OPEN
> competition for a FREEWARE product a success, isn't mine style. And
> neither should be yours.
>
> -Em

There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We could
all go blindly forward thinking no one here would do something like this
but with $14,000 in prize money there could be someone now or after the
finals are posted in Feb. that after losing decides they where not dealt
properly. The rules are conditions to a contract that was ratified by each
of us submitting an entry. To change the rules now with out first including
all those involved is a breach of contract. With such a team of volunteers
it would be a very easy win for anyone who lacking in integrity would spend
the money to file a suit. The Pov team would have no funds to fight and
would be force to agree to a settlement. That would be a very bad deal for
all of us. I am just worried. I am not sure if this issue was considered in
the decision.

"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:web.417ee390b45fa19ef7635e200@news.povray.org...
> emkaah <emkaah@yahoodotcom> wrote:
> > m1j wrote:
> > > the improvements for later and go again with the improvements. If the
> > > companies that donated the prizes expected this competition to be
perfect
> > > then perhaps new sponsors are needed anyway.
> > Dumbo.
> >
> > > legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal
advice
> > > I would encourage some counseling.
> > >
> > Suggesting to sue a bunch of VOLUNTEERS working hard to make an OPEN
> > competition for a FREEWARE product a success, isn't mine style. And
> > neither should be yours.
> >
> > -Em
>
> There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We could
> all go blindly forward thinking no one here would do something like this
> but with $14,000 in prize money there could be someone now or after the
> finals are posted in Feb. that after losing decides they where not dealt
> properly. The rules are conditions to a contract that was ratified by each
> of us submitting an entry. To change the rules now with out first
including
> all those involved is a breach of contract. With such a team of volunteers
> it would be a very easy win for anyone who lacking in integrity would
spend
> the money to file a suit. The Pov team would have no funds to fight and
> would be force to agree to a settlement. That would be a very bad deal for
> all of us. I am just worried. I am not sure if this issue was considered
in
> the decision.

There is no legal issue, because everyone who registered agreed to this:

http://www.povcomp.com/rules/agreement/

Specifically, "5. By registering or entering the competition you accept and
agree that:" "b. Neither the competition organisers nor anyone associated
with the competition may be held responsible for any loss or damage of any
sort whatsoever, howsoever caused, that you may suffer as a result of
entering."

Lance.

thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
thehandle - www.thehandle.com

"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I do however believe more respect to those that did make the deadline should
> be shown.

How do you know if the organizer's haven't prepared some kind of
consolidation already?  It's just that practically nothing can be done at
this point, the competition continues.  Do you think it would be fair if
some authors or works was put on the pedestal at this point?

It's life.  It's not supposed to be predictable or set in stone.  Just try
to learn to adjust.

> with writing povray and I agree but now when we push and work to produce
> with in the given required timeline we get blasted for not producing well
> enough.

The organizer's have taken all the responsibility and blame.  The images
were good for a three-month competition, but the organizer's realized that
what they really were after were the kind of results that could be expected
after 6 months of amateur work.  I don't see why you would feel a need to
take any of this so personally, unless it's a general problem with personal
insecurity.  D'oh.

> I am sure everyone has learned something from this.

Seems to me that not everyone, not yet.

> But, this is not the normal way to handle these problems in normal
> competition.

Oh but doesn't that just fit?  The normal way to handle a box in a 3D
software would be to click on a button.  :)

> Like I said before; there could be legal issues that could change things.
> If anyone has access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling.

Now *that's* the adult way of coping with the world.  Just sue 'em.

--
jussi.kantola

"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We could

Of course the was.  You suggested that, and I quote, '[if] anyoneone has
access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling'.

You'd better calm down a bit before your next post.

--
jussi.kantola

m1j <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> If the deadline is moved officially I will put more time in to my image. I
> am glad to be able to do so. But, this is not the normal way to handle
> these problems in normal competition.

  That's where you are wrong. It's very usual for competitions (not only
computer graphics competitions, but also other similar ones) to extend
deadlines if the amount of entrants was too small for a reasonable
competition.

  I really don't understand why you are disappointed and why you are
suggesting this silly idea that the prices should be given now
regardless of the quality of the competition.

  Extending the deadline serves everyone, ending the competition now
serves no-one (except perhaps the winner).

  Extending the deadline serves the entrants and potential entrants:
Many people complained that they did not have the time to make an entry
even though they would have wanted. Some even complained that they started
making an entry but did not make it in time. Some entrants have expressed
that they did not have time to develop the image as much as they would
have wanted.
  And why should existing entrants complain? It's a fact that deadlines
make people work harder. That's the reason why there are deadlines (and
often even several ones) in school and work projects. Now, the entrants
have made a lot of work for their entry because of the deadline; now that
the deadline was extended they can work even more on their entries. The
total amount of work put into the entry can in many cases be even larger
than what it would have been if the deadline would have been set to January
in the first place. This means that (hopefully) many of the entries will
be better than they would have been, which is good for the entrant and
everyone.

  Extending the deadline serves the competition organizers: If the overall
quality and amount of entries increases, the goal which was set for the
competition will be reached more easily.

  Extending the deadline serves the sponsors: They get "more bang for
their buck", as one could say. The sponsors will be happier and might
be more willing to sponsor future competitions.

  Extending the deadline serves the public: If the overall quality of
the competition increases, the public will get more "wow!" experiences.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the entrants: Many were not
able to participate at all, and many of the ones who did participate did
so with hastily created entries which they themselves are not happy with.
The prices would go to the ones who were able to get something more or
less cool done fast, not necessarily the ones who are most talented.
  We are not measuring speed here; that's not the purpose of this
competition. We are measuring quality.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the organizers: The purpose
of the competition was to get a large amount of high-quality, well-worked
images for, among other things, to promote POV-Ray as a high-quality
program, not to see who gets something done fast.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the sponsors: If they get
disappointed, they might not be willing to sponsor any further competitions
in the future, which certainly does not serve the POV-Ray community or
anyone. Also if the reputation of POV-Ray, the pov-team and the POV-Ray
community gets a stain in the eyes of the "big guys", that can only be
negative.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the public: The public could
get disappointed and the reputation issues above would also have negative
consequences from the big public.

> Like I said before; there could be
> legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
> I would encourage some counseling.

  Ah, but I see now that you were just joking, so no harm done.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -