"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4214f626@news.povray.org...
> Ross <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> > oh, maybe you thought the view of the image would be through the
telescope.
> > it wouldn't be. it was almost the same view as in "Victoria"s World".
>
>   How would you then see the ant and understand the humor?
>

visual cues to bring the eye up to the top of the telescope, where the ant
would be visible from the viewers perspective, and unrealistically large for
an ant anyway.

Marc Jacquier wrote:


> Do you think improving that image? (just a better quality render...)
> 

I don't think it would be a significant enough improvement to make it 
worthwhile.  There is just too much else that falls short. The hair can 
look better but the density and coverage has to be balanced very 
carefully. Out of testing time, and in order to guarantee an entry at 
the last minute, I had to overdo the density, effectively nullifying the 
usefulness of my technique. I may rework that composition just to 
improve the technicals and rerender or I may upgrade the whole concept.

(While the open setting is very pleasing and came off way better than I 
expected, the original idea involved a more oppressive sense of the 
jungle, like described by Ferdinand Celine.)

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message 
news:4214f26f$1@news.povray.org...

> Thanks Steve. A little support goes a long way.

  I'm in support of all PoV-Ray users, with *whatever tools they use* to use 
it. It's a powerful renderer, there's no doubt about that.


 My entry was a
> calculated risk all along. I came to the concept rather late. 
> Never-the-less, even though I expected it, I was feeling a little bruised 
> that I couldn't make the top 1/4 in the judging.

 I remember and understand. I think I would have been some places behind you 
with 'Flowers' or 'Imminent'. Lol!

>
> Chris Cason made a point of noting that the ranking outside the winner's 
> circle was just approximate, an attitude I wholehearted support.  If 
> anyone remembers, I have been quite vocal on that subject in the past and 
> believe that a detailed ranking makes little sense in the context of 
> artmaking and expecially so when you enter the middle ranks.  To me it is 
> simply an artifact born of the need to find a winner.

   Yes, and correctly so, if so deserved. One image will always stand out 
from the others, (that's the nature of the beast, no pun intended), but 
overall, I didn't see the 'ground-breaking' image I thought I would see in 
this competition.  (Sorry to be blunt all, but it's just my opinion).


>
> Whatever my need to whine, I must confess that this contest forced me to 
> intensify my thinking about the themes I want to pursue.  And that is a 
> good thing.

   You're not wrong in your thoughts. It IS a good thing. I've got some 
images in my head that I MUST do, and I 'think' I can do. I would describe 
them something like, 'imaginative', but with meaning. So, let's say I'm 
thinking further than I've ever thought before 'because' of this comp.

 Which is a good thing. :)

    ~Steve~

St. wrote:

> 'ground-breaking' image I thought I would see 

maybe: "Hoped you might see?"

The image was exceptional in ways that Povers can learn from.  It is 
true that we value technical, even conceptual "ground-breaking", but we 
perceive it across one maybe two dimensions. This image resulted from 
care and craftmanship through a range of dimensions.  It's that 
accomplishment over a range of technical and pictorial concerns that is 
not often equalled here.  Modeling, composition, lighting, scale, 
orchestration of detail, space, atmosphere, pictorial language are all 
used to modulate our experience and maintain our interest.

Chris Cason wrote:

> [This announcement can also be found at
> [http://www.povcomp.com/results.php]

Neat :)

I personaly find 'The Last Guardian' more suitable for 3 or 4 place, and I
love 'Dissolution' by Ziga Petric  and  'The Kitchen' by Jaime Vives
Piqueres. But perhaps this is because of poor compresion of blue-jpg of
Guardian. I ques judges wanted to show also power of Pov-RAY engine, with
dispersion+scaterring media+photons is perfect example of. 

I would love to see a bit improved versions of 2 and 3 place in examply by
using media to show that image was raytraced on greated engine :)


-- 
Rafal Maj Raf256

Jeremy M. Praay wrote:

> I think I agree with the others.  Your scene was great, but the 
> unfortunately, the image suffered from some technical problems.  I think you 
> imply that you were overly ambitious.  But I get the feeling that this would 
> render quite well with a few adjustments, and enough time.
> 

> I purposely tried to make my entry rather simple, especially given the 
> initially short time frame.  With the extra time, I tried to clean it up, 
> and I added a few more objects.   At this point, I'm embarrassed to ever 
> display my October entry again.  Radiosity was kicking my behind.  I had no 
> idea that the lighting setup would be so difficult, and without doing lots 
> of day-long renders, it was difficult to get a handle on.
> 
> Incidentally, I adapted your Wings3D women's shoe tutorial for the boots 
> near the door.  Unfortunately, the boots aren't the best boots model, but I 
> couldn't stand the thought of starting over again, and they're not a major 
> focus of the image.
> 
> On a lighter note, I sometimes find myself making that same ape face after I 
> just finished creating something cool.  I'm such a primate.  ;-)
> 

I'll reply in your O-T pub scene thread

Rafal Maj Raf256 <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> But perhaps this is because of poor compresion of blue-jpg of
> Guardian.

  Odd. I don't see any visible jpeg artifacts in the image.

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

While working on my submission, I hoped to make the top 25,
kept my fingers crossed that I would make the top 10 and
had a brief fantasy about winning. I feel pretty good about 
making 8th place as there are quite a few great images in
the top 25. 
   Can't wait until the next contest.

Chris Holtorf

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message 
news:42151fae$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>
>> 'ground-breaking' image I thought I would see
>
> maybe: "Hoped you might see?"

  Well, yes. Maybe I should have phrased that differently. I don't know, 
this is hard to do, (explain my thoughts without anyone jumping down my 
throat), but there wasn't imo a lot different from what I've seen before in 
the IRTC, (apart from one image that wasn't entered), which is why I took 
the route I did. Don't get me wrong, PoV is a hard animal to tame, and there 
is no way I could produce "The Last Guardian" like Johnny did. Not yet 
anyway. ;)

   For the record, I hope that if there's another PoVComp, then there will 
be a lot more information on what PoV 'can' achieve, (I certainly HOPE so 
for anyone new to PoV. It will be ten times better now that everyone knows 
what to expect and do), and what not to do in the event that someone might 
'bust a gut' for nothing. I.e., scaling at much larger resolutions. This was 
my downfall. I haven't ever rendered an image at high resolutions until 
recently, so didn't think there would be a difference, (seeing is 
believing!)

  But 'now' I know. That's why I asked if the detail images were important 
or not in a recent thread.

>
> The image was exceptional in ways that Povers can learn from.  It is true 
> that we value technical, even conceptual "ground-breaking", but we 
> perceive it across one maybe two dimensions. This image resulted from care 
> and craftmanship through a range of dimensions.  It's that accomplishment 
> over a range of technical and pictorial concerns that is not often 
> equalled here.  Modeling, composition, lighting, scale, orchestration of 
> detail, space, atmosphere, pictorial language are all used to modulate our 
> experience and maintain our interest.

   Jim, your words, and art, always 'teach' me more, and I thank you for 
that.

    ~Steve~

Jim Charter wrote:
> Chris Cason made a point of noting that the ranking outside the winner's 
> circle was just approximate, an attitude I wholehearted support.  If 
> anyone remembers, I have been quite vocal on that subject in the past 

Indeed, the ranking outside the top 25 is not really a ranking at all (which
is why those images don't have a number placed on them like the others do)
and is in no way to be considered the opinion of the judges as a whole. Only
the top 25 were ranked. When given the choice of placing the remaining images
in alphabetical order or placing them in some sort of preference order we
chose the latter, but the ordering is very informal and certainly not the
opinion of the judges as a whole.

FWIW I loved the concept of your image.

-- Chris