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

Chris Holtorf wrote:
>    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. 

I'd hazard a guess that some people (and I'm one of them) would be interested
in seeing your image rendered with a HDR environment.

St. wrote:


> 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, 

Agreed, collectively the IRTC equals, and, in context, surpasses what we 
have seen here. But I doubt any round, on its own, would quite be equal 
to this in sustained quality.  But I agree that no image here really 
displayed the sort of dramatic, collective step forward that sometimes 
happened in IRTC rounds. I think some images were big steps forward for 
their individual authors though. And sadly a few big names, who would 
have enriched this field very much, failed to show.  Shame, but that is 
the nature of contests, I suppose.  As I have stated in the past, my 
view is that contests simply provide a focus, like McLuhan's famous 
lightbulb.  It's great if the winner gets a computer, or some increased 
attention, or bragging rights, but in a way that is just a sideshow. 
The real meaning resides with the also rans.  The contest gave each of 
them an incentive to make an image that they wouldn't have otherwise. 
And each image is an adventure.


>   For the record, I hope that if there's another PoVComp, 

So do I. In retrospect it was pretty damned exciting.  I also hope that 
this one will give a boost to all Pover's sense of identity, and 
stimulate more of the ground-breaking and enthusiasm we've known from 
the past.  I hope it will showcase the software, attract more talent to 
our ranks, and motivate the developers to keep the program vital.  I 
hope it will reinvigorate the IRTC too.

> 
>  But 'now' I know. 

Exactly

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

Ah shucks.  Well I know I'll have a hangover in the morning.

Chris Cason wrote:

> 
> FWIW I loved the concept of your image.
> 
> -- Chris

It's worth a lot :)

I feel quite silly that this thread even touched on my entry.   But the 
discourse has to start somewhere I guess.  See where it leads.  I really 
cannot state strongly enough how much I admire your efforts here.

Chris Cason <nos### [at] deletethispovrayorg> wrote:
> FWIW I loved the concept of your image.

  By the way, which image is that?

-- 
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 -

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:4215e640@news.povray.org...
> Chris Cason <nos### [at] deletethispovrayorg> wrote:
> > FWIW I loved the concept of your image.
>
>   By the way, which image is that?

African Caprice
http://www.povcomp.com/entries/209.php

I think the biggest way to improve the image (in my opinion) is with the
lighting.  Right now the image appears a little flat and therefore it's not as
dramatic as it could (and deserves to) be.  I'd really love to see this scene
taken further!  There's no reason to stop now since there's already been so much
work put into it; just a few changes to the lighting of the scene could make a
huge difference I think.  If it was my scene I'd probably drop the camera height
a tiny bit as well, or if not, introduce some focal blur to separate the
background from the main subjects (heh, yes, I know... rendertime++)

Lance.

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

Lance Birch wrote:

> I think the biggest way to improve the image (in my opinion) is with the
> lighting.  Right now the image appears a little flat and therefore it's not as
> dramatic as it could (and deserves to) be.  I'd really love to see this scene
> taken further!  There's no reason to stop now since there's already been so much
> work put into it; just a few changes to the lighting of the scene could make a
> huge difference I think.  If it was my scene I'd probably drop the camera height
> a tiny bit as well, or if not, introduce some focal blur to separate the
> background from the main subjects (heh, yes, I know... rendertime++)
> 

Thankyou for the insights, and even more, the spirit of support.  In a 
nutshell, it is hard for me to give up on the backlighting.  The 
original vision was of the scene taking place in a gloom set against a 
backdrop of turgid, oppressive light, screened by a silhouette of jungle 
growth. That is not quite how the scene turned out, but I still cling to 
certain of its original aspects. I will try to swallow my conceptual 
arrogance and, if I ever find that new level of maturity, try the scene 
with some different lighting.  Parenthetically, I believe I have run up 
against this difficulty in contests before.  I think I just have a taste 
for the slightly flattening effect of halflight and backlighting that is 
a little at odds with the raytracing aesthetic. So I also wonder if some 
adjustment of the finishes might bring up the textures and still give me 
that backlight.

As for camera angle, as it stands now it's a calculation depending a lot 
on the barely emerging far eye of the chimp without completely loosing 
the profile of the Songye.  But no doubt I can steepen it a little further.

Focal blur.  Never tried it before.  If I do this I am going to put some 
custom foliage in though!  In fact some of my earlier tests made use of 
more dramatic color in the blossoms for instance, and they weren't 
without a certain appeal.