"Marc Jacquier" <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote in message 
news:421f9133@news.povray.org...
>

> news:421f856f@news.povray.org...
>>
>> > Nope but you had one of whining! and you took it indeed...
>
> Sorry I should have wrote "Maybe" instead of "Nope"
>
>>   I thought better of you.
>
> So did I.
> I am not a native English speaker and it's not easy for me to express what 
> I
> mean but I made this conpetition mostly for the fun, so I cant share your
> point of view.

  That's not a problem for me Marc. You are entitled to your opinion as is 
anyone in here.

    ~Steve~

>
> Marc
>
>

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message 
news:421f874f$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>>
>> "Marc Jacquier" <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote in message 
>> news:421f83a4$1@news.povray.org...
>>
>>>

>>> news:421e3e20@news.povray.org...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>   I did that, I used POV, but wouldn't have had a chance in hell of
>>>
>>> winning
>>> Nope but you had one of whining! and you took it indeed...
>>
>>
>>  I thought better of you.
>>
>>   ~Steve~
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>>
>>
> Steve, he's just giving you a "read".  Stop taking swings at people. You 
> gotta calm down.

   Yes, I know that Jim. And I appreciate your guidance - I'll listen to 
anyone that's worth listening to, whether they be my senior, or are of a 
higher intellect than me, (not that I have any intellect it seems).

   But yes, you're right. I can only apologise, fellow povers, for my 
behaviour. I will bow-down to all and say sorry. When I saw those comments 
though, they did indeed infuriate me, and let's just say that I lost my grip 
a little which is unusual for me.

    Sorry all.

   ~Steve~

St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>       My point is that if it was a 'pure pov only' contest, you wouldn't, 
> and couldn't, have had the entries that you did. You 'had' to allow 
> modellers. I bet you sighed with relief when you found out that image was 
> pov only?

  And where exactly have I or anyone else said that third-party models
are not ok in the competition?

  And why would I have sighed with relief? I don't understand that.
Do you think the images were first classified and then the descriptions
were read? Of course we were fully aware of their descriptions.

>   It's simple. The judges *shouldn't* have been disclosed for a start. Of 
> the ones I know, I can *only* see one in that list that I would say is 
> actually qualified to judge

  Now you are starting to directly insult the judges?

  I am a liar full of bullshit and all judges except one were incompetent
and not qualified to be judges. What next? Will you start defining
our parentage in full detail?

-- 
#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 -

St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> >  There's a big difference between using external models and composing
> > your entire scene solely of external models.
> >  The objective of the competition was not to show how POV-Ray can be
> > used to project meshes onto the screen.

>    Blah blah blah... (and so it goes on). Yawn.

  So I was right: No amount of explaining will convince you, but you
will not even try to understand anything and keep with this holy war of
yours.

-- 
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:421f944a@news.povray.org...
<snip>
>
>  I am a liar full of bullshit and all judges except one were incompetent
> and not qualified to be judges. What next? Will you start defining
> our parentage in full detail?
>


Yes, and you raped our families, too.

C'mon Warp.  You're not helping yourself at this point.

-- 
Jeremy
www.beantoad.com

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message 
news:421f94ab@news.povray.org...
> St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>> >  There's a big difference between using external models and composing
>> > your entire scene solely of external models.
>> >  The objective of the competition was not to show how POV-Ray can be
>> > used to project meshes onto the screen.
>
>>    Blah blah blah... (and so it goes on). Yawn.
>
>  So I was right: No amount of explaining will convince you, but you
> will not even try to understand anything and keep with this holy war of
> yours.

  I've apologised to you and all in here. Leave it at that.

    ~Steve~

>
> -- 
> 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 -

St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> >  Projecting a bunch of meshes to the screen is not showing what POV-Ray
> > is really capable of.

>     Then what was the point of allowing modellers at all if a "bunch of 
> meshes" on the screen is NOT going to have a chance of winning? If this 
> wasn't about 'art' and rendering with PoV-Ray, then what was it about?

  Since no amount of repetition will make you understand, then why
should I bother repeating it once again?

  You really, really don't understand what is the difference between
using third-party models and composing your entire image with them?

>    Without risk of getting personal, you are talking down to me as though 
> you are some kind of elevated level above me. You are not. You are on the 
> same level as me and anyone else here.

  You started insulting me, and I'm a person who can't take much of that
without getting angry, so you get a response according to that.

> >  What do you mean by "I will still say that I have sen as good in the
> > IRTC"? Firstly you haven't even mentioned IRTC before this, and secondly
> > I don't understand what you mean by that. As good as what? And what does
> > that have to do with anything?

>     Ok, what was "ground-breaking" in this contest? Was there *anything* 
> "ground-breaking" at all? No. That was one of the criteria of even entering 
> the contest, and yet, it wasn't there in my opinion.

  "Ground-breaking" and using modellers seem to have some relation, at
least from your point of view. Sorry if I'm too dumb to understand it.

> >> >  Not true. If you had made a definitely better image than The Last
> >> > Guardian, you would have won.
> >
> >>      BS, and you know it.

>      I'm not calling *anyone* a liar.

  It's rather clear that you are calling me a liar above. I know how
the images were judged because I was part of the process and I know
that an image much better than the current winner would have won
regardless of how it had been made. You are saying that this claim
of mine is BS. Thus I'm lying to you.

> Heck, Warp, can't you see what my real problem with this whole thing is?

  Yes, but can you?

  Your real problem is that there was a lot of $$$money$$$ involved,
you missed the deadline by a quite short margin and did not get into
the competition and you are now pissed off because of that, and you
are now seeking some kind of revenge on the whole competition.
  You will of course deny that, but I am quite sure.

> It 
> was judged by *some* people that in my opinion shouldn't have been judges. 

  So now that your "csg-only" argument is not really holding water,
you start attacking the competence of the judges?
  What next? Will you start attacking the sponsors perhaps? The pov-team?
The contestants? Something else?

> >> > The method of production was only secondary.
> >
> >>   Exactly.

>     I meant 'exactly', as in, it wasn't secondary.

  Oh, sorry. I must have some reading comprehension problem. Perhaps your
English is a bit different than mine?

> The method of production 
> in 'your' eyes was 'pov only'. Tell the truth Warp, did you judge *solely* 
> on what the image looked like? Or did you take into account that an image 
> used pov only?

  I judged mainly on how the image looked like and secondarily on how
it was done. I had picked my favorites before I even looked how they
were done exactly (my initial top 6 was approximately the same as the final
result).
  But of course because I'm full of BS you don't have to believe me.

> >> there was *no way* I would win using an image made up of Wings models 
> >> only,
> >> however good it would be.
> >
> >  Yeah, you know this thing better because you were a judge and I was not.

>     Now you're not making sense.

  I think it's pretty clear. What are you not understanding?
  (Btw, it's sarcarsm, if you know what that means.)

> >  You are still an idiot, it seems.

>   <sigh> And there you go. A judge calling someone an idiot. So you 
> concluded that I was an idiot before, then? That's the first time you've 
> called me an idiot, but it was already in your head. I rest my case with you 
> being a judge, and biased towards me. I've met you before. If I'd have 
> entered, and everyone else thought my image was the best, I bet you would 
> have argued against them. Tell me you wouldn't have.

  I knew you would quote that line alone, separated from its context,
and that's exactly why I wrote it in its own line, so I could say this.

  Your paranoia is reaching ridiculous extents.
  Firstly, I succumbed to the temptation of calling you an idiot only
because of your attitude in this thread. I do not have any memory of
any previous texts you have written to me or anyone else and I do not
have any concept of your personality. Even if you have fooled around
in the past, I don't have any memory of that (it's very rare that I
remember people by name/nickname because of their texts).
  Secondly, judges did not know the authors of the images. Even if you
had entered and even if I had negative feelings about you personally
(which I did not), I would have had no way of knowing which image was
yours.

-- 
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 -

Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> No I believe one judge in a few comments indulged in proselytizing 
> against the viability of mesh modeling.  And that that is dangerous 
> because when stated by an official, can induce a generalized set of 
> values and preferences.

  So basically you are saying that the judging principles were
(probably) ok, but the judges' comments published along the entries
could have been more mature and careful at some points (because as
they are they can give the wrong impression to some people)?

  If that is your point, then I suppose I can't argue.
  I just got the impression from your post that you were also attacking
the judging process itself and that you got the impression this was
an "sdl-only" competition.

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Jeremy M. Praay <jer### [at] questsoftwarecom> wrote:
> C'mon Warp.  You're not helping yourself at this point.

  I know, but when someone goes on and on with insults, I find it
hard to just stop.

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Steve do you still remember the rant I had a few months ago? I was
complaining that pov models are going to be rated the same as models made
with 3rd party tools.  And yes I was pretty upset and frustrated at that
point and made the decision not to enter the competition because it's going
to be a waste of time. And oh yes I strongly believe that I was right at
that point and everyone else are wrong. But I do want you to know what
happened after I made that decision.

To be honest, my initial goal to enter the competition is for the prize, but
then after knowing that I won't have the advantage of using models made in
povray, as well as hearing how your modeling skill is close to Mr.
Rosenman, how the hell do I stand a chance? So I stopped working on my
image, stopped for two weeks, and during those two weeks I reflected on the
kind of things I said, and realized that I am not completely correct.
Gilles was right that modelers are not necessarily easier than povray
models, it's like having oil painting and watercolour, they are different
things and both have their own advantages and disadvantages.  If this
competition involves no prizes would you have entered? Back in September I
would've said no, but starting in November I realized my goal shouldn't
simply be chasing after first place. You can say I am just bullshiting
right now because the contest is over, but my expectation dropped from
"hopefully winning some poster money to print the poster for my Design
Project Presentation" to "using this as a chance to show the rest of the
people that yes, povray is capable of doing things that normally people
won't do".  That is my principle, and to be precise, my principle is that
it is not the tool you choose to use, but rather, how you use that tool to
make your image.  And it's NOT simply using that tool, but using it in an
innovative and interesting way. At least that's my believe. If I give you
three colours, red yellow and blue, what are you going to do with it? Some
people may draw really creative patterns with only those three colours, or
some people may mix the colours and get millions of other colours. The
point is, the art is in you, not what's given. If you perceive this contest
as a way to explore what haven't been done before, then you, and I, will be
a lot more happy.

I don't use povray "very often", in fact, the only time I get to play around
with it is during summer break, and now with work + school I can't really
afford to spend a lot of time of this competition. So for someone like me
(and probably a lot of other people) who can't dedicate sufficient chunks
of time in this matter, my hope is that someday, people will recognize my
work and say, yes, it is something unique, it is something that is
POSSIBLE. I was wrong in the first place for looking at things from one
direction, I was looking at povcomp in the sense that it has large first
prize. After two weeks of self reflection, it was clear to me that there is
another way to look at the competition, it's a way to promote mutual
learning. You too should try to see things with a different perspective,
perhaps you will get more insight to the true meaning of your values.

> This has nothing to do with my image. It is to do with principle.

If this is your principle then it's a good thing that you sticked with it. I
did, at one point, was tempted to use a modeller to make one of the
objects, because the povray model lacks detail and it is very crappy. But
no, in the end, i didn't use a modeler because it was the goal of my entry
to exploit povray as a modeler.

> Sure, I understand this, but please, don't think I was unappreciative. I
> just think it was a waste of time for anyone not using pov only.

My thought WAS the same.


Just a thought.
J