 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 May 2000 22:09:04 -0400, John VanSickle
<van### [at] erols com> wrote:
>The criteria should be photorealism and artistic value. IRTC
>winners should be considered first, of course.
"Of course," you say?
That's nonsense, of course. IRTC winners are no more sacred than
anyone else. Placing special emphasis on a select group would be
unwise. Important works can easily be created outside the IRTC, or any
other similar group. Quality work should be recognized no matter where
it originates. Emphasizing one group of people - any group of people -
is unfair to everyone.
It seems that photorealism is one possible criterion, if only because
so many raytracing enthusiasts are trying to achieve it. However, it
certainly isn't required to produce a great work of art, or a valuable
rendering. In fact, when raytracing achieves *total* photorealism,
watch the value of photorealism drop into the gutter. It has it's
place, but it certainly isn't the only reason to value a work.
Artistic value is hard to define. Sort of like that old comment on
pornography: "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." The
trouble is, artistic value is totally in the eye of the beholder. So
how does one go about selecting the works with the best *intrinsic*
artistic value? Do we ask a large group of people to vote on which
works have the most artistic value?
Voting brings up the concept of popularity. All too often when a large
group of people choose something, it's based upon nothing more than
popularity. It's perhaps the easiest quality to measure, but perhaps
the least deserving of additional recognition.
You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
I don't really have a conclusion for all this, other than to say that
intelligently picking candidates for a hall of fame isn't an easy
task. I feel it's too easy to stick to some over-simplified rules and
miss out on a real gem of an image, simply because it didn't fit into
someone else's notion of greatness.
As always, please view my comments as fuel for discussion, and not the
final word by any means.
Later,
Glen Berry
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have a little battle of the tracers going on in a
seperate group between Pov and Lightwave. I'm sort of
limited in what I can use to fight back because I was comparing
the difference between using image_maps for texture or using
pigments, normals etc.
They sent this(lightwave 6.0 btw).
http://www.tiac.net/users/pclute/oera_vw_rad.jpg
Honestly, I don't think the textures are that interesting. They're
pretty much plain colors. But it looks very believable.
I wonder though...with a tree macro, some media clouds...I don't
think this is unattainable with pov or megapov.
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Clute wrote:
>
> I have a little battle of the tracers going on in a
> seperate group between Pov and Lightwave. I'm sort of
> limited in what I can use to fight back because I was comparing
> the difference between using image_maps for texture or using
> pigments, normals etc.
>
> They sent this(lightwave 6.0 btw).
> http://www.tiac.net/users/pclute/oera_vw_rad.jpg
> Honestly, I don't think the textures are that interesting. They're
> pretty much plain colors. But it looks very believable.
> I wonder though...with a tree macro, some media clouds...I don't
> think this is unattainable with pov or megapov.
>
> --
Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
Should do as an answer ...
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
>
> http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
>
> Should do as an answer ...
*just stares at it dumbfounded*
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
>
> Marc Schimmler wrote:
> > Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
> >
> > http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
> >
> > Should do as an answer ...
>
> *just stares at it dumbfounded*
>
That's what I did for many minutes.
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:11:17 -0400, Glen Berry wrote:
>You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
>when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
>that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
>this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
>motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
>motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
>utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
>mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
That wasn't mine.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Lance Birch wrote:
> >
> > Marc Schimmler wrote:
> > > Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
> > >
> > > http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
> > >
> > > Should do as an answer ...
> >
> > *just stares at it dumbfounded*
> >
>
> That's what I did for many minutes.
It took me at least five minutes before I snapped out of it and emailed
Gilles ;)
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 May 2000 09:14:28 -0400, ron### [at] povrayorg (Ron Parker)
wrote:
>On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:11:17 -0400, Glen Berry wrote:
>>You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
>>when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
>>that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
>>this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
>>motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
>>motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
>>utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
>>mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
>
>That wasn't mine.
Ooops! (embarrasment)
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Look at Gilles current IRTC entry...
I like it, but I can't help but mention that for some strange reason, the
fire hydrant bothers me. It just pops out in a way I don't like. Also,
shouldn't that bird be scaled a little smaller? (Unless this is some large
variety of crow I've never seen.) And lastly, the person is blurred just a
little too heavily for my taste. That and the hydrant for some reason,
distract me. Except for that, this is a <censoring
beep>F%^*(&X(^#$#*(]C()&!*(#^_*F$(%&^#*</censoring beep> good image. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> >Look at Gilles current IRTC entry...
>
> I like it, but I can't help but mention that for some strange reason, the
> fire hydrant bothers me. It just pops out in a way I don't like.
Maybe ...
> Also,
> shouldn't that bird be scaled a little smaller? (Unless this is some large
> variety of crow I've never seen.)
The Raven ... nevermore?
> And lastly, the person is blurred just a
> little too heavily for my taste. That and the hydrant for some reason,
> distract me. Except for that, this is a <censoring
> beep>F%^*(&X(^#$#*(]C()&!*(#^_*F$(%&^#*</censoring beep> good image. :)
true
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
