Right after I posted I went to see the entries...
Yikes!
I do agree with Tony about the fire hydrant, although I can't
quite figure out why it bothers me. I think because everything
else looks soo real, it looks a bit CG(imagine that).
As for the crow Tony...That'a just a baby, I've seen crows around
here that look like black cats with wings. :)
-- 
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.

Post a reply to this message

>As for the crow Tony...That'a just a baby, I've seen crows around
>here that look like black cats with wings. :)

Whoa...

Post a reply to this message

Well, they did add links to a few images in the IRTC on the main page of
the povray web site. It seems to me that the IRTC acts as a kind of Hall
of Fame. I think that the POV-Ray website should link to the really good
IRTC entries that are made in POV-Ray.
As a matter of who decides, the POV-Ray development team has the final
choice, but I think that people should encouraged to send in their non
IRTC entries to be considered. (Yes, that means HE and Gilles should
just send in their hard drives. ; ) )

I also realize that this is a bit more work for the developers. Maybe
the TAG team can manage the new hall of fame, or perhaps they will ask
for volunteers, which of course I would volunteer for.

Josh

Phil Clute wrote:

> Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
> It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
> time.
> I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
> historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
> among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
>
> What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
> Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
>
> --
> Phil
> ...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.

--
Josh English
eng### [at] spiritonecom
"May your hopes, dreams, and plans not be destroyed by a few zeros."

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

The more I stare at it the stranger it becomes. But that's how I like
it.
This is unquestionably the most fascinating picture I have ever seen.

--
David Fontaine     <dav### [at] faricynet>    ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/

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. 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. :)

I am unable to sjake the feeling that it is a very peculiar image. I can't put
my finger on it.
I agree the person is blurred too much.
What you said about the hydrant, in my case applies to the paper machine.

--
David Fontaine     <dav### [at] faricynet>    ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/

Post a reply to this message

David Fontaine wrote:
> I agree the person is blurred too much.


Remember, in the readme.txt he does refer to the person as a "ghost".

--
Lance

The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone

Post a reply to this message

I just read that part today. It still distracts.

Post a reply to this message

Glen Berry wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 01 May 2000 22:09:04 -0400, John VanSickle
> <van### [at] erolscom> 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.

I didn't say emphasize.  I said to consider them first.

> 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.

Yes, but a major reason for a hall of fame is to show what a cool
piece of software POV-Ray is.  Photorealism accomplishes that.

I'd like to amend my suggestion above to read:

"The criteria should *include* photorealism and artistic value."

Regards,
John
-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

TonyB wrote:
> 
> He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
> program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use "professional"
> programs.

FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me some $$.
Of course, in my miserable povery any money is good money, and since I can't


-- 
Margus Ramst

Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

Lance Birch wrote:

> David Fontaine wrote:
> > I agree the person is blurred too much.
>
> Remember, in the readme.txt he does refer to the person as a "ghost".

Yeah, I read it five minutes after posting that... oh well

--
David Fontaine     <dav### [at] faricynet>    ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/

Post a reply to this message