 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill DeWitt" wrote:
> "Rune" wrote :
> > Sorry, but what you think is close
> > enough, I think is not close at all.
>
> Well what I meant is close enough to
> show that it could be done.
If some people think it is easier to do with another program, then why would
you force them to use POV-Ray?
> In 5 min., by hand with only a switching
> of screens as a guide, and it is close
> enough that most people would have
> recognized it. But if it had been done in
> a spline in the first place, it would be
> -exactly- as hard to duplicate in a spline.
> That is, not very hard.
POV-Ray is text-based, and it is not real-time. Therefore it may not be so
easy to duplicate a spline precisely in POV-Ray. I know that I had problems.
> But personally, I think that some of the
> ones I made that were less of an exact
> match were in some regards a better
> looking symbol. I suppose that even if I
> made a "better" one you would say that
> since I didn't do that particular one,
> POVRay just can't do as good a job.
Then you didn't read what I wrote:
> POV-Ray *can* make some good logos, but
> there's also some good logos it *can't*
> make. We shouldn't discard any good logos.
Also remember that I make all my logos in POV-Ray. It's not my own interest
I'm trying to protect.
> I think you have a fixed Idea and don't want to see anything else.
Hey now! *I* think we should accept logos no matter which program they are
made with, but *you* think we should accept logos made with POV-Ray only!
Judging from that I would say that *you* are the one who have a fixed idea!
But let's not make this something personal.
Greetings,
Rune
---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <run### [at] iname com> wrote :
>
> Hey now! *I* think we should accept logos no matter which program they are
> made with, but *you* think we should accept logos made with POV-Ray only!
>
Actually I never said anything about what we shouldn't accept, I simply
gave my opinion about how I would like to see the Logo's submitted and the
competition judged.
I agree that anyone should be able to submit anything and take their
chances. But I feel I am within my rights to express my opinion about what
values I might then make my judgment upon, with hopes of encouraging others
to explore such values. I will certainly score higher a logo made in POV
with the code submitted.
About the same reason I would score a little lower on the IRTC Technical
value when someone uses a modeler.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>POV-Ray is made to create 3D graphics, not 2D graphics. I think logo 12
from
>the old competition is simple and have some nice qualities, but it is
rather
>complicated to reproduce exact in POV-Ray. I think the main reason that
>POV-Ray is not that suitable to create 2D graphics is that it is
text-based,
>and that it is not real-time.
i agree (again :)..
i made that logo as a freehand vector drawing with some fixes afterwards..
drawing in realtime with pov-ray is (afaik) impossible..
painting oil-colours (which is *fun*, btw) is somewhat hard with pov-ray
too..
same applies to charcoal and watercolours and whatever..
but ray-tracing works fine, and i think that's the work pov-ray should be
used to.
instead of working like an bridge engineer with mathematics, i'd like to
work with intuition, no matter what tools i use.
and so i think it would have been impossible for me to create that logo in
pov-ray.
it propably could be re-created with pov-ray now it is done, but original
couldn't been.
i checked that "easy done 5 minutes pov spline" -version without ring (is
there more versions?), but it lacks that "impression".
i spent a lot more than five minutes when planning original, sketching it
and experimenting with it..
-alt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill DeWitt" wrote:
> I agree that anyone should be able to
> submit anything and take their chances.
I'm glad we agree that the logos may be made with any program(s).
> But I feel I am within my rights to
> express my opinion about what values
> I might then make my judgment upon,
> with hopes of encouraging others
> to explore such values.
Of course.
> I will certainly score higher a logo
> made in POV with the code submitted.
Here is my opinion: Since a logo is just a piece of graphics, the only thing
that makes a logo good or bad is it's appearance. Therefore I think we
should judge from the appearance only.
Because appearance is the only thing that matters, the code is irrelevant.
BTW: How will you judge logos which is made in POV-Ray, but where the code
isn't provided?
> About the same reason I would score a
> little lower on the IRTC Technical
> value when someone uses a modeler.
The IRTC is not just about praising good images. It is also about praising
skills.
But in the logo contest the only goal is to find the best logo for POV-Ray.
It is *not* about praising the skills required to make that logo.
Greetings,
Rune
---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It seems like most people think that the logo may be made with any program.
Unless I get objections to this, I will consider that a conclusion.
We can still argue if the logo *should* be made with POV-Ray, I just wanted
to be sure that we agree that it *may* be made with other programs, if the
logo designer wishes so.
Greetings,
Rune
---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Why not accept every logo, either made with POV or not. We could always
convert the "winning(s)" logo(s) later. Should that conversion not be
practical, it would show that the logo creator was very right not to use POV
indeed. (Darn! My English is behaving strangely again.)
Povingly
Philippe
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Philippe Debar" wrote:
> Why not accept every logo, either made
> with POV or not. We could always convert
> the "winning(s)" logo(s) later. Should
> that conversion not be practical, it
> would show that the logo creator was
> very right not to use POV indeed. (Darn!
> My English is behaving strangely again.)
I get your point and agree completely.
Greetings,
Rune
---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think that's a fair assumption to make. And another thing: if it comes
down to the reason that POV should be used is that the logo may then be
rendered in any size, then I think it is worth noting that any vector
graphics file may also be scaled up or down without loss. Not the case with
bitmaps, however. Just a point to keep in mind.
--
Dan D.
"Through the Eye of a Needle"
http://fbox.vt.edu/D/ddombrow/
Rune wrote in message...
> It seems like most people think that the logo may be made with any
program.
>
> Unless I get objections to this, I will consider that a conclusion.
>
> We can still argue if the logo *should* be made with POV-Ray, I just
wanted
> to be sure that we agree that it *may* be made with other programs, if the
> logo designer wishes so.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Rune
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ddombrow wrote:
>
> I think that's a fair assumption to make. And another thing: if it comes
> down to the reason that POV should be used is that the logo may then be
> rendered in any size, then I think it is worth noting that any vector
> graphics file may also be scaled up or down without loss. Not the case with
> bitmaps, however. Just a point to keep in mind.
Personally I think another good reason to use POV-Ray to create the
logo is so that it may be distrubted with the program. This way
anyone can use the logo "object" in one of their scenes if they wish
and could even customize it in any way they want. If the logo is
created in some high end vector graphics program then only the original
designer can modify it with any reasonable assurance of quality.
One thing that is universal about the people that visit these
groups and visit povray.org is that we all use POV-Ray. This means
anyone of us can render or modify the logo to suit our needs, use
it in our scenes, and create custom versions of it for our personal
web pages. If a non POV-Ray created logo is adopted then we are limited
in how it may be adapted to our personal needs. Rune argues uniformity
while I argue diversity.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This means
>anyone of us can render or modify the logo to suit our needs, use
>it in our scenes, and create custom versions of it for our personal
>web pages.
Then why don't we use each our own logo? An official logo that can be
modified by anybody? it's a non sense.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
