Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> I have not said anything about this being allowed - i was just talking 
> about the possibility.  In fact this rule has been interpreted quite 
> loosely recently in the IRTC - all kind of convolution filters are 
> considered not breaking the rules as well as resizing from a larger 
> render.  If you remove artefacts or do other tweaks in a larger render 
> and then scale it this is next to impossible to spot in the resulting image.

  I once complained about the IRTC allowing image rescaling as a
post-processing step using an image manipulation program because you
can, among other things, get a much better antialiasing than the
renderer might be able to do normally (thus the antialiasing quality
seen in the image does not correspond to the quality of the output of
the renderer).
  I was more or less astonished when the attitude of the IRTC maintainers
was that this is not only ok, but they talked in a way that they might
even want to allow even more post-processing.

  If they allow post-processing then it's not a rendering competition
anymore. It's a computer graphics competition.
  I don't think that was the original goal of the IRTC.

-- 
#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 -

Post a reply to this message

Then don't participate. I won't because I'm not that talented.

H

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:406d5922@news.povray.org...
> Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> > >   Doesn't this replicate too much IRTC with a topic of "fractals"?
>
> > I'm unclear as to why this is a problem/objection.
>
>   Because there's no challenge. It's boring.
>
> -- 
> #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 -

Post a reply to this message

Wow, nice images. Immediately I want to see them in stereo.
I'm sure you've done that. Are you willing to share some
POV SDL? I wouldn't use it in competition, just to accelerate
my learning.

Harolddd

"Paul Bourke" <pdb### [at] swineduau> wrote in message
news:pdb_NOSPAM-B97870.21213002042004@news.povray.org...
> The first POVRay Fractal Raytracing Contest is now open, see
>    http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/povfrac/
> If you have a favourite 3D fractal and ideas on an elegant way
> to render it then maybe this contest if for you.
> -- 
> Paul Bourke
> pdb_NOSPAMswin.edu.au

Post a reply to this message

Harold <bai### [at] 3dculturecom> wrote:
> Then don't participate.

  I might not, because I'm not artistically very talented, and I really
lack any good ideas for this topic.

-- 
#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 -

Post a reply to this message

Is it possible to submit old images ?

JC

Paul Bourke wrote:

> The first POVRay Fractal Raytracing Contest is now open, see
>    http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/povfrac/
> If you have a favourite 3D fractal and ideas on an elegant way
> to render it then maybe this contest if for you.


-- 
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)

Post a reply to this message

Paul Bourke wrote:
> 
> The first POVRay Fractal Raytracing Contest is now open, see
>    http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/povfrac/

So, where the rules say "Include files are not permitted" does this
mean that TTF files are also excluded ?

Bernard

Post a reply to this message

> Is it possible to submit old images ?

There is no rule against it.
On the other hand, you might consider this a good opportunity
to improve a previous image.

-- 
Paul Bourke
pdb_NOSPAMswin.edu.au

Post a reply to this message

> > The first POVRay Fractal Raytracing Contest is now open, see
> >    http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/povfrac/
> So, where the rules say "Include files are not permitted" does this
> mean that TTF files are also excluded ?

Thanks, I've tightened that up

"The POVRay scene file entered must be totally self 
 contained and not rely on any external files."

-- 
Paul Bourke
pdb_NOSPAMswin.edu.au

Post a reply to this message

> Wow, nice images. Immediately I want to see them in stereo.

Certainly I have an animation of the DLA image
   http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/fractals/dla3d/
at 1024x768 and in stereo, it is quite stunning. I can send you
a CD if you like with a mono animation of this and other movies 
in Quicktime (I have some CD's left over from a talk I gave recently).

> I'm sure you've done that. Are you willing to share some
> POV SDL? 

Most of those image examples are created using external programs 
that create the geometry, an are therefore mostly inellegible for
this competition :-). 
From the top
- fisheye image of 3D sponge, VERY old, actually rendered in Radiance
  but could easily be done in POVRay. Uses radiosity
  http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/fractals/gasket/spongeb.html
  ps: this was done back around 1990.
- DLA, this requires a rather numerically intensive program to
  create the data for POVRay.
- Wada fractals, the povray code is provided on the www page.
- Attractor, this is easy to create in POVRay and has been the
  discussion of many posts to the various povray news groups
  after I entered it in the SSC3
- Quaternion, easy in POVRay since it is one of the primitives
  provided.
- Applonian fractal, again requires a rather tricky piece of
  code external to POVRay to create the sphere positions.
-- 
Paul Bourke
pdb_NOSPAMswin.edu.au

Post a reply to this message

"The aim of this competition is to create a visually
compelling image of a 3D fractal form using the POVRay
raytacing program"

I would say this limits the acceptable software and the
required image far more strictly than the IRTC.  An IRTC
subjcet of "fractals" would surely accommodate anything from
a pure render of a 4d-julia to an imaginatively presented
close-up of the definition of the word "fractal" in a
rendered paper dictionary.  "Visually compelling" also seems
to exclude the possibility of a "technical merit" award as
per the IRTC for mere technical achievment.



>   Doesn't this replicate too much IRTC with a topic of
"fractals"?
> This is mainly because there are practically no limits on
what the
> user can do (except using external files, which isn't very
limiting,
> and a maximum of 10000 bytes, which isn't very limiting
either).
>
>   The problem I see with this is that there's really no
challenge
> in this competition other than making a beautiful image.
Which is
> exactly what IRTC is for.
>
>   (And of course how to define a "fractal" is another
question...)

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:406d5701@news.povray.org...
>   Doesn't this replicate too much IRTC with a topic of
"fractals"?
> This is mainly because there are practically no limits on
what the
> user can do (except using external files, which isn't very
limiting,
> and a maximum of 10000 bytes, which isn't very limiting
either).
>
>   The problem I see with this is that there's really no
challenge
> in this competition other than making a beautiful image.
Which is
> exactly what IRTC is for.
>
>   (And of course how to define a "fractal" is another
question...)
>
> -- 
> 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 -

Post a reply to this message