> entrants only? Well I guess you could submit something stupid just to vote.

But remember, your entry will be judged and commented on by your
peers....should be something you are proud of. :-)

-------------------------------------
P a u l   B o u r k e
http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/

Post a reply to this message

> Is the name of the artist derived from the email address or should we
> include it in the comments? For after voting of course.

In the past some people wanted to stay anonymous ... at the end I emailed
all entrants and asked for names or aliases. Sure I guess I could add that
as a field but it worked OK last time. Feel free to add identifying
information (your name) in the longer versions or comment. ps: only the
short code will be visible during voting and you should not waste bytes
with your name there.

-------------------------------------
P a u l   B o u r k e
http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/

Post a reply to this message

"Paul Bourke" <pau### [at] uwaeduau> wrote:
> Round four of the POVRay short code contest
>
> Not quite a full on announcement but close enough.
>
> Please point your browser here and make any suggestions, comments, wording,
> etc.
>    http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/scc4/
>
> Very similar to the last one in 2004 except ...
> - Voting by entrants only
> - Source code available during voting, you vote on the craft as well as the
> image
> - No external resources, eg: #include, font files, and so on.

Would it be possible to assume anything about global settings, or will we
need to include a block in the source code?  I was thinking mainly about
assumed_gamma and max_trace_level.  Especially with assumed_gamma, without
it no gamma information is included in a png file, and that could radically
change how any image looks to different viewers.  Thanks.

Post a reply to this message

I'm working on some entries already! :)
Though I'm going to have to work harder now the score's not divided by the 
byte size!

Anyway the current set of rules on your site sound great. Though isosurfaces 
are a bit annoying without functions.inc... Still, that's the point in the 
challenge.

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Paul Bourke" <pau### [at] uwaeduau> wrote in message 
news:web.4517c7f86007cae685a114a40@news.povray.org...
> Round four of the POVRay short code contest
>
> Not quite a full on announcement but close enough.
>
> Please point your browser here and make any suggestions, comments, 
> wording,
> etc.
>   http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/scc4/
>
> Very similar to the last one in 2004 except ...
> - Voting by entrants only
> - Source code available during voting, you vote on the craft as well as 
> the
> image
> - No external resources, eg: #include, font files, and so on.
>
> -------------------------------------
> P a u l   B o u r k e
> http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Yeah it does suck that if you want natural lighting you have to waste so 
many characters in "global_settings{assumed_gamma 1}", I mean that's 1/8th 
the file size gone already! Personally I'm just trying to cope without it, 
but it hurts :(

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Blue Herring" <bhe### [at] tinfoilcatcom> wrote in message 
news:web.45228f94e7874c87a4e843e0@news.povray.org...
> "Paul Bourke" <pau### [at] uwaeduau> wrote:
>> Round four of the POVRay short code contest
>>
>> Not quite a full on announcement but close enough.
>>
>> Please point your browser here and make any suggestions, comments, 
>> wording,
>> etc.
>>    http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/scc4/
>>
>> Very similar to the last one in 2004 except ...
>> - Voting by entrants only
>> - Source code available during voting, you vote on the craft as well as 
>> the
>> image
>> - No external resources, eg: #include, font files, and so on.
>
> Would it be possible to assume anything about global settings, or will we
> need to include a block in the source code?  I was thinking mainly about
> assumed_gamma and max_trace_level.  Especially with assumed_gamma, without
> it no gamma information is included in a png file, and that could 
> radically
> change how any image looks to different viewers.  Thanks.
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Tek <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Yeah it does suck that if you want natural lighting you have to waste so 
> many characters in "global_settings{assumed_gamma 1}", I mean that's 1/8th 
> the file size gone already! Personally I'm just trying to cope without it, 
> but it hurts :(

  This *is* a short code competition. You have to live with that fact.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> Even for those of us who learned to program on the ancient Commodore PET (8k
> RAM max) 256 bytes is a tad claustrophobic.  Sound like fun. Thanks.

Well I wouldn't be so sure, looking at some of the entries so far I'm
starting to wonder if the size should not have been reduced to increase the
challenge.

-------------------------------------
P a u l   B o u r k e
http://local.wasp.uwa.edu.au/~pbourke/

Post a reply to this message

Paul Bourke <pau### [at] uwaeduau> wrote:
> Well I wouldn't be so sure, looking at some of the entries so far I'm
> starting to wonder if the size should not have been reduced to increase the
> challenge.

  Nah. I think 256 bytes is a rather good limit, where making a good image
is challenging but possible. Much lower than that, and I believe the
quality of the images would probably decrease radically.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

How morally acceptable is it to post public WIPs of scc4 entries?

  First of all, publishing public WIPs breaks the rule that entries should
be anonymous at the judging stage.

  However, that's not the only problem I see with that:

  At least one person is doing this, and he is *getting help* from people
to reduce his scene, as well as improvement ideas.
  I don't know about you, but to me this feels a bit like cheating. Isn't
this an individual competition, where people submit their own work?

  Another thing I find a bit questionable is that he is getting feedback
in advance. Unlike those (like me) who just make a scene and submit and
wait for the contest results to be published, he is getting opinions about
the quality of his work in advance and thus *might* have an upper edge on
further developement.
  Of course nothing would stop me from posting public WIPs too, but I still
feel like it would be kind of cheating.

  Besides, how will it affect judging when people have seen a scene in
advance, before any of the other scenes?
  Sure, it's quite unclear whether this will affect positively or
negatively the votes, but I'm sure that at least in some cases it
*may* have some effect, and I think this is questionable. It's
questionable because, at least in some cases, not all entries may
be judged equally: Some entries have been published before the
judging and thus some people may have a prejudiced (in a positive or
negative way) opinion about that entry.

  Should there be a rule that entries must be previously unpublished?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   I don't know about you, but to me this feels a bit like cheating. Isn't
> this an individual competition, where people submit their own work?

For what it's worth, it would bother me only if there was an actual 
prize involved beyond recognition. Otherwise, it would seem like a 
good-natured competition to promote POV and POVing in general, yes?

Post a reply to this message