 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> 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?
Bending the rules (written or unwritten) doesn't still feel right.
It feels unfair.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I apologise for causing such controversy. I usually post my IRTC WIPs for
suggestions just to guage opinion on what people think of the work and I
have previously posted WIPs for earlier rounds of the SCC, it didn't occur
to me that this would be any different. I thought this was a perfect
opportunity to invite discussion of some syntactical trickery in POV, though
I grant you it does contravene the anonymity rule.
Why is it anonymous anyway? I doubt if anyone has a significant personal
bias.
Anyway, sorry if I've bent the rules, it wasn't my intention and I don't
believe it will gain me any advantage. I mostly just wanted to show off my
work :)
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4525c9d5@news.povray.org...
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> 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?
>
> Bending the rules (written or unwritten) doesn't still feel right.
> It feels unfair.
>
> --
> - Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Why is it anonymous anyway? I doubt if anyone has a significant personal
> bias.
If Gilles or Jaime participated in the competition, I'm certain that
at least some voters could have at least a bit of bias towards their
entries if they were not anonymous.
I wasn't actually trying to say that posting WIPs should be banned.
I just wanted to discuss about this. Is this a compo where completely
original personal work is submitted, or is it ok to get help from the
public? Is it fair that some people get optimization tips from people
while others just create their work entirely by themselves? Is it fair
that some people show their work in advance before the judging even
begins, while others don't?
As for the anonymity breach, naturally nothing would stop eg. me from
posting here, before judging begins, something like "hey, I was the one
who made the image such and such, vote for me". However, I don't think
too many people would appreciate that.
But of course if the majority of participants think that it's completely
ok to post WIPs, then I suppose I'll have to submit to that.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> I apologise for causing such controversy. I usually post my IRTC WIPs for
> suggestions just to guage opinion on what people think of the work and I
> have previously posted WIPs for earlier rounds of the SCC, it didn't occur
> to me that this would be any different. I thought this was a perfect
> opportunity to invite discussion of some syntactical trickery in POV, though
> I grant you it does contravene the anonymity rule.
>
> Why is it anonymous anyway? I doubt if anyone has a significant personal
> bias.
>
> Anyway, sorry if I've bent the rules, it wasn't my intention and I don't
> believe it will gain me any advantage. I mostly just wanted to show off my
> work :)
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
But I think that there is a difference showing your IRTC work and asking
for artistic advice and asking for technical advice on a SCC. The later
work then becomes a collaboration. I think that you have inadvertently shot
yourself in the foot.
Furthermore I believe you when you said you were just showing off your work
but you should have kept the code to yourself until after the contest was
over.
improve with exposure, some lose but mostly (IMO) you gain.
pas
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
that sure that a 256 to 512 bytes competition will be a good challenge and
well balanced challenge (i mean a 257 byte pictures will get a max of x2
advantages under 512 byte) the only the good quality of picture will be
relevant ..
but the short code contest is mainly based on the use of restrained objects
...
news:web.45252ac9e7874c885a114a40@news.povray.org...
> > 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Leroy wrote:
> Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> The fact that the code will be visible makes this easier to deal with
>> but i still fear that during voting there could be extensive
>> discussion about whether some entries are based on older ones.
>
> I'm thinking of entering for the first time.
> How can I make sure I don't mistakingly do what you feared?
Simple ... write your own code rather than modifying someone else's!
I think unique and innovative code should be rewarded through the voting
system without having to worry about whether bits have been borrowed...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paul Bourke wrote:
>>> Probably a stupid question, but.... we can submit more than one entry, right?
>> I hope so.
>
> I have no problem with multiple entries as long as they are each distinctly
> different.
> On the other hand lets not go crazy .... lets say a maximum of 4 per person?
> Everyone happy with that?
>
Can I ask how "disctinctly different" is defined ...?
For instance I've made two scenes which are both based on the same
(well, slightly modified) function. One uses it for a density map
whereas the other uses it for an isosurface ... however both are very
spherical shapes, but still look very different. I'm not sure whether I
even want to submit both, but for clarity would the rule be here?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> I apologise for causing such controversy. I usually post my IRTC WIPs for
> suggestions just to guage opinion on what people think of the work and I
> have previously posted WIPs for earlier rounds of the SCC, it didn't occur
> to me that this would be any different. I thought this was a perfect
> opportunity to invite discussion of some syntactical trickery in POV, though
> I grant you it does contravene the anonymity rule.
I think it will improve the overall quality of the competition, and is
therefore a good thing. Not everyone likes to reveal their work so soon,
and that's fine. Tek's post is probably of more help to people with less
knowledge than Tek himself, since he is only gaining a few pointers
whereas anyone who studies his code could glean all kinds of insights.
Also I think having a few early tasters just builds the anticipation...
Pete
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paul Bourke wrote:
> Round four of the POVRay short code contest
I can't seem to find any information about the first two rounds. I'd be
quite interested to see what people came up with! Does anyone have a link?
Pete
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Pete Hurst <pet### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> For instance I've made two scenes which are both based on the same
> (well, slightly modified) function. One uses it for a density map
> whereas the other uses it for an isosurface ... however both are very
> spherical shapes, but still look very different. I'm not sure whether I
> even want to submit both, but for clarity would the rule be here?
I think it's enough to have a heuristic there. Trying to define a
formally exact rule can be quite difficult.
I would say that if you can ask a random person "do these two images
show the same scene?" and the person answers "no" then the images are
sufficiently distinct.
(Of course using just the exact same scene but radically changing the
textures is a very borderline case. I would say it falls into the
non-distinct category. Just make the scenes different.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
