Shay wrote:
>"Philippe_Gibone" <Ph.### [at] wanadoofr> wrote in message
>news:3f7322ac[at]news.povray.org...
>|
>| I made a mistake when voting : for off-topic images I rated
>| Artistic and technical Merit as honestly as I could, but I
>| was wrong, I think, now that an off-topic image should be
>| rated (1, 1, 1)
>
>No, I think that you were right the way to vote the way you did.
>Attempting to correct any other factors by "donking" what you feel to be
>off-topic entries will only cause more problems.

Off-topic is sometimes a very gray area too, there are degrees of
off-topic... did the artist just submit an image with no regard to the
theme, or is it 'sort-of' related and I just don't get it.  If it's clearly
not related, I'll give a low concept score and probably take a point off
the artistic and technical too simply because I don't think a blatantly
off-topic entry should be permitted to take place away from on-topic
entries. If it's a sort-of then I score concept by how sort-of I feel it is
and let artistic and technical stand. I reserve 1,1,1 for rules violations,
and I don't think off-topic is a rules violation.


>In truth, I think that it's mostly the technical merit scores which
>skewed this round. At any time in the IRTC, most of the entrants will
>have a low enough experience level (and in some [most?] cases
>intelligence level) that they see downloading and using a macro from
>Gilles' site or rotating a few boxes around a sphere as a significant
>technical achievement. Any who have moved past that level are very
>likely not to receive the credit they deserve for their modeling and
>technical work. If these experienced entrants want to keep competing,
>then they will need to accept this and focus their efforts on making
>more *attractive* images. At the same time, any voter who wants to
>contribute to the legitimacy of the IRTC results should pay attention to
>improving his technical merit judging.


Well, I can't complain about my own overall score (any time I finish top 10
in a round with that many good entries I'm happy!) But my artistic and
technical scores puzzled me, and don't seem to fit your theory. If I was
judging my own entry I'd have probably reversed those two.  I thought
artistically it was pretty good while technically it was so-so. My score
says the opposite. Go figure.

I have noticed that different topics seem to get more extreme levels of
interest on one category. Some topics are more technical by nature
(architecture) while others get more artistic focus (lanscapes) and some
(surrealism) get more concept scrutiny. And that's probably not a bad
thing, otherwise I think they'd all start to look the same.

RG - well, I think I finally have an idea for 'decay' but it will require
some serious work on lighting... that's technical, isn't it?

Post a reply to this message