On Tue, 06 May 2003 18:45:39 +0200
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:

> Well, the relections are quite clearly 'fake' (they have quite some
> inconsistencies when you look closely).  Whether they are added
> afterwards or just a painted reflection map used in the render can't
> be said for sure of course.  Same applies for the tree that lack's a
> shadow (shadows could be simply turned off for it although there is no
> obvious reason why one should do that).  

  Hmmm... now that I look closer I see that tree without shadow... and
also notice now the bushes thing noted by Gonzo. It seems fake, but I
can't understand why, being so easy to cheat *inside* the renderer (for
me much more than postprocesing shadows and reflections later). 

> I want to make clear that i don't have anything against any of the
> images discussed in this thread, i just think if there are rules they
> should be clear and objective and they have to be enforced.

  I think the rules are clear enough, but they are there for the judges
mainly. Historically, except on extreme cases, were the judges
who "disqualified" illegal images by rating it poorly, and I think this
worked well to the date. At least for an amateur competition withouth
prizes, administered on free time basis.

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres
		
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message