Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> 
> 
> > * 3dcomwat.jpg - I am not sure about this.  It's an impressive
> > picture, the text says:
> 
>   For what I can see on the image, the persons do not seem added over
> the rendered image, but used as thin figures on the scene. This is a
> technique used widely on architecture renders. Look at the shadows and
> the borders of the figures, they are perfectly integrated. Even the
> reflection is right on terms of perspective!

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).  

> 
> Note: I know this one is outdated because today resizing techniques on
> the average program are much better, but it is on the FAQ, so it is a
> sort of "approved" behavior until revised by the admins.

As already said i agree on that - if the FAQ allowes something although
the rules don't it can't be forbidden.

> P.S.: As always, I prefer the way "let's the judges decide".

In that case you should have a rule 'allow everything but require to
describe what techniques are used'.  Otherwise the judge can't decide
because he does not know (this in fact is a problem about all images with
near to no description in the text file).  

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.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message