"Slashdolt" <jer### [at] questsoftwarecom> wrote in message
news:3e3ec628$1@news.povray.org...
> Sometimes I feel that the artist may have tried to achieve a certain look
> and feel to the final image, without it being photo-realistic, yet with
many
> of us, if it doesn't look photo-realistic enough, it's gets a lower score.
>
I hate "me, too-ing" but I have to say that I agree 100% with you, Slash.
There does seem to be a tendency for many to mark down non-realistic images.
Hell, if I wanted photo-realism I'd go out and buy a camera. What I want
from myself and would like to see from others is artistry and imagination.

A real problem I have is that it is frequently obvious that the person
making the comments has not read read the .txt file. A comment on my image
in the last round read:
I don't exactly see what different perspectives have to do with a "frozen
moment".
If the person making that comment had read my file they might have found
out.

Finally, while I'm on a roll, does anyone (apart from me) look at what
hardware is being used? After all an image that takes 2 hours to render on a
modern machine may very well take two or more days on an early Pentium I
based box.
I personally add marks for working with "ye olde 486".

John

BTW Gonzo, thanx for the kind comments in the last round

--
Run Fast
Run Free
Run Linux

Post a reply to this message