web.417d11adb45fa19e497bbfc0@news.povray.org...

> Thanks for the response and the clarifications.  I apologize if I was a 
> bit
> crabby.

Thanks. No harm done. Well, bad news are bad news, no matter how they are 
delivered.

> 1) Add the explanation about copyright to the official rules.  You might
> also explain that any other information in the image that can be used to
> identify the entrant should be removed.  For instance, I noticed that in 
> my
> image, there is a directory path in part of the image that has my name in
> it.  I also have a picture of myself included, but I'm pretty sure that
> none of the judges know who I am based on my picture....

Well, putting some identifying items (other than a signature) in the image 
can be an artistic choice and I'm of the opinion that this should not be 
regulated. If you want to put a picture of yourself in the image, or a 
directory path, because it adds artistic value to the image, this is your 
choice and I think that it has to be accepted as such.

In any case, total anonymity is close to impossible. People can have 
recognisable styles, use favourite objects, topics or textures etc. But 
since most of the judges won't be familiar with the community, this 
shouldn't be a problem. I'd say that we should trust the judges to do their 
best to ignore the names of the entrants (for instance, they won't do 
intensive searches to discover who is who...), and that entrants should do 
their best to keep to the guidelines as they are written now. Let's have 
common sense and good manners prevail.

> 2) Set a lower limit on the number of images that need to be submitted
> before judging can go forward.

I have no prior experience in organising contests, so it's difficult for me 
to comment on that. I'd be willing to know how the sort of issues we're 
facing right now are taken into consideration in other competitions (though 
it's too late now).

> 3) Continue to try to get publicity for the contest and encourage all
> current entrants to encourage others to get involved.

We'll certainly try to do that in the weeks to come. I'm glad that a good 
number of people have already declared their interest in participating.

> 4) Perhaps someone could set up an IRC channel #povcomp2004, where artists
> can waste time and talk about new ways to procrastinate.
> 5) Provide some kind of acknowledgement, perhaps a t-shirt or some bit of
> inexpensive swag, to the people who met the first deadline.

I'll run this with the organisers. I'm not sure about the "inexpensive swag" 
thing, as it could be perceived as condescending by some folks.

> 6) Upon discussing this contest with a friend of mine, he pointed out what
> might be part of the problem.  Since you have explicitely stated that
> artists will be given more credit for self-made models than ones borrowed
> from someone else or created using 3rd party tools, you may have narrowed
> the pool of participants to POV-Ray artists who are very good at creating
> models and in creating impressive images using those models.

(note that the guidelines do not say "3rd party tools", but "3rd party 
models", but your point remains valid)

Part of POV-Ray's greatness and specificity is the use of code to create 
models. I've been a mesh user for years, a promoter of mesh and image maps 
in POV-Ray, and a big user of 3rd party objects and tools but if I had 
entered the competition, I would certainly have made sure that some 
prominent models in the scene would have been both original and hand-coded. 
This being a POV-Ray competition, asking people to show off their POV-Ray 
skills is somehow mandatory. Can this turn off people? Perhaps, but the best 
POV-Ray images should be intrinsically POV-Ray made, just like Poser 
contests, for instance, have the use of Poser models as a central point. 
This would be different if the competition was open to other renderers (like 
the IRTC).

> If, as I expect, you don't have any problem with an artist using/adapting
> models they created in the past in this image, then it might be best to 
> say
> so explicitly.

This could be made more explicit. On a side note, writing guidelines (and 
contracts) is always a "damned-if-you-do, damned if you don't" exercise. 
Write too much of it, and a sizeable number of people will misread it or 
fail to read it. Write not enough of it, and a equally sizeable number of 
people will be confused by the lack of guidance and start seeing things 
where there's nothing to see. Finding the right balance is tough.

> I hope this is of some help.

Your help is welcome !

Gilles


-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters