POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.competition : Why I won't enter PoVComp again. : Re: Why I won't enter PoVComp again. Server Time
20 Apr 2024 04:51:34 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Why I won't enter PoVComp again.  
From: Warp
Date: 24 Feb 2005 18:42:21
Message: <421e665d@news.povray.org>
St. <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>  After reviewing the judges comments on the winners excellent image, I know 
> I won't ever have a chance. Ever. It should be called "POVONLYCOMP"!

>    Here are some of the comments if you haven't seen them yet:

>    "Highly commendable that it did not rely on any imports but that the 
> author made use of POV-ray facitities exclusively"

>   "A big plus for using extensively the primitives and features of POV-Ray 
> (instead of resorting to cheap meshes created by third-party tools)"

> "Cheap meshes"??!! Try it some time buddy. You'll find it hard to get what 
> you want after 10+ days...! (This comment, I have great exception to).

  The goal of the competition was to show what POV-Ray is capable of.

  POV-Ray is more than just a renderer. Modelling your entire scene
in a third-party mesh modeller and your textures in photoshop and then
simply using POV-Ray to get those meshes on the screen in basically
the same way as any other renderer would do is certainly not the best
way to show what POV-Ray is capable of.
  This really was a *POV-Ray* competition, not the IRTC. If you just want
to use POV-Ray for projecting your meshes and textures to the screen, then
you can do it in the IRTC or any other computer graphics competition.
The main goal of povcomp was not that.

  However, regardless of that, and believe or not, that was not the main
reason for choosing The Last Guardian as winner. It was simply, in the
opinion of most judges, the best image. Even most of the judges not
using POV-Ray had this opinion.

  There were other images which came very very close. If The Last
Guardian would have been just a bunch of meshes it would certainly
have been a very difficult choice, but I'm quite sure it would still
have been in the top4 at least. The creative use of POV-Ray features
just hit the spot there.

  The Last Guardian is just a superb image, and it also shows that
superb images are possible to do with POV-Ray without the aid of
expensive third-party graphical modellers, and it also uses creatively
the features available in POV-Ray.
  Shortly, that was about exactly what the povcomp was looking for.

>   I did that, I used POV, but wouldn't have had a chance in hell of winning 
> even if my image was better than anyone elses because I solely use Wings for 
> my models now

  Not true. If you had made a definitely better image than The Last
Guardian, you would have won.
  Granted, the competition would have been very hard against superb
images using more of POV-Ray's features, but the main judging principle
was still how the image looks. The method of production was only secondary.

>  My dismal, failed, attempts, (two), at an image for the POVCOMP cost 'me' 
> money and time for your (not very good, inconsiderate, and naive) gain.

  Nobody forced you to participate.
  It's you who seem quite naive. Were you expecting to win because making
your image "costed you money"?
  Can't you simply accept that some people are able to do better images
than you?

>   Say what you like, I know I'm right.

  Self-righeousness is the way to go, yeah.

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.