"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message 
news:43904369@news.povray.org...
>
> Yes, I like this better too. Now you might experiment with the crucifixion
> shadow on a higher level, against the wall... But maybe that would become 
> to
> explicite.

Hmmmm... Interesting thought, but I'll probably keep it where it is in this 
image.  What I really didn't want to do was "beat you over the head" with 
the cross/crucifix.  In fact, if the majority of viewers never noticed it, 
that would be fine.  I often like putting things in my scenes so that if 
someone stares at it for 5 minutes, they may eventually exclaim, "Hey!  Did 
you see this?"

I _may_ create other versions, or other Shaker scenes.  I suppose it largely 
depends on how long my interest holds, among other things.  I've also 
thought it would be neat to produce (I don't know what it's called) a series 
of 3 pictures: the large central image, with the two smaller (tall) pictures 
on the side.  But I do not see this scene working well that way.  It would 
likely be a new scene.

> There is an interesting  *conflict*  as it were, between the horizontal
> shelf(?) and the projection of the window. As if spirituality was breaking
> through down to earth materialism...
> The shelf thing, is that where Shakers hung their furniture in order to
> clean the floor? I have seen photographs were that was higher up the 
> wall...
>

Last night, I looked over my Shaker books again.  Most rooms had the 
peg-board at about 6 feet up the wall, and some rooms also had the lower 
"dado rail" (it's a new term for me), which apparently is there to prevent 
the back of the chairs (or other furniture) from banging against the wall. 
As such, mine appears to be a little too high to be realistic.

I experimented with changing the height of the rail last night.  Also, the 
highest point of the wall that is visible is only around 5 feet high, so the 
pegboard could not be seen (if it existed).

Thank you for all of your input.  I really appreciate it.  I'm learning. 
:-)

Post a reply to this message