clipka wrote:
> So to me, one (though not the only) guiding question for technical meri
t 
> is, "does the scene look as /convincing/ as it is possible these days?"

> 
	I disagree. This assumes that the be all, end all of raytracing is 
photorealism. It isn't. If I want a photo, I'll just take my camera 
and shoot. To me, technical merit is "how well was technique used in 
the service of the concept and art?". If the concept calls for a 
comics look, then the image will never be "convincing" no matter how 
good the technical realisation. For example (okay, it's an 
animation, but the principle is the same): 
http://www.irtc.org/irtc/irtc?_n&pg=ViewSubmission&id=Animations_July
-October2000_earlyfly.mpg

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeb### [at] freefr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)