 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Is terragen considered a raytracer for purposes of the competition or would
I need to use something like forrester or wilber to convert it into a povray
format?
-The "D"
A Thunderstorm is God's way of telling you you spend too much time on the
computer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The "D" wrote in message <397d0678$1@news.povray.org>...
>Is terragen considered a raytracer for purposes of the competition or would
>I need to use something like forrester or wilber to convert it into a
povray
>format?
As it says in the IRTC rules
( http://www.irtc.org/stills/rules.html#tools ):
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.Acceptable Tools
This describes what software and hardware you may use.
b.Any rendering program is acceptable. The competition welcomes the
use of cheap or free software rather than packages only available to a few
professionals. There is nothing wrong with using such software.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise, in the Stills FAQ, ( http://www.irtc.org/stills/faq.html#q1.1.7 ):
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1.1.7] Can I use a renderer besides POV-Ray? Isn't this a POV-Ray
competition?
You can use any computer rendering program. The competition is hosted
by POV-Ray, but they do not make any demands on us or the participants.
[1.1.9] Can I use a scan-line renderer instead of a ray tracer? How about
one that uses some other rendering
technique?
Yes, all algorithms are welcome. The quality should be equivalent to
modern ray tracers, though, or your image will compare badly with the other
entries. Note--we do not consider photocopying or paint programs to be
"renderers". The image should be generated by a computer, algorithmically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So yes, you can use Terragen for rendering your images.
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gte net> wrote in message
news:397d1cff$1@news.povray.org...
> As it says in the IRTC rules
> ( http://www.irtc.org/stills/rules.html#tools ):
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
[snippage]
>
> So yes, you can use Terragen for rendering your images.
>
> Mark
Ok. thanks. thought I remembered something about it having to be raytraced,
and I'm pretty sure terragen doesn't ray trace. Thanks for the help
-The "D"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The \"D\" wrote:
> Ok. thanks. thought I remembered something about it having to be raytraced,
> and I'm pretty sure terragen doesn't ray trace. Thanks for the help
If there is a program that turns terragen "source" into POV-Ray source,
then it must be some kind of rendering tool, which is legal.
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It's a bit contradictory that in the internet RAYTRACING competition ANY
renderer is allowed, even if it doesn't know anything about raytracing.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
True, but considering the odd photo is submitted, I think demanding rt apps
only is going to create too much confusion and bad-feeling. I think that the
basic requirement of an algorithmic app is a good compromise.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Is a painting program acceptable if it uses some depth information to
calculate transparency and focal blur?
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:397d8d51@news.povray.org...
> Is a painting program acceptable if it uses some depth information to
> calculate transparency and focal blur?
>
Depth info about what?
Okay, here's a scenario:
1. You paint a pic, using layers to which you can attach a particular depth
level.
2. You apply the focal blur based on this info.
It would seem to me that you could submit this to the IRTC provided that the
"source" included the picture from stage one. This would be the equivalent
of an image map being the bulk of a raytrace, and with correspondingly low
scores.
What you couldn't do is claim that the whole picture is
raytraced/algorithmised/whatever. No one could reproduce your submitted
picture without a copy of your picture prior to the focal blur. No algorithm
would exist for it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandluf9couk> wrote:
: What you couldn't do is claim that the whole picture is
: raytraced/algorithmised/whatever.
So if I paint an image map to use it on an object in my raytraced scene,
it's not a valid entry because the whole picture is not algorithmically
calculated?
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <397daf95@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
wrote:
>Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandluf9couk> wrote:
>: What you couldn't do is claim that the whole picture is
>: raytraced/algorithmised/whatever.
>
> So if I paint an image map to use it on an object in my raytraced scene,
>it's not a valid entry because the whole picture is not algorithmically
>calculated?
???
(a) the quote you're replying to doesn't imply that. It only implies
that if you paint an image map to use on an object, you cannot claim
otherwise. (I hope this isn't controversial.)
(b) The post you're replying to covered this in a different paragraph:
"It would seem to me that you could submit this to the IRTC provided
that the "source" included the picture from stage one. This would be the
equivalent of an image map being the bulk of a raytrace, and with
correspondingly low scores."
So, yes, of course you can use image maps. The more your scene is an
image map, however, the more low scores you can expect to receive.
Jerry
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jerry" <jer### [at] acusdedu> wrote in message
news:jerry-7E0E52.08415825072000@news.povray.org...
> In article <397daf95@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
> wrote:
>
> (a) the quote you're replying to doesn't imply that. It only implies
> that if you paint an image map to use on an object, you cannot claim
> otherwise. (I hope this isn't controversial.)
>
> (b) The post you're replying to covered this in a different paragraph:
>
> "It would seem to me that you could submit this to the IRTC provided
> that the "source" included the picture from stage one. This would be the
> equivalent of an image map being the bulk of a raytrace, and with
> correspondingly low scores."
>
> So, yes, of course you can use image maps. The more your scene is an
> image map, however, the more low scores you can expect to receive.
>
> Jerry
Couldn't have put it better myself. Dunno why I'm responding except I wanted
to see Tom next to Jerry. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dick Balaska <dic### [at] buckosoftcom> wrote in message
news:397D344F.91047285@buckosoft.com...
> The \"D\" wrote:
>
> > Ok. thanks. thought I remembered something about it having to be
raytraced,
> > and I'm pretty sure terragen doesn't ray trace. Thanks for the help
>
> If there is a program that turns terragen "source" into POV-Ray source,
> then it must be some kind of rendering tool, which is legal.
well Acutally wilbur converts the terragen terain file into a POV targa
heightfiled (sort of) it does also have the possiblility of converting the
terrain file in to a POV mesh include file but that's rather ineficient. Not
sure how forrester converts the file but it lets you do stuff like put trees
and plants and other pov made objects onto the terain (not sure if or what
it's converted to to do this). Which I'd rather not do for the current
(ending aug '00) topic of the Sea since the textures produced in forrester
are inferior to terragen's surface maps, and overall finished scene (at
least without major tweaking)
-The "D"
It's as easy as 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993......
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Shouldn't it be called 'The Internet Rendering Competition' (IRC) then?
Just wondering...
Nekar
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:397d5be5@news.povray.org...
> It's a bit contradictory that in the internet RAYTRACING competition ANY
> renderer is allowed, even if it doesn't know anything about raytracing.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
How about if someone uses just the options under Render in Photoshop to make
his pic...
Just wondering
Nekar
"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandluf9couk> wrote in message
news:397dbbf2@news.povray.org...
> "Jerry" <jer### [at] acusdedu> wrote in message
> news:jerry-7E0E52.08415825072000@news.povray.org...
> > In article <397daf95@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
> > wrote:
> >
> > (a) the quote you're replying to doesn't imply that. It only implies
> > that if you paint an image map to use on an object, you cannot claim
> > otherwise. (I hope this isn't controversial.)
> >
> > (b) The post you're replying to covered this in a different paragraph:
> >
> > "It would seem to me that you could submit this to the IRTC provided
> > that the "source" included the picture from stage one. This would be the
> > equivalent of an image map being the bulk of a raytrace, and with
> > correspondingly low scores."
> >
> > So, yes, of course you can use image maps. The more your scene is an
> > image map, however, the more low scores you can expect to receive.
> >
> > Jerry
>
> Couldn't have put it better myself. Dunno why I'm responding except I
wanted
> to see Tom next to Jerry. ;)
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 09:19:52 +0200, Nekar Xenos wrote:
>Shouldn't it be called 'The Internet Rendering Competition' (IRC) then?
You do realize that the post to which you're replying is several months
old, right?
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
: You do realize that the post to which you're replying is several months
: old, right?
On the other hand, the issue is not old. It's still a good question.
--
char*i="b[7FK@`3NB6>B:b3O6>:B:b3O6><`3:;8:6f733:>::b?7B>:>^B>C73;S1";
main(_,c,m){for(m=32;c=*i++-49;c&m?puts(""):m)for(_=(
c/4)&7;putchar(m),_--?m:(_=(1<<(c&3))-1,(m^=3)&3););} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> : You do realize that the post to which you're replying is several months
> : old, right?
>
> On the other hand, the issue is not old. It's still a good question.
The rule just have to be changed to :
"the image must be a 2D projection of 3D spatial data"
Maybe a little technical, but very clear.
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was just browsing and then I lost track of time... ;)
Nekar
"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote in message
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 09:19:52 +0200, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> >Shouldn't it be called 'The Internet Rendering Competition' (IRC) then?
>
> You do realize that the post to which you're replying is several months
> old, right?
>
> --
> Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
> My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
