Wanted to wait until all of the entries were in to comment. Looks like
commenting and voting shuts down at the end of the round, so I guess I
missed my chance to comment "the right way." Here they are:

"The Time Machine" by Rick:
More _The Science of History_. A nice but underdeveloped take on the
subject. I hope turned-around and punny interpretations of the topic
remain a part of the RTC. Given the preponderance of religious items in
the scene, the presence of the "Mona Lisa" begins to suggest an "art as
religion" angle, but this is inadequately reinforced and likely just a
product of a randomish web search for items.

"SotSoG" by ThomdeG:
Now this is evenness in tone. Along with those discussed in your image
description, there exists the concept that, as we look outwards to the
far reaches of space and inwards to the building blocks of matter, our
world is shrinking and growing at the same time. The Earth below,
appearing both primordial and modern-idyllic at the same time,
appropriately reveals nothing - the same cannot be said for the pants.

"X-ray" by JimCharter:
Definitely titillating. With the media-filled-models method you used,
this X-ray is as much simulated as imitated. I also notice how well the
faked background noise plays the same role as Miro's "infinite soup" (if
you remember that conversation). An extremely rare example in this
community of a concept that is perfectly realized - there are no
apparent concessions to the medium or subject.

"Revolution" by Andrey_K:
An excellent metaphor. The stacked boxes aesthetic is worn out, but
cliches are cliches for a reason, and this particular cliche owes its
popularity to more than just ease of creation. This geometry could work
as-is with better lighting.

"Fundamental Re-Creation" by milco2006:
Your modeling and texturing skills are improving. This has a retro
sci-fi look to it which makes the simple CG techniques work pretty well.

"Evolution" by Seb_3D:
An ambitious concept. What I found most interesting is how the older
parts of the car have degraded. The car as a whole is falling apart at
the same time it is evolving.

"Science at Work" by steve:
Fire; dripping, boiling, and rippling liquids; foam; smoke - typical of
your ambition. These effects are achieved with varying degrees of
realism, but there's something to be said for your persistent refusal to
be limited to what is "doable" in POV-Ray.

"Pool of Science" by lequenne:
Rewriting your macro to build hallways instead of shelves would add a
lot more books without altering your composition. The lack of reflection
in the literal pool is in my opinion a missed opportunity to expand the
metaphor.

"Black Death" by Michael_H:
No posies? Don't know if damask screams Elizabethan to me, but I guess
it is period correct. I like the picture, but more obvious clues would
help those of us who do not possess you knowledge of the subject.

Post a reply to this message

Thanks for taking the time Shay.  Yeah I got shutout from commenting and 
voting on the last few entries too.

Post a reply to this message

Thank you Shay, for your comments.

I did voting and commenting yesterday without a problem. So maybe there was 
a site problem?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

I've been looking at the images for a couple of days here.

Honestly, I think there's no contest. Michael Hunter's "Black Death" is 
the best image here, and the best image I've seen in the tc-rtc/irtc in 
a long time. It looks to me like someone took a 14th or 15th century 
manuscript and digitally edited in photographs over the drawings. :-) 
This is a piece of art.

James Charter's "X-Ray" is probably my pick for second place, and in my 
mind "Science at Work" and "Pool of Science" are tied for third place. I 
have to echo Shay's comment that the pool could really use some 
reflections. :-)

Looking at the scores, I see that my opinions are not widely held. :-) 
Ah, well. Fantastic work.

I should enter again some time here, now that I have a shiny new 
computer. :-)

-- 
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom wtr### [at] calpolyedu

You know you've been raytracing too long when you think 80s movies have 
the funniest special effects.
Aaron Gage a.k.a Slartibartfast

Post a reply to this message

William Tracy wrote:
> I've been looking at the images for a couple of days here.
> 
> Honestly, I think there's no contest. Michael Hunter's "Black Death" is 
> the best image here, and the best image I've seen in the tc-rtc/irtc in 
> a long time. It looks to me like someone took a 14th or 15th century 
> manuscript and digitally edited in photographs over the drawings. :-) 
> This is a piece of art.
> 
> James Charter's "X-Ray" is probably my pick for second place, and in my 
> mind "Science at Work" and "Pool of Science" are tied for third place. I 
> have to echo Shay's comment that the pool could really use some 
> reflections. :-)
> 
> Looking at the scores, I see that my opinions are not widely held. :-) 
> Ah, well. Fantastic work.
> 
The scores are a puzzle to me, seems the winner is the one that gets the 
most responses of average or better.  For the system to work it seems 
that every reviewer must judge every work.  If you look at the current 
scores as ratios of points/potential points the ranking would be 
different.  But that is not 'fair' either.  Seems the only fair way 
would be to enforce that all review all, or else somehow attribute each 
entry a dummy average score for each potential reviewer, then have the 
reviewers in effect altering one of the scores up or down from average.

Post a reply to this message

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht 
news:46dcaa58$1@news.povray.org...
>>
> The scores are a puzzle to me, seems the winner is the one that gets the 
> most responses of average or better.  For the system to work it seems that 
> every reviewer must judge every work.  If you look at the current scores 
> as ratios of points/potential points the ranking would be different.  But 
> that is not 'fair' either.  Seems the only fair way would be to enforce 
> that all review all, or else somehow attribute each entry a dummy average 
> score for each potential reviewer, then have the reviewers in effect 
> altering one of the scores up or down from average.


I have been surprised too...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> "Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
> news:46dcaa58$1@news.povray.org...
> >>
> > The scores are a puzzle to me, seems the winner is the one that gets the
> > most responses of average or better.  For the system to work it seems that
> > every reviewer must judge every work.  If you look at the current scores
> > as ratios of points/potential points the ranking would be different.  But
> > that is not 'fair' either.  Seems the only fair way would be to enforce
> > that all review all, or else somehow attribute each entry a dummy average
> > score for each potential reviewer, then have the reviewers in effect
> > altering one of the scores up or down from average.
>
>
> I have been surprised too...
>
> Thomas

Ye, I am slightly puzzled by the rating system. Is it just me or has it not
been possible to rate the pictures since the competition finished? This is
certainly unfair on the pool of science which has only had one rating as it
was put up on the deadline and then I found i couldnt rate it!

Malcolm

Post a reply to this message

>
> Ye, I am slightly puzzled by the rating system. Is it just me or has it not
> been possible to rate the pictures since the competition finished? This is
> certainly unfair on the pool of science which has only had one rating as it
> was put up on the deadline and then I found i couldnt rate it!
>
> Malcolm

I couldn´t vote either. By the time I tried to log in, all I got was a blank
page. I tried the next day and got in just to find that voting was closed.

About a month ago I wrote to Steve and told him about my concerns about the
voting system. It was obvious to me at that point, that the system wasn´t
working as people were already voting for the three images already
uploaded, but there was no guarantee they would come back and vote for the
rest!

Steve by the way kindly replied to my e-mail and said this would be looked
into.

At that point I had no idea that voting would be closed just as soon as all
images were in!

So this is basically how the voting system currently seems to work:

Images uploaded early get all the votes. Late submission get hardly any as
people simply don´t get the opportunity to vote for them!

Also this system allows people to vote only for some images (their peers
maybe) and ignore everybody else.

I´m sure it´s not intentional, but obviously this isn´t a fair system.

Those who upload late are often those who have put most work into their
submissions and they are those who get "punished".

In my e-mail back then I suggested a system that blocks the votes from each
single voter, until all images have been voted for. Which means that voting
can not start until after the deadline. One week should be enough, then a
winner can be declared.

Well, these are only my thoughts, but I´m sure there must be a way to make a
fair voting system.


Hildur

Post a reply to this message

Hildur K. wrote:

> Well, these are only my thoughts, but I´m sure there must be a way to make a
> fair voting system.


Hi,

I guess Steve and Colin are already trying to work something out. Web 
applications can be a pain to modify.

I got bitten by the same "voting bug" over at irtc.animations :) i guess 
some changes are indeed necessary. We had five entries this round, i 
tested voting, and presto: now i'm not even on the ranking page any more 
:) because voting on one's own entry isn't possible (which is OK), but 
with nobody else having (a chance to have) voted, this means my (0/0/0) 
doesn't even get listed anymore except on the "all entries" page...

Two thoughts:

1) either all entrants must complete their voting on all entries for the 
points system to work, or none at all - that's where "panel judges" 
become necessary. A partial vote obviously puts the entrant voters into 
disadvantage.

2) Voting needs a second timeframe (deadline thru deadline + 1 week 
sounds reasonable, i guess) so that the line-up doesn't change after 
voting has started.

Well, if 2) gets implemented, it shouldn't be a problem to have another 
voting period on the last topics by simply tweaking the timeframe's 
end-date...

-M

Post a reply to this message

"Markus Altendorff" <maa### [at] panoramasde> schreef in bericht 
news:46de8dc9@news.povray.org...
>
> I guess Steve and Colin are already trying to work something out. Web 
> applications can be a pain to modify.
>
>
> Two thoughts:
>
> 1) either all entrants must complete their voting on all entries for the 
> points system to work, or none at all - that's where "panel judges" become 
> necessary. A partial vote obviously puts the entrant voters into 
> disadvantage.

Yes of course. My impression was (but I didn't control at that stage) when I 
voted (sept. 1st) that all(?) images had got 8 votes... But I seem to be 
wrong there.
>
> 2) Voting needs a second timeframe (deadline thru deadline + 1 week sounds 
> reasonable, i guess) so that the line-up doesn't change after voting has 
> started.

Indeed. That seems obvious. I thought this was also Steve's intention, but 
as there was a problem with the site at closing time, maybe that dropped 
out...

>
> Well, if 2) gets implemented, it shouldn't be a problem to have another 
> voting period on the last topics by simply tweaking the timeframe's 
> end-date...
>


Thomas

Post a reply to this message

This is how the ratings in the History of Science round are distributed:

 1st place - no. of ratings 8
 2nd place - no. of ratings 7
 3rd place - no. of ratings 7
 4th place - no. of ratings 6
 5th place - no. of ratings 5
 6th place - no. of ratings 5
 7th place - no. of ratings 3
 8th place - no. of ratings 3
 9th place - no. of ratings 1

Obviously only one submission has received votes from all voters.
I´ll let the rest of the numbers speak for themselves.

Hildur

Post a reply to this message

"Hildur K." <hil### [at] 3dcafemailevery1net> schreef in bericht 
news:web.46deaa94e14db43d625d3df20@news.povray.org...
> This is how the ratings in the History of Science round are distributed:
>
> 1st place - no. of ratings 8
> 2nd place - no. of ratings 7
> 3rd place - no. of ratings 7
> 4th place - no. of ratings 6
> 5th place - no. of ratings 5
> 6th place - no. of ratings 5
> 7th place - no. of ratings 3
> 8th place - no. of ratings 3
> 9th place - no. of ratings 1
>
> Obviously only one submission has received votes from all voters.
> I´ll let the rest of the numbers speak for themselves.
>

Wow!!  I admit that I had not looked this closely. So it means that voting 
is just not finished at all. In fact, thinking about it, that is just what I 
assumed also for some reason when I  voted on  september 1st. I didn't pay 
much attention to what image got what place. I was a bit puzzled though, 
about my image being first. That was not really my own opinion...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Hi Steve,

hope you're doing better? Has the tc-rtc admin team any 
plans on tweaking the voting system, or re-running the last 
vote with all submission in place, in the making?
Just asking out of curiousity, as always :)

-Markus

Post a reply to this message

"Markus Altendorff" <maa### [at] anthrosphinxde> wrote in message 
news:46e3f496@news.povray.org...
> Hi Steve,
>
> hope you're doing better?

    Illness-wise? I never was ill*. I meant in the first instance that I 
felt bad letting all you guys down.  :o(

     *But that's debatable in an everyday family kind of way.


 Has the tc-rtc admin team any
> plans on tweaking the voting system, or re-running the last vote with all 
> submission in place, in the making?
> Just asking out of curiousity, as always :)

    Yes, I know Markus... This is all being dealt with. As soon as it is 
dealt with, I'll post the news, but please be patient, I've got two arms and 
two legs to 'play origami with' first...  ;)

      ~Steve~



>
> -Markus

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:

>     Yes, I know Markus... This is all being dealt with. As soon as it is 
> dealt with, I'll post the news, but please be patient, I've got two arms and 
> two legs to 'play origami with' first...  ;)
> 

Okay, that's the sound of me shutting up now. :)

-M

Post a reply to this message

"Markus Altendorff" <maa### [at] anthrosphinxde> wrote in message 
news:46e4297d$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>
>>     Yes, I know Markus... This is all being dealt with. As soon as it is 
>> dealt with, I'll post the news, but please be patient, I've got two arms 
>> and two legs to 'play origami with' first...  ;)
>>
>
> Okay, that's the sound of me shutting up now. :)

    No, please don't, I appreciate your thoughts, and what you say. 
Seriously.

    I know I fk'd up bigtime, and that's hard for me to take, but today, I 
received an email from someone (a Pover) that explained it in text in a way 
that will enlighten said origami figure even though I've explained it all 
verbally *many* times now.

    If you can decipher that Markus, (and I'm sure you can), then you will 
know where *I'm* coming from.

      Later,

     ~Steve~



>
> -M

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>     I know I fk'd up bigtime, and that's hard for me to take, but today, I 
> received an email from someone (a Pover) that explained it in text in a way 
> that will enlighten said origami figure even though I've explained it all 
> verbally *many* times now.
> 
>     If you can decipher that Markus, (and I'm sure you can), then you will 
> know where *I'm* coming from.

Ah!

Uh.

(scratch scratch)

... no? :)

You lost me somewhere in there - i've a "useful" grip on the 
english language when it comes to user's manuals and reading 
web pages, but i'm afraid i may lack the understanding of 
the finer things of origami. i.e. i just know there's some 
message in your paragraphs above that keeps on escaping me. :)

Hey, and no need to feel bad just because it wasn't perfect 
on the first try! You managed to make a "living" webpage 
available, and that's more than can be said for the IRTC 
right now!

We all live and learn :)

-M

Post a reply to this message

Markus Altendorff wrote:
> Ah!
> 
> Uh.
> 
> (scratch scratch)
> 
> ... no? :)
> 
> You lost me somewhere in there - i've a "useful" grip on the english 
> language when it comes to user's manuals and reading web pages, but i'm 
> afraid i may lack the understanding of the finer things of origami. i.e. 
> i just know there's some message in your paragraphs above that keeps on 
> escaping me. :)

Well, I'm a native English speaker (well, at least as close as Americans 
can get) and he lost me, too.

-- 
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom wtr### [at] calpolyedu

You know you've been raytracing too long when you know exactly what a 
scene look likes after reading only its POV script.
     -- Taps a.k.a. Tapio Vocadlo

Post a reply to this message

"Markus Altendorff" <maa### [at] anthrosphinxde> wrote in message 
news:46e4605a@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:

>>     If you can decipher that Markus, (and I'm sure you can), then you 
>> will know where *I'm* coming from.
>
> Ah!
>
> Uh.
>
> (scratch scratch)
>
> ... no? :)

     Then my code worked.  :)


>
> You lost me somewhere in there - i've a "useful" grip on the english 
> language when it comes to user's manuals and reading web pages, but i'm 
> afraid i may lack the understanding of the finer things of origami. i.e. i 
> just know there's some message in your paragraphs above that keeps on 
> escaping me. :)

     Well, it's easy really. What do you do with origami? Bend it, fold it, 
twist it, bend it, fold it, twist it. Put this in context with the words 
'arms' and 'legs', and it becomes clearer. The reference to "said origami 
figure" is a kind of euphemism for the word 'Colin'.  ;)

   Seriously, here lies the problem. I say "do A" and he does "B". But, you 
have to understand where he's coming from too. I've explained what the 
community is like here, I've explained how 'passionate' we all are about 
this, I've explained how long we've all been doing this, and I've explained 
how hard we all work at our hobby. I've explained that some projects can 
result in 1+GB folders (my folder for the image "Dumped" 
http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2006-08-31/dumped.jpg is 1.51GB!) 
indicating *how* hard we work at it. But, he just doesn't understand it at 
all.

   I saw him last week and asked if we could have the voting period extended 
to after all the images and animations are in and he says "Why?" "It's all 
there for them, why don't they just vote?", and I say "Well, these guys are 
from all around the world, different time zones and such", and he says, 
"Well, why don't they just make *sure* that they vote on time?" And I say, 
"yes, but this is a hobby, people have to work and then do their hobby in 
their spare time, so sometimes they're hard-pushed to get to the deadline on 
time, and anyway, if a guy has worked his/her butt off and uploads at the 
last minute, then surely that isn't fair to that person who will get a low 
vote for possibly the best image/animation." So then he says, "Well, why 
don't you announce all the topics for the whole year, that way they know the 
topics in advance and can work on their images/animations with plenty of 
time to spare, so everyone should get fair votes."

   Me: "But that won't work."

   Him: "Why?"

   Me: "Because it leaves room for cheating."

   Him: "Cheating?? Who are we dealing with here?"


    See? See what I'm up against? The upshot of all this is that I'd ask you 
guys if  announcing the topic a week earlier would be ok, thereby 
effectively giving us all a weeks grace to finish our images/animations and 
then (in theory) have time available to vote and comment in that last week. 
So, I'll leave that for you all to comment on.

   Meanwhile, there are other issues too. Friday afternoon, I received the 
FTP PW and UN, but, it's absolutely useless. Everything is tied into the 
database with coding, stuff like; $CURRENT and $BODY, and I'm no coder, so I 
can't physically 'do' anything myself, well, not in a normal HTML way, that 
is. I tried it. If I change *one* letter on that home page, it kills the 
"view the winning image" links, and the two thumb links, but *not* the other 
links underneath, oh no, they're fine. It's just plain weird. So I've got to 
get that sorted out, (if I can).

    Anyway, today, I'm sending the email that I received yesterday to Colin 
because 1) it explains everything in a way that's so much better than I've 
explained it already, but also confirms what I've explained, and 2) it's not 
coming from me. Fingers crossed.


>
> Hey, and no need to feel bad just because it wasn't perfect on the first 
> try!

   But I do feel bad Markus. At the moment, I'm a very emotional guy, (I've 
always been emotional, but the things that are happening around me right now 
have boosted that by 100%). It's like I'm losing every battle with 
everything I do, and I'm being dragged backwards, not making strives 
forwards. It's a weird feeling, because outwardly, I'm a strong guy that can 
take it on the chin, but inside, it's just not good. I feel like a 
hard-boiled egg waiting to be peeled.



You managed to make a "living" webpage
> available, and that's more than can be said for the IRTC right now!
>
> We all live and learn :)


   Well, "It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings!"  :)

     ~Steve~



>
> -M

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> 
>    Seriously, here lies the problem. I say "do A" and he does "B". But, you 
> have to understand where he's coming from too. I've explained what the 
> community is like here, I've explained how 'passionate' we all are about 
> this, I've explained how long we've all been doing this, and I've explained 
> how hard we all work at our hobby. I've explained that some projects can 
> result in 1+GB folders (my folder for the image "Dumped" 
> http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2006-08-31/dumped.jpg is 1.51GB!) 
> indicating *how* hard we work at it. But, he just doesn't understand it at 
> all.
> 

Odd... i thought the very idea of "voting while the list on the ballot 
keeps on changing" would seem strange to *anyone* :)

>    Well, "It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings!"  :)

That figure of speech i know ! :)
(thanks to my two decades of listening to pop music - The Lightning 
Seeds do have this line in one of their singles)

-M

Post a reply to this message

Hey Steve! You have an interesting communication paradox with Colin! It made 
me grin most widely and you oregami metafor is well choosen, but I realize 
this can be fairly frustrating most of the time. Keep it up! You have our 
wholehearted support to back you up!

Don't feel bad. It's going all right (We have not yet been yelling abuse at 
you, have we?). Being emotional is all right too if you are able to express 
it properly. I know what I am talking about, being emotional but also fairly 
closed. And, well, it sounds a bit lame, but there are just moments in time 
when everything seems to go down the drain (hey! reminds me of that Tim 
Nikias image) but my experience - for what it's worth - is that it often 
forms the preliminary to sustainable growth, spiritual insight, renewed 
strengh, whatever is needed. So, don't dispair.
[end of sermon by Rev. Thomas; congregation bows head and weeps]

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> "Markus Altendorff" <maa### [at] anthrosphinxde> wrote in message 
> news:46e3f496@news.povray.org...
> 
>>Hi Steve,
>>
>>hope you're doing better?
> 
> 
>     Illness-wise? I never was ill*. I meant in the first instance that I 
> felt bad letting all you guys down.  :o(
> 

I didn't/don't feel let down, there is nothing for you to feel bad about.

Post a reply to this message

Ok, an update for you.

  I sent that email that I received yesterday to Colint this morning, and 
now he understands.

  This is what he proposes:


 a) We have Period 1 > 8 weeks
    i) Images can be uploaded
    ii) No voting is allowed

 b) We have Period 2 > 1 week
    i) No images can be uploaded
    ii) Voting is allowed
    iii) Voting is only allowed if all images/animations are voted on.


    He can obviously do it this way, (just wish he'd grasped this in the 
first place though), but it will take a while, about 3 - 4 weeks. Now, where 
it says "We have Period 2 - 1 week", he says that this can be 2 weeks if you 
want.

     So, overall, is this what we want, and do we want 1 week or 2 weeks 
voting and commenting time?

      ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote in message 
news:46e52f7b$1@news.povray.org...

>  So, don't dispair.

   Thank you Thomas for your kind thoughts. I'm ok, it's just that generally 
I can handle what life throws at me, but then something rears its ugly head 
and I know I'm absolutely powerless to do anything about it. It's 
frustrating, and it makes me feel bad and sad at the same time, and I know 
those feelings won't go away.


> [end of sermon by Rev. Thomas; congregation bows head and weeps]

    Heh, well, see, it's quips like that, that keep me smiling.   :o)

     ~Steve~



>
> Thomas
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> Ok, an update for you.
>
>   I sent that email that I received yesterday to Colint this morning, and
> now he understands.
>
>   This is what he proposes:
>
>
>  a) We have Period 1 > 8 weeks
>     i) Images can be uploaded
>     ii) No voting is allowed
>
>  b) We have Period 2 > 1 week
>     i) No images can be uploaded
>     ii) Voting is allowed
>     iii) Voting is only allowed if all images/animations are voted on.
>
>
>     He can obviously do it this way, (just wish he'd grasped this in the
> first place though), but it will take a while, about 3 - 4 weeks. Now, where
> it says "We have Period 2 - 1 week", he says that this can be 2 weeks if you
> want.
>
>      So, overall, is this what we want, and do we want 1 week or 2 weeks
> voting and commenting time?
>
>       ~Steve~

Hey Steve,

sounds like a perfect fix to me!

One or two weeks? I don´t know. One should in most cases be enough, two is
plenty. More time, more votes I guess.

By the way, thanks for your patience and understanding. Looks like we have a
good thing going here which can only get better and better.

Hildur

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>      So, overall, is this what we want, and do we want 1 week or 2 weeks 
> voting and commenting time?
> 

Two. I would sometimes miss the one week period due to my work schedule.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message

> St. wrote:
> >      So, overall, is this what we want, and do we want 1 week or 2 weeks
> > voting and commenting time?
> >

No worries about not getting this sorted, I am persoanlly just thankful for
the work that you have put in so far to get the site to exist and to
operate. The new resolution with Colin sounds good, particularly the
everyone who votes having to vote for all the pictures. In terms of the
question of one or two weeks for voting and commenting then I would say two
just to so as to accomodate for as many people as possible to vote and
comment.

Thanks again steve,

Malcolm

Post a reply to this message

Steve -
Thanks for keeping us posted. (unlike some other web page, I don't think I
have to mention any names) but two weeks sounds good to me for the judging
period......remember this is all voluntarily done to make this web page
work. Why make it any harder to participate and judge then it should be.
It's suppose to be fun (scratch head)......, isn't it ?.....

Thanks again Steve.
Darin

And Markus,
If we don't get a chance to vote on this first round, I would have voted
higher marks for your animation than Johns. And, thank you for the brutally
honest marks, I did deserved them. Learning new techniques like particles
and other things in pov, I let my quality slip a lot. This will improve.
OOPS this is the stills area......sorry

Darin

Post a reply to this message

dbott wrote:
> It's suppose to be fun (scratch head)......, isn't it ?.....

Hey, you've got no idea how serious fun can be :)

If anyone's counting, i'd also suggest keeping the two-weeks 
schedule for voting.

Another thing i'm unsure of - can non-participants of a 
round (who are registered members of tc-rtc) vote, too? This 
would help to get a bigger number of samples to calculate 
the votes from, and having "independent" voters would also 
make sure that a "valid" vote could be calculated even if 
the "participants-only" vote for a round is incomplete due 
to whatever reasons, and thus invalid.

> And Markus,
> If we don't get a chance to vote on this first round, I would have voted
> higher marks for your animation than Johns. And, thank you for the brutally
> honest marks, I did deserved them. Learning new techniques like particles
> and other things in pov, I let my quality slip a lot. This will improve.
> OOPS this is the stills area......sorry

Well, i'm usually starting with "10", which stands for "OK" 
in my book, and add/subtract from there, so i didn't mean 
those marks to be brutal in any way!
Apart from that, i'm using quite a different toolset for my 
animations than most of the others do, so i guess my entries 
are kind of the "odd ones out" :)

An acquaintance of mine runs a freelance recording studio in 
his basement and he's offered to try and make a dubbed 
version. In german language, with bavarian accent. I'm a bit 
scared ... last time he offered to do audio stuff, it was 
for the "IRTC: Escape" topic years ago where i was just 
hoping for some music, but ended up with sound FX on top of 
that, which was ... weird, because the text remained as mute 
subtitles :S

I guess we should really move this over to irtc.animations 
by now... :)

-M

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> schreef in bericht news:46e53eed@news.povray.org...
> Ok, an update for you.
>
>  I sent that email that I received yesterday to Colint this morning, and 
> now he understands.
>
>  This is what he proposes:
>
>
> a) We have Period 1 > 8 weeks
>    i) Images can be uploaded
>    ii) No voting is allowed
>
> b) We have Period 2 > 1 week
>    i) No images can be uploaded
>    ii) Voting is allowed
>    iii) Voting is only allowed if all images/animations are voted on.
>
>
>    He can obviously do it this way, (just wish he'd grasped this in the 
> first place though), but it will take a while, about 3 - 4 weeks. Now, 
> where it says "We have Period 2 - 1 week", he says that this can be 2 
> weeks if you want.
>
>     So, overall, is this what we want, and do we want 1 week or 2 weeks 
> voting and commenting time?
>

Yes, this looks good. I would suggest 2 weeks for period 2.
I would also be in favour for voting possibilities for members who have not 
submitted an image.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> schreef in bericht news:46e53eed@news.povray.org...
> > Ok, an update for you.

>
> Yes, this looks good. I would suggest 2 weeks for period 2.
> I would also be in favour for voting possibilities for members who have not
> submitted an image.
>
> Thomas

I agree that a two week voting period would be suitable and like Thomas’s
idea that voting should not be restricted to the entrants. I still think
that the scores should be hidden until the end of the contest.

Steve:
Would it be possible for us to email you with our scores and for you, with
the help of your beautiful assistant, display the results.


Stephen

Post a reply to this message

2 weeks works for me.

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> schreef in bericht 
news:web.46e644c53670edabc4e49fa40@news.povray.org...
>
> I agree that a two week voting period would be suitable and like Thomas's
> idea that voting should not be restricted to the entrants. I still think
> that the scores should be hidden until the end of the contest.
>

Oh yes, I think this is important: Hide scores until end of contest!!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message