 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In order to decide quickly for the topic, so we can start asap working on
it, I propose to make the dead line for suggestion/decision within the next
6 hours.
Though some of you were on the same idea, I can say I am a little bit like
the 'initiator' on the thread, so, if no one minds, I also propose myself
to pronounce the final decision according to suggestions.
Bruno
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> Seconding Verm's "primitive", I suggest to use only basic shapes such as
> spheres, cylinders, cones, toruses .. no isosurface, no mesh, no blob
> ....Just to see what is possible and encouraging more imagination than pure
> technique.
To give credit it was sort of derived from Christoph Hormann's post on
p.competition on 12/11/2005 :-).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Everyone,
How about turning Thomas de Groot's suggestion on its head, with a topic of
"Checkered Plane" ?
(i.e. Challenge people to come up with a new angle on an old cliche)
Cheers,
Alun.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:28:16 EST, "Alun" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
>Hi Everyone,
>
>How about turning Thomas de Groot's suggestion on its head, with a topic of
>"Checkered Plane" ?
>
>(i.e. Challenge people to come up with a new angle on an old cliche)
>
>Cheers,
>Alun.
A good idea but not fair to new posters, I think. It is hard enough to think of
something original without all the experienced folk using up all the ideas :-)
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:51:31 EST, "Bruno Cabasson"
<bru### [at] alcatelaleniaspace fr> wrote:
>In order to decide quickly for the topic, so we can start asap working on
>it, I propose to make the dead line for suggestion/decision within the next
>6 hours.
>
I think you should give it a couple of days as not everyone lives online.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bruno Cabasson wrote:
>
> Thomas de Groot already suggested :"This is NOT a checkered plane"
Not bad. Not sure I really understand it, but not bad. My mind goes to
optical illusions.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:28:16 EST, "Alun" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Everyone,
>>
>>How about turning Thomas de Groot's suggestion on its head, with a topic of
>>"Checkered Plane" ?
>>
>>(i.e. Challenge people to come up with a new angle on an old cliche)
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alun.
>
>
>
> A good idea but not fair to new posters, I think. It is hard enough to think of
> something original without all the experienced folk using up all the ideas :-)
>
Probably true. It's a good idea but maybe let the reflective sphere /
checker plane thing stay pristine
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Verm wrote:
>
> Sleep.
> Confusion?
> Rebirth?
>
Timely suggestions, and totally in the tradition of IRTC topics. But
maybe too ambitious for the shortened time space.
>
> Primitive - what can you do with just one type of primitive?
Better for the shortened time perhaps. From the Short Code contests we
know that people respond well to "attenuated means" type challenges.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> Verm <pov### [at] thirteeendynucom> wrote:
>>
>>Primitive - what can you do with just one type of primitive?
>
>
> start :-)
He lost it, both his head and the start.
>
I need more elaboration, I'm thinking either "optical illusion", or "the
"universe
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> Beauty
Sure.
> Your favourite tools
Have always liked this one.
> Degradation
Too close to home!
> Something 2D in 3D
Sounds hard
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
