 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I really had much to study this week, so there are just a few changes.
Things to add:
everything already told and not added yet.
Question:
For this scene I'm working in 1024x768 (60 hertz which are killing my
eyes...) rather than my usual 800x600. Yesterday I turned back to 800x600
and I could see that this image is quite out of size for this resolution
(and antialiasing method 1 doesn't seem to be sufficient). My question is:
which resolution do the judges work with? I mean, there are images that at
lower resolutions don't look as good as at higher resolutions. Should I add
a "best viewed at 1024x768 or up"...?
Thanks in advance,
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'irtc_big.jpg' (244 KB)
Preview of image 'irtc_big.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmail com> wrote in message news:3b24a8b6@news.povray.org...
> (and antialiasing method 1 doesn't seem to be sufficient). My question is:
> which resolution do the judges work with? I mean, there are images that at
> lower resolutions don't look as good as at higher resolutions. Should I add
> a "best viewed at 1024x768 or up"...?
> Thanks in advance,
> Jonathan.
Personally, I recommend sticking with 800*600. The removal of image dimension limits
was, IMHO, to allow for odd ratios, rather than an open invite to submit vast
pictures. However, if the level of detail in your picture is such that it needs a
higher res. to show it off, then use whatever is appropriate. Judges will happily
scroll, and will presumably zoom out to get an overall feel for an image.
The judges will use various resolutions, and you can be sure that some will be
viewing at 800*600. I doubt many will view at lower resolutions.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b24a8b6@news.povray.org>, JRG says...
> I really had much to study this week, so there are just a few changes.
>
> Things to add:
> everything already told and not added yet.
>
> Question:
> For this scene I'm working in 1024x768 (60 hertz which are killing my
> eyes...) rather than my usual 800x600. Yesterday I turned back to 800x600
> and I could see that this image is quite out of size for this resolution
> (and antialiasing method 1 doesn't seem to be sufficient). My question is:
> which resolution do the judges work with? I mean, there are images that at
> lower resolutions don't look as good as at higher resolutions. Should I add
> a "best viewed at 1024x768 or up"...?
> Thanks in advance,
> Jonathan.
>
If I may: the bench top where the soldering iron usually is, probably
would be scorched more.. :)
--
Regards, Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
>
> I really had much to study this week, so there are just a few changes.
Looks much better, I won't say more since you have more changes to make,
except what's with that sandwich? Nothing personal, but it looks
terrible. ^^;
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The clutter is looking good. Iron's still off balance though. That'll
be fixed in the next one?
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: IRTC WIP take 5 (243 kb before encoding)
Date: 12 Jun 2001 03:11:27
Message: <3B25C0E2.98BAD24D@gmx.de>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
>
> I really had much to study this week, so there are just a few changes.
>
> Things to add:
> everything already told and not added yet.
>
Nice, the metal textures look really good, but i think the glass of water
should stay more in the middle, it looks too good to be moved to the rim,
maybe switch it with the sandwich, which looks a bit too much like
plastic. :-)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Xplo Eristotle" <xpl### [at] infomagiccom> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3B253BC2.E5B2311F@infomagic.com...
> except what's with that sandwich? Nothing personal, but it looks
> terrible. ^^;
>
> -Xplo
Sorry about that, but my mother's not a good cook. You know, she's from
Poland....
Jonathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3B253F59.AC04B439@faricy.net...
> Iron's still off balance though. That'll
> be fixed in the next one?
Yeah, I promise.
JRG
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Tom Melly
Subject: Re: IRTC WIP take 5 (243 kb before encoding)
Date: 12 Jun 2001 12:13:37
Message: <3b263fb1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3b262349@news.povray.org...
>
> "Xplo Eristotle" <xpl### [at] infomagiccom> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:3B253BC2.E5B2311F@infomagic.com...
>
> > except what's with that sandwich? Nothing personal, but it looks
> > terrible. ^^;
> >
> > -Xplo
>
> Sorry about that, but my mother's not a good cook. You know, she's from
> Poland....
> Jonathan
Dunno if you're interested, but I've got a sandwich you can use:
http://www.tomandlu.co.uk/webres/raytracing/gallery/pics/tmlab.jpg
source at:
http://www.tomandlu.co.uk/webres/raytracing/gallery/tmlab.zip
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3b263fb1@news.povray.org...
> Dunno if you're interested, but I've got a sandwich you can use:
> http://www.tomandlu.co.uk/webres/raytracing/gallery/pics/tmlab.jpg
> source at:
> http://www.tomandlu.co.uk/webres/raytracing/gallery/tmlab.zip
Thanks a lot! It's far better than mine!
BTW I don't know if I'd eat this one... ;-)
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
