AAAAaaaaaaaaarrrrrrgh "Humiliator" strikes again!
I was so much happier when I didn't know your works, Gilles.
No just kidding ;-)
BTW I had an idea for the IRTC dreaming round: a pond, a frog on the shore
looking a its image in the water, and the image was to be the prince
charming's one. But here I swear I can smell the perfume of your flowers.


3D3D12CC.5D0F2200@gmx.de...
> Also the waves here are quite high frequency, something also indicating
strong wind effect.

I don't agree on this point: wavelength depends of the *fetch* i.e. the
length on which the wind interacts with the water. the wavelength increases
with the fetch, so, on small ponds, you only have hi-frequency ripples.
With this surrounding you may have some turbulence caused by plants, some
area beeing exposed to breeze while others are sheltered.

Marc

Post a reply to this message

While I think this is a wonderful image, and it has many technical and
artistic merits, I hope you don't mind me saying that I think you may have
missed your mark by a little. Certainly it is better than I could have done,
but I think that in one area, an important one, you could have done better.

    The "evilness" of the tree was not apparent to me even on a second and
third look until I read the title.

    My eye is draw up by the black lines of the reflection, up the trunk of
the trees to the middle of the branches. Only on a second look did I see
that something was wrong with the reflection and then I spent a minute
wondering what you did wrong to make such distorted reflections. Only after
I decided that you could not have done that by accident did I re-read the
subject line and then look over your comments to see what you were trying to
do.

    I can't imagine how you could fix it, and it may not be broken enough to
worry about, but I thought you might like to know that although I like the
image in general, for me at least, the effect you seem to be trying for is
not as pronounced as it might be.

    The only things I can think of is to lose the small wind ripples that
make the reflection seem distorted (unfortunately, that would diminish the
realism of the water), and/or maybe "evilize" the reflected sky somewhat to
give more clues (but which also destroys the singular nature of the evil
tree). Both bad ideas really, but I hate to critizise without giving
suggestions.

Post a reply to this message

Very, very impressive. A wonderful piece of work yet again.

Kev.

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt wrote:
>     The only things I can think of is [...]
> [...] and/or maybe "evilize" the reflected sky somewhat
> to give more clues (but which also destroys the singular nature of the
> evil tree). 

   I also had the same problems recognizing the "evil part", and my idea 
was the same. Is not that bad idea at all... why only the tree has to have 
an evil side? This idea in fact seems better to me: is the pond who has the 
power to show the evil side of everything it reflects.


-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

Marc Jacquier wrote:

news:
> 3D3D12CC.5D0F2200@gmx.de...
> > Also the waves here are quite high frequency, something also indicating
> strong wind effect.
>
> I don't agree on this point: wavelength depends of the *fetch* i.e. the
> length on which the wind interacts with the water. the wavelength
increases
> with the fetch, so, on small ponds, you only have hi-frequency ripples.
> With this surrounding you may have some turbulence caused by plants, some
> area beeing exposed to breeze while others are sheltered.

Not meaning to pick holes in things, but I'd tend to agree.  I have a lake
behind my house here, and the stronger the wind, the choppier and larger the
waves generally become, and seemingly more consistent overall.  On most days
when the wind is quite soft, there are usually a lot more very small ripples
and turbulent 'patches' where the ripples appear to be non-existent or
moving in the opposite direction to the surrounding area.  It's a very
strange effect and seeing Gilles' image reminded me of it immediately (as I
posted in my original reply).  I often sit outside late at night watching
the ripples under the moon light (nights like tonight, actually).

Lance.

thezone.firewave.com.au
www.firewave.com.au

Post a reply to this message

One word  "Incredible!", as is all of your work.

Post a reply to this message

This is absolutely stunning!!! How long did it take you?

Gail
--
#macro G(H,S)disc{0z.4pigment{onion color_map{[0rgb<sin(H/pi)cos(S/pi)*(H<6)
cos(S/pi)*(H>6)>*18][.4rgb 0]}}translate<H-5S-3,9>}#end G(3,5)G(2,5.5)G(1,5)
G(.6,4)G(.5,3)G(.6,2)G(1,1)G(2,.5)G(3,.7)G(3.2,1.6)G(3.1,2.5)G(2.2,2.5)G(9,5
)G(8,5.5)G(7,5)G(7,4)G(7.7,3.3)G(8.3,2.7)G(9,2)G(9,1)G(8,.5)G(7,1)///GS

Post a reply to this message

JRG wrote:

> More likely we'll be able to purchase the poster from zazzle... most of his works
are
> worth it though. :-)

Hu, didn't know zazzle. I was precisely looking for a poster for my new 
appartment :-)

-- 
Jul### [at] cnedraorg
http://www.cnedra.org

Post a reply to this message

news: 3d3d9655@news.povray.org...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> >     The only things I can think of is [...]
> > [...] and/or maybe "evilize" the reflected sky somewhat
> > to give more clues (but which also destroys the singular nature of the
> > evil tree).
>
>    I also had the same problems recognizing the "evil part", and my idea
> was the same. Is not that bad idea at all... why only the tree has to have
> an evil side? This idea in fact seems better to me: is the pond who has
the
> power to show the evil side of everything it reflects.

Well, I tend to enjoy the idea that most of the people who see the image
will just see another pretty (or banal) pond-with-tree-with-flowers image
and that a few of them will have the appropriate delayed reaction. Of
course, it could be made more obvious, with Bill's and yours variants, and
these would make great images, perhaps more meaningful. I played with other
ideas as well, like putting a whole city in the reflection, which could be
an alternate version.
Still I like it more subdued. Why ? Because the interesting thing is that
after all it is obvious. The reflection is large, dark, gnarled, spiky and
leafless, right in the middle, and itself quite disturbing (I took the
inspiration from a sycamore tree by Andrew Wyeth like the following one
http://www.gallery-ii.com/images/wyeth_pa-landscape.jpg).
In fact, I should render the image with the normal reflection so that people
could see the difference (perhaps I'll just do that for the "making of").
There should be no need to pump up the evilness. However, most of us will
miss it - I'd miss it too - because we get confused by the pretty and normal
environment. Let's say that it's fortunate that we have such a positive and
optimistic nature :-)


G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> Well, I tend to enjoy the idea that most of the people who see the image
> will just see another pretty (or banal) pond-with-tree-with-flowers image
> and that a few of them will have the appropriate delayed reaction.

It took me some time to 'see' it.  In fact, I've seen it when I started
wondering 'but why does he called it "dark side" ?'...

Once again, you made it !  You're several years ahead from the best
of us, as should be an artist !  (I hope I didn't hurt your terrible*
modesty...)

(* in the english meaning too...)

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message