"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:web.417ee390b45fa19ef7635e200@news.povray.org...
> emkaah <emkaah@yahoodotcom> wrote:
> > m1j wrote:
> > > the improvements for later and go again with the improvements. If the
> > > companies that donated the prizes expected this competition to be
perfect
> > > then perhaps new sponsors are needed anyway.
> > Dumbo.
> >
> > > legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal
advice
> > > I would encourage some counseling.
> > >
> > Suggesting to sue a bunch of VOLUNTEERS working hard to make an OPEN
> > competition for a FREEWARE product a success, isn't mine style. And
> > neither should be yours.
> >
> > -Em
>
> There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We could
> all go blindly forward thinking no one here would do something like this
> but with $14,000 in prize money there could be someone now or after the
> finals are posted in Feb. that after losing decides they where not dealt
> properly. The rules are conditions to a contract that was ratified by each
> of us submitting an entry. To change the rules now with out first
including
> all those involved is a breach of contract. With such a team of volunteers
> it would be a very easy win for anyone who lacking in integrity would
spend
> the money to file a suit. The Pov team would have no funds to fight and
> would be force to agree to a settlement. That would be a very bad deal for
> all of us. I am just worried. I am not sure if this issue was considered
in
> the decision.

There is no legal issue, because everyone who registered agreed to this:

http://www.povcomp.com/rules/agreement/

Specifically, "5. By registering or entering the competition you accept and
agree that:" "b. Neither the competition organisers nor anyone associated
with the competition may be held responsible for any loss or damage of any
sort whatsoever, howsoever caused, that you may suffer as a result of
entering."

Lance.

thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
thehandle - www.thehandle.com

"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I do however believe more respect to those that did make the deadline should
> be shown.

How do you know if the organizer's haven't prepared some kind of
consolidation already?  It's just that practically nothing can be done at
this point, the competition continues.  Do you think it would be fair if
some authors or works was put on the pedestal at this point?

It's life.  It's not supposed to be predictable or set in stone.  Just try
to learn to adjust.

> with writing povray and I agree but now when we push and work to produce
> with in the given required timeline we get blasted for not producing well
> enough.

The organizer's have taken all the responsibility and blame.  The images
were good for a three-month competition, but the organizer's realized that
what they really were after were the kind of results that could be expected
after 6 months of amateur work.  I don't see why you would feel a need to
take any of this so personally, unless it's a general problem with personal
insecurity.  D'oh.

> I am sure everyone has learned something from this.

Seems to me that not everyone, not yet.

> But, this is not the normal way to handle these problems in normal
> competition.

Oh but doesn't that just fit?  The normal way to handle a box in a 3D
software would be to click on a button.  :)

> Like I said before; there could be legal issues that could change things.
> If anyone has access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling.

Now *that's* the adult way of coping with the world.  Just sue 'em.

--
jussi.kantola

"m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We could

Of course the was.  You suggested that, and I quote, '[if] anyoneone has
access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling'.

You'd better calm down a bit before your next post.

--
jussi.kantola

m1j <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> If the deadline is moved officially I will put more time in to my image. I
> am glad to be able to do so. But, this is not the normal way to handle
> these problems in normal competition.

  That's where you are wrong. It's very usual for competitions (not only
computer graphics competitions, but also other similar ones) to extend
deadlines if the amount of entrants was too small for a reasonable
competition.

  I really don't understand why you are disappointed and why you are
suggesting this silly idea that the prices should be given now
regardless of the quality of the competition.

  Extending the deadline serves everyone, ending the competition now
serves no-one (except perhaps the winner).

  Extending the deadline serves the entrants and potential entrants:
Many people complained that they did not have the time to make an entry
even though they would have wanted. Some even complained that they started
making an entry but did not make it in time. Some entrants have expressed
that they did not have time to develop the image as much as they would
have wanted.
  And why should existing entrants complain? It's a fact that deadlines
make people work harder. That's the reason why there are deadlines (and
often even several ones) in school and work projects. Now, the entrants
have made a lot of work for their entry because of the deadline; now that
the deadline was extended they can work even more on their entries. The
total amount of work put into the entry can in many cases be even larger
than what it would have been if the deadline would have been set to January
in the first place. This means that (hopefully) many of the entries will
be better than they would have been, which is good for the entrant and
everyone.

  Extending the deadline serves the competition organizers: If the overall
quality and amount of entries increases, the goal which was set for the
competition will be reached more easily.

  Extending the deadline serves the sponsors: They get "more bang for
their buck", as one could say. The sponsors will be happier and might
be more willing to sponsor future competitions.

  Extending the deadline serves the public: If the overall quality of
the competition increases, the public will get more "wow!" experiences.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the entrants: Many were not
able to participate at all, and many of the ones who did participate did
so with hastily created entries which they themselves are not happy with.
The prices would go to the ones who were able to get something more or
less cool done fast, not necessarily the ones who are most talented.
  We are not measuring speed here; that's not the purpose of this
competition. We are measuring quality.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the organizers: The purpose
of the competition was to get a large amount of high-quality, well-worked
images for, among other things, to promote POV-Ray as a high-quality
program, not to see who gets something done fast.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the sponsors: If they get
disappointed, they might not be willing to sponsor any further competitions
in the future, which certainly does not serve the POV-Ray community or
anyone. Also if the reputation of POV-Ray, the pov-team and the POV-Ray
community gets a stain in the eyes of the "big guys", that can only be
negative.

  Stopping the competition would not serve the public: The public could
get disappointed and the reputation issues above would also have negative
consequences from the big public.

> Like I said before; there could be
> legal issues that could change things. If anyone has access to legal advice
> I would encourage some counseling.

  Ah, but I see now that you were just joking, so no harm done.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>   Extending the deadline serves everyone, ending the competition now
> serves no-one (except perhaps the winner).

Good thing that there is no chance in hell that I will be the winner.

>   Extending the deadline serves the entrants and potential entrants:
> Many people complained that they did not have the time to make an entry
> even though they would have wanted. Some even complained that they started
> making an entry but did not make it in time. Some entrants have expressed
> that they did not have time to develop the image as much as they would
> have wanted.

I think people will be much less angry if the deadline is extended BEFORE
the initial deadline is reached. I have seen these complains on the forum
earlier, and perhaps people should've voiced their concerns well before the
competition ends.

"Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> This being a POV-Ray competition, asking people to show off their POV-Ray
> skills is somehow mandatory. Can this turn off people? Perhaps, but the best
> POV-Ray images should be intrinsically POV-Ray made

Agreed, and this shouldn't be limited to just models, but textures as well.
It is not easy to make really good procedural textures in Povray but in
many cases it is possible. So I think the judges should have a certain
level of weighing on pov-made texture as well.  Will all the judges be
familar with Povray so that they can evaluate the technical aspects of the
entries?

J

j <phazxero[at]hotmail[dot]com> wrote:
> I think people will be much less angry if the deadline is extended BEFORE
> the initial deadline is reached.

  I suppose the team was hoping that it was just a case of people working
hard until the last possible moment before submitting their work, and
that they would get a flood of entries close to the deadline. Unfortunately
that seemed to be a wrong assumption. The deadline came and no flood.

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

"j" <phazxero[at]hotmail[dot]com> a écrit dans le message de
news:web.417faecbb45fa19edb959710@news.povray.org...

> I think people will be much less angry if the deadline is extended BEFORE
> the initial deadline is reached.

That would have been better for everyone in retrospect, but it was not
possible to take such a decision before the deadline without knowing the
final number of entries. We had some inkling of the problem when some folks
reported that they were quitting the competition in these groups, but this
alone wasn't enough to postpone it. The fact that 75% the registered
contestants had dropped out was an unwelcome surprise to say the less.

> Agreed, and this shouldn't be limited to just models, but textures as
well.
> It is not easy to make really good procedural textures in Povray but in
> many cases it is possible. So I think the judges should have a certain
> level of weighing on pov-made texture as well.  Will all the judges be
> familar with Povray so that they can evaluate the technical aspects of the
> entries?

Most judges won't be familiar with POV-Ray. However, the judges will discuss
the pictures and those with POV-Ray experience will have the opportunity to
point out the POV-specific qualities of the images.

G.


-- 

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

"jute" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.417f69eab45fa19e67c1c3ff0@news.povray.org...
> "m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We
could
>
> Of course the was.  You suggested that, and I quote, '[if] anyoneone has
> access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling'.
>
> You'd better calm down a bit before your next post.
>
> --
> jussi.kantola
>
>
>

i think you might have misunderstood his intentions. so did i initially (it
sounded like veiled threats honestly), but by reading his response i trust
he means that he encourages the povcomp team to seek legal counseling before
finalizing the deadline extention. That seems like sound advice.

-r

"Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> "jute" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
> news:web.417f69eab45fa19e67c1c3ff0@news.povray.org...
> > "m1j" <mik### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > There is no suggesting in my post. I was just stating a warning. We
> could
> >
> > Of course the was.  You suggested that, and I quote, '[if] anyoneone has
> > access to legal advice I would encourage some counseling'.
> >
> > You'd better calm down a bit before your next post.
> >
> > --
> > jussi.kantola
> >
> >
> >
>
> i think you might have misunderstood his intentions. so did i initially (it
> sounded like veiled threats honestly), but by reading his response i trust
> he means that he encourages the povcomp team to seek legal counseling before
> finalizing the deadline extention. That seems like sound advice.
>
> -r

Thank you very much for accurately reading my post. I intended no threat
from me but just concern that some one could and might.

Well, I guess I really can't say whether this extension is a good thing or a
bad thing.  I had dropped out of this competition when I was almost
finished with a *not very refined* entry due to time constraints.  Since
the closure of the contest, I have been able to dedicate more of my effort
to other demanding (and exceptionally gluttonous) time-devouring subjects.
Now that it has reopened, I will have to finish my work and submit it.
This will hog a lot more of my already scarce commodity (time), but I think
it will be rather more rewarding than most of my mandated pursuits (aka
school :p).  I really don't care where I stand or will stand as far as
comparative quality, I just want to be able to satisfy my own imagination
(it's finicky, that's for sure!)
Let's oil those engines and get back in the race!
Don't worry about getting frustrated; If worst comes to worst, come and join
me in Antarctica, I'll have the Penguins put on some more hot chocolate.

Good luck one and all (not just to the entrants, I mean everybody)!

Gena wrote:

> Dave Matthews wrote:
> 
>> And I do think that it is very important to get submissions from more 
>> of the
>> really great POVers, especially since you and Christoph and some of the
>> other experts exempted yourselves in order to organize the competition.
> 
> 
> I think everybody can participate now including organizers. Why not?
> 
> Gena.
> 

I'd love it, but I thought that they'd decided not to.  (I wonder what 
that first prize would be capable of in Christoph's or Gilles' hands?)

Dave Matthews

"Gena" <gen### [at] yahoocom> a écrit dans le message de
news:417de0cd$1@news.povray.org...

> I think everybody can participate now including organizers. Why not?

It's prohibited by the rules. If there were no prizes that wouldn't be much
a problem, but with a financial incentive, it would immediately lead to
suspicion and to all sorts of potential troubles, including legal ones.

G.


-- 

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

"Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> he means that he encourages the povcomp team to seek legal counseling before
> finalizing the deadline extention. That seems like sound advice.

I stand corrected.  Sorry m1j.

--
jussi.kantola

> It's prohibited by the rules. 

But you yourself make the rules :)


> If there were no prizes that wouldn't be much
> a problem, but with a financial incentive, it would immediately lead to
> suspicion and to all sorts of potential troubles, including legal ones.

It's a pity that from competition were excluded people who
proved their commitment to POV-Ray during many years and who
really deserve the prize.

Gena.

Gena wrote:
> 
>> If there were no prizes that wouldn't be much
>> a problem, but with a financial incentive, it would immediately lead to
>> suspicion and to all sorts of potential troubles, including legal ones.
> 
> 
> It's a pity that from competition were excluded people who
> proved their commitment to POV-Ray during many years and who
> really deserve the prize.

I don't think this is about deserving or not.  If Appro, Zazzle or any 
other company is interested in an image from Gilles or me they know we 
are both open to doing contract work when time permits. :-)

I'd rather see the prizes as an encouragement for those participating 
and the whole contest as a chance for people to exercise and present 
their abilities.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 23 Sep. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Gena wrote:


> It's a pity that from competition were excluded people who
> proved their commitment to POV-Ray during many years and who
> really deserve the prize.
> 
If that describes anyone, it describes you, Gena.

"jute" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> > he means that he encourages the povcomp team to seek legal counseling before
> > finalizing the deadline extention. That seems like sound advice.
>
> I stand corrected.  Sorry m1j.
>
> --
> jussi.kantola

I should apologize as well. I did not state my points clear enough.

rben wrote:
> 6) Upon discussing this contest with a friend of mine, he pointed out
> what might be part of the problem.  Since you have explicitely stated
> that artists will be given more credit for self-made models than ones
> borrowed from someone else or created using 3rd party tools, you may
> have narrowed the pool of participants to POV-Ray artists who are
> very good at creating models and in creating impressive images using
> those models.  You have limited the ability for those artists who are
> primarily good at creating impressive images using models that others
> have created.  Personally, I like this, since I make most if not all
> of my own models for each image, but it does narrow the field
> considerably.

If you really want the competition to be about scenes made entirely in POV
with no 3rd party modellers or models, then you are not going to get
amazingly high quality images that are comparable to what people see around
them (films, magazines, photos etc) in such a short time.  POV is not the
best tool for creating complex 3D models, and if you tell people they will
get more credit for trying to use it to do something it wasn't really
designed for, they are going to spend a lot of time doing that rather than
showing off the *real* features that POV is *really* good at.

Had they made it clear that it was perfectly acceptable to use a 3rd party
modeller for creating meshes then I'm sure the quality of entries would have
been far higher.

FWIW I started out planning to enter, but due to a holiday and several trips
with work, I just didn't have the time.  What I did start with was creating
models in POV, I never even touched properly on the lighting or textures, I
was "leaving that for later".  IMHO this is totally wrong, the contest
should be all about the lighting, textures, materials etc, not about seeing
who can get POV to create the most realistic 3D model.  I won't be carrying
on with my entry, I don't want to be wasting my time on one single image for
a prize that might never actually be given away.

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> a écrit dans le message de
news:4188bafe$1@news.povray.org...

> Had they made it clear that it was perfectly acceptable to use a 3rd party
> modeller for creating meshes then I'm sure the quality of entries would
have
> been far higher.

Well, the guidelines say "You are allowed to use any tool you want for
modeling, texturing etc.". About modeling, they say that "self-made models"
will be seen in a positive light, but it's vs non-self-made models, not 3rd
party modelers! The "technical novelty" section also says that while using
the POV-Ray SDL is a good thing, the goal of technical novelty "should not
be attained at the expense of neglecting any of the other guidelines".

It could perhaps have been made clearer, but then the risk was to make
people think that *not using* 3rd party tools would have been a
disadvantage, which would have turned off the many users POV-Ray users who
are SDL-coders at heart. Indeed, the entries show great models created in
POV-Ray and great models with 3rd party modelers. Some models are best done
with a mesh modeler, and others can benefit a lot from the SDL. It really
comes down to the quality of the models in the end, no matter the tool.

> What I did start with was creating
> models in POV, I never even touched properly on the lighting or textures,
I
> was "leaving that for later".  IMHO this is totally wrong, the contest
> should be all about the lighting, textures, materials etc, not about
seeing
> who can get POV to create the most realistic 3D model.

A good image results from the combination of different skills. You're
absolutely right about the importance of lighting and texturing, but
modeling skills are also part of the exercise.

> I won't be carrying on with my entry, I don't want to be wasting my time
on one single image for a prize that might never actually be given away.

There's no reason to think that the prizes won't be given away. They will.
If you've worked hard to make detailed models, you now have the opportunity
to create a scene worthy of them that will include excellent texturing and
lighting. After working on the "Reach for the stars" space image for several
months, Jaime and I spent quite a bit of time creating scenes featuring some
of (mostly Jaime's) best models that had appeared in the main image, because
we thought that they deserved to be seen in their best light.
http://www.oyonale.com/iss/english/details.htm#Museum

G.

-- 

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

Gilles Tran wrote:
> "scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> a écrit dans le message de
> news:4188bafe$1@news.povray.org...
>
>> Had they made it clear that it was perfectly acceptable to use a 3rd
>> party modeller for creating meshes then I'm sure the quality of
>> entries would have been far higher.
>
> Well, the guidelines say "You are allowed to use any tool you want for
> modeling, texturing etc.". About modeling, they say that "self-made
> models" will be seen in a positive light, but it's vs non-self-made
> models, not 3rd party modelers! The "technical novelty" section also
> says that while using the POV-Ray SDL is a good thing, the goal of
> technical novelty "should not be attained at the expense of
> neglecting any of the other guidelines".

OK sorry I misunderstood.  I was thinking that because I am no expert at 3rd
party modellers, I would have more of a chance of winning by getting some
"credit" for doing models in raw POV.  If you are saying that an identical
model created in both raw POV and a 3rd party modeller gets the same credit,
then I will have to practise more with what looks like easier tools to use
for complicated models.

>> I won't be carrying on with my entry, I don't want to be wasting my
>> time
> on one single image for a prize that might never actually be given
> away.
>
> There's no reason to think that the prizes won't be given away. They
> will.

But what happens if the quality of work isn't much different by the end of
January?  Will the prizes be given away then, or will you wait another 3
months?  Just genuinely curious.

> If you've worked hard to make detailed models, you now have the
> opportunity to create a scene worthy of them that will include
> excellent texturing and lighting.

I'll see, the more I think about it the more I'm tempted to carry on :-)

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> wrote:

> OK sorry I misunderstood.  I was thinking that because I am no expert at 3rd
> party modellers, I would have more of a chance of winning by getting some
> "credit" for doing models in raw POV.  If you are saying that an identical
> model created in both raw POV and a 3rd party modeller gets the same credit,
> then I will have to practise more with what looks like easier tools to use
> for complicated models.

It will be a pity if models made solely in povray does not deserve more
credits. The only reasons that I would use a modeller are for things like
nurbs, organic, some ridiculously oddly looking shape that can only be done
with meshes. I do agree that it takes some time to create high quality
models in povray, and because of this I believe that models made purely in
Povray should deserve extra credit.

j wrote:
> "scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> wrote:
>
>> OK sorry I misunderstood.  I was thinking that because I am no
>> expert at 3rd party modellers, I would have more of a chance of
>> winning by getting some "credit" for doing models in raw POV.  If
>> you are saying that an identical model created in both raw POV and a
>> 3rd party modeller gets the same credit, then I will have to
>> practise more with what looks like easier tools to use for
>> complicated models.
>
> It will be a pity if models made solely in povray does not deserve
> more credits.

I agree, but by the sounds of it the organisers want world-class images as a
result, *not* world-class POV code.

> The only reasons that I would use a modeller are for
> things like nurbs, organic, some ridiculously oddly looking shape
> that can only be done with meshes. I do agree that it takes some time
> to create high quality models in povray, and because of this I
> believe that models made purely in Povray should deserve extra credit.

Just because something is harder and takes longer I don't think it should
deserve more credit.  Most of us are only hobbyists, we have a limited time.
If we are being rewarded for spending 10 hours generating a clever model in
POV compared to spending 2 hours knocking it up in a modeller, then that's 8
hours we've lost that could have been spent on texturing/lighting within POV
to make the final image look world-class.

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> Just because something is harder and takes longer I don't think it should
> deserve more credit.

That's true. Things that take longer to make may not necessarily deserve
more credit.

> If we are being rewarded for spending 10 hours generating a clever model in
> POV compared to spending 2 hours knocking it up in a modeller, then that's 8
> hours we've lost that could have been spent on texturing/lighting within POV
> to make the final image look world-class.

But then, how do you know that I spent the majority of my time modeling in
pov? It's the same as saying you spend more time to make fabulous looking
lighting/texture thus deserving more credit, isn't that sort of the same as
spending more time to make fabulous looking model in povray? It is a Povray
competition after all.

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> a écrit dans le message de news: 
4188f5dc$1@news.povray.org...

> OK sorry I misunderstood.  I was thinking that because I am no expert at 
> 3rd
> party modellers, I would have more of a chance of winning by getting some
> "credit" for doing models in raw POV.  If you are saying that an identical
> model created in both raw POV and a 3rd party modeller gets the same 
> credit,
> then I will have to practise more with what looks like easier tools to use
> for complicated models.

I will expand on this later (with examples) when I write the "POVCOMP hints" 
about modelling but here's a couple of answers:

Most judges won't be familiar with POV-Ray but the judges who know it will 
able to add some balance to the discussions so that POV-Ray specific 
features can be properly judged. However, the goal is still to make great 
pictures, which means that quality remains central. As a judge, I would not 
give extra points to a bad model because it's done in SDL. I would only 
reward good models, whatever the tool used.

See for instance this model of typewriter by Jaime Vives Piqueres:
http://www.oyonale.com/iss/english/museum_05.htm
It's certainly one of the most impressive examples of SDL model I've seen. 
It's small, clean code that doesn't use much memory, and, because it's SDL, 
it still looks great on close-up. The same typewriter created with a 
traditional modeller would be a huge, RAM-eating mesh with visible polygons 
that would make testing difficult due to long parsing times. In this case, 
SDL wins. As a judge, I wouldn't reward using SDL per se, but the smart use 
of SDL (and POV-Ray) to create a superior model.

So it comes down to this: use the right tool for the right job. If you can't 
do something as good as you want it to be in SDL, don't. If you can't model 
a good-looking human face in Wings, don't. But if you can do one of these 
things, please do it! If something is going to be rewarded, it's the ability 
to make the best of the tools and time budget available to the artist. Lots 
of impressive stuff can be done in SDL, and often more easily than with a 
mesh modeller, so this can be shown. Also, SDL-based objects can have their 
own specific artistic values and some styles of imagery can also benefit 
from this.

> But what happens if the quality of work isn't much different by the end of
> January?

It will. I'm confident that the good stuff already there will become 
*really* good stuff by the end January. In any case, 3 extra months wouldn't 
make a difference at this point.

> I'll see, the more I think about it the more I'm tempted to carry on :-)

You're welcome!

Gilles

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

"j" <phazxero[at]hotmail[dot]com> wrote in message
news:web.4189338fb45fa19e4d3bf7670@news.povray.org...
> "scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> > Just because something is harder and takes longer I don't think it
should
> > deserve more credit.
>
> That's true. Things that take longer to make may not necessarily
deserve
> more credit.
>
> > If we are being rewarded for spending 10 hours generating a clever
model in
> > POV compared to spending 2 hours knocking it up in a modeller,
then that's 8
> > hours we've lost that could have been spent on texturing/lighting
within POV
> > to make the final image look world-class.
>
> But then, how do you know that I spent the majority of my time
modeling in
> pov?

   Because you will say so in your text file...


It's the same as saying you spend more time to make fabulous looking
> lighting/texture thus deserving more credit, isn't that sort of the
same as
> spending more time to make fabulous looking model in povray? It is a
Povray
> competition after all.

   Can you 'please' stop splitting hairs? If you look at
http://www.richardrosenman.com/

   How can you do this in Pov??  Eh? Eh?

   Get used to it. Modellers are in, and PoV <YOU> create/s the
superior textures, lighting, and finishes.

   That link was fantastic for me. I think I can get close, at least
conceptually-wise.

   Give it a go, and stop whining please.

    ~Steve~

>
>

scott wrote:
> But what happens if the quality of work isn't much different by the end of
> January?  Will the prizes be given away then, or will you wait another 3
> months?  Just genuinely curious.

I can think of no circumstances (excluding perhaps major natural calamity) in
which we would extend the deadline again.

I promise this: even if we do not get a single additional render entered into
the contest we will not extend again in order to give more time. That is time
enough. The winners will be announced in February '05.

-- Chris

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> Just because something is harder and takes longer I don't think it should
> deserve more credit.  Most of us are only hobbyists, we have a limited time.
> If we are being rewarded for spending 10 hours generating a clever model in
> POV compared to spending 2 hours knocking it up in a modeller, then that's 8
> hours we've lost that could have been spent on texturing/lighting within POV
> to make the final image look world-class.

Making models in Povray doesn't mean you have to spend hours and hours
slapping sphere and cylinder together, there are certainly better and
faster ways to do things in povray. Brute force never works, at least not
in a timed exam.

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>    Can you 'please' stop splitting hairs? If you look at
> http://www.richardrosenman.com/
>
>    How can you do this in Pov??  Eh? Eh?
>
I give you a modeller, can you?
I didn't say everything is possible to model in povray. And just because it
hasn't been attempted in povray doesn't mean it's not possible.

So it looks like I have already wasted a chunk of time finding innovative
ways to make models in povray that people normally don't do it in povray. I
don't enjoy doing worthless things.

>    Get used to it. Modellers are in, and PoV <YOU> create/s the
> superior textures, lighting, and finishes.

I would use a modeller if I really have to, but if there are two equally
good models, one made in Povray and one made with a modeller, I think the
one made with Povray should deserve more credit, and that's the end of it.

J

j wrote:
>>    Get used to it. Modellers are in, and PoV <YOU> create/s the
>> superior textures, lighting, and finishes.
>
> I would use a modeller if I really have to, but if there are two
> equally good models, one made in Povray and one made with a modeller,
> I think the one made with Povray should deserve more credit, and
> that's the end of it.

True, but often the one done in a modeller will have taken less time, and if
the organisers want world class final images they should not put any
pressure on people to "waste" time using POV to get a better chance of
winning.

As an example, I spent maybe 45 mins - 1 hour making a model of a plastic
tray in POV for my entry.  It took me a while to get the geometry correct,
the rounds on all the sides, the handle on the front took a lot of trial and
error etc.  For comparison I just made the same thing in our CAD package
here at work, it took me less than 5 minutes.

Now if you gave me 60 minutes to make a "world class" image of a plastic
tray, which method is going to give the best final image?

I understand fully your concerns about using "pure" POV code, but as there
is a time limit to the competition, and the organisers have complained about
the images not being high enough quality, I think it would be sensible for
them to say that there will be no bias given to "pure" POV models over those
done in modellers.  After all, we want to show off to the non-POV community
what POV is capable of in terms of final image quality as a ray tracer, not
as a modeller.

"j" <phazxero[at]hotmail[dot]com> wrote in message
news:web.418a4624b45fa19e4d3bf7670@news.povray.org...
 "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> >    Can you 'please' stop splitting hairs? If you look at
> > http://www.richardrosenman.com/
> >
> >    How can you do this in Pov??  Eh? Eh?
> >
> I give you a modeller, can you?

    Can I do what? Model something like Mr. Rosenman has? I really
don't know if I can, I'm trying now, (and btw, when I saw his work, I
was already modeling something similar, so I was quite shocked to see
what he's done), and so far, so good, touch wood. But seriously,
there's no way I could do it directly in PoV-Ray. How would someone
make the folds in the skin? I've been using PoV for 5 years now, and
soon learnt early on that translating and rotating was going to be my
bugbear. I just couldn't do it. It seemed to take ages to move a box
where I wanted it. Then I tried sPatch, then Wings, (and with Wings,
you can build an entire scene on your screen if so desired - that's
the bit I like), and haven't looked back since.


> I didn't say everything is possible to model in povray. And just
because it
> hasn't been attempted in povray doesn't mean it's not possible.

      I agree.

>
> So it looks like I have already wasted a chunk of time finding
innovative
> ways to make models in povray that people normally don't do it in
povray. I
> don't enjoy doing worthless things.

     No no, don't take it like that. Keep up the good work! Nobody
would be wasting their time developing a way of modeling directly in
PoV if it's achievable. I say fair play to you if that's your goal. I
don't know what you're doing, but to me, I would say that a massive
library of different shapes 'could' be a good start - so that someone
could make a good robot, a good car, a good house, castle, whatever,
in PoV if they want. I think that would be one way forward. Thoughts?


>
> >    Get used to it. Modellers are in, and PoV <YOU> create/s the
> > superior textures, lighting, and finishes.
>
> I would use a modeller if I really have to, but if there are two
equally
> good models, one made in Povray and one made with a modeller, I
think the
> one made with Povray should deserve more credit, and that's the end
of it.

    Absolutely. I would be the first to shake the winners hand if this
is the case.

    Btw, sorry, I was in one of those moods again last night, and you
don't want to know... <sigh>

    Good luck to you.

    ~Steve~

>
> J
>
>

St. wrote:
>   - so that someone could make a good robot, a good car,
> a good house,  castle, whatever, in PoV if they want. I
> think that would be one way forward. Thoughts?

My entry was hand-coded.

  -Shay

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:418a7044$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> >   - so that someone could make a good robot, a good car,
> > a good house,  castle, whatever, in PoV if they want. I
> > think that would be one way forward. Thoughts?
>
> My entry was hand-coded.

     I know it was. ;)  I bet you haven't touched a modeler for,
ooooh, sometime now? The thing is Shay, I can't see any other way
forwards than to use a modeler if you want a complete <and fairly
realistic> scene. If you've achieved this, then I can't wait to see
your submission. You know, everyone screams that Wings is good, (and
it is), but it can be equally as hard as PoV itself in the frustration
camp. As David Bowie once sang; "It ain't eeeasy..."   ;)

    ~Steve~


>
>   -Shay

St. wrote:
> I bet you haven't touched a modeler for, ooooh, sometime now?

How about never? :) I did play with Rhino and Wings for a couple of 
evenings, but never actually modeled anything.

> The thing is Shay, I can't see any other way forwards than to
> use a modeler if you want a complete <and fairly realistic>
> scene.

I can't afford the RAM to make a scene as "complete" as many of those in 
the links with *any* tool, especially poster sized, but my image was not 
  abstract, a mathematical figure, or a procedural landscape. Probably 
thousands of lines of code. In a few evenings (*if* I had the RAM), I 
could add a few trees, flags, or whatever filler I wanted and have the 
frame completely packed with details.

> If you've achieved this, then I can't wait to see
> your submission.

Not sure if I'll leave it up. I haven't canceled it yet. I'll probably 
decide something on Jan 31. I'm just flat out of resources. I could doll 
it up a *bit* over the next three months, but it would still be a 
two-month scene, and no small part of that two months was spent on 
resource management already. Sort of bringing a knife to a gun fight, 
and I don't want to submit anything to which I would feel any desire to 
attach an excuse.

  -Shay

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:418a902a$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> > I bet you haven't touched a modeler for, ooooh, sometime now?
>
> How about never? :) I did play with Rhino and Wings for a couple of
> evenings, but never actually modeled anything.

    Well, at least you know what's involved with these modelers. I
tried Rhino, and didn't know what I was looking at. :/


>
> > The thing is Shay, I can't see any other way forwards than to
> > use a modeler if you want a complete <and fairly realistic>
> > scene.
>
> I can't afford the RAM to make a scene as "complete" as many of
those in
> the links with *any* tool, especially poster sized, but my image was
not
>   abstract, a mathematical figure, or a procedural landscape.
Probably
> thousands of lines of code. In a few evenings (*if* I had the RAM),
I
> could add a few trees, flags, or whatever filler I wanted and have
the
> frame completely packed with details.

   But I'm the same with only 384Mb's of RAM. You really don't want to
know how many times Wings crashes on me with the models that I make.
In fact, I have Wings3d19, 22, 24, and 25 installed here, and the best
one for me is the '19' version. I think this is because from version
22 on, they used a progress bar, and *I* think this 'hassles' the
progress of modeling in this particular program, (any other Wingers
notice this?) Still, I will reset, and reboot as many times as I have
to, to get that object!  ;)


>
> > If you've achieved this, then I can't wait to see
> > your submission.
>
> Not sure if I'll leave it up. I haven't canceled it yet. I'll
probably
> decide something on Jan 31. I'm just flat out of resources. I could
doll
> it up a *bit* over the next three months, but it would still be a
> two-month scene, and no small part of that two months was spent on
> resource management already. Sort of bringing a knife to a gun
fight,
> and I don't want to submit anything to which I would feel any desire
to
> attach an excuse.

   Shay, don't worry about it. Leave it up, and/or improve it, (I
doubt it needs improving from what I've seen from you though).

  Good luck to you too.

   ~Steve~


>
>   -Shay

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>     Can I do what? Model something like Mr. Rosenman has? I really
> don't know if I can, I'm trying now, (and btw, when I saw his work, I
> was already modeling something similar, so I was quite shocked to see
> what he's done), and so far, so good, touch wood. But seriously,
> there's no way I could do it directly in PoV-Ray. How would someone
> make the folds in the skin? I've been using PoV for 5 years now, and
> soon learnt early on that translating and rotating was going to be my
> bugbear. I just couldn't do it. It seemed to take ages to move a box
> where I wanted it. Then I tried sPatch, then Wings, (and with Wings,
> you can build an entire scene on your screen if so desired - that's
> the bit I like), and haven't looked back since.
>

When I mentioned about brute force I don't just mean mindlessly putting a
million primitives together to get a ultra high quality model.  Like Gilles
says, use the right tool for the right thing.  I don't have to put
realistic people in my scene for it to be world-class, make use of things
that can be done in Povray and you could be surprised. Don't restrict
yourself to using a modeller because you need high quality models, just be
creative.

It appears to me that with today's CG standards most scenes with organic
models (human in particular) are deemed world-class (not saying that these
kind are the only world-class images).  People can make the most
photorealistic and detail human face but the artistic value is not really
there.  Perhaps my philosophy for cg is different.  I don't think a
world-class image is the direct result of merely using a tool to make
images that parallel other world-class images. A world-class image should
involve things that are unique, inspiring, something that others have not
tried before... and on top of the remaining artistic components. Povray can
do some amazing light effects, so can mental ray (I shouldn't make a
comparison since I haven't used it before). The tools are not really
different, but you, and I, and the way we perceive the world, are.

>      No no, don't take it like that. Keep up the good work! Nobody
> would be wasting their time developing a way of modeling directly in
> PoV if it's achievable. I say fair play to you if that's your goal. I
> don't know what you're doing, but to me, I would say that a massive
> library of different shapes 'could' be a good start - so that someone
> could make a good robot, a good car, a good house, castle, whatever,
> in PoV if they want. I think that would be one way forward. Thoughts?

I've done most of the modeling during the "first phase" of the competition,
so for the remaining month it's going to be improving everything. I am
trying to make my scene 100% povray, hopefully it will be unique.

>     Btw, sorry, I was in one of those moods again last night, and you
> don't want to know... <sigh>
>
>     Good luck to you.
>
>     ~Steve~

My apologies, I guess I was a bit upset but I can see that your intension is
good. Best of luck to you as well.

J

St. wrote:
> 
>    Shay, don't worry about it. Leave it up, and/or improve
>  it, (I doubt it needs improving from what I've seen from you
> though).

Thanks, but I did go ahead and withdraw it. Worked on it a bit last 
night, and my heart's just not in it anymore. Same with an aborted 
second entry. I'll mail it to you if you want to check it out. Figured 
I'd ask first, 'cause it's 1.6 megs.

<hold on>

Don't have your address handy. I remember the front, but can't remember 
the domain.

  -Shay

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:418ba20f$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> >
> >    Shay, don't worry about it. Leave it up, and/or improve
> >  it, (I doubt it needs improving from what I've seen from you
> > though).
>
> Thanks, but I did go ahead and withdraw it. Worked on it a bit last
> night, and my heart's just not in it anymore. Same with an aborted
> second entry. I'll mail it to you if you want to check it out.
Figured
> I'd ask first, 'cause it's 1.6 megs.
>
> <hold on>
>
> Don't have your address handy. I remember the front, but can't
remember
> the domain.

  Well, I've been really cheeky and sent you an email. Hope you don't
mind. Just reply Shay.

   Later mate.

    ~Steve~


>
>   -Shay

St. wrote:
> 
> Well, I've been really cheeky and sent you an email. Hope you don't
> mind. Just reply Shay.

That looks like a RAM *hawg*! The shapes look awesome, but on this 
monitor, every picture looks like a crappy render from 1995, or maybe 
something rendered with +Q1. I wish there were some way to take a screen 
shot of a crappy monitor picture, you'd probably get a laugh out of 
seeing your pic this way. I'm going to forward it home where I can see 
it and then I'll respond to the "crits welcome" part via email where I 
won't give anything away.

I'm off to find mine now. I'm sending it from my work address, so I 
won't get any email reply to that address until Monday.

  -Shay

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:418bdd9b$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
> >
> > Well, I've been really cheeky and sent you an email. Hope you
don't
> > mind. Just reply Shay.
>
> That looks like a RAM *hawg*!

   Heh, well, close.  ;)

 The shapes look awesome, but on this
> monitor, every picture looks like a crappy render from 1995, or
maybe
> something rendered with +Q1.

 No, what you're seeing are 'some' models in the image *un-smoothed*.
At 800x600, you can't see this, or at least, *I* can't.

  That first image was rendered at bog-standard +a0.0


I wish there were some way to take a screen
> shot of a crappy monitor picture, you'd probably get a laugh out of
> seeing your pic this way.

   'Print Screen' on your keyboard? CTRL-V to any graphics app.


 I'm going to forward it home where I can see
> it and then I'll respond to the "crits welcome" part via email where
I
> won't give anything away.
>
> I'm off to find mine now. I'm sending it from my work address, so I
> won't get any email reply to that address until Monday.

   No probs, looking forward to seeing it Shay. :)

   OH man, just got it. I bow to you young Sir! I'll mail you Monday.

   ~Steve~


>
>   -Shay

While "The aim of POVCOMP 2004 is to show the full potential of POV-Ray", I
am disappointed that objects made in Povray are treated equally as objects
made with modellers on the assumptions that people will spend too much time
on modelling (thus neglecting other things) and models made in Povray won't
be good enough.  I don't object the use of modellers but this is not fair
to the contestants who will be able to deliver, on time, pov models that
are comparable to ones made with modeller. I don't see the point in
continuing as this a complete waste of my effort, I can better spend my
time on other more important matters.

J

St. wrote:

>>  The shapes look awesome, but on this monitor, every picture
>> looks like a crappy render from 1995, or maybe something
>> rendered with +Q1.

>  No, what you're seeing are 'some' models in the image *un-smoothed*.
> At 800x600, you can't see this, or at least, *I* can't.

ROFL. I think you misunderstood. When I said "on this monitor, every 
picture looks...", I meant *every* picture. The monitor is going out. 
It's got nothing to do with *your* pictures.

My Internet service was f'ed at home. The technician just left so I have 
just now gotten to see your pics on a working monitor. Looks great. I've 
got some ideas. I'll start typing an email now.

>> OH man, just got it. I bow to you young Sir!

lol

  -Shay

j wrote:
> While "The aim of POVCOMP 2004 is to show the full potential of POV-Ray",
> I am disappointed that objects made in Povray are treated equally as
> objects made with modellers

POV-Ray has evelved to be a bit more than a renderer. It would be a 
waste IMO if the winner only used the SDL to place a few light sources 
and tweak his rad settings.

  -Shay

"j" <phazxero[at]hotmail[dot]com> a écrit dans le message de news: 
web.418d1c60b45fa19e3395a5e60@news.povray.org...

> I don't see the point in continuing as this a complete waste of my effort, 
> I can better spend my
time on other more important matters.

There are things that are better done in SDL. Others are better done with 
modellers. This is nothing new: the old hall of fame from the mid 90s 
featured renders of models created in pure SDL and renders of models created 
in 3D Studio.  Btw, the idea that something done with a modeller is always 
faster and easier is plain wrong. As someone who has been using modellers 
for a while, I can tell you that it's certainly difficult. A single model 
can take weeks or months. And one can spend a lot of time on a mesh model 
and still end up with something ugly. Modellers are not magical tools!

Again, it's the right tool for the right job. If your project is one where 
pure SDL is the perfect tool and that the result is "world-class" (not that 
I'm fond of this expression) it will have demonstrated "the full potential 
of POV-Ray" and will be rewarded accordingly.

In any case, given the variety of talents existing in the POV-Ray community, 
I wouldn't be surprised that the best entries cover the whole gamut of what 
is possible to do with POV-Ray nowdays, from complex constructs built 
entirely in SDL to mesh-based scenes, and mixtures of both. This was already 
the case for the entries submitted so far and the current Hall of fame is 
also a good demonstration of this.

To put it simply, people should not worry about the way the tools they use 
will be perceived by the judges. Use what you think is best to get the 
results you want, and, if you know your trade well, you just can't be wrong.

G.

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

j wrote:
> While "The aim of POVCOMP 2004 is to show the full potential of
> POV-Ray", I am disappointed that objects made in Povray are treated
> equally as objects made with modellers on the assumptions that people
> will spend too much time on modelling (thus neglecting other things)
> and models made in Povray won't be good enough.  I don't object the
> use of modellers but this is not fair to the contestants who will be
> able to deliver, on time, pov models that are comparable to ones made
> with modeller.

But unless your models lend themselves to being made simply in POV, you will
save time by using a modeller and hence be able to spend more time making
your scene look amazing, which is what the judges want IMHO.

Take this shape as an example, it's a sphere with a square cut down the
middle, and all the edges rounded.  It's just one of the sub-objects that
make up an object in my scene.  How long would it take you to do that in POV
code?

I don't think there are that many realistic looking models that are quicker
to do in POV, especially since most things need rounded edges to look right.
It's just too time consuming to do rounds with CSG.

Attachments:
Download 'untitled1.jpg' (4 KB)

Preview of image 'untitled1.jpg'

"scott" <sco### [at] spamcom> a écrit dans le message de news: 
418f6e70@news.povray.org...

> But unless your models lend themselves to being made simply in POV, you 
> will
> save time by using a modeller and hence be able to spend more time making
> your scene look amazing, which is what the judges want IMHO.

There are many areas where the power of POV-Ray's SDL can be harnessed to 
create amazing things without equivalent in a modeller. After all, there's a 
good reason why some sort of script is supported in many high-end 3D 
packages...
Basically, everything that can be built algorithmically through a 
shape-building macro has a definite edge over modellers, where this sort of 
procedure isn't very natural. Creating a macro to generate hundreds or 
thousands of different objects based on a random seed is something quite 
unique to POV-Ray for instance (see Chris Colefax's city generator, or my 
own pipe and cloud macro). POV-Ray's SDL will let you place them 
automatically and cleverly too. High-end modellers can do this sort of 
things, but it's really more work than it would be in POV-Ray (at least from 
my current experience with Rhino and Cinema 4D). If you throw in mesh 
instanciation and a smart use of primitives, it becomes possible to create 
insanely complex-looking structures without a render farm. Actually, POV-Ray 
can manage complexity quite well.

G.


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