"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.

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