"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