 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The best PovComp image sucks...
...a bit, because it hase way to low gamma/brighntess/contrast, therefore on
common monitor everything besides water, fish and ship-wreck looks just
like a black spot.
Only after turning up the gamma, it becomes visible that the ocean floor has
interesting geometry... perhaps author of image and/or PovComp team should
apply this adjustments to picture - it would be much more impressive
then... :)
(Btw, all my friends to with I show images from PovComp agreed that the most
beautifull is 'Victoria's World' by Douglas Eichenberg and
http://www.povcomp.com/entries/124.php - with got 4th place...)
--
Rafal Maj Raf256
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rafal Maj Raf256 wrote:
> The best PovComp image sucks...
> ...a bit, because it hase way to low gamma/brighntess/contrast, therefore on
> common monitor everything besides water, fish and ship-wreck looks just
> like a black spot.
>
> Only after turning up the gamma, it becomes visible that the ocean floor has
> interesting geometry... perhaps author of image and/or PovComp team should
> apply this adjustments to picture - it would be much more impressive
> then... :)
>
> (Btw, all my friends to with I show images from PovComp agreed that the most
> beautifull is 'Victoria's World' by Douglas Eichenberg and
> http://www.povcomp.com/entries/124.php - with got 4th place...)
>
Massey Ferguson's suck. No torque.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:52:53 -0500, Jim Charter wrote:
> Massey Ferguson
Now *there's* a name I haven't heard in a while - my dad used to work for
them.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:52:53 -0500, Jim Charter wrote:
>
>
>>Massey Ferguson
>
>
> Now *there's* a name I haven't heard in a while - my dad used to work for
> them.
Good ol' red & white. There really is nothing you can say here without
offending someone.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rafal Maj Raf256 <spa### [at] raf256 com> wrote:
> The best PovComp image sucks...
> ...a bit, because it hase way to low gamma/brighntess/contrast, therefore on
> common monitor everything besides water, fish and ship-wreck looks just
> like a black spot.
>
> Only after turning up the gamma, it becomes visible that the ocean floor has
> interesting geometry... perhaps author of image and/or PovComp team should
> apply this adjustments to picture - it would be much more impressive
> then... :)
The Last Guardian looks good on my monitor, but I view on a Mac which has a
1.8 Gamma.
> (Btw, all my friends to with I show images from PovComp agreed that the most
> beautifull is 'Victoria's World' by Douglas Eichenberg and
> http://www.povcomp.com/entries/124.php - with got 4th place...)
My personal favorite as well, though most beautiful doesn't always mean
best.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nah, there was no offense taken there - long story short, after 30 years
with the company, he was part of a lawsuit against the
successors-in-interest and the end result was he decided that giving
loyalty to a company didn't pay off because the company didn't have any
loyalty to him. Kinda a tough life lesson to learn at 80. :-(
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Nah, there was no offense taken there - long story short, after 30 years
> with the company, he was part of a lawsuit against the
> successors-in-interest and the end result was he decided that giving
> loyalty to a company didn't pay off because the company didn't have any
> loyalty to him. Kinda a tough life lesson to learn at 80. :-(
>
> Jim
No they don't, yet people continue to march to the slaughter. ie they
vote republican
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Renderdog wrote:
> The Last Guardian looks good on my monitor, but I view on a Mac which has
> a 1.8 Gamma.
Well it isnt very bad here at PC, but before turning out gamma, I thought
that there was nothing special about ocean-floor, that this is just some
height field or something, I had to turn gamma up to notice neat ocean
plants and so on.
But, IMHO, even with them, picture is not as pretty as it could be, in
example some fish or plants with nicely glowing parts + scattering media,
would be neat.
IMHO this image is nice but Ive seen better pov-images.. :)
--
Rafal Maj Raf256
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ayup. Come to think, I don't know if dad did vote, his Alzheimer's
might've kept him from it. :-(
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rafal Maj Raf256" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote in message
news:2029905.hPIANG34Rp@raf256com...
>
> ... on common monitor ....
> Only after turning up the gamma, it becomes visible that the ocean floor
> has
> interesting geometry... perhaps author of image and/or PovComp team should
> apply this adjustments to picture - it would be much more impressive
> then... :)
>
Fascinating. I myself have often been making images too dark, engendering
complaints from everyone from my wife to p.b.a. commenters. And I never
completely figured it out. Was it my lack of artistic sense? The PC vs.
Mac lightness problem? Is it an innate eye-sensitivity issue-- FWIW I'm
Swedish.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
