 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
time.
I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 May 2000 18:41:55 -0400, Phil Clute <pcl### [at] tiac net>
wrote:
>Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
>It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
>time.
>I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
>historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
>among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
>
>What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
>Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
I think the Hall of Fame should at least be updated. When you ask
about voting, I want to ask you "Who's Hall of Fame is it?"
If it's ours, then our votiung makes sense, but I always had the
impression the Hall of Fame belonged to the POV-Team.
If the POV-Team invites our opinion on what to include in their Hall
of Fame, I have another question. Does the Hall of Fame exist to honor
gifted people or special images? I would hope the emphasis is on the
individual image.
Later,
Glen Berry
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
> If it's ours, then our votiung makes sense, but I always had the
> impression the Hall of Fame belonged to the POV-Team.
I have had the same impression based on the content of the hall of
fame and the images included with the official Pov CD. A sort of
brotherhood of gifted POV-Ray users and contributors of the past.
On a side note: Chris Cason has been mentioning for some time now
that he plans to redesign povray.org and I doubt he will want
to do anything with that particular area until he does. Same is
true with the user galleries area. It is still there but any
maintenance on it has been abandoned for the time being.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Clute wrote:
>
> Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
> It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
> time.
> I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
> historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
> among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
>
> What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
> Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
The criteria should be photorealism and artistic value. IRTC
winners should be considered first, of course.
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Vote Graham.
Graham has long been a devoted user of POVray and is an ideal candidate
for membership of the hall of fame. Is this a political contest? What,
no! Ok, ignore the previous sentence then.
G.
Phil Clute wrote:
>
> Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
> It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
> time.
> I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
> historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
> among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
>
> What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
> Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
>
> --
> Phil
> ...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway wrote:
>
> Vote Graham.
Graham who ?
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
'Graham who ?'
Hmph. I'm offended. ;)
FYI You might regonise my name if you look back at last years messages,
I've been using POV for several (6) years but have recently gone to
university and connection has been a PITA and as such have not
frequented this news group as much as I might. Oh well, my fame has not
spread as much as I'd hoped.
G.
Ken wrote:
>
> Graham Redway wrote:
> >
> > Vote Graham.
>
> Graham who ?
>
> --
> Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway wrote:
>
> 'Graham who ?'
> Hmph. I'm offended. ;)
Easy there cowboy.
> FYI You might regonise my name if you look back at last years messages,
> I've been using POV for several (6) years but have recently gone to
> university and connection has been a PITA and as such have not
> frequented this news group as much as I might. Oh well, my fame has not
> spread as much as I'd hoped.
I am familiar with you and some of your past deeds with regards to
POV-Ray. I seem to recall you were a little more active when c.g.r.r.
was popular but I have also noticed your presence here as well.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Close but no cookie, I've never looked or posted in C.G.R.R.
'Deeds'? You make me sound like a terrorist, how did you know? Was it
the balaclava that gave it away? Anyway, its nice to know that my name
has not been forgotten entirely, I haven't forgotten your name and there
are still a few famililar faces (names) such as TonyB, Greg MJ and Bill
DeWitt. No Lance Birch?
G.
Ken wrote:
>
> Graham Redway wrote:
> >
> > 'Graham who ?'
> > Hmph. I'm offended. ;)
>
> Easy there cowboy.
>
> > FYI You might regonise my name if you look back at last years messages,
> > I've been using POV for several (6) years but have recently gone to
> > university and connection has been a PITA and as such have not
> > frequented this news group as much as I might. Oh well, my fame has not
> > spread as much as I'd hoped.
>
> I am familiar with you and some of your past deeds with regards to
> POV-Ray. I seem to recall you were a little more active when c.g.r.r.
> was popular but I have also noticed your presence here as well.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway wrote:
> No Lance Birch?
He still posts here but mainly restricts his activity to the off-topic
group. He is one of those traitors who has gone over to the dark side
and uses 3DS Max so that is really the only appropriate group for him
now....
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> When you ask
> about voting, I want to ask you "Who's Hall of Fame is it?"
Good question, I don't know.
> I would hope the emphasis is on the
> individual image.
Same here. But if the Hall of Fame is strictly a Pov-Team thing
then I guess it's up to them...
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I too have been tempted by the dark side and have had a frivilous
relationship with it, but have recently returned to a more agreeable
piece of software, with one of its better properties being that it runs
under Linux. Its a shame because Lance seemed to have a natural aptitude
for POVray. Oh well.
G.
Ken wrote:
>
> Graham Redway wrote:
>
> > No Lance Birch?
>
> He still posts here but mainly restricts his activity to the off-topic
> group. He is one of those traitors who has gone over to the dark side
> and uses 3DS Max so that is really the only appropriate group for him
> now....
>
> --
> Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>He is one of those traitors who has gone over to the dark side
>and uses 3DS Max so that is really the only appropriate group for him
>now...
He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use "professional"
programs. He just went with a big name he knows he can trust. For the rest
of us, there is POV. And besides, he never nocks it, he admits and knows
that POV is very good. I don't think I've ever seen him say otherwise.
Besides, is the dark side so evil after all? Thanks to the efforts of the
darksiders we have movies like Star Wars, and characters like Jar-Jar... OK,
OK, *bad* example...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It was meant as a friendly jest.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And only partially taken as such. I noticed my error only after writing the
first paragraph. That's why I tossed in a "joke" at the end. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What the! I almost missed this thread, glad I saw it now...
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
> He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
> program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use
"professional"
> programs. He just went with a big name he knows he can trust. For the rest
> of us, there is POV. And besides, he never nocks it, he admits and knows
> that POV is very good. I don't think I've ever seen him say otherwise.
Woohoo, I have someone at my defence! ;)
You're right in all points you made. I still love POV-Ray, it has a sheer
power in its rendering engine that MAX will never have (and it's free,
without it I wouldn't be doing the kind of graphics I am now).
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway wrote:
> under Linux. Its a shame because Lance seemed to have a natural aptitude
> for POVray. Oh well.
Gee, all these nice things being said about me! I better throw in some
MAX-lover comment soon or something... ;)
It's funny, when I mentioned that I started with POV-Ray to the two people I
work with at the moment they laughed at me, until I showed them how fast it
is at rendering reflections and refractions compared to MAX, then they just
stood there and said "so you mean you write *code* to make this thing
work???"
hehehe
Of course showing them Gilles Tran's work just blew them away. The
expressions on their faces were priceless really...
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 May 2000 22:09:04 -0400, John VanSickle
<van### [at] erolscom> wrote:
>The criteria should be photorealism and artistic value. IRTC
>winners should be considered first, of course.
"Of course," you say?
That's nonsense, of course. IRTC winners are no more sacred than
anyone else. Placing special emphasis on a select group would be
unwise. Important works can easily be created outside the IRTC, or any
other similar group. Quality work should be recognized no matter where
it originates. Emphasizing one group of people - any group of people -
is unfair to everyone.
It seems that photorealism is one possible criterion, if only because
so many raytracing enthusiasts are trying to achieve it. However, it
certainly isn't required to produce a great work of art, or a valuable
rendering. In fact, when raytracing achieves *total* photorealism,
watch the value of photorealism drop into the gutter. It has it's
place, but it certainly isn't the only reason to value a work.
Artistic value is hard to define. Sort of like that old comment on
pornography: "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." The
trouble is, artistic value is totally in the eye of the beholder. So
how does one go about selecting the works with the best *intrinsic*
artistic value? Do we ask a large group of people to vote on which
works have the most artistic value?
Voting brings up the concept of popularity. All too often when a large
group of people choose something, it's based upon nothing more than
popularity. It's perhaps the easiest quality to measure, but perhaps
the least deserving of additional recognition.
You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
I don't really have a conclusion for all this, other than to say that
intelligently picking candidates for a hall of fame isn't an easy
task. I feel it's too easy to stick to some over-simplified rules and
miss out on a real gem of an image, simply because it didn't fit into
someone else's notion of greatness.
As always, please view my comments as fuel for discussion, and not the
final word by any means.
Later,
Glen Berry
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have a little battle of the tracers going on in a
seperate group between Pov and Lightwave. I'm sort of
limited in what I can use to fight back because I was comparing
the difference between using image_maps for texture or using
pigments, normals etc.
They sent this(lightwave 6.0 btw).
http://www.tiac.net/users/pclute/oera_vw_rad.jpg
Honestly, I don't think the textures are that interesting. They're
pretty much plain colors. But it looks very believable.
I wonder though...with a tree macro, some media clouds...I don't
think this is unattainable with pov or megapov.
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Clute wrote:
>
> I have a little battle of the tracers going on in a
> seperate group between Pov and Lightwave. I'm sort of
> limited in what I can use to fight back because I was comparing
> the difference between using image_maps for texture or using
> pigments, normals etc.
>
> They sent this(lightwave 6.0 btw).
> http://www.tiac.net/users/pclute/oera_vw_rad.jpg
> Honestly, I don't think the textures are that interesting. They're
> pretty much plain colors. But it looks very believable.
> I wonder though...with a tree macro, some media clouds...I don't
> think this is unattainable with pov or megapov.
>
> --
Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
Should do as an answer ...
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
>
> http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
>
> Should do as an answer ...
*just stares at it dumbfounded*
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
>
> Marc Schimmler wrote:
> > Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
> >
> > http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
> >
> > Should do as an answer ...
>
> *just stares at it dumbfounded*
>
That's what I did for many minutes.
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:11:17 -0400, Glen Berry wrote:
>You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
>when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
>that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
>this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
>motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
>motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
>utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
>mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
That wasn't mine.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Lance Birch wrote:
> >
> > Marc Schimmler wrote:
> > > Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
> > >
> > > http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
> > >
> > > Should do as an answer ...
> >
> > *just stares at it dumbfounded*
> >
>
> That's what I did for many minutes.
It took me at least five minutes before I snapped out of it and emailed
Gilles ;)
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 May 2000 09:14:28 -0400, ron### [at] povrayorg (Ron Parker)
wrote:
>On Tue, 02 May 2000 03:11:17 -0400, Glen Berry wrote:
>>You seem to have overlooked one other quality that is often mentioned
>>when trying to rationalize what to honor in a hall of fame: Images
>>that represent an important historical breakthrough. One example of
>>this might the image that Ron Parker created with his custom
>>motion-blur patch of POV-Ray. As far as I know, this was the first
>>motion-blurred image created strictly with POV-Ray and no external
>>utilities. I think it was also an IRTC winner. It's the one with
>>mousetraps and yellow balls flying everywhere.
>
>That wasn't mine.
Ooops! (embarrasment)
( Remove the "7" from 7no### [at] ezwvcom to email me. )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Look at Gilles current IRTC entry...
I like it, but I can't help but mention that for some strange reason, the
fire hydrant bothers me. It just pops out in a way I don't like. Also,
shouldn't that bird be scaled a little smaller? (Unless this is some large
variety of crow I've never seen.) And lastly, the person is blurred just a
little too heavily for my taste. That and the hydrant for some reason,
distract me. Except for that, this is a <censoring
beep>F%^*(&X(^#$#*(]C()&!*(#^_*F$(%&^#*</censoring beep> good image. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> >Look at Gilles current IRTC entry...
>
> I like it, but I can't help but mention that for some strange reason, the
> fire hydrant bothers me. It just pops out in a way I don't like.
Maybe ...
> Also,
> shouldn't that bird be scaled a little smaller? (Unless this is some large
> variety of crow I've never seen.)
The Raven ... nevermore?
> And lastly, the person is blurred just a
> little too heavily for my taste. That and the hydrant for some reason,
> distract me. Except for that, this is a <censoring
> beep>F%^*(&X(^#$#*(]C()&!*(#^_*F$(%&^#*</censoring beep> good image. :)
true
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Right after I posted I went to see the entries...
Yikes!
I do agree with Tony about the fire hydrant, although I can't
quite figure out why it bothers me. I think because everything
else looks soo real, it looks a bit CG(imagine that).
As for the crow Tony...That'a just a baby, I've seen crows around
here that look like black cats with wings. :)
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>As for the crow Tony...That'a just a baby, I've seen crows around
>here that look like black cats with wings. :)
Whoa...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, they did add links to a few images in the IRTC on the main page of
the povray web site. It seems to me that the IRTC acts as a kind of Hall
of Fame. I think that the POV-Ray website should link to the really good
IRTC entries that are made in POV-Ray.
As a matter of who decides, the POV-Ray development team has the final
choice, but I think that people should encouraged to send in their non
IRTC entries to be considered. (Yes, that means HE and Gilles should
just send in their hard drives. ; ) )
I also realize that this is a bit more work for the developers. Maybe
the TAG team can manage the new hall of fame, or perhaps they will ask
for volunteers, which of course I would volunteer for.
Josh
Phil Clute wrote:
> Gilles mentioned that there may be need for a new Hall of Fame.
> It looks like the Hall of Fame hasn't been updated in a long
> time.
> I also agree with Gilles that we should keep the old Hall for
> historical purposes; but there's a few excellent artists(Gilles
> among them)who are not honored there and really should be.
>
> What should the criterion be? ie. Who and what images?
> Should we vote(seems reasonable to me)?
>
> --
> Phil
> ...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
--
Josh English
eng### [at] spiritonecom
"May your hopes, dreams, and plans not be destroyed by a few zeros."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Look at Gilles current IRTC entry
>
> http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-04-30/gt_city.jpg
The more I stare at it the stranger it becomes. But that's how I like
it.
This is unquestionably the most fascinating picture I have ever seen.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
> >Look at Gilles current IRTC entry...
>
> I like it, but I can't help but mention that for some strange reason, the
> fire hydrant bothers me. It just pops out in a way I don't like. Also,
> shouldn't that bird be scaled a little smaller? (Unless this is some large
> variety of crow I've never seen.) And lastly, the person is blurred just a
> little too heavily for my taste. That and the hydrant for some reason,
> distract me. Except for that, this is a <censoring
> beep>F%^*(&X(^#$#*(]C()&!*(#^_*F$(%&^#*</censoring beep> good image. :)
I am unable to sjake the feeling that it is a very peculiar image. I can't put
my finger on it.
I agree the person is blurred too much.
What you said about the hydrant, in my case applies to the paper machine.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> I agree the person is blurred too much.
Remember, in the readme.txt he does refer to the person as a "ghost".
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I just read that part today. It still distracts.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
>
> On Mon, 01 May 2000 22:09:04 -0400, John VanSickle
> <van### [at] erolscom> wrote:
>
> >The criteria should be photorealism and artistic value. IRTC
> >winners should be considered first, of course.
>
> "Of course," you say?
>
> That's nonsense, of course. IRTC winners are no more sacred than
> anyone else. Placing special emphasis on a select group would be
> unwise. Important works can easily be created outside the IRTC, or any
> other similar group. Quality work should be recognized no matter where
> it originates. Emphasizing one group of people - any group of people -
> is unfair to everyone.
I didn't say emphasize. I said to consider them first.
> It seems that photorealism is one possible criterion, if only because
> so many raytracing enthusiasts are trying to achieve it. However, it
> certainly isn't required to produce a great work of art, or a valuable
> rendering. In fact, when raytracing achieves *total* photorealism,
> watch the value of photorealism drop into the gutter. It has it's
> place, but it certainly isn't the only reason to value a work.
Yes, but a major reason for a hall of fame is to show what a cool
piece of software POV-Ray is. Photorealism accomplishes that.
I'd like to amend my suggestion above to read:
"The criteria should *include* photorealism and artistic value."
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
> program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use "professional"
> programs.
FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me some $$.
Of course, in my miserable povery any money is good money, and since I can't
afford MAX I can't make any Real Money™... Bit of a dilemma, innit? :)
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
> David Fontaine wrote:
> > I agree the person is blurred too much.
>
> Remember, in the readme.txt he does refer to the person as a "ghost".
Yeah, I read it five minutes after posting that... oh well
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Since when can't we make money out of hobby? I know I guy named Pablo P.
whose hobby was painting, but he use the same equippement as some other
"non-professional" artist.
> He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
> program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use
"professional"
> programs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me
some $$.
I never said you couldn't make a few bucks with it. I have made a little
money (OK, $10) with POV. What I said is that serious 3D graphics work, esp.
in the movie industry relies on expensive programs such as Max. It's not our
fault, things have always been like that.
>Of course, in my miserable poverty any money is good money, and since I
>can't afford MAX I can't make any Real Money™... Bit of a dilemma, innit?
:)
Yes. I wish I had some RM™. I could sure use some. I must save every penny I
can get my hands on to buy that Playstation 2 when I comes out. :D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Margus Ramst wrote:
>
> TonyB wrote:
> >
> > He wants to get a job. POV is a hobby program. Max is a "professional"
> > program. If you want real money, you have to know how to use "professional"
> > programs.
>
> FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me some $$.
> Of course, in my miserable povery any money is good money, and since I can't
> afford MAX I can't make any Real Money™... Bit of a dilemma, innit? :)
Povery? - the state someone is when POVing for too long?
--
Francois Labreque | It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it
flabreq | is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
@ | the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a
attglobal.net | warning, it is by caffeine alone I set my mind in
motion.
- Stolen from Badger's .sig file
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
>
> Povery? - the state someone is when POVing for too long?
>
I was really trying to avoid that pun, but yes, there you have it...
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"TonyB" <ben### [at] panamac-comnet> wrote :
>
> I never said you couldn't make a few bucks with it. I have made a little
> money (OK, $10) with POV. What I said is that serious 3D graphics work,
esp.
> in the movie industry relies on expensive programs such as Max. It's not
our
> fault, things have always been like that.
>
Between 1995 and 2000 I have made about $10,000 using POV and free
graphics programs (for the most part, I bought ULead's Gif Animator for $29
and I got Corel 8 with the last of the real money). I was selling WEB
animations for about $50-200 each.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You are an exception. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
looks like a photograph to me.
--
Mike
wk: mik### [at] pyxiscom www.pyxis.com
hm: mwe### [at] sciticom www.geocities.com/mikepweber
"Phil Clute" <pcl### [at] tiacnet> wrote in message
news:390E99AB.1AF8CA77@tiac.net...
> I have a little battle of the tracers going on in a
> seperate group between Pov and Lightwave. I'm sort of
> limited in what I can use to fight back because I was comparing
> the difference between using image_maps for texture or using
> pigments, normals etc.
>
> They sent this(lightwave 6.0 btw).
> http://www.tiac.net/users/pclute/oera_vw_rad.jpg
> Honestly, I don't think the textures are that interesting. They're
> pretty much plain colors. But it looks very believable.
> I wonder though...with a tree macro, some media clouds...I don't
> think this is unattainable with pov or megapov.
>
> --
> Phil
> ...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
> > FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me some $$.
> > Of course, in my miserable povery any money is good money, and since I can't
> > afford MAX I can't make any Real Money™... Bit of a dilemma, innit? :)
>
> Povery? - the state someone is when POVing for too long?
Nah, it's from that famous quote in Shakespeare's "Spherelet"
"Get thee to a povery! Why wouldst thou be a miscalculator of rays?
To a povery, go! Or if thou must needs render, I give thee
this plague for thy source file: Be thou precise as strumian,
as accurate as floating point, thou shalt not avoid aliasing.
We are meshes, all of us, trust none of us! To a povery, go!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Joyal wrote:
> Since when can't we make money out of hobby? I know I guy named Pablo P.
> whose hobby was painting, but he use the same equippement as some other
> "non-professional" artist.
Picasso was forced to paint by his father. Although, his father told him to
literally "paint what you see", and instead he painted abstract...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very funny :)
Charles Fusner wrote:
> Francois Labreque wrote:
> > > FYI, I am currently hard at work on two POV projects that should net me some $$.
> > > Of course, in my miserable povery any money is good money, and since I can't
> > > afford MAX I can't make any Real Money™... Bit of a dilemma, innit? :)
> >
> > Povery? - the state someone is when POVing for too long?
>
> Nah, it's from that famous quote in Shakespeare's "Spherelet"
>
> "Get thee to a povery! Why wouldst thou be a miscalculator of rays?
> To a povery, go! Or if thou must needs render, I give thee
> this plague for thy source file: Be thou precise as strumian,
> as accurate as floating point, thou shalt not avoid aliasing.
> We are meshes, all of us, trust none of us! To a povery, go!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
