Chris Cason has given me permission to lead a collection of  still
images for sale on CD. The CD will be sold through Hallam Oaks for the
purposes of benefitting the povray team and supporting the IRTC and
news.povray.org server.

See some details of this project at
(Note to Ken: let's not put this link on the povray page just yet, some
details are being worked out.)
http://www.geocities.com/pterandon/10best.html

There will be three collections of images on the CD.

1.  TUTORIALS.
    Tutorial images with explanatory text to explain a feature of
povray.

2.  YOUR 10 BEST IMAGES
    Ever been frustrated with the judging in online contests? Here's
your chance to be the judge! Simply submit your 10 best images produced
by povray.  The only requirement is that you answer a few questions
about the image so that a purchaser of the CD could look at "all images
from Columbia" or some "3d toony work,"  or "landscapes."

3.  A povray-raytraced IMAGE CONTEST:   "A Contest of 10 best."
     This project will involve one contest, run much like an IRTC
contest.  The theme is "A Contest of 10 best," where images should
celebrate the many raytracting styles, or many ways of modelling an
object in povray, and/or the many special effects possible in povray.
Since the winning image(s) will be used on the cover to promote the
project, attention to this theme is critical. A breathtaking sunset, no
matter how inspiring or beautiful, is an inappropriate image for this
contest.  An art gallery where someone is looking at 10 radically
different but pretty sunsets, is an appropriate iamge.

TIMELINE:
While the Povray Team has given official permission to this project,
some details are still being worked out in terms of server space, entry
form details, etc.  The EARLIEST possible deadline is October 21, 2000;
it is likely to be later than this.

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> Chris Cason has given me permission to lead a collection of  still
> images for sale on CD. The CD will be sold through Hallam Oaks for the
> purposes of benefitting the povray team and supporting the IRTC and
> news.povray.org server.

I think this is a pretty neat idea. So what you are telling us is
that you will be collecting images from people here in the groups
and from other POV-Ray users to make a collection of our images.
There is no restriction on what images we submit or how talented
we are.

I will be more than happy to search my hard drives looking for
suitable material to submit.

Will .tga and .png images be allowed and what will the file size/
resolution size limits be ?

Any idea what the approximate cost of the CD will be yet ?

Why hasn't anyone else responded to this thread yet ?

-- 
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

Ken wrote:

> I think this is a pretty neat idea.

Agreed!

> Will .tga and .png images be allowed and what will the file size/
> resolution size limits be ?

Ooh, didn't even think of that... important stuff to know.

> Why hasn't anyone else responded to this thread yet ?

I need time to squeeze out more LEGO stuff!

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
news:39A12A3B.1EB28E21@my-dejanews.com...
> Simply submit your 10 best images produced
> by povray.

What if you don't have 10 best images? I would be happy to send my best
scenes, but I only have a couple that might be ok.

Post a reply to this message

Dave Blandston wrote:
> 
> "Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
> news:39A12A3B.1EB28E21@my-dejanews.com...
> > Simply submit your 10 best images produced
> > by povray.
> 
> What if you don't have 10 best images? I would be happy to send my best
> scenes, but I only have a couple that might be ok.

I've wondered about that as well but I imagine that something can
be worked out for those who do not feel they have enough material
to contribute the full ten images.

-- 
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

Yes, you can contribute anything (non-pornographic, non-copyright violation,
etc.).  Send what you're comfortable sharing with the world.

Ten is the limit.  There's no problem with less. Actually, one could
contribute:
    a) 10 "Your Best" images;
    b) 1 contest entry
    c) several high quality tutorials.

Because this is going on a CD and sold the same way as an IRTC, the image
should be a JPG with:
    a) dimensions: width<= 800 ,  height <=600
    b) file size <= 0.25 MB

The files should be uploaded to a IRTC/POV-TEAM-OWNED server, with a web
address and those specifics forthcoming.

Cost: I dunno.  Depends on number and quality of entries; market research by
Hallam Oaks, etc............

Ken wrote:

> Dave Blandston wrote:
> >
> > "Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
> > news:39A12A3B.1EB28E21@my-dejanews.com...
> > > Simply submit your 10 best images produced
> > > by povray.
> >
> > What if you don't have 10 best images? I would be happy to send my best
> > scenes, but I only have a couple that might be ok.
>
> I've wondered about that as well but I imagine that something can
> be worked out for those who do not feel they have enough material
> to contribute the full ten images.
>
> --
> 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

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> Chris Cason has given me permission to lead a collection of  still
> images for sale on CD. The CD will be sold through Hallam Oaks for the
> purposes of benefitting the povray team and supporting the IRTC and
> news.povray.org server.
> 
> See some details of this project at
> (Note to Ken: let's not put this link on the povray page just yet, some
> details are being worked out.)
> http://www.geocities.com/pterandon/10best.html
> 
[...]

Sounds like a good idea, 

i just wonder about the IMAGE CONTEST part, i can imagine a "10 ways to create a
realistic waterfall" project, but the only way i see to illustrate such things
in one picture it is the art gallery.  With the waterfall project you could
create 10 waterfalls one next to the other, that would not be very realistic,
but it would work.  Your sunset example would not work that way.  How about
simple tiling of different versions or other geometric arrangements? That would
of course require some kind of post processing.

Christoph

--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

See the web page for some possibilities that might make it easier to get 10 things
in one image.  Please strive to comply with the themes of:

1.Trigger a response of: "Wow, there's ONE software package that can do ALL of
that?"
2.Have 10 of something.
3.These 10 things will imply the "winners," the "best," the things of highest
quality, someone's personal favorites (however humble), those competing at the
highest level.

Yes, if you're doing a footrace between a sPatch figure and a Poser figure and a
blob figure, yes, you'll eventually run out of modellers to use before you come up
to 10.  So don't beat yourself up trying to get 10 different modellers, but try to
keep with the theme of 10 things, 10 good things, and different things.

My preference would be to avoid tiling.  But this is how I envision the voting:
1)  a group of judges culls (hopefully the tiny fraction) that aren't on topic;
2)  the judges plus all the entrants vote on the best.  (A tiled image WOULD be on
topic and COULD delight a majority of voters).

Alas, is tiling "post-processing"?  I [can you hear the sound of floodgates about to
burst forth?] suppose not.









APOLOGIES if this ends up as HTML; I tried to remove all vestiges of html after an
inadvertent keystroke added some......

Christoph Hormann wrote:

> "Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > Chris Cason has given me permission to lead a collection of  still
> > images for sale on CD. The CD will be sold through Hallam Oaks for the
> > purposes of benefitting the povray team and supporting the IRTC and
> > news.povray.org server.
> >
> > See some details of this project at
> > (Note to Ken: let's not put this link on the povray page just yet, some
> > details are being worked out.)
> > http://www.geocities.com/pterandon/10best.html
> >
> [...]
>
> Sounds like a good idea,
>
> i just wonder about the IMAGE CONTEST part, i can imagine a "10 ways to create a
> realistic waterfall" project, but the only way i see to illustrate such things
> in one picture it is the art gallery.  With the waterfall project you could
> create 10 waterfalls one next to the other, that would not be very realistic,
> but it would work.  Your sunset example would not work that way.  How about
> simple tiling of different versions or other geometric arrangements? That would
> of course require some kind of post processing.
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

I was reading the page and I saw the part about "fan images"; images
depicting copyrighted or trademarked objects owned by litigious companies.
I hope this does not exclude my own and others' LEGO work. Perhaps I should
email them.

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

I'm sure others would enjoy your work if it made it to the CD.

Perhaps it's just a bit of paranoia, BUT in this instance, someone (povteam)
would be making $$ off of a depiction of someone's trademarked product.  I
think the problem occurs when you charge people for a depiction.   I can sing
Beatles' songs all I want in the shower but when I start recording their songs
& selling them, it's another issue.

My guess is that a car manufacturer would love having fan pics of its autos out
there--the more people endear the car, the more car sales.  My guess is that
Disney would sue in a heartbeat over sales of images of their characters.
Lego, on the other hand, is sort of right in the middle, closer to a product
than a copyrighted character.   So please YOU find out or please POVTEAM make a
call.......


David Fontaine wrote:

> I was reading the page and I saw the part about "fan images"; images
> depicting copyrighted or trademarked objects owned by litigious companies.
> I hope this does not exclude my own and others' LEGO work. Perhaps I should
> email them.
>
> --
> David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
> Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> I'm sure others would enjoy your work if it made it to the CD.
> 
> Perhaps it's just a bit of paranoia, BUT in this instance, someone (povteam)
> would be making $$ off of a depiction of someone's trademarked product.  I
> think the problem occurs when you charge people for a depiction.   I can sing
> Beatles' songs all I want in the shower but when I start recording their songs
> & selling them, it's another issue.
> 
> My guess is that a car manufacturer would love having fan pics of its autos out
> there--the more people endear the car, the more car sales.  My guess is that
> Disney would sue in a heartbeat over sales of images of their characters.
> Lego, on the other hand, is sort of right in the middle, closer to a product
> than a copyrighted character.   So please YOU find out or please POVTEAM make a
> call.......

I am not speaking for the POV-Team or David but I will add that
the makers of LEGO have been known to actively pursue copyright
infringment against others in the past and are not considered
very tolerant of such activity (much like Disney). I would be
very careful about how the scene is labled and that the word
"LEGO" appears no where in the image.

-- 
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

Ken wrote:

> I am not speaking for the POV-Team or David but I will add that
> the makers of LEGO have been known to actively pursue copyright
> infringment against others in the past and are not considered
> very tolerant of such activity (much like Disney). I would be
> very careful about how the scene is labled and that the word
> "LEGO" appears no where in the image.

Don't you mean "Lego (TM)" ?

This trademark frenzy America has gotten itself into is absurd.   I once saw a one
page sheet in the lobby of the corporation I work for. It told about the things we
make and the history of the plant for visitors.  Fully 20 percent of the words on the
page were disclaimers of trademarks: "Blahblah is a registered trademark of Blahdeco
Corporation."


____________
Greg M. Johnson
Opinions solely those of myself.

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:

> Don't you mean "Lego (TM)" ?

NO!! NO!! NO!!
It's a REGISTERED trademark!!
LEGO®
:-)

> This trademark frenzy America has gotten itself into is absurd.

Really!!

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> I am not speaking for the POV-Team or David but I will add that
> the makers of LEGO have been known to actively pursue copyright
> infringment against others in the past and are not considered
> very tolerant of such activity (much like Disney). I would be
> very careful about how the scene is labled and that the word
> "LEGO" appears no where in the image.

As I am aware; that is why I would want to make fully sure. Now, as I understand, POV
is not-for-profit, and revenue generated by the CD would fund POV development and the
POV server upkeep, so the real question becomes, "Is it illegal to charge for
pictures of LEGO, or is it merely illegal to make profit on pictures of LEGO?"

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

I'm sure it's illegal to make REVENUE....

David Fontaine wrote:

> Ken wrote:
>
> > I am not speaking for the POV-Team or David but I will add that
> > the makers of LEGO have been known to actively pursue copyright
> > infringment against others in the past and are not considered
> > very tolerant of such activity (much like Disney). I would be
> > very careful about how the scene is labled and that the word
> > "LEGO" appears no where in the image.
>
> As I am aware; that is why I would want to make fully sure. Now, as I understand,
POV
> is not-for-profit, and revenue generated by the CD would fund POV development and
the
> POV server upkeep, so the real question becomes, "Is it illegal to charge for
> pictures of LEGO, or is it merely illegal to make profit on pictures of LEGO?"
>
> --
> David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
> Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:

>     a) 10 "Your Best" images;
>     b) 1 contest entry
>     c) several high quality tutorials.

I don't think you should accept IRTC entries, although there
is no legal reason for you not to.  The reason being that these
are already accounted for on a CD.

> Because this is going on a CD and sold the same way as an IRTC, the image
> should be a JPG with:
>    a) dimensions: width<= 800 ,  height <=600
>    b) file size <= 0.25 MB

BTW, there is no longer an image size restriction on IRTC images.

Have you considered including animations?  I would submit mine, which
i think is quite good. (1 minute 4 MBs)

dik

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> I'm sure others would enjoy your work if it made it to the CD.


> My guess is that a car manufacturer would love having fan pics of its autos out
> there--the more people endear the car, the more car sales.

Then you missed the lawsuit against the fan-site http://www.dodgeviper.com ?

>  My guess is that
> Disney would sue in a heartbeat over sales of images of their characters.
> Lego, on the other hand, is sort of right in the middle, closer to a product
> than a copyrighted character.   So please YOU find out or please POVTEAM make a
> call.......

http://www.lego.com/info/fair.asp
Do not use the Lego logo.  Do not use the word Lego as a noun; only an adjective.
Do not bold the word Lego.  Disclaim that Lego likes you.
"This image is of a model made of Lego® bricks.  LEGO® is a trademark of the LEGO
Group
of companies which does not sponsor, authorize or endorse this image."

(Heh Ken, two links in one message.  Shazam!)

dik

Post a reply to this message

David Fontaine wrote:

>  so the real question becomes, "Is it illegal to charge for
> pictures of LEGO, or is it merely illegal to make profit on pictures of LEGO?"

Here's a better example.  The people who uploaded copyrighted music to Napster made no
profit; no revenue, either.

Post a reply to this message

Dick Balaska wrote:

> "Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
>
> I don't think you should accept IRTC entries, although there
> is no legal reason for you not to.  The reason being that these
> are already accounted for on a CD.

The web page describing the project in more detail discourages submission of
IRTC entries.

> Have you considered including animations?  I would submit mine, which
> i think is quite good. (1 minute 4 MBs)

No doubt.  Let's see how many entries we get.  If there are 1000 participants,
we'll have our hands full just figuring out what to do with it all.   If there
are 10 participants, then yes we can add other dimensions to the project......

Post a reply to this message

Very interesting analysis and useful perspectives......

Dick Balaska wrote:

> "Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> > My guess is that a car manufacturer would love having fan pics of its autos out
> > there--the more people endear the car, the more car sales.
>
> Then you missed the lawsuit against the fan-site http://www.dodgeviper.com ?

You' re right I probably overstated car maker's easiness with fan sites.  Here,
however,
the suit was about ownership of the URL and his decision to try to sell it on eBay.

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,37929-2,00.html

> >  My guess is that
> > Disney would sue in a heartbeat over sales of images of their characters.
> > Lego, on the other hand, is sort of right in the middle, closer to a product
> > than a copyrighted character.   So please YOU find out or please POVTEAM make a
> > call.......
>
> http://www.lego.com/info/fair.asp
> Do not use the Lego logo.  Do not use the word Lego as a noun; only an adjective.
> Do not bold the word Lego.  Disclaim that Lego likes you.
> "This image is of a model made of Lego® bricks.  LEGO® is a trademark of the LEGO
Group
> of companies which does not sponsor, authorize or endorse this image."

I've only read about half this site and I'm no anti-IP anarchist, but everytime I read
the
word "patent," I kept thinking: did they patent the superellipsoid?
Lego says:
>>  A trademark is a word, symbol or design, including a logo or
>>  the shape of goods or of their packaging, that distinguishes the
>>  goods of one company from those of another company.

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:

> Here's a better example.  The people who uploaded copyrighted music to Napster made
no
> profit; no revenue, either.

Huh? That's completely different. Making pictures of LEGO does not give the people who
view those pictures duplicated LEGOs for free. Uploading copyrighted music does. So
theoretically one potentially helps business and the other hurts it*.
The only problems I could see are 1) If a non-affiliated party made money off of their
distinct likeness (even some individual LEGO pieces are copyrighted), or 2) if
pictures
depict LEGO models whose building instructions are copyright. However, AFAIK the
latter
does not apply once the set is out of production, because there are large net archives
of
instruction book scans of out-of-print instructions. The Ice Planet vehicle I'm not
sure
about (it's '93 I believe), but the Auto Chassis I am sure is out of production, and
the
castle is my own design...


(*Actually, with mp3 piracy the similarity to theft is largely exaggerated...)

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Dick Balaska wrote:

> Then you missed the lawsuit against the fan-site http://www.dodgeviper.com ?

I'm not pretending to know anything about said case, but I would imagine it was over
the
domain name. There was once a Lego®;-) robotics competition site that got shut down
because
it had Lego in the domain. Obviously a company with a trademark identity would want to
retain that identity for official purposes...

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message