 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Give me a week or so to make a fancy site w/ POV files [and HTML 2.0
compliance ;) ].
High score in "Efficiency" is three pats on back.
High score in "Artistitry" is two
High score in "Paucity" is one.
again, give me a week to make a fancy site; I'll answer questions by way of
the site...
If this looks bad in your browser, copy & paste text to notepad or monospace
editor.
"zzz" was an invalid vote.
TITLE SCORE bytes Efficien Artistry Paucity
b42 0 243 0.00 0 0.0
c06 41 343 11.95 41 3.5
c17 8 396 2.02 8 0.5
c42 2 286 0.70 2 0.2
ks0 26 500 5.20 26 1.0
ks1 8 483 1.66 8 0.3
ks2 25 469 5.33 25 1.1
ks3 42 481 8.73 42 1.8
ks4 1 467 0.21 1 0.0
ks5 4 499 0.80 4 0.2
ks6 26 444 5.86 26 1.3
ml1 8 499 1.60 8 0.3
ml2 9 497 1.81 9 0.4
ml3 14 494 2.83 14 0.6
pdb 36 414 8.70 36 2.1
pg1 4 56 7.14 4 12.8
psq 12 311 3.86 12 1.2
pto 48 233 20.60 48 8.8
sc1 29 368 7.88 29 2.1
sc2 18 471 3.82 18 0.8
si1 34 487 6.98 34 1.4
si2 48 487 9.86 48 2.0
ta2 18 498 3.61 18 0.7
ta3 0 497 0.00 0 0.0
tb1 3 326 0.92 3 0.3
tb2 26 509 5.11 26 1.0
tpa 4 497 0.80 4 0.2
w42 1 6 16.67 1 277.8
wp2 34 466 7.30 34 1.6
wp3 17 495 3.43 17 0.7
wrp 83 499 16.63 83 3.3
zzz 1 0 N/A N/A N/A
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson <gregj:-)565### [at] aol com> wrote:
> c42 2 286 0.70 2 0.2
> ta3 0 497 0.00 0 0.0
> w42 1 6 16.67 1 277.8
No offence to the maker(s) of c42 and w42, but it really surprises me
that someone could find them better than ta3 (it didn't get in my top 6,
but IMHO it's much better than those other two).
I have no idea who the author of ta3 is, but I feel somewhat sorry for
him/her. To get a score of 0 while those others got some points even though
ta3 clearly has more effort behind it.
It makes me wonder if someone voted for his/her own images (while the
author of ta3 was honest)...
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3c9faae1@news.povray.org...
> No offence to the maker(s) of c42 and w42, but it really surprises me
> that someone could find them better than ta3 (it didn't get in my top 6,
> but IMHO it's much better than those other two).
> I have no idea who the author of ta3 is, but I feel somewhat sorry for
> him/her. To get a score of 0 while those others got some points even
though
> ta3 clearly has more effort behind it.
> It makes me wonder if someone voted for his/her own images (while the
> author of ta3 was honest)...
>
I don't think that happened (the former clause of your last sentence.) You
mean *you've* never been offended by IRTC results?
There have been anims in IRTC for which I'd rather watch a minute of black
screen (some may prefer this over my work-- wait a minute, some have said my
work IS too much like a black screen!).
And then there's the idea of the graffiti outside on the wall of a modern
art museum. For various reasons, some good some bad, from neurological to
philosophical, you'll probably get a few percent of visitors to the museum
saying they prefer the painted initials on the outside.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3c9faae1@news.povray.org...
> Greg M. Johnson <gregj:-)565### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> > c42 2 286 0.70 2 0.2
> > ta3 0 497 0.00 0 0.0
> > w42 1 6 16.67 1 277.8
>
> No offence to the maker(s) of c42 and w42, but it really surprises me
> that someone could find them better than ta3 (it didn't get in my top 6,
> but IMHO it's much better than those other two).
> I have no idea who the author of ta3 is, but I feel somewhat sorry for
> him/her. To get a score of 0 while those others got some points even though
> ta3 clearly has more effort behind it.
> It makes me wonder if someone voted for his/her own images (while the
> author of ta3 was honest)...
I, as the creator of the both, w42 and c42, can assure you, that I didn't vote
for my own images ...
I didn't vote for ANY image at all ...
As for, what happend, I've no idea who voted for these images, but
I can assure you, If I would have voted, I'd surely not voted any point for
one of mine, after I've seen the other ones ...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jan Walzer <jan### [at] lzernet> wrote:
> I, as the creator of the both, w42 and c42, can assure you, that I didn't vote
> for my own images ...
And I am happy that people have been honest. :)
Voting for one's own images was the only rational explanation I could
think of.
Well, we can only say that the voters have cast their votes and that's it.
The behaviour of human mind always has some randomness which we cannot
always understand.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
