news:3c36203d@news.povray.org...
> > I think I can take that job, using Poser3.
>
> Be my guest! I really should get Poser one of these days...

OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).

> The heightfield for this image would be gigantic, unless we could find a
way
> of tiling a many large heightfields without it showing.

I don't know (I think Jaime is the master with heightfields, I remember a
Canyon...).
H.E.Day's code was:
height_field {
pattern 400, 400 {
hf_gray_16
bozo
color_map {
[ 0.0 color rgb 0.5 ]
[ 0.2 color rgb 0.0375 ]
[ 1.0 color rgb 0.0 ]
}
warp {turbulence 1 lambda .25}
scale 0.05
}
smooth
scale <100,75,100>
translate <-50, 0, -50>
texture{
pigment{granite color_map {[0 rgb 1][1 rgb .5]}
scale 2
scale 5*y
}
finish {ambient 0 diffuse 1 crand .05}
}
}
It renders fast, and maybe could be a start
I'm going to start posing the child.
Bye
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

> OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
> Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).

Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need to
ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know. It used to be on his website. He doesn't
have them so large any more. I'm not an old fan of his, a friend just sent
this one to me via ICQ mentioning he'd like to do it, and I liked it so much
I tried to do it myself. I really would like to see more of Mr. Whelan's
work some time (large, not the tiny things he has up now).

As for the heightfield... I suppose we could do with lower resolution and
make up with proper texturing. I posted my code in p.i.b yesterday, have a
look at it.

Post a reply to this message

Tony[B] wrote:

> Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need to
> ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know. 


Maybe I should moderate what I said.  If it's just inspiration (same
kind of mood, same theme,...), there's no problem.  If it's a straight
remake, you could say that it's for "study" purposes, but, then, it
should be clearly labelled as such, and not be published on the web.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Fabien Mosen wrote:

> Tony[B] wrote:
> 
>> Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need
>> to ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know.
> 
> 
> Maybe I should moderate what I said.  If it's just inspiration (same
> kind of mood, same theme,...), there's no problem.  If it's a straight
> remake, you could say that it's for "study" purposes, but, then, it
> should be clearly labelled as such, and not be published on the web.

  No, Fabien, we talk (at least me) about the *original* image. Clearly, 
our work is not illegal as the original image is used only as inspiration, 
and the final image will surely not resemble too much the original.

  The problem is about publishing a hi-res version of the original image 
for everyone to have a reference. This picture is no more available at the 
official site at such resolution, and the FAQ on the site clearly states 
the images can't be published, except for scanned book covers. Seems that 
lately Michael Whelan reduced *very* drastically the size of the images on 
their site, suposedly because some people were stealing the hi-res images 
for ilegal purposes (entering contests, printing posters, etc...).

  The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice 
resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it. There 
are several places on the net showing this image at hi-res, and linking 
them is not illegal, altough Michael Whelan seems to think the contrary 
(his statements are really restrictive, and he thinks that you are a 
criminal if you look at his images on ilegal sites).

  What do you all think? 

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

>   No, Fabien, we talk (at least me) about the *original* image. Clearly,
> our work is not illegal as the original image is used only as inspiration,
> and the final image will surely not resemble too much the original.

I though we were trying to get as close as possible. At any rate, Fabien's
suggestion is good: we could change the image just enough to say it is
inspired by, but not a direct copy of MW's work, so he doesn't feel ripped
off or anything. Let's discuss in what ways we could improve on it, or
complement it. For one thing, it's not entirely clear how the child got
there or why. I think we should add more people, and give something in the
image that hints to a way down there. We could have several folks with lamps
like that, looking for someone/something.

>   The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice
> resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it.
>   What do you all think?

What if we only show certain areas of the image at high-res for reference?
Like the child, a few of the spikes, and one of the box-like sections
closest to the camera? The way Gilles' has "detail" images. I'll crop out
those and send them to you, OK?

--
Anthony Bennett

Post a reply to this message

news: 3c37183d@news.povray.org...

>   What do you all think?

Just my 2 ?, but the best way to avoid any problem of this kind is still to
create 100% (OK, 75%) fresh material ;-)

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> 
>   What do you all think? 


Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
to participate ?

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

What I thought when I first "broke down" the picture was that we would be
simply using it as a reference. I thought that the idea of the poles
protruding from the amazingly large walls, together with the possibilities
of several doors and windows opening from those walls were such a cry for
more objects/people/deliruiums that I simply didn't even think of just
recreating the original scene.

When I think of "gillestranesque", I picture much more than a boy holding a
pendulum. Is say let's crowd that space, kids!

Ruy

Post a reply to this message

Fabien Mosen wrote:
> Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
> to participate ?

  Even this is expresely forbiden by the FAQ on michaelwhelan.com, if you 
could believe it. I'm really with Gilles, about working on original 
material, now that all people know the idea (more or less).

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> Fabien Mosen wrote:
> 
>>Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
>>to participate ?
>>
> 
>   Even this is expresely forbiden by the FAQ on michaelwhelan.com


Well, it's forbidden by law, in any case.  But, if it's just to show
the mood and style we're after, privately, who cares ?

> if you 
> could believe it. I'm really with Gilles, about working on original 
> material, now that all people know the idea (more or less).


Yep.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message