>   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

news:3c37183d@news.povray.org...
>   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?
I think that is the only possible solution.
Search for pendulum
http://home.att.net/~hoo13/Whelan02.html

As I understand it, there is a general opinion to take this image as a start
of a project (even though we have a manger that will have to puntualize
that). I see no legal problem on it.
Where will it lead us?. You know it?; I don't.
Maybe we will have to discuss it, but in the meanwhile, why don't we start?
Bye
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

news:3c36b9d9@news.povray.org...
> > OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
> > Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).
>
> 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).


can try the link provided in my last post.

> 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.

I have looked at it and this is what I see:

1.- I'm rendering the image at 640 x 480, AA 0.3, render priority highest,
no other program running. It goes on 45% at the moment and it has been
rendering 7 h, 37 m, 11 s. I think isos are too slow for the project, maybe
for the final render... I think we must try a heightfield of some kind
instead (image map, pattern, or so). [My PC is an AMD Athlon 600 Mhz with
128 Mb Ram]

2.- You have a good view of the left wall, but the right one looks like the
inverse copy of the left one (where white turns black and viceversa). Is
that right? seems strange.

That's all.
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

> can try the link provided in my last post.

OK. Thanks.

> 1.- I'm rendering the image at 640 x 480, AA 0.3, render priority highest,
> no other program running. It goes on 45% at the moment and it has been
> rendering 7 h, 37 m, 11 s.

First of all, the aspect ratio is x*1.0, y*1.2. Secondly, I've been doing my
test renders at a much smaller resolution without AA.

> 2.- You have a good view of the left wall, but the right one looks like
the
> inverse copy of the left one (where white turns black and viceversa). Is
> that right? seems strange.

The one on the right is just a box with the texture heightfield, not an iso
like the one on the left.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 01:21:46 +0100, Txemi Jendrix wrote:

>As I understand it, there is a general opinion to take this image as a start
>of a project (even though we have a manger that will have to puntualize
>that). I see no legal problem on it.
>Where will it lead us?. You know it?; I don't.
>Maybe we will have to discuss it, but in the meanwhile, why don't we start?

It makes me think of a walled city that has been abandoned and all the houses
removed, of course the city was on a wall that's why it was a walled city. 

I'd like to do some modelling, but Tony tell me what to medel and I'll do it.

--
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  4:48pm  up 97 days,  8:36,  1 user,  load average: 1.24, 1.17, 1.06

Post a reply to this message