Christoph Hormann wrote:
>Everyone should be allowed to rate according to personal preferences.  One
>can only hope that in the average a fairly adequate rating comes out.  But
>in case of the technical rating you can at least try to find some
>objective measures.  For me this is mostly the technical ability of the
>artist shown in the image.  This can be in various fields, ranging from
>some interesting algorithm to generate mathematically defined shapes to
>well drawn image maps.  But you should not make the mistake to ignore
>things that don't explicitly show up in the image but none the less were
>important for generating it.  In this case you might know (or not, he did
>not mention it in the text file) that it was Mael who added HDR image
>based lighting support to POV-Ray.  IMO this is an equally good argument
>for a high technical score as any technically interesting modelling
>technique etc.

I agree, the fact that Mael created the HDRI patch certainly warrants some
technical consideration.  How much is harder to determine, since the IRTC
isn't a programming competition. But more likely, the voters who were aware
of that fact probably gave due points there, and the problem was that not
all voters were aware of it.

But that aside, still, the model is excellent, with a very high level of
detail.

Judging by some of the comments on my own image (async_rg) I have to assume
that Mael's score suffered from the apparent voter preference towards
"scene" -vs- "object".  And this may not have as much to do specifically
with his image as the fact that in this round there were quite a few
"objects" submitted, so probably some voters just got into a "oh, another
object picture" mode and marked down for it.

Personally, I *probably* prefer to see a "scene" simply because I think an
image should say or do something to involve the viewer. A single object
that doesn't stimulate any kind of viewer interest, no matter how well
modelled, isn't going to bring me back for a second look.

But that doesn't mean that an "object" can't make a statement. I have to say
*probably* because I've often seen images posted in p.b.images that are one
object, but can still make me come back for more.

RG

Post a reply to this message