Larry Hudson <org### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> > Perhaps moving to a system where the topic is only a single word.  This can
> > surely be understandable to most while leaving the possibility open for
> > anywhere from narrow to broad interpretation, simple to complex scenes.  It may
> > be more palatable to a lot of artists who don't want to jump into full detailed
> > scenes as opposed to more simple or abstract ones.  Even the topic "glass" as
> > mentioned could have lots of possibilities beyond the obvious, and surely
> > getting lots of entries is better than only getting a handful.
> > .....
> > Just a thought...
> >
> > -tgq
>
> Perhaps this is what you really mean, but instead of limiting the topics
> to a single word, I would suggest that this be expanded to allow short
> phrases that imply a single concept.  For example (taken directly from
> the IRTC):  Imaginary Worlds, Spectacular Landscapes, Toys & Games,
> Forces of Nature, and similar.
>
>       -=- Larry -=-

Well not really (not to say that your suggestion isn't without merit, after all
it is more or less the way the original IRTC was set up).  Ideas like that
promote a single concept that can tend to fall in a narrow to very narrow scope
of interpretation which can be limiting to some individuals.  Whereas a single
word (depending on the word I suppose) can be open to very broad
interpretation.  Some folk are very good at assembling full scenes, whereas
others tend to focus on solitary or collections of objects, while others tend
to dabble in the minimalistic and abstract.  Full titles, such as are being
used now, tend to lead themselves more heavily toward full scenes.  Concepts,
such as you suggest, lend to scenes and sometimes objects.  But I think single
words would lend themselves more freely to the full spectrum of genres and
capabilities (for a singular example of this taken to an extreme, just have a
look at the growing gallery at CGSphere, in which all entries must be based on
the same base sphere, this is a bit more direct in concept, but the diversity
of ideas it is producing is what I am pointing out).
Pick a word at random and think of the ideas that may be produced.  For example
(using http://www.randomword.net/) "unification".  There is no concrete image
that springs to everyone's mind.  Some will see grandiose scenes of the Berlin
Wall falling, others may see simpler ideas such as two halves of a mystical
amulet combining, while yet others can see even simpler ideas like the fusion
of two primitives.

I am just thinking that it may get more participation if people felt they don't
need to go overboard.  I didn't participate in IRTC very often (read:once)
because I usually found myself without the inspiration or time to assemble the
scenes that seemed suitable to the topic (even the one time I did participate,
I felt my scene was unfinished).
I love seeing the capability of full POV-Ray (and any 3D renderer for that
matter) in all it's glory, with the spectucalar productions produced by the
likes of Gilles Tran or Jaime Vives Piqueres (to only name a couple), but I am
equally drawn to the abstract or simplistic images (have a look at my
favourites gallery at deviantART
http://barberofcivil.deviantart.com/favourites/ )
(sorry not trying to promote myself here)
I would love to see all these genres on an equal playing field, wher one is no
more or less appropriate than the other.


-tgq

Post a reply to this message