|
 |
"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlink net> schreef in bericht
> news:web.497a253fc722a95af50167bc0@news.povray.org...
> > Here's something to contemplate: Should the HOF showcase images that only
> > show
> > off POV-Ray's impressive 'strengths'? Or should it also include POV images
> > that
> > have pictorial beauty, regardless of what techniques were used? (Of
> > course,
> > having both at the same time is the ideal; but they are different
> > philosophical
> > concepts.) I kind of sense that the general attitude is for including,
> > first and
> > foremost, the 'strengths' side of things. I don't disagree; but that may
> > be
> > slighting some of the more intrinsically beautiful or complex images in
> > p.b.i,
> > those that have great subject matter, composition or what-not, but which
> > may
> > not have gobs of radiosity, depth-of-field, SSS, etc.
> >
> > Either type of image would be most welcome, IMO.
> >
>
> It would be *technique* at the service of *beauty*, or the *beauty* of
> *technique*...
Very well put, Thomas!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
