this a ideal time and opportunity to review the IRTC rules? Because 10+ years
is really a long time in the history of computer generated imaging.

And if this is a fact, that people claim, that the IRTC was meant to be for
raytracing only, why are images that were created in other type of renderers
being accepted? Why have they on several occasions won the competition?

why would you want to vote down a wonderful computer generated image, simply



some professional software? That is real nonsense.

In the IRTC, what people vote for is artistic, technical and concept category.
The first and the last have nothing to do with raytracing skills at all. They
are all about the quality of the image and not about how it was generated. They
are about the artist, not the method.

The technical category can possibly have something to do with raytracing, but
not necessarily, as the results often show, when entries made in all sorts of
3D software, commercial or not, have been voted to a winning place. So overall
quality seems to weight more than the actual practical skills.

So maybe the ideology some people seem to think is behind the IRTC, is not
really there, and perhaps never was.

I have had the impression that here we have two types of people, the more
technically inclined and the more artistically inclined. And then there are a
few who seem to be able to embody both.

Maybe this is all basically a question about which group is the dominating? The
coders perhaps want this competition to be about making wonderful images in

restrained by technical issues. And both groups seem to be sort of intolerant
about each other, while they should be supporting each other.

The coders can inspire and come up with innovative solutions, helping others
find the means to create particular effects. The artists bring their
inspiration and challenge everybody to bring up the quality of the content.
Both sides badly need each other to learn from.

This is really what makes the IRTC unique. Having people claiming this is for
Povers only, is a step backward and would make the IRTC one sided and biased.
Even boring. Which is not very inspirational.

If anybody is in doubt, they can check for themselves and see how many entries
are really made by code only in Povray without the aid of a modeller, and how
many are not, and check which of those entries occupy the top positions.

Post a reply to this message