"ChrisH" <lho### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> If the IRTC goes to a "pure" POVRAY rendering only format

I don't think this is ever going to happen - the IRTC was always exactly what
its name suggests, i.e. a competition/showcase for ray-traced images. One could
use any modelling tools to create the data, then any raytracer to render the
final image. There was never any specific focus on POV-Ray that I was aware of,
aside from the fact that because the competition was/is hosted by the POV-Ray
server there were more people in the POV-Ray community aware of it. And, to
start with at least, the new IRTC is likely to be dominated by POV-Ray users
simply because it's here that all the discussions have been taking place.

Highly placed entries generated by POV-Ray almost always employed external
modelling tools, so I don't think you have anything to fear on that count. :-)


As an aside, I really don't think we need to be that restrictive in the rules,
beyond insisting on the raytracing algorithm for the final render. Surely there
are enough experts involved to spot abusers and cheaters? Especially if thorough
image documentation (and, ideally, source files) are encouraged.

I think Warp's point about post-processing is a little more problematic
(although his example of antialiasing is not something I personally would
object to - in many cases, it can be faster to render large and jaggy than
smaller and with aa, to the extent that to do the latter might cause one to
miss the submission deadline!).

In any case, it's good to see so many IRTC veterans voicing their opinion here.
I look forward to seeing everyone's work in future rounds. :-)

Post a reply to this message