Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 15/08/2013 8:07 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> > My comment about hitting the topic was more intended as an observation and not
> > really as criticism.
> >
>
>
> I know but it is one of the things that niggle me. I think that the
> voting categories are outdated fine for when the IRTC started but the
> technical one does not make sense to me nowadays.
>
> > As for the "golf" topic, my first thought was a car, and not Tiger Woods;-) But
> > this may be biased being German.
> >
>
> For me golf is a good walk ruined. ;-)
>
> > And for the voting. You have only small influence with your work. People does
> > not ever look at the pictures and try a fair vote. Sometimes they like you,
> > sometimes they dislike you and vote you down. My lowest voting for my "Ariadnes
> > Garden" picture was 5,5,5. I didn't missed the topic but I used an image
> > designed for an earlier round (and admited that), which seems to be an
> > unforgivable thing to some persons.
>
> Well you are not alone, I once got 3-3-3.  There is one member, who
> entered the IRTC as well. Often gave those sort of scores to images he
> found displeasing.
>
> > In this case I can accept the artistic and concept vote, but not the technical
> > one, having used occlusion map baking, splines to create the general shape of
> > the creatian labyrinth and to have the grass down where the ball was moved. And
> > a lot of other things.
>
> That is what I mean. Other than detailing what you have done and leaving
> it up to the voter to understand the difficulty. It won't be credited.
> As far as I know, occlusion map baking may be easy to do and a bit of a
> cheat. I've never tried to use it. So how can I, or anyone like me, give
> an informed vote?
>
> > More work in this one than in other ones I did. But
> > technically only 5 for one voter. One has to accept that.
>
>
> Accept what? That he is an idiot or a spoiler?
> Long ago I realised that when someone disagreed with me on artistic
> matters. It did not mean that I was wrong and generally meant that they
> only had a superficial understanding of the subject or they were just a
> blowhard. ;-)
>
>
> --
> Regards
>      Stephen

Yes, I know. We had a discussion about the technical score at the TC forum
resulting in that it should not be deleted. My personal opion has not changed.
With TC RTC all other systems to generate CG are accepted and a comparison of
technical difficulties is not possible. Ives uses Autodesk software, Normand has
it's own Java Open GL software and you cannot judge their technical
difficulties. So the technical score should go IMO.

To address the "not meeting the topic" issuue: my rubber duck image contains a
certain element of geologe called "water" ;-) No, I will not have it into the
contest. But my wife will have a cup with the inscription of "Mom is the best"
or something like that. So I may open an account at Zazzle next days.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message