Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software

POVRay Short Code Contest Results In 46

Posted by michael from the minimalism dept.
PateraSilk writes "The Results for the POVRay Short Code Contest are available here. This contest looks for the best images to be generated in POVRay with the smallest amount of code--in this case, under 256 bytes. Definitely 'less is more'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

POVRay Short Code Contest Results In More

POVRay Short Code Contest Results In

Comments Filter:

  • Correction... (Score:5, Informative)

    by andreMA ( 643885 ) on Thursday March 11, 2004 @12:26PM (#8532473)
    That should be 256 bytes, not K.

    • Re:Correction... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Yrd ( 253300 )
      I was just about to say that! 256K is a LOT of POV code, in my experience at least.

      Although of course you need a lot of POV code to get some of those glorious images on the IRTC.

  • Correction (Score:4, Interesting)

    by slothdog ( 3329 ) * <slothdog&gmail,com> on Thursday March 11, 2004 @12:28PM (#8532495) Homepage
    The challenge was to create a POVRay file smaller than 256 bytes. And the results are amazing. Fantastic work.

    I remember leaving my 386 on all night rendering stuff that looked much worse than these....

  • Wow, a sphere (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cecil ( 37810 ) on Thursday March 11, 2004 @12:29PM (#8532514) Homepage
    I considered "Simple" to be only mildly more interesting than the red square that came in last. How the hell did it win first (and third) place?

    Kind of disappointing, although when I read the conditions for each place, I realized that the 'real favourite' would end up being second -- and I was right. Agate Face is amazing for its size.
    • I concur. And the first place entry didn't even have any commentary.

      Who did the judging? Maybe it was a bug in the voting system. Recount!

    • Re: Wow, a sphere (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Thornae ( 53316 ) on Thursday March 11, 2004 @12:48PM (#8532763)
      Well, "Simple" is aesthetically pleasing and has a sense of photo-realism, using only 50 bytes more than the red square. As far as use of POV goes, I liked it better than many of the others.

      Nonetheless, I agree that "Agate Face" is the best image. So did the judges, by their comments.

      Neat contest, anyway. I'll be having fun looking through some of those code fragments for ideas...

    • Re:Wow, a sphere (Score:3, Interesting)

      by frAme57 ( 145879 )
      I can understand the appeal of The agate face. It has a cool sort of realism; kind of like a well made video game or CG movie. So maybe it is a success on its technical merits. But read the contest introduction. [swin.edu.au] It is meant to be a contest of both technical and artistic merit.

      I am not an art teacher but if I was (and did you read the blurb about the panel members?) I think I would say things like:

      "The warm tones in the foreground and the blue background give The agate face a sense of space and a feeling

      • But I wonder why I should look at it.

        Well, there's that face in the rock that might be more interesting that what's going on offscrean for one thing.... You made some great points but that wasn't one of them.

    • The rules for scoring are such that the score for a submission is based upon the judges votes divided by the byte count. This favors smaller images. 'Simple' being only 72 bytes gets almost a 4 times advantage over 'agate'.

      Here are the rules:

      Each voter will choose their six favourite images based upon artistic merit. A first choice will get 6 points, the second will get 5 points, and so on.

      The gold place winner will be determined by dividing the total number of points awarded by the byte count.

      The sil

  • How in the world... (Score:1, Redundant)

    by scootr1 ( 159749 )
    did something finish in first *and* third?
    • > How in the world did something finish in first *and* third?

      A previous poster mentioned

      If you read the rules, the first place entry was determined by (votes total/bytes) while second place was (votes total) and third was (votes total/(bytes^2))

      Given this strange judging criteria, it happened that Simple had the highest score for both votes total/bytes and votes total/bytes^2.

  • Less vs. More (Score:5, Informative)

    by nacturation ( 646836 ) <nacturation AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday March 11, 2004 @03:09PM (#8534380) Journal
    Less can be more, but more is often so much more. The Chado Hall of Fame [povray.org] image is stunning. I'm still trying to convince myself that it's not a photograph.

    • Re:Less vs. More (Score:5, Interesting)

      by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Thursday March 11, 2004 @07:15PM (#8537550) Homepage Journal
      Have you ever seen a photograph this well lit? The way you can tell that it's not a photograph is that it's way too perfect. Everything is shiny. Also notice that there are no lit translucent objects -- I've heard that we don't have the math for this yet.

      Not sure about the math, but that's one of the reason that human skin looks so lifeless in CG. Skin is translucent (that's why your hand glows red when you hold a flashlight up to it). Currently CG skin is only a surface -- it doesn't show light reflecting from within the skin.

      • Re:Less vs. More (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        sorta looks like a picture from architectural digest to me... lighting is on par with many professional shots i've seen.

      • Re:Less vs. More (Score:4, Informative)

        by qbwiz ( 87077 ) <john@baumanfamily.c3.1415926om minus pi> on Thursday March 11, 2004 @08:40PM (#8538183) Homepage
        Not sure about the math, but that's one of the reason that human skin looks so lifeless in CG. Skin is translucent (that's why your hand glows red when you hold a flashlight up to it). Currently CG skin is only a surface -- it doesn't show light reflecting from within the skin.

        Actually, they have found ways to do this now. For example, there's PovMan [aetec.ee] which is an add-on to Povray that lets you make shaders that describe how a surface reflects and transmits. There's a skin shader on the website that lets you create more realistic skin.
      • check out this gallery and scroll down.

        http://www.splutterfish.com/sf/sf_gen_page.php3? pa ge=FeatureGalleries/Illumination

      • [i]Currently CG skin is only a surface -- it doesn't show light reflecting from within the skin.[/i]

        Totally wrong. Try googling for 'subsurface scattering skin'.
      • To add to another post which talks about subsurface scattering I'd just like to point to the two other fields which has really given photorealism a shot in the arm.

        Image Based Lighting uses a high dynamic range image as a source for lighting a scene. The result is quite stunning.

        Photon Mapping is a way to simulate real light. It is used quite effectively combined with techniques like Sub Surface Scattering. Basically it allows you to make global illumination but at a relatively low rendering time. The res

  • Wow... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by doublebackslash ( 702979 )
    This is some of the most creative work I've ever seen. GREAT job.
    I used to use POV (no time now) and I never even had thoughts that loked like this, let alone project that good.
    Unbelieveable.
  • great example of how powerful POV has become - it's quite amazing what you can do with it with just a few bytes of code.
    a very geeky contest with amazing results, but only a few /.ers seem to care (judging from the number of posts - even the trolls don't care...). guess i'll comfort myself with rendering some of the scene files from the site...

  • Higher Resolution (Score:2, Interesting)

    by nicklaszlo ( 720488 )
    Wow. This is great. Is it possible to get higher resolution images? These would look realy bad if I wanted to put them up as a wall paper on my high resolution screen. How is it licensed? I have POV, but I haven't learned to use it. If I download the source, can I make my own high res. version? How long will it take?
  • Wow.. wow this is very cool... anyone remember, comparatively, the 64kb competition a while ago? For video+audio? Any good tutorials out there for POVray? Don't say search on google, because that means 316,000 crap results and one or two good tutorials...
    • I learned from reading the included help files.
      Best documentation out there.
      After I muddled though the tutorial, I went wild, and just used the help as reference. Wish i hadn't lost my old files before I had backup systems in place ;(.
      I'm sad now.

  • Judges need a thesaurus (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WTFmonkey ( 652603 ) on Thursday March 11, 2004 @07:46PM (#8537804)
    "Evocative" and "aesthetic" used that often and in those ways make it sound like you're trying to be smarter and deeper than you really are. Stop it.
    • Evocative" and "aesthetic" used that often and in those ways make it sound like you're trying to be smarter and deeper than you really are. Stop it.

      Your message lacks evocation and aesthetics. It resembles the sophomoric flow of a less talented slashdot participant. It thus should be delegated to those honed in the fine arts of non-positive moderation scoring techniques.

  • Amazing! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jacek Poplawski ( 223457 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @06:54AM (#8541669)
    These pictures are amazing!
    Now I have reason to install and learn PovRay...
  • Can anyone explain where the buildings for City come from? I get most of the description, but the buildings seem to not be enumerated or randomly generated anywhere.

    • Re:explain (Score:4, Informative)

      by Quill ( 238781 ) <martinNO@SPAMsimaltech.com> on Friday March 12, 2004 @01:55PM (#8544889) Homepage
      (Take a look at the verbose version [swin.edu.au] of the code for an easier read.)

      The buildings are actually just one big isosurface. This is a surface in 3D space that is described by a function, similar to describing a line on a 2D graph. For example (warning, I'm been out of school for a while!), the formula y=x would describe a straight line at a 45 deg angle, whereas y=x^2 describes a parabolic curve. You can make the formula more complex and make us of functions (like sin(), cos(), max(), etc...) to end up with some really funky lines that wobble all over.

      The authors of "City" and "The Agate Face" both use isosurfaces effectively.

      I cannot.

  • I like to keep this around for torturing postscript printers, you can also feed it go ghostview:


    %!OPS-1.0 %%Creator: HAYAKAWA,Takashi<h-takasi@isea.is.titech.ac.jp> /A/copy/p/floor/q/gt/S/add/n/exch/i/index/J/ifelse /r/roll/w/div/H{{loop}stopped
    Y}def/t/and/C/neg/T /dup/h/exp/Y/pop/d/mul/s/cvi/e/ sqrt/R/rlineto{load def}H 300
    T translate(V2L&1i2A00053r45hNvQXz&vUX&UOvQXzFJ!FJ!J !O&Y43d9rE3IaN96r63rvx2dcaN
    G&140N7!U&4C577d7!z&& 93r6IQO2Z4o3AQYaNlxS2w!!f&nY9 wn7wpS

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Close