|
|
November images
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
November images // Image Gallery
Post by splinters // Dec 7, 2006, 10:31pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Well done to Mr Cuillo on winning the gallery this month. What he won't want to admit was being introduced to TS many years ago by an over enthusiastic teacher who haunts these forums...:rolleyes:
Well done mate, didn't think you had stuck with the program with so many other tempting pieces of software at your disposal...:D |
Post by Methusela // Dec 7, 2006, 11:10pm
|
Methusela
Total Posts: 414
|
Congrats to him, excellent image. If he's around, how'd you manage that great icy look to the [space station?]
Also, it's all sorts of worth it to download the winning animation, it's simply stunning. My congratulations of the highest order to Mr. Bogdanovic. Really brilliant. |
Post by splinters // Dec 7, 2006, 11:53pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
I thought it was a bobsleigh run from a dramatic angle...:confused:
Not sure he actually posts on this forum though. |
Post by Methusela // Dec 8, 2006, 12:39am
|
Methusela
Total Posts: 414
|
Yeah I thought that might be it too. Man, that'd be so much fun! |
Post by Steinie // Dec 8, 2006, 2:07am
|
Steinie
Total Posts: 3667
|
One of you two taught him well, I love the texturing job he did. |
Post by daybe // Dec 8, 2006, 10:44am
|
daybe
Total Posts: 562
|
I would like to say congratulations to everyone who placed in this months gallery, very nice work by everyone. The animation winner was quite good and must have takin quite some time to complete, well worth a look as Methusela suggests. |
Post by brianalldridge // Dec 8, 2006, 2:51pm
|
brianalldridge
Total Posts: 397
|
It's an awsome snowboard run, some of the best trueSpace snow I've seen period. |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 8, 2006, 4:44pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Hmmm, I guess I wasn't that impressed with the snow. It looked like two giant spools with some white on it and a nice cloud background which could have been a standard photograph or from a fancy landscape renderer such as Vue.
I thought the toy kitchen with all its intricate detail was much better in effort and presentation. Even the particle board decal which many hobbyist use was quite good.
Like this scene was drawn in a 2D program, took about 15 minutes and no post effects were done and hardly any effort.
No offense to the winner, but I wonder what criterea is used in judging these things. |
Post by brianalldridge // Dec 8, 2006, 8:02pm
|
brianalldridge
Total Posts: 397
|
No offence, but that doesn't quite begin to compare, maybe you should get a higher res. moniter. |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 8, 2006, 9:17pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
I wasn't comparing my simple picture to his for artwork, I was explaining that the tasks done to complete the entry wasn't nearly as complicated as some others I saw.
If you want to insult what kind of monitor I have, you can use the private message feature of the forum.
I was being curious about what criterea is used in judging contests. Some images that I thought were better in some months didn't win. I just would like to know why and by what method should the entry be constructed to have a better chance of winning.
BTW, I don't know either one of the people discussed. |
Post by splinters // Dec 8, 2006, 10:22pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
BTW, I don't know either one of the people discussed.
If you are referring to the one who taught him...that was me...:D Albeit quite some time ago...I cannot take any credit for what he has mastered since.
AS for criteria, you can find it in the archives as Roman once posted it, but I remember lighting, texture and composition all figured highly. I think it has all of these.
Still, something more piggy should definitely have won this month...:rolleyes: ;) :D |
Post by Methusela // Dec 9, 2006, 3:04am
|
Methusela
Total Posts: 414
|
I was curious about that as well, do you get anything for a 'Special Recognition?' |
Post by Steinie // Dec 9, 2006, 3:20am
|
Steinie
Total Posts: 3667
|
"Actualy I do have a list of criteria at least for still images: Here it is, from top to bottom with decreasing importance:
1. Lighting
2. Composition
3. Surfacing
4. Modeling"
His Voice and His vision now say after me aaaooooohhmmmmm......
There are rumors you win a secret key that unlocks the room located behind the desk in truePlay for winning "Special Recognition"
But I think it's just a mop closet... |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2006, 3:47am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
If you are referring to the one who taught him...that was me...:D Albeit quite some time ago...I cannot take any credit for what he has mastered since.
AS for criteria, you can find it in the archives as Roman once posted it, but I remember lighting, texture and composition all figured highly. I think it has all of these.
Still, something more piggy should definitely have won this month...:rolleyes: ;) :D
Naw, I was referring to the artists who had won first place and the other artist who was in mentioned category. I don't recall what place the latter got, but he's the one that modeled the toy kitchen. Memory turns on me in my sixth decade. :)
In my opinion what should determine the winner in a 3D contest is the Three Dimensional aspect of the art. If one wants to enter flat stills, then they might as well go shoot a photograph and edit that in their favorite painter editor.
Just as someone recently wrote, "it ain't 3D unless it moves." Or at least prove it can move by showing different views.
There is a lot of 2.5D art out there on the Web. I call it 2.5D art as it looks 3D, but you can't tell because it is just sitting there. I'll show an example of my own 2.5D drawing if I can find it. :)
Edit: Found the example I was referencing. This is some 2.5D art I drew up awhile back. Yes, it still needs some work but I like to hang on to WIPs for a long time. heh This was done in a 2D Vector art program. |
Post by prodigy // Dec 9, 2006, 4:52am
|
prodigy
Total Posts: 3029
|
I agree with jamesmc when say
"Hmmm, I guess I wasn't that impressed with the snow. It looked like two giant spools with some white on it and a nice cloud background which could have been a standard photograph or from a fancy landscape renderer such as Vue."
I think the picture its totaly supported by the background.. and not impresive for the snow.. ITs a good picture, we know but... Congratulations :D
We are not judges from caligari.. but i think 2nd place have more 3d than the first.. Yup, 1st maybe better image composition..
Maybe the Caligary team think... 2 month..2 car winners enoght?? jejeje its a joke..
Good entry at all. i think the "Stephen Britton" bath picture its excelent, sad to see a simple honorable mention.. :( |
Post by splinters // Dec 9, 2006, 4:53am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
I was curious about that as well, do you get anything for a 'Special Recognition?'
Yeah....special recognition...:D :D
Seriously, I only enter for fun as I have everything TS related I could possibly want. Hell, I won/earned three copies of tS7 last year but you can only have one. Now, if I win, I tend to give my $100 towards a copy for my students. |
Post by splinters // Dec 9, 2006, 5:07am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
In my opinion what should determine the winner in a 3D contest is the Three Dimensional aspect of the art. If one wants to enter flat stills, then they might as well go shoot a photograph and edit that in their favorite painter editor.
But this is the stills gallery...what else can the final output be but a flat still??
What differentiated the two, and what you cannot possibly see, are the different angles, textures, light settings etc. that Mr Cuillo probably experimented with before commiting this image to his hard drive.
That you cannot do with a single photographic image.
Really, have your opinion on this, and if it offends you enough then stick to the 3D gallery but please don't condemn people for entering flat stills in a still gallery.
And if stills are not 3D then I might as well get rid of tS now and dig my old polaroid out... |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2006, 5:43am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
But this is the stills gallery...what else can the final output be but a flat still??
What differentiated the two, and what you cannot possibly see, are the different angles, textures, light settings etc. that Mr Cuillo probably experimented with before commiting this image to his hard drive.
That you cannot do with a single photographic image.
Really, have your opinion on this, and if it offends you enough then stick to the 3D gallery but please don't condemn people for entering flat stills in a still gallery.
And if stills are not 3D then I might as well get rid of tS now and dig my old polaroid out...
I'm not condemning anyone. You need to stop putting words in my mouth.
A fact that it is a 3D still doesn't mean it should be portrayed in just one view. A true 3D still should be equally viewed from any direction and look just as good in quality from any direction. It doesn't need to be animated.
Yeah I know, we all make illusions of 3D, even with human models. Sometimes it isn't necessary to draw a human body and put clothes on it; one can just draw the clothes, have them conform to a human-like appearance and put bones in the clothes to achieve the same effect.
The stills you are talking about are actually 2.5D as they are meant for one view. To me, why buy a 3D program if you are going to make 2.5D stills.
In the image of the ski ramp in my opinion one should be able to look up the slope of the ski ramp or from any direction. The reason I offered the brass telescope as an example of 2.5D art is that it appears to have a third dimension, but I cannot change the view and see the telescope from any view I wish. This is a shortcoming of 2D vector art programs.
I can surmise that the artist used the image to be only viewed in one view and without the viewpoint being viewed from any other angle other than that one particular view. If viewed from another angle, because of its construction the ski slope may not be what is expected, but merely an illusion meant for a one view only.
To me, that is not 3D art, that is 2.5D art i.e.; non-moveable and restricted to one view.
IMHO in order for a still (non-animated) 3D picture to qualify for a contest, it should be able to be viewed from different angles to show that the artist truly understands the concept of 3D art. Also, that he knows how to apportion his textures, lightning and shadows to the maximum where the art can be viewed from any angle and appreciated just as much to the preferenced view.
The exception to this of course would be a bottom view if the scene is of a house or a road, etc. Not many are interested in seeing what the bottom part of a house looks like. :)
Of course, if tS Image Contest Judges want their art to reflect just a 2.5D still art, then so be it.
I would think that a 3D graphics company would want more.
Note, 3D art view from different angles is not animated, just the viewpoint has changed. Easily changing viewpoint is really what 3D art is all about imo. |
Post by splinters // Dec 9, 2006, 6:59am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
A fact that it is a 3D still doesn't mean it should be portrayed in just one view. A true 3D still should be equally viewed from any direction and look just as good in quality from any direction. It doesn't need to be animated.
I can surmise that the artist used the image to be only viewed in one view and without the viewpoint being viewed from any other angle other than that one particular view. If viewed from another angle, because of its construction the ski slope may not be what is expected, but merely an illusion meant for a one view only.
To me, that is not 3D art, that is 2.5D art i.e.; non-moveable and restricted to one view.
IMHO in order for a still (non-animated) 3D picture to qualify for a contest, it should be able to be viewed from different angles to show that the artist truly understands the concept of 3D art. Also, that he knows how to apportion his textures, lightning and shadows to the maximum where the art can be viewed from any angle and appreciated just as much to the preferenced view.
Note, 3D art view from different angles is not animated, just the viewpoint has changed. Easily changing viewpoint is really what 3D art is all about imo.
Seems to be some contradiction here; 'true 3D art can be viewed from different angles'.
Well, how do you know it wasn't?
You summise that the artist intended one view to be seen but how do you know that he did not send in several views and Roman chose this one?
Bottom line; if he used tS then it is 3D and could be viewed, rotated etc.
As an illustrator, I will use whatever gets the job done be it 2D or 3D-it just happens that I use tS for all my 3D and most of my work is 3D but it is always a still and I often have that one viewpoint in mind when creating the image.
Arguing this is futile-like the photoshop arguments a few months ago when DigitalDali won...funny how the response to his recent course was pretty positive.
So with that in mind, I have said all I can about this...:) |
Post by 3dpdk // Dec 9, 2006, 7:25am
|
3dpdk
Total Posts: 212
|
I think when the great scientific minds of our time, or maybe the near future, come up with real-time, practical holographic imaging, then your argument will have some validity. Until then, unless you are speaking of animations (which in reality is a series of still images) we are stuck with submitting single still images of our three dimensional creations.
The Stills gallery is for submitting complete, single images of artistic value and not a "models" showcase. Caligari (Mr Ormandy in particular) has said that these images are not judged for any predetermined amounts (or the lack of) on their pre or post processing but for their overall artistic value and visual appeal, as long as tS was used to create the majority of the subject matter or content.
By your definition photography is a 2.5 dimensional art form. So-be-it! It is none the less a valid art form.
The stills gallery is a place for artist to display their art. The "JUDGMENT" of art (in ANY form) has ALWAYS been a topic for heated debate!
Paul |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2006, 7:36am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Seems to be some contradiction here; 'true 3D art can be viewed from different angles'.
Well, how do you know it wasn't?
You summise that the artist intended one view to be seen but how do you know that he did not send in several views and Roman chose this one?
Bottom line; if he used tS then it is 3D and could be viewed, rotated etc.
As an illustrator, I will use whatever gets the job done be it 2D or 3D-it just happens that I use tS for all my 3D and most of my work is 3D but it is always a still and I often have that one viewpoint in mind when creating the image.
Arguing this is futile-like the photoshop arguments a few months ago when DigitalDali won...funny how the response to his recent course was pretty positive.
So with that in mind, I have said all I can about this...:)
You still don't get it, I think.
If the image was intended to represent the dazzling heights of a ski jump/slope then I think it would be much more exciting to show not only the crest as the start of the image, but also a terrifying slope by which the skier would have navigate.
I understand your meaning about illustration from one viewpoint. However, imo that is not 3D art, that is 2.5D art.
The ability to change camera views is the very essence of a 3D scene and imo should be the essence of why we all do 3D art.
IMO, in order to qualify for a 3D "stills" contest - different views need to be entered (top, right, left, front, obliques.) Then and only then can one claim to have generated a capture in time of a 3D scene. |
Post by Steinie // Dec 9, 2006, 8:03am
|
Steinie
Total Posts: 3667
|
I was part of that "other" argument about using PS in the Gallery. My point has always been that the Gallery (I thought) was a showplace of TS work and not PS work. Caligari has already stated that they didn't mind. So be it.
If it wasn't allowed would you be calling the winners in the Gallery "Master" of TrueSpace"?
Jamesmc is stating the same reasons I had in the other argument. Is it really the skills of the "3D Artist" being exhibited or an Illustrator doing so-so work and then cleaning it up afterward.
I'm not against any Artist but the way it is being allowed in the Gallery. Old argument that keeps coming back. It's their Gallery, their Standards, my only question has always been is it Their software....
I don't think any of us have ever agreed on who should have won in the Gallery. But again I thought he did a great job with the textures. Is it showcasing the capabilities of TS or a pretty picture? I don't know. Same argument, different month. |
Post by spacekdet // Dec 9, 2006, 8:20am
|
spacekdet
Total Posts: 1360
|
IMHO in order for a still (non-animated) 3D picture to qualify for a contest, it should be able to be viewed from different angles to show that the artist truly understands the concept of 3D art. Also, that he knows how to apportion his textures, lightning and shadows to the maximum where the art can be viewed from any angle and appreciated just as much to the preferenced view.
I don't know what else to say to this but:
"Show your Stuffs!"- Kevin "OpieJuan" Barnett
and one more while I'm at it:
"What a strange illusion it is to suppose that beauty is goodness."- Leo Tolstoy |
Post by 3dpdk // Dec 9, 2006, 9:04am
|
3dpdk
Total Posts: 212
|
to quote a friend "bring on the kool-aid!":D |
Post by rj0 // Dec 9, 2006, 10:08am
|
rj0
Total Posts: 167
|
I'm just glad that I'm wasn't the one having to decide which was 'best'. Several of the renderings this month looked really good to me. Eric's car appeared to have taken a 'monstrous' modeling effort (and looks really good), which impressed the heck out of me. Enrico had a couple of excellent scenes, and I found myself engrossed in the detail of his toy kitchen. Stephen's use of both cartoon and highly realistic textures in his 'sit on' image amazes me. It's hard to make those 'work' together, and he did an awesome (not to mention funny) job of it. Zach did a great job of capturing scale and space, another great image to get lost in. And the rest were all very good or better (some really excellent for the genre that they were attempting), and I'm sure that the selections among them all were in the eye of the beholder (and maybe which side of the bed they woke up on).
rj |
Post by e-graffiti // Dec 9, 2006, 10:39am
|
e-graffiti
Total Posts: 171
|
Naw, I was referring to the artists who had won first place and the other artist who was in mentioned category. I don't recall what place the latter got, but he's the one that modeled the toy kitchen. Memory turns on me in my sixth decade. :)
In my opinion what should determine the winner in a 3D contest is the Three Dimensional aspect of the art. If one wants to enter flat stills, then they might as well go shoot a photograph and edit that in their favorite painter editor.
Just as someone recently wrote, "it ain't 3D unless it moves." Or at least prove it can move by showing different views.
There is a lot of 2.5D art out there on the Web. I call it 2.5D art as it looks 3D, but you can't tell because it is just sitting there. I'll show an example of my own 2.5D drawing if I can find it. :)
Edit: Found the example I was referencing. This is some 2.5D art I drew up awhile back. Yes, it still needs some work but I like to hang on to WIPs for a long time. heh This was done in a 2D Vector art program.
I find this an interesting discussion. In my opinion vector, bitmap, and yes 3D programs all have an end result of a 2d image with a different means to an end result of a picture. The real 3d (ie moving a sphere along the z axis) is in the aspect of making the image but once it is rendered it is 2d. I have seen vector art that you would swear was a photo if not something created in a 3d program as 3d does have a "signature" look which can and long before we had "3D programs" was being created manually. This is vector art from a 2d package http://www.bertmonroy.com/fineart/text/fineart1.htm#. Technically if it "moves", for example animation, it is 4D as the fourth dimension is time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime.
And speaking of 4D the winner of the animation contest did an outstanding job. I thought I was watching a car commercial. This is one of the best animations I have seen done with tS. |
Post by splinters // Dec 9, 2006, 12:52pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
I have seen vector art that you would swear was a photo if not something created in a 3d program as 3d does have a "signature" look which can and long before we had "3D programs" was being created manually.
Ironically, I have been working for years to lose that 'signature' 3D look as it has been a HUGE obstacle in getting my books published. I am torn between keeping my own style (3D) and giving the publishers what they want (2d watercolours).
So far I am winning... morally but they are winning financially...as in they haven't sent me a contract and advance yet...:o |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2006, 1:22pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Okay, here is a quick throw together of some vector art with a bitmap touch or two... Only spent a couple hours on it, so it's not ready. However, according to the current rules, I could insert some sort of 3D something or other in the picture and it would qualify for the contest.
One is a wireframe type from the vector program (early shot) and it shows vector objects. The rest is bitmap. The other is yet another WIP but shows the anti-alias version of it. BTW, it's why I prefer spline 3D modeling over polygonal 3D modeling. Spline modeling is very much like vector art, more intuitive. |
Post by 3dpdk // Dec 9, 2006, 3:10pm
|
3dpdk
Total Posts: 212
|
Yes, you may have a clever deception there and if done well enough may get past the reviewers at Caligari and there will always be those who will try to get around the rules ... If I took the time to do it I probably could paint a convincing 3D scene in acrilics, take a photo and submit it (and I realize that one of your points is that by including several different angled views might help to prevent this type of disception, but nothing is to say that I couldn't paint several different views).
So ...
copied directly from the submission page are these rules:
Create a still image or an animation using any Caligari product as your primary tool. You may use other programs to create texture maps, crop, and scale your rendered images, and assemble animation clips into one animation. You may also use trueSpace plug-ins. You need to specify the codec used if submitting an animation. We are looking for animations and images that make the most of our software's capabilities, and present them in an eye-pleasing manner. Animations must be no larger than 15Mb in size, and images should be in JPG format and 800x600 (or very close to those dimensions) in size. Animations or images outside of these requirements may be cropped or resized.
plane and simple "any Caligari product as your primary tool."
The acceptance of textures created in outside programs opens a multitude of flexibility on the part of the artist and I can think of a scene done entirely with planes textured with photos; even one plane - one photo, but in the end, if Caligari feels that this image would showcase ONE of trueSpace's capabilities, it might just win if well done.
I can't see that the winning image didn't fit the "submission critera" whereas your example, as it is, has nothing to do with trueSpace or any of it's plug-ins and technically should not be submitted for consideration in the contest. (but that's not to say that some might not attempt it from time to time.) |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2006, 3:42pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
...or simply submit a cob or scn file with each submission. |
|
