===== Well-modelled wasps, but where are the stings?! I totally agree with your comments about country; we all know how jingoistic some people can be. I think that the field is optional, though. ===== bzzzzzz...... ouch ;) I feel like wasp... ===== Ah, but COUNTRY: is an optional field. I like knowing where people come from. I just think it's a nice way to highlight how international the competition is. ===== This is quite good. I like the overall effect, although I felt the texturing and lighting could have used some work. Regarding the country thing: Why not? I find it very interesting to know whereabouts these images came from, possibly to relate some sort of cultural influence to them, but I rate each image on its own merit, and there's definitely no influence based on country of origin. I would hope most of us 'net-savvy people would have grown out of racism by now. At any rate, this image placed #5 on my list, although initially I liked your other image better. I think it was the finer details and the sense of realism as far as lighting and dimension go that won me over. Congrats! Good job! ===== Lots of reflection, maybe to much to be convincing. Nice wasps though! ===== Absolutely wonderful waps, excellent ===== RE: COUNTRY: Or someone might be interested to see from what countries people are submitting from. Just like they like to know how an image was made. It isn't really neccesary, but it's interesting... ===== i liked you image a lot and gave it high marks. although you do have a point about just voting for a country, i think the irtc was just curious to find out many country representations there are. there was a question about this on the newsgroup. its is nice to see that so many people from all over the world enter the competion and bring such a diversity to the theme. ===== A very striking image. Love the modelling - very crisp and clean. The wood texture on the cabinet fronts is extremely subtle - didn't notice it until my second perusal of the picture. The quilted (tile?) pattern on the walls is very intriguing. 20-20-20 ===== One of the best I've seen. The bugs are very good. I like the way the image bends in the tea kettle. You paid good attention to small details. ===== Bzzzz ===== Beutiful image! ===== Top of the class... ===== by far the best and most natural animal parts I've seen done in almost any 3-D modeller, let alone the text-based POVRay! HOW are those wings done? ===== Very interesting interpretation of the topic. Everything is *way* too reflective. It's *subtle* reflection that makes an image convincing. Great wasps. ===== I like you image. I find it inspirational. the image is of picture quality, something I appreciate. The bee's legs could have been better, but the image is great overall. As for the country, when I judge, I read every textfile, and when someone doesn't include any comments, I'm likely not to rate them as highly in technical merit as someone who explains a very insightful method for creating a complex object. If the country is, say, Spain, and the person's English skills are obviously not the greatest, I tend to forgive this oversight. On the same note, wouldn't it be more harmful to include the bias of machine used? Are Mac voters more likely to vote down IBM users? Or should I vote someone all fives because they can afford 3D Studio and reward someone with 20's just because they use only POV RAY? There is so much room for bias already that I can harldy consider "country" a harmful element. (Note: Although I disagree with your comment, I aplaud your principles. Besides, I liked your picture a great deal...) ===== Something about this image makes it very pleasing to look at... ===== Reflections are something most people overlook as a way of viewing models. I'm glad you didn't try to cram everything in front of the camera as your image is very natural as it is. Well done! ===== This one is very good, well detailed and pretty complex. ===== Great wasps! That's one hell of a clean kitchen, though! ===== Exelent wasps. Its a little to reflective on the counter tops. And to bad POV does not suport motion blur yet, that would have really made your wasps look great. ===== Even though I agree that 'country' should not be part of the competition I really enjoy finding out the location of the various artists. Perhaps it could be kept secret until after the voting. ===== The image is not bad however the differance in bright between the wasps and the rest of the image is jarring ps. I didn't notice the country until after I read your note, then I had to scroll all the way back to the top. What the matter with Finland anyway. ===== Excellent bugs. The finishes on the cabinet work and background need work - the reflectivity detracts from the sense of 3 dimensional space and diffuses the differences between the various objects. Bugs are excellent. No bias in this vote because you are from Finland - IMO it is an extra added bit of information to know the COUNTRY of the artist. That doesn't influence my voting - it just adds to my sense that the IRTC is international in scope. On the other hand - if you have bugs like you have drawn in Finland then I might have to take that into consideration should I decide to visit your country - those bugs look mean and huge. ===== Wasps appear to be stationary ! ===== A very good image. The wasps are lovely, and the kitchen is nicely designed. One criticism would be the oven door which is unnaturally reflective, a common problem of raytracing scenes. (Use those bump maps). As for the country issue, I've got to disagree. I love seeing all the different countries that we get entries from, and I find it hard to believe that the people here vote for on nationalistic grounds. This isn't the olympics of the art world :-) ===== Extremely well executed. Undoubtedly one of the better ones. ===== very nice! ===== a great image, wonderful texturing, the only thing that could be improved would be the legs, they just don't look right, although I am unable to give a more specific suggestion of how to improve them ===== An excellent image. The desaturation of background elements perfectly throws focus on the topical objects: the wasps. And attractive they are too. Just a few minor points: Too much refraction in the wings - the wings appear to be thicker than they really are and the far left wasp's legs are unfortunately broken up. The hinged structure of the legs should be made more obvious. ===== Great Little insects you've got there! ===== Wow. ===== Nice one, the reflections are a bit overdone, though. ===== I liked this image! Also, while I sort-of agree with your comment about "COUNTRY" in the description file, I hope that no-one *will* vote that way. In fact, while trying to download all the images, I actually paid very little attention to any of the header except for "TOOLS USED"... ===== The eyes of the wasps are very well done. It is a fine image. ===== Good image. It is true that someone may choose to vote for a country rather than an image. However, the same thing could be said for gender, age, or where the person "seems" to come from (based on the person's name or e-mail address). Or, even if the text file itself was banned, we'd have people who gave the best scores to only a certain type of image. ("If it doesn't have reflections, it's crap," or "I'm scared to death of bees, so I'll give this bee image a poor score.") There is no way to eliminate *all* bias. ===== good wings. ===== Nice modelling on the wasps (although a better effect may have been acheived without a close-up). The kitchen scene could use some work. It seems to reflective. ===== Good overall presentation ===== nice image. beautiful bees! the rest of the image is as you said - rushed and simple - but still good. note - the COUNTRY field is nice because i like to know that others in the world are enjoying povray. if you feel that people would vote biased based on country then you are being silly. ===== One of the three best pictures here, technically. ===== Nice bees! ===== BUGS!!!! They fly and they annoy... nice execution of idea. ===== Great modelling! Especially liked the wings. Countertop surfaces too shiny. Too many wasps in the same pose--fewer, or differently posed, would be better. ===== Very good modelling, and an interesting point of view...