$%k### morons!!!!

I just had an ... altercation with the editor of CGNetworks.

I had said that okay, the rules were the rules, but that there were people who can run rings in Bryce around anybody with a more expensive package.

His answer was to blabber again about rules and he ended with "No one is bashing Bryce. You can go back to your Bryce-loving and sleep content."

M$@&**???ing cretin!

What do you know about what I love? What do you know about what I'm content with?

I'm so mad I could break a table. I hate condescension.

Especially from someone who absolutely has no idea what he's jabbering about. Blithering idiot.

AAAAAaaaaaaaarggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!

"Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign of a disturbed mind." TM Terry Pratchett :-)

Sorry, I simply had to vent this.

Message edited on: 10/22/2004 06:31

LOL Well, after what ive seen, he was "kind" to you. Ive seen the guy ban people for less. :)

Just seen it, like 20 min ago, very rude person indeed, I guess they can be all that, cuz it is a big boys place! :)

I think there is not really difference in effort between creating 20x20 grid low poly terrain model and rendering it with poly sub-displacement in Cinema4DR9 for example and randomly generating it in Bryce !!! He is just nitpicking for the hell of it...

Since Bryce is so much ahead of all software they had to clip it wings to be leveled with Maya, 3D studio Max... I guess they gonna ban every software wich costs less then 500$ in order to weed out those fake parametric artists, lol !

Do not worry, man, it's all good ! :)

Message edited on: 10/22/2004 06:55

I was very kind to him. I'm a veteran of "political" newsgroups so I know how to direct a lot of bile. But he's free to ban me. It will just show what kind of jerk he is. Kemal, I didn't want to point him the inappropriateness of his simile. Yep, it's the NASCAR rags and formula. :-)

Message edited on: 10/22/2004 07:09

omg, they're denying parametric modellers? so no bryce booleans allowed?? wtf is that about?? My boolean modelling skills and those of many other brycers around are way better then most peoples polygon modelling skills will ever be! I think I'm feeling the urge to help that mod with his head banging... ;)

I stay happy by not wandering far from this forum. Just stay here at home Erlik. They've got nothing to teach you.

I think they're just afraid some brycer is gunna walk away with their copy of 3DSMAX 7 ;) if we can do the things we do with just bryce, they'll be out of a job when we get our hands on 3DSMAX ;)

Call me dumb, but I've got a question. If a person enters this contest using Bryce, then they can't use it to make any of the terrains? and Can't boolean to make models? Can't use trees and can't import poser or daz figures? Did I miss anything? Or am I all wrong?

:o) Just kick his butt with a great render in Bryce, then he'll shut ;o)

If Ang is right, what the hell do they expect anyone to do?

@Ang25- that's the crux of it alright, and no, you are not wrong, but I think the arrogant snots at CGNetwork are.

indeed they are. but this is a case of people not knowing the rules of the challenge and the site. i agree the guy's a dick and should be shot for the good of society, but if you read the FAQ and all the rules, it specifically states what is allowed and what not. having the same q asked 1,000,000 times over would piss off any of us.

i did want to make an off-hand comment and wonder out loud how it would be if the guy gave all his answers in yoda-talk. but after a few sarcastic replies of my own, and what elrik told him, i realized his patience was wafer-thin :D

E~

Message edited on: 10/22/2004 10:23

i agree the guy's a dick and should be shot for the good of society Remind us again, where was it you did that course in diplomacy, Drac? ROTFL

Drac left the diplomacy for the CGTalk forum ;)

what? i was sweet as pie. Drac

seriously, you guys haven't seen me blow up ever since the pumeco thing. and even then i was being overly nice.

"but if you read the FAQ and all the rules, it specifically states what is allowed and what not." The point is, I RTFM. That is, both the FAQ and the rules. Carefully. Remember, I'm a journalist and I'm used to looking for fine print. I didn't find answers. I wanted an explanation why Bryce, which doesn't come with a useful terrain, is considered to produce "pre-fab" models. Also, why a DEM, extensively worked upon, is different from an extensively worked upon texture you had downloaded. And, as Rudy noted, they added Terragen and Bryce to the ruleslater. It was first only Poser and "DAZ3D". I'm sorry now that I didn't take a screenshot of the page in that state. As to the last statement by the mod, Wiro, that's diplomacy at work - I didn't answer at all. :-)

what's wrong with 3dsmax (other than the price..;)? it's a perfectly valid program for creating complex models to use in Bryce scenes..;) some folks ask for it..and they gets it..there are some folks ya just can't reach
-Cool Hand Luke (I think)..;) don't worry 'bout it none..

lol

What we've got here is a failure ... to communicate. :D

you just have to think from your perspective. i mean not only is it a place where literally dozens of different programs are put together in a test of their and their owners' abilities, but it's also a classy forum where artistes and real artists come most often times know it ALL. so it's normal for them to clique up against these newcomers who use a crayola box to render. shrug i still say burn'em, but yeah. and mind you, consider this as well, no bryce work is ever going to win that challenge. ever. specifically because it will ultimately be cliqui. even if you pass the first popular vote it's still going to be a pain in the ass afterwords. you expect the cgtalk admins to vote for a bryce piece? how much money is corel sponsoring them with compared to discreet or whatever? drac

Some admins just might. There are a few open minded ones. "Spirit World" actually managed to get into the CGtalk choice gallery, and to my knowledge, there arent many Bryce images in there, if any at all. And whats even funnier, they asked me to do a tutorial for it. LOL

@Erlik - Hi Alfred E Newman.:-)) Welcome to the "Fans of Mad Magazine" club..:-)) "What, me worry?".. Cheers, Diolma (And don't kick the plant-pot - it makes it nervous...)

Ok I haven't read the rules, etc. What AREN'T they allowing on the 2D side of the contest? Apparently from this thread the contest is more about the programs than the actual art. Narrow minded so and so's

Screw that place. That guy is a prick.

Im getting the impression here that this particular site doesnt accept pre-fabed, out-of-the-box terrains, humanoid figures and the such. In other words, only things that the artist can build from the ground up using true 3D modeling tools including terrains and figures. Personally I dont find that too hard to understand, if in fact that is what they require. It seems to me that they want to test for 3D modeling skills all around and not out-of-box content composition. Lets get real here. Believe me when I tell you that when things are constructed well, in the hands of a skilled artist, using these high-end modelers, very little can compare, thats why they go cinema grade, broadcast quality professional. In truth, and as a Bryce and 3D Studio aficionado and user, Bryce can never compare in versatility and creative modeling power. It is exactly the Brycians cleverness and propensity to improvise and compensate in the lack of high-end capacity, which sets him apart from other artists. All your Brycian Boolean complex modeling isnt even considered true Boolean modeling in the true 3D world so how would you expect it to be accepted? Bryce lends itself well to short-cut backdrop modeling. Imagine for a moment that you would have to construct every stream, every mountain, every tree, every cloud, every human, every animal, every grass blade from its basic foundations in the world of modeling polygons, Bryce would be hard pressed to produce these as a stand-alone, as true 3D meshes. These other packages can do that and more in capable hands, it only takes that much longer to produce. And I get the impression from what you are saying that this is what they are after. My 2 cents.

"Lets get real here. Believe me when I tell you that when things are constructed well, in the hands of a skilled artist, using these high-end modelers, very little can compare" I have to agree with this... I love Bryce. I use it near exclusivly. But lets not all fool ourselves thinking it is some great 3D app. Its great for what it does. But its not C4d or 3d max. I have seen some untouched renders out of c4d etc that look insane! Anyone would be hard pressed to do non-postworked to death great images in Bryce. It has limits. That isnt a bash, thats a reality. I never went to cgtalk until I saw this thread. Look at the stuff there not even rated. It blows away #1's in the bryce h20. lol. Alot there seem to be very SERIOUS artists. Not just weekend/sparetime hobbiests. They have a bit of a right to be judgmental imo. My 2 cents.. -B

And why can weekend/sparetime hobbiests not be serious? I thought i is the end-result that counts, the progress you show, the ideas and stories behind. Having expensive software does not automatically mean that you are creative, you have to show that creative process and participate. And at that point i fail to see how Bryce can be an unfair advantage. To take the NASCAR example, you still need talented drivers to get them round the track.

"Bryce lends itself well to short-cut backdrop modeling. Imagine for a moment that you would have to construct every stream, every mountain, every tree, every cloud, every human, every animal, every grass blade from its basic foundations in the world of modeling polygons, Bryce would be hard pressed to produce these as a stand-alone, as true 3D meshes. These other packages can do that and more in capable hands, it only takes that much longer to produce. And I get the impression from what you are saying that this is what they are after." Okay. These other packages can do that with help of plugins. Yesterday I asked a colleague who uses Max how would he create a landscape. He said, I would import a terrain from Bryce. :-) And he was disgusted by the idea that he'd have to model a complex terrain in Max. Anyway, why did people create Ozone, Atmosphere, Shave And Haircut, Smoke, Pyro, XFrog, OnyxTree, Hair Department, and who knows what else? So they don't have to create all that stuff by hand. I can model a tree in Rhino, but why would I (with few possible exceptions)? Everybody is concerned with the image, not how you came to it. BTW, striving, give Bryce GI and subsurface scattering and particle system, and you'll see much better renders. I'm not saying better pictures, just better renders.

Attached Link: http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=172936

have a look at the attached image I can do that with bryce, amapi and psp too.. It would take me 3 months to render, but I could make it.. really the only limitation to my bryce renders at the moment are the rendertimes.. I think this is the same for many artists here.

I dont understand all the hoopla. From what is posted here concerning this sites rules for entry into their contest, it seems to me that they are asking that all entries be created in a real 3D modeling package. It seems they dont want out-of-box, pre-fabricated objects and Bryce terrains and Poser figures are just that. Bryce is a terrain-generating package and Poser figures are figures that have been created by professionals and are altered by the end user. I dont see whats so complicated about that. They dont want to compete with professional, out-of-box, pre-fabricated objects. It seems to me that they want the artist to exercise his modeling creativity and mastery of the software package, not simply to compose his image from other professionally produced sources. It is not an unreasonable request to me since here in this very forum, we often pose in our challenges the restriction to use Bryce only with no importing of outside objects or postwork from other sources. These other packages can do that with help of plugins. Not necessarily, although it can become quite an involved operation, within these other packages you can create any model of real-life objects including terrains not using their handy plugins, as Pogs link above clearly indicates. The plugins that come with or are coded for these packages uses the modelers own features and code to produce their magic much as the Bryce Terrain Editor allows you to alter a terrain. Your friend may cringe at the thought of creating a terrain model in 3D StudioMax because it may be labor intensive to build a realistic looking terrain from scratch. Think of not hitting the create terrain button in Bryce and trying to build a realistic terrain from Bryces primitives. That would give you some idea of what it entails. I thought i is the end-result that counts, the progress you show, the ideas and stories behind. Having expensive software does not automatically mean that you are creative, you have to show that creative process and participate. And at that point i fail to see how Bryce can be an unfair advantage. Everybody is concerned with the image, not how you came to it. That is not what Im coming away with in this post. Im understanding that some people have taken issue with the sites contest entry requirements and the use of pre-fab, pre-packaged objects from outside sources. I dont think that this post is discussing the moot point and rhetorical question of which software package is capable of producing the most esthetically stunning images because it should come as no revelation that it is the artist and not his tools that decides that outcome. We here at Bryce set our own challenge requirements and would be outraged if someone from outside our domain would question those requirements to better suit their personal inclinations. Would we not?

sorry, not convinced.......

Well it started a discussion, Percydaman asked the following: I have what I hope is a legitimate question along these lines. Im currently using vray for my project. It has sub-pixel displacement at rendertime. Now I never considered that to be cheating, but this latest discussion has me asking that question. I dont want to do something that will disqualify me. Its not parametric modelling in the purest sense of the word, but you CAN take a texture and use displacement to change a flat plane to highly detailed modelling. Isn't that what Bryce does? Never used it so am not totally sure. And that is good, i read from this people at least are questioning if certain techniques are fair or if they should be alowed. In the meantime Leonard posted this: While I'd love to continue debating this issue, I honestly really have other things to do and would appreciate it if we could end this here. I hope to see you at the finish line.

Pog?????

Oh, okay RobertJ, I see that the issue has become detached from another thread perhaps in another forum or site. Its not parametric modelling in the purest sense of the word, but you CAN take a texture and use displacement to change a flat plane to highly detailed modelling. Isn't that what Bryce does? Never used it so am not totally sure. This is a valid point well taken since in the link offered by Pog above the artist also used a displacement map for his terrain creation in 3D StudioMax: Lins-Extrude-Poly-MeshSmooth-Displace

Pog???? what???? I'm not saying anything, really, just waffling. I've agreed all along that not allowing the use of mathematically generated terrains was silly. And I don't see much difference between that and using sub-pixel displacement. I think the guy has painted himself into a corner. I was commenting on the theory that hobbyists are likely to reach the same level of skill as trained professionals. If that were so, no-one would bother going to college for four years. Brycers complain about Poser in the Bryce gallery, for exactly the same kind of reasons that this guy is banning the use of Bryce presets. He obviously doesn't understand that 'the experts' don't use presets, that they're just an easy introduction to the program. That's just a misunderstanding on his part, and I notice he didn't answer the query about the use of sub-pixel displacement. But I can't fault him for trying to keep the standard of entries high. The artwork on the site warrants his care. Might be better to folks to just submit entries, and see how it goes?

LOL...Pog, I didn't understand to what you were referring to. "While I'd love to continue debating this issue, I honestly really have other things to do and would appreciate it if we could end this here. I hope to see you at the finish line." Is not exactly an answer to anything and permeates of rudeness with its abruptness.

“These other packages can do that with help of plugins.” Not necessarily, although it can become quite an involved operation, within these other packages you can create any model of real-life objects including terrains not using their handy plugins, as Pog’s link above clearly indicates. The plugins that come with or are coded for these packages uses the modeler’s own features and code to produce their magic much as the Bryce Terrain Editor allows you to alter a terrain. Your friend may cringe at the thought of creating a terrain model in 3D StudioMax because it may be labor intensive to build a realistic looking terrain from scratch. Think of not hitting the “create terrain” button in Bryce and trying to build a realistic terrain from Bryce’s primitives. That would give you some idea of what it entails.<< I know what it entails. :-) And that's not primitives. The link that Pog posted shows how the artist created his mountain in Max - really quite a simple process. But my point is that you you use basically the same process in Bryce AND you get a better result. My friend objects to modelling terrains in Max, because he can get a better result in Bryce. Anyway, I decided to give it a rest, because I obviously cannot change their minds and I really stay mad for long. I could object to some further silly statements there, but there's no use.

Quest - DUH! I see where the confusion arose - I didn't refresh the page before posting #33, you'd posted in the meantime. lol

"and I really stay mad for long" Obviously it was to be "I really DON'T stay mad for long." Now back to the scheduled programming.

Hehehe, Pog this happens all the time, I figured thats what it was but wasnt sure so I needed to ask, hence all the question marks. Back to the scheduled programming: But my point is that you you use basically the same process in Bryce AND you get a better result. My friend objects to modelling terrains in Max, because he can get a better result in Bryce. Perhaps Im a little dense and dont quite get your meaning but in what respect do you equate the mountain building process in the artists link posted by Pog (BTW, a very nice render) and the process of terrain building in Bryce? The Max process used in that example is a multi-stepped process and not at all the only option available to modelers. Whereas in Bryce the simple clicking of the create terrain button will instantly through mathematical algorithms produce a viable terrain object for you. You do not build the object, Bryce does the building and this is exactly what Bryce, Vue and Terragen was designed to do, generate terrains and it wouldnt look good for Bryce and the others if it didnt do the job it was designed to do and do it better than a modeling program. I consider Bryce and programs cloned from Bryce specialty programs in that it specializes in building terrains. Although many of the high-end modeling programs come with terrain building plugins they (the programs) do not specialize in that endeavor and could not logically hold a candle to the task which Bryce was inherently designed to do without much fuss and interfacing from the artist and does it better. So I dont see the comparison. I too would object to modeling terrains in Max because Bryce could easily provide the terrains algorithmically that I need. But I know full well also that 3D StudioMax offers me that feature but much more labor intensively. Therein lies the crux of what I first understood this post to be about, the rules regarding the contest entry requirements. From an artistic POV, the end product is most important to the artist not what tools he/she uses to get to that pinnacle, I agree and will wholeheartedly grant you that. But I can understand placing limits on what software can and cannot be allowed for a contest entry if the ultimate test is that of artistic creativity and mastery of the artist using modeling programs. Disallowing terrain generators and figure enhancing programs fall through the cracks because in those programs, the objects are algorithmically generated or professionally pre-created and not at all made by the artist but by the software and therefore cannot not be included as the rendering artists product. Unfortunately the contest in question is not an open house contest where everything goes. And I do find fault with the moderator for not making the distinction in that Vray case and the displacement maps. Gasp, coming up for air. :)

"Perhaps I’m a little dense and don’t quite get your meaning but in what respect do you equate the mountain building process in the artist’s link posted by Pog (BTW, a very nice render) and the process of terrain building in Bryce?" Extrude vs. heightfield? Meshsmooth vs. Smooth in TE? If I wanted to create an outcrop like that, I couldn't just click on Create Terrain, either.

Message edited on: 10/24/2004 02:06

Ackshelly, I wasn't particularly talking about the terrain or how it was made, rather about the professional quality of it and other images in the gallery there. As far as I can see, there'd be nothing to stop anyone from making a terrain from scratch in the terrain editor, using the paint tools, or importing a pic from PhotoShop to use as heightmap. That's very little different from modelling it from scratch, and far as I can remember ZBrush can use a form of heightmap to make meshes as well. Say you made/painted a basic terrain shape in Bryce, then exported as .obj, and worked on it some more in a modelling program (I use Wings mostly), then imported it back into Bryce. I do that all the time. Technically, you're importing a mesh object, you've just made that mesh object in several stages. I'm arguing round in circles here, because I do agree with the guy in principle, now that I've read his replies. But there are ways around the ban that would be quite legitimate, by making the terrain 'your own' with further work. Which most people (apart from newbies) do anyway........ And newbies would be insane to enter a contest like that, where the standard is going to be so high. So a middle ground might be to view it as a way of dissuading newbies from cluttering up the entries with loadsa spheres over water. ramble ramble ramble ramble

LOLErlik, theres no way youre going to sell that bone to me. There is absolutely no comparison between a 3 dimensional geometric estrude operation and a 2D bitmap pixel heightfield operation nor is there any comparison between a 3D subobject meshsmooth operation and a simple blur smooth terrain operation. If you are speaking in very broad and general terms I would concede but from a technical standpoint the comparisons would be way off the mark. To build a similar outcrop as the one shown in the link, it would be a matter of editing the terrain in Bryce or using a heightmap imported from an image editing program. Mind you, I was careful in saying that Bryce would produce a viable terrain for you. This doesnt mean that you wouldnt have to work on it to get the desired look you want. Same as you would have to work in Max to get the look youre after. But your basic terrain object would be instantly there for you with bumps, erosions and slops already on it. I can only imagine what the argument would be like for contest entry if Bryce offered a plugin for all these high-end modelers.