A note about my entry: The maga hat is one of the crazy hats. I also made the shirts and wall pink: This was a nod to the Simpson’s episode where Bart makes Homer’s shirt pink by throwing his red cap into the whites. This then lead Homer’s employer to label him a crazy person.
I loved those little guys, btw.
Guy on the left: And his hat was, like, this big!
Guy on the right: * stunned in amazement *
Seeing those guys fight must also be hilarious.
Since we’re elaborating on sources here’s the original webcomic my hat is based on (Girl Genius).
I had no reference for mine, it is imaginal, though I have experience operating and maintaining an M10 gas mask (which I based the filtration system on), open face ppe, and paintball equipment and I used those experiences and memories to know what parts to place. I also, regrettably, have experience with major depression, anxiety, and a specific hitherto unnamed mental issue, as well as three separate attempts on my life, though those experiences are also valuable when trying to get that same feeling into a piece. Hopefully it translates as the anxious mania I was going for, where time is slow and everything is FUBAR.
Was listening to this a lot as well, helps the mood of eroding sanity, definitely recommend for stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL998ajnjN4&t=1006s
I have some questions. Can pure entries include-
- Textures from websites?
- Textures form addons?
- Model from model generating/Ready made model addons such as extra objects, discombobulator, archipack, etc?
- Post processing in programs other than Blender?
The way I see it, anything you call pure will be called pure. If you used textures and addons, but your entry is super amazing, I may even vote for it, weather or not you called it open. My bias, however, is towards the pure entries.
Anything that comes with Blender is indisputably pure – that includes anything generated from add-ons included with Blender, even if the add-ons need to be activated in the Preferences box first. It also includes the maps that come with Blender such as the environments in the studiolights folder. For example, my entry this week uses Suzanne (one of Blender’s primitives), a Newell teapot (from the Extras included add-on), the studio.exr map (included in the studiolights folder) for the environment/lighting, and the default cube – everything else (materials, remodeling of the teapot, compositor setup) was done by me during the contest timeframe, so it’s pure.
When you use add-ons that don’t come with Blender, anything not made by you (that doesn’t come with Blender), anything made outside of the contest timeframe (that doesn’t come with Blender), other software, etc – that’s when the rest of the “is it pure or open” rules come into play. Like “is it in the foreground or background?”, “is it just a few?” etc. I use GIMP to reduce the filesize of my submissions – still pure. If I’d done compositing in GIMP that took the image from “meh” to “wow!” I’d mark it open.
This is all "if you can honestly say to yourself . . . ", but if you mark an entry as Pure that comes across as Open you’ll probably lose votes.
Yep pure is you can say that anyone using blender alone could recreate it. Textures add-ons and such that are free for all would fall under pure, now if you used substance painter or hardops or kitops that are paid addons then I would classify that as an open entry. Now using photogramatry (projection from an image onto an object) that is kind of a grey area as you didn’t actually model all the details in that image on the object, just projected it onto the object. If that object is not a center of focal point then you could possibly say pure but for the most part that would be an open entry.
That’s a lot more concise than what I posted, nice!
Sorry to disagree (you’ve been at this longer than I have), but there are plenty of free-for-all add-ons and resources that aren’t from Blender or made in the contest timeframe – they’re not open, are they? Or is, say, the MB-Lab add-on open? (That’d be a game-changer!)
I’d say it’s not pure because it used other software/equipment – even if just a cellphone with a photogrammetry app.
This I’d love to agree with! Something like “the main point of an image needs to be pure for the image to be pure” is something I wanted to include in my post, but I found nothing even implying that in the rules post.
It is quite explicit there, in my opinion:
I suppose you meant to ask “they’re not pure, are they?”. Using MB-Lab in an entry would make it open.
It is hard to draw a clear line between open and pure entries, and the classification is quite subjective. I personally find using HardOps would be pure since it is a tool, you still need to work inside Blender to get something out of it, while Graswald gives you a bunch of assets with a click of a button, making it open.
In the end, just mention what you used if you’re in doubt if it is okay. People will tell you if they think your classification is not adequate.
Most of this has already been covered in the posts above. Thanks for that.
A few additional thought on this matter:
Textures: A pure entry should be more that just textures. But using them usually isn’t a problem. (Of course, creating them yourself feels more pure than just using/downloading pre-made materials.) [And, even though the rules don’t care about this: always check licenses before using stuff from the internet. You don’t want to get sued over a weekend challenge entry.]
Addons: I think, Generator-Addons (e.g. sapling) which come with blender, can be considered being part of blender.
External Post processing: Minor changes shouldn’t affect the pure/open category. Applying the full range of G’MIC effects (which are absolutely wonderful) is a whole different story.
As it has been noted before, it is hard to come up with an exact definition that works for every case but isn’t to restrictive at the same time. As in toxicology, the dose makes the poison. (However, in this case the poison isn’t very dangerous as entering open entries is absolutely fine.)
I think this sums it up quite well: If you can honestly say to yourself, “Yes, I mainly used Blender to make this”, “Yes, nearly all of the foreground models are new”, “Yes, most of the models are new”, then the entry is Pure.
(I like to read “foreground models” as “important parts of the entry”.)
This might help too: Instead of overthinking the rules in a hairsplitting way, just keep in mind the intentions behind them. Try to be fair. Be open about how an entry was created. This way we can keep this event being fun - and hopefully everyone can learn a thing or two. As far as I can tell, calling this a ‘challenge’ instead of a ‘competition’ was a brilliant/wise decision.
And… the winner of Weekend Challenge 889 with votes from 34.9% of the voters is… Lilith_Scratch!
Here’s to all the great participators…
Wow! Thank you all so much for your votes. Each one mattered there, that was close. This forum is home to some amazing artists and I hope you all enjoy next weekend’s theme!
No worries, it is what it is and to each their own. I haven’t been blending much lately anyway so you would know better than I. I should have just left it with what was already stated before my post.
It does not matter weather open or pure, anything with a discombobulator in it will win !
Congrats Lilith_Scratch, and thanks to those who voted for mine!
This week my votes went to watercycles’s Keeping America Great (poor Suzanne!), Lilith_Scratch’s Artemis (effective composition, blur, & lighting), and didierv’s Alchemist hat (love the concept!). Also enjoyed cinek_r9’s AHHHHHHH (oops!), Render_Style’s Time Machine Hat (like the concept), fcharr’s Beyond the Wall of Pink (nice caricature), Xeofrios’s Fancy Hat (the composition & lighting really show it off), Kanga3020’s Mad Hatter Party (would’ve gotten my vote if it’d been sunny, really good), Sssjjjbbb’s Tallulah the Toucan (another that I really liked an came close to voting for, but something about the lighting threw me), Karmon’s Green sombrero (gave me a giggle), and Helge’s Just In Your Hat (s’cute!).
Not how I understood that, thanks for clarifying!
Thanks to everyone for letting me come third in my first ever blender challenge! I am looking forward to participating in many more. Cheers to Lilith for the win and making such a masterpiece! And also thanks to everybody for such beautifully composited replies.
This was your first too!? I thought I was the only one :o definitely didn’t expect you to be!
Yeah, I got that backwards, sorry! I meant that if free add-ons (outside of those included with Blender) were pure, then using MB-Lab would be pure, which would make a whole range of artistic expression available in pure entries to those of us who aren’t able to get a human figure done inside of the challenge timeframe.