If the winner doesn’t supply a theme before Thursday 22:30 GMT, the organizer will select the theme. In this case, the winner’s theme will be used the next time we are lacking a theme on Thursday 22:30 GMT.
Having selected the theme, the winner will not be eligible to enter that week. They may however still submit an image, but it won’t be included in the voting.
(Open because I used historic models that (unlike Suzanne and the Newell Teapot) don’t come with Blender, the Sutherland Team’s VW Bug and the Stanford Bunny. The rest of the modeling (feet & wind-up knobs for the teapots, trim for the VW Bugs, the display bases, etc) I did inside of the WC period.)
A very impressive Render AravindCG.
The human figure is good alone but the effort you put in to make the floorboard texture and stickers from scratch puts it above and beyond.
Can I ask how you modeled the clock? Particularly that even placement of the numbers around the rim.
Thank You Levito. The character on the picture is a character from Blender studios. You can download it from blender cloud for free. And I didn’t modelled that clock, it is a image I made a circle and I applied the texture on top.
Although I’m bothered by my clearly superior hard work being overlooked, don’t mistake this for a rant
Here’s just a few thoughts after trying a few of these challenges: voting looks crooked mainly because of multi-voting which can be used to influence the final result (been there, done that), and the “open” title - just tried it now myself - encourages people to cheat (e.g. last time some NASA textures won, try to beat that with procedural!). Also many “pure” entries are obviously open…
The whole fun in this, at least for me, is to do it all from scratch, to test my own limits, not googling skills, nor fighting in 4 days what other have done in years. I’m starting to have mixed feelings about this… Maybe you should redefine the rules a bit, Helge, cause it’s more of a charade right now.
Isn’t “influencing the final result” the reason for voting?
I guess, things could be worse. The sole purpose of the poll is to make up your mind about who should be the winner. And if that includes rethinking the original choice or voting for more than one entry - so be it. (If I’m not mistaken, I can’t do anything about the possibility to change the original vote, anyways.)
That isn’t as easy as it may seem. I don’t think that completely banning the use of bitmap textures from pure entries would be a good idea. Not everything can be achieved with procedural textures and it would make things unnecessarily difficult for new users.
More complex rules could solve that issue (like % of screen pixels occupied by pre-made objects or textures) but the rules are too complicated already.
To me, the best way to deal with this seems to be: trying to keep things fair by being open about the tools/assets/things used to create an entry.
The best place to discuss an entry’s category has always been the entry thread. I don’t think that many people use the wrong category on purpose. Most participants don’t mind changing the category if the original one doesn’t fit the rules.
Calling other people “cheaters” just because you’re not winning is really bad sportsmanship. I doubt someone on this forum was impressed at my skills of UV-unwrapping a UV sphere and putting a texture on it. (If you were, I recommend you watch Blender Guru’s tutorial on how to make Earth)
In my 4 years participating in the weekend challenge, textures have always been “ok, as long as you don’t abuse”. Putting a photo of an object on a plane and calling that an entry would be going too far, but, say, a wood texture for a floor is fine.
What makes people vote on one entry and not on another is often a mystery to me. But if you’re getting mad at the results of the voting, then you missed the point of this challenge.
I wish that the “Shopper” had been a competing entry! That’s hilarious! And, very original.
I think that the real “purpose” of the challenge is to just give people a chance to show off a little bit. They toss out an open-ended “subject” and challenge you to come up with something in a few days. And, even if you don’t compete, it’s grand fun to watch what different people do come up with in response to the same provocation. In a sense, “everybody wins.” We should all just have fun with it.
Helge, I am new to this weekend challenge. I participated in two weekend challenges before this one. I didn’t know that we have to create everything ourself from scratch for pure entry. What should I do? Helge
Don’t worry. You don’t have to do anything.
To keep things fair, I simply moved your entry into the ‘open’ section.
Regarding the pure/open categories: It isn’t an exact science, but reusing old models or models from external sources will drag an entry more towards the ‘open’ end of the scale. However, that doesn’t mean that everything has to be new. But if central/important parts or main elements of an entry haven’t been created within the time frame of the challenge, it should be considered ‘open’.
That being said: ‘open’ entries are not a bad thing. Some of the best entries we had over the years have been open. It is just a way to add some additional fairness to the challenge.
I voted for Tailor Shop thinking it was pure, still feels like a good vote from my part. Having said that, I feel like some new blender artists want easy access to quality work. The pure Manuel Bastioni entries had me rolling my eyes. Seems like there is concern that our challenge may be too challengy if people are expected to enter solely with their own work. I think skill takes time to accrue, and those of us who spent months getting by on very basic entries, may feel a bit disappointed by the entitlement of others.
In my opinion textures are fine as long as they are not the absolute main focus of the image. In Millani’s entry especially, the he had put that much amount of effort that that the texture dosen’t really matter (it is like just 10 percent of the image)
There’s a lot good work there, but the composition and lighting make it hard for me to look at, so it fails the “create a cool image” test for me.
Everybody’s in this for their own reasons – if that’s what’s fun for you, great, but that’s not the rules. Using outside textures in an Open entry isn’t cheating, nor should it be IMHO, since using outside-of-Pure stuff is the whole point of Open entries. NASA maps are an excellent example of Open resources allowing entries that can’t be done inside of the Pure restrictions (unless you can do a procedural / hand-painted Pluto – Helge, still wanna see how you did that).
As for “pure” entries that seem obviously open, yeah, that’s frustrating, especially when voters go gaga for 'em, but the rules aren’t clear. I’d like “no outside textures in Pure entries”, but that’s not what the rules of our “just a fun little challenge” currently say.
It is hard when you work really hard on an entry and it doesn’t get many (or any) votes. But you can only see your work through your filter. That’s why it is so brutal to put your artwork out there and have it judged alongside others.
It is evident @Blutag that you did a lot of modeling and if voters were voting just on modeling then maybe you would get more votes. I found your light spires confusing: I couldn’t tell if they were volumetric lighting coming from little hanging lights or actual objects. Even a crop like follows I think shows off your models more.
I have struggled to find success in the challenges and I have been participating less. But it should be challenging to win… I know this. Just need to make sure to keep encouraging people to be part of it.
Also (and this is one I struggle with when I enter) it has to read THEME. So yours does not read “SHOP” to me. If you are playing to win it seems necessary that it must read the theme. (Unless you are Helge and can do something crazy cool, or funny and amazing, but that person doesn’t seem to throw their hat in the ring; they seem to be on a different level)
Hi, i find it unfortunate that you take it like that.
From my point of view the objective is not necessarily to win but rather it is rather a pretext to try new things in a given time and personally, I find that it helps me to progress.
For some time now I have struggled to finish on time by testing things that my current level does not allow me to finish because I have neither the experience nor the practice of the other participants but each time I learn new things ^^.
(And it would be interesting to have more feedback on the composition of the images and the points that could be improved)
For me this is a learning exercise. People will be voting for an image. Seeing what wins and trying to work out why it won, helps me get better. An idea that conveys the theme in a literal manner tends to win. Unfortunately, effort makes no difference, I have created a creature from scratch, sculpted, retopologised, rigged, textured, made procedural clouds, fog, etc and still ended up bottom of the pile. We just have to pick ourselves up and hope the next theme will inspire us with the perfect idea and we can win a coveted spot on the featured gallery list
Thanks @sundialsvc4 and @Boder. I’m glad you like it. If you look back a few years you’ll find quite a few of my hats lying around in the sand of time. However, Boder is right about “on topic” entries. Many of my entries are rather loosely connected to the theme or misinterpreting it on purpose. I think it is fun, and this gives me a lot of freedom when searching for an idea, but I guess it could indeed influence the amount of gain-able votes - if that is what you are after. Entering mostly non-competing entries feels right to me. Apart from that, things started feeling a little awkward, when I started ‘maintaining’ the challenge threads.
Yes, that feels strange. Modeling humans in the time frame of the weekend challenge can be a rather painful experience, so I guess Manuel Bastioni models are an obvious shortcut. While I can imagine circumstances where ‘pure’ entries are using these models (e.g. small, secondary, blurred,… elements of the entry), most of them should be ‘open’. (And in many of the legitimate ‘pure’ entries, the models could just as well have been done with a few verts and a skin modifier. :-))
Indeed, that can lead to interesting discussions. And most of the time it presents great opportunities to learn a few new things. To start discussions like that, it is a good idea to ask for some feedback in the voting or entry threads. This way, everyone knows if feedback on the entry is welcome/appreciated.
I’ve been rambling a little more on this matter a few years back:
I once found the secret formula for attracting votes. I don’t remember the details but it definitely included birds. Unfortunately, I (and google) can’t find that post anymore. However, a few general things seem to help getting votes:
Putting some effort into the central/key element of the entry can be worth more than 100 random objects. (this also helps to finish in time and keep things focused)
Visually focusing on the most important aspect of the image. This can also be emphasized by composition. Most voters will not spend much time analyzing (or even zooming) every entry. Both, the thumbnail and the full res version of the image should get your point across in the blink of an eye.
If you have the time, add a character (with eyes!). If you don’t have time - strip the character, just add the eyes.
If you have a character, keep it close to the camera. It can’t help you if it isn’t visible right away.
Spend some extra time on composition and lighting. If you get that part right, the modelling and materials may not even matter all that much.
That being said: winning is relative. It is always nice to learn new stuff, make ideas come alive, spend some time with the hobby, … there is a lot to win by just doing that. And no votes are needed for it.
And if you’re not into that kind of communist utopian unctuousness, here is the one unsurpassable secret secret: Penguins always win!