=====
From sonya_roberts@geocities.com:
Hmmm....nasty jpghing artifacts as a feature of an image...cool concept.  I
think overall I'd have rather seen a less pixellated-looking scene though.
=====
From agage@mines.edu:
Using quality reduction to give a 'cartoonish' appearance is interesting, but
the colors wouldn't bleed that badly unless you fed your VCR a grilled-cheese
sandwich or two.  Overall, I think you achieved what you were going for, which
I'll give you credit for, but having flatter colors might have helped.

=====
From ddonegan@fix.net:
I really like this picture.  I think you really captured the mood you were trying for.  :-)
=====
From kazemir@pde.com:
I must admit, when I first saw the image, I thought "Who's the guy
who stole a frame from a bad MPEG".  But after reading your text file
I understand your intention.  I will give you points for the idea, and the fact
that you did a good job, but the job was done without ray-tracing.
it doesn't attract

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nasty artifacts, too much compression?

=====
From jgoeson@msn.com:
Great concept!  I disagree with you a little about the low quality JPEG translation not being post-processing, but I agree that it is a large part of the concept, so I'm considering it to be a good thing.  Great job!


=====
From jaime@ctav.es:
Well, I admit : no postprocesing here. But it's too pixelated, and bad videos
look more like grainy-diffused, IMHO. Otherwise, liked the "road runner" idea.

=====
From gmccarter@hotmail.com:
Fascinating technical effect with jpg compression to simulate videotape dropouts.
Yes, I read the text file!  Perfect colors.  Nice use of Julia fractal.



=====
From wozzeck@club-internet.fr:
Interesting idea (I ALWAYS read explainations ;-) and errr... the result is as you wanted it to be (I think). Another common problem with VCRs is the "flag" effect: the top of the image is twisted, reaching 45° with the remainder of the screen. I think this could have been done placing a glass cylinder at the top of the screen (not tested: no warranty!)
BTW this picture is VERY hard to rate !

=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
Oh how i wish you had rendered this at the standard size. I would have given it a higher score. I love the road runner! You did a nice job.





=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great concept.  Including this image in your other, and the way you've
used jpeg conversion as an "enhancement".  I'm very impressed.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I don't like the idea of misusing JPEG artifacts as parts of the image. Using
this deliberately to me is post-processing.
Apart from that, Video-drop outs look totally different than the
8x8-JPEG-blocks.

=====
From pgrooby@trimble.co.nz:
Although according to the letter of the law the low quality j-peg thing is OK. 
I think it goes against the spirit of producing you effets in a ray-tracer.

=====
From Martin.Magnusson.7121@student.uu.se:
Very interesting technique! It works very good. At
first I actually thought that it was a screen dump from a TV. The only thing
I can think of that could be better is the ywlloe ground.

=====
From arcana@sinbad.net:
Cute image. <grin> You're right about the jpeg compression, although I would 
have given you higher technical points if you'd achieved the effect purely 
through povray. <grin>

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
This time, when I will read the comments about my image, I will know who has read the text file, and who has not ! ........ I'm convinced.

=====
From msfl.bf@fasonet.bf:
Good colors, just like the originals. 
The high JPeg compression doesn't really make it look like an old video, as 
far as I've seen old videos. Maybe a very high antialiasing could have 
worked better. 
See, I read the text-file ;)

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Postprocessing is illegal! ;-)
Just kidding, I *read* the text file! Excellent idea!

=====
From bobfranke@halcyon.com:
I can't agree.  You used jpeg compression to achieve a special effect.  Therefore,
this image was post processed and should lose some technical points. Because most
of the images also loose quality with the jpeg compressing I guess the point can
be argued. So I guess the image still qualifies for the competition.

=====
From peter@table76.demon.co.uk:
I don't know; if the JPEG conversion is used as part of the image's effect,
you could argue that it _is_ post processing; but the rules say conversion's
allowed, so never mind :-) .


=====
From web_user@128.194.74.70:
Notable for originality


=====
From web_user@eglab11.mines.edu:
Good idea
Notable for originality