May Challenge Voting

[ravells]

An amazing number of entries! Well done all!

[Midgardsormr]

Indeed. Since this challenge had a very specific technical aspect to it, I decided to vote based on compression ratio. So I voted for myself. (-;

Seriously, though, I calculated the compression ratios of every entry and here are the top five, in descending order:

Midgardsormr: 63.815 pixels / byte
Valarian: 47.523 px / byte
RobA: 26.697 px / byte
rlucci: 25.062 px / byte
matthuwm: 23.056 px / byte

These numbers are based on the "properties" window in Internet Explorer, in which the file size is slightly larger than that reported by the forum software.

I freely admit that I designed "to the judge" in this case. I knew from the outset how I would choose my vote, and I built my map to compress as small as possible and still be larger than most other offerings. All other offerings, as it turned out, although Valarian could easily have exceeded my resolution; he had more than enough file size left.

Had I judged on visual appeal and useability instead, I'd still be trying to figure out where to put my vote. Rlucci, Torq, Cisticola, Meleeguy, Torstan, and dorpond all turned in stellar entries.

Good job, everyone! And good luck in the polls!

[Redrobes]

C'mon thats crazy. Everyone was trying very hard to hit the 74.999Kb image size which would maximize the quality per pixel whilst still being under the limits. We could have all gone lower at the expense of quality. Apart from Valarian who used the PNG format everyone else (I believe) used JPG and had a variable compression ratio to adjust. A much better objective test would be to see how much difference the compressed maps were compared to uncompressed (or lossless) versions so as to determine how much compromise had to be introduced to make the byte ceiling. In which case only Valarian would get a 100% score anyway.

Valarian is in my vote running but if I ask which piece id hang on the wall I get a different answer. Also if I ask which one is most suitable for a VTT I get another and I am inspired by yet another and in terms of which map is farthest out of my ability to repro then I get another. I haven't made up my mind yet. Theres so many good ones and who ever wins surely deserves it this month.

Well done everyone. Drill down from the thumbs and don't just look at the small image. Some of the entries look better full size.

[Midgardsormr]

Well, I've never claimed I wasn't crazy...

No sane person would have calculated the compression ratio for every single entry! Yours is 17.759 pixels / byte, by the way.

[Robbie]

I think the beauty of this challenge is the open-endedness of the requirements. Keep in mind that as long as you keep the given requirements in mind when casting your vote...your method of vote choice is specifically a matter of opinion. I REALLY appreciate the different views on criteria. And we had a minor debate in the CL forum about voting criteria...in the end it came down to leaving it up to you the voting public to decide your vote criteria beyond the given guidelines.

My personal take is of course getting the best looking map out of the 75k ceiling...but I am 100% on board with other takes on the 75k requirement.

[alucard339]

That is one really though decision to take for a so small thing as a vote.

I was as most of U torn by the criteria to choose the vote. Mine fall down to playability (usable more than once), beauty and no vote for myself : so MY run down were: RobA, the new kid (Vry), Cisticola, GP, Dorpond and my friend Torq.


My finalist became Torq and Cisticola. My vote finally got lost in a fly of bats ().

I'm only happy that the final vote for the price is not my sole responsibility

Nice work to U all,

Alu.

[Valarian]

Althought the temptation is there ... I too have ruled out the "vote for myself" as an option.
On the criteria, I've cast my vote. I'd get something completey different if I was voting for the artistic merit rather than suitability for a VTT battlemap. Cisticola, Gamerprinter and Torstan all did beautiful pieces of work, but I felt there was a little too much cover for a battlemap. They'd still be useful in a VTT as atmospheric images, but (I feel) not as battlemaps.