<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 5/7/2004 11:28:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buchty@cs.tum.edu writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Ah, but there's a difference. 3D image synthesis does not focus on<BR>
recreating digital artwork of existing pictures, sceneries, landscapes<BR>
etc.<BR>
<BR>
Photo realism here means that you can't tell that this actually was no<BR>
photo but a completely artificial rendering.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
True. When someone makes a 'photo'realistic patch on a synth (ie, one that sounds like a real instrument without sounding like any given real instrument) I"m quite impressed. I'm not sure how to describe quite what I mean.... sounds that have all the characteristics that they COULD be made by real-life materials, but not by any given set of real-life materials. Like a filterbank set up to model the resonant cavity of, say, a cello body - but then transposed up to the range and waveform of a trumpet. Basically, like physical modelling of a physically impossible system.</FONT></HTML>