Logo by Pauldelbrot - Contribute your own Logo!

END OF AN ERA, FRACTALFORUMS.COM IS CONTINUED ON FRACTALFORUMS.ORG

it was a great time but no longer maintainable by c.Kleinhuis contact him for any data retrieval,
thanks and see you perhaps in 10 years again

this forum will stay online for reference
News: Check out the originating "3d Mandelbulb" thread here
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. March 29, 2024, 12:10:33 AM


Login with username, password and session length


The All New FractalForums is now in Public Beta Testing! Visit FractalForums.org and check it out!


Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Share this topic on DiggShare this topic on FacebookShare this topic on GoogleShare this topic on RedditShare this topic on StumbleUponShare this topic on Twitter
Author Topic: The cover image from "The Science of Fractal images"  (Read 3817 times)
Description: My attempt to duplicate the cover image from "The Science of Fractal images"
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Duncan C
Fractal Fanatic
****
Posts: 348



WWW
« on: August 29, 2008, 02:54:44 AM »

The creator of the cover image for the book "The Science of Fractal Images," Hartmut Jürgens, is apparently a Macintosh user, and has started using my application, FractalWorks. He tells me he found my app when searching the internet for images related to the book "The Beauty of Fractals."

We've been corrisponding, and he challenged me to try to duplicate the cover image from "The Science of Fractal Images." I took a stab at it, and think I got reasonably close. Here is my image:


And here is a link to an image of the cover of the book:


That image is quite small. The one on the cover of the book is much clearer.

I suspect I'm using a different algorithm to calculate my height values (I'm using distance estimates, and I think Herr Jürgens is using continuous potential values) so the landscape has a somewhat different topology, but this seems fairly close.

What does everybody think?

Logged

Regards,

Duncan C
Duncan C
Fractal Fanatic
****
Posts: 348



WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2008, 03:39:26 PM »

Potential values give a different shape to the 3D image than distance estimates. I really need to add continuous potential values as an option. Then I could probably recreate the look of this cover image much more accurately.

However, the data structures start to get quite large. I already offer distance estimates and fractional iteration values for every pixel. Both are arrays of floats, at 32 bits/pixel. Adding continuous potential would increase my memory use by another 32 bits/pixel. (16 bits/pixel for iteration value, 32 bits for DE values, 32 bits for fractional iteration value, plus 32 bits/pixel for potential value, not to mention display color values, 3D vertex and normal data, etc, etc.

I might fudge my fractional iteration values to be only the fractional part, since I store the integer iteration value separately. I could probably get away with a single byte, since fractional iteration values are really only used for smooth color transitions. I suspect 256 shades of color between iteration values would be plenty for smooth shading.


Duncan C
Logged

Regards,

Duncan C
HPDZ
Iterator
*
Posts: 157


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2009, 07:20:26 PM »

Any progress on this endeavor?

It looks to me like perhaps the fractal values were clipped to a ceiling value. Near the set, everything gets flat. In other words, something like this:
Code:
if (count>limit) count=limit
I've tried to recreate it with smoothed count values usnig Mathematica for the 3-D rendering and got reasonably close but not exactly the same.

Regarding the details of memory usage and representing the image: You could decrease your memory usage by not saving all the different calculation results, but only the ones you are actually using in a particular image (i.e. if an image isn't using distance estimator data, don't save the DE values). I use a 32-bit number to hold counts + fractional value; I multiply the count by a factor F and add the fractional count value, which is scaled to range from 0 to F-1. Usually I use F=1000, but when I start to get squeezed by needing higher counts (in some unusual deep zooms) I have found that as few as F=10 will work pretty well. An 8-bit value should be fine, and 16 bits would be way more than enough.
Logged

Zoom deeply.
www.hpdz.net
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
"fractal science kit" fractal. Images Showcase (Rate My Fractal) domidup 0 1387 Last post March 02, 2012, 12:47:21 AM
by domidup
I had a vague idea that "fractal" was related to "pretty pictures" Meet & Greet Repomancer 5 7672 Last post October 10, 2012, 02:04:23 AM
by David Makin
Fractal article "pour la science" Art Discussions arias 1 2797 Last post March 24, 2015, 04:40:39 PM
by bib

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM
Page created in 0.159 seconds with 27 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.004s, 2q)