Welcome to Fractal Forums

I am new to your forum.  I am not new to the exploration and creation of fractals.  I got started back in 1994 after securing my own top of the line 486 DX4/100.  well, it was tops at that time.  With that machine I spent from 1994 - 2000 making 13,000 fractals.  After that I made a couple more PC (P200 & AMD K6-2/500) purchases making some ten thousand fractals per year.  For 2006 I borrowed an AMD Duron 1.2 GHz PC which allowed me to churn out 25,000-30,000 fractals in one year!  With my newest animation machines I was able to meet a HD animation deadline in two months...resulting in about 20 minutes of fractals.  To date I now have 90,104 different fractals.  This does not include the 100,000+ frames of HD fractal animation.  I actively use 3 out of 4 functioning machines to work at my fractal art (AMD K6-2/500 MHz, AMD 3.4 GHz 64-bit, P4M 2.2 GHz).

Most of my fractals can be seen on my website at www.allfractup.com

Also on my site are numerous try before you buy samples on the downloads page at:

www.allfractup.com/Downloads.html

I have three main galleries for General Use, Cross Stitch Patterns, and Posters.  (update: I also have started exploring 3D Mandelbulb type fractals.  Many of my fractals can be enhanced with ChromaDepth 3D glasses).

Who else here has created a bunch of fractals?  Do you have a web site that chronicles or features your creations?  If so, what is the URL?


Thanks,


Bruce Berryhill
Fractal Artist and Fractal Animator
Creator of nearly 100,000 fractals www.allfractup.com

Hi Bruce,

Welcome to the forums.

I have no idea how many fractals I have made in total - most I either created as temporary tests that didn't even get saved as parameter files or are parameter files for fractals that I didn't consider good enough to be called fractal art or are WIP that I've never finished.
The rest of my work - what I consider to be fractal art and what I've released publicly simply to demonstrate the possibilities from my formulas for Ultra Fractal and my old MMFrac software - is on the following sites (the deviantart gallery is the most up to date):
 
http://www.fractalgallery.co.uk/
http://website.lineone.net/~dave_makin/
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?username=MakinMagic
http://djm.digitalart.org/
http://makinmagic.deviantart.com/

With some YouTube videos here:

http://www.youtube.com/makinmagicfractals

I should add I started in 1999 with Fractint on a P75 laptop.

bye
Dave

Hi Bruce,

I'm on Windows XP.
I use the animation edition of Ultra Fractal - to save either as individual frame pngs or directly as an uncompressed AVI. Ultra Fractal's animation facility is quite sophistacated.
I then have various pieces of (free) video software including VirtuaDub and something called "StreamClip" that gives access to all the encodings from Quicktime for encoding stuff rather than just playback - obviously you need Quicktime installed for that (just the free version).

bye
Dave

I found out quite early, when I was a very young child, that quality was better than quantity.  This pertained to whatever I used, bought, or made.  I would much rather spend hours on a single item to make sure it was exactly what I wanted, than to have several of less quality.

As to others which have created many fractals, there are quite a few people, and those sites are easily found around the Internet.  I personally never bothered to count the thousands I have rendered over the years.

And your site states:  "For years I was the first to make unique fractal T-shirts...".   I do not believe that is a true statement.  You should word it that you "thought you were the first".  Because fractal T-shirts (and other items) were being made before you even started making fractals.

BTW, do any of these names mean anything to you:
  Bob S. Laquer, Purplegoo2, psikill4, whiteboy1, mraging, bagemage

Making thousands of fractals a year cannot be an artistic activity, too industrial :D


Aren't Fractal_Artist and Purplegoo2 the same person ?

Absolutely.  Those are all aliases I have used over the years.  What of it?  In fact I see one, two, three, five that I still use. 


It sure has been swell catching up like this.  We should do it more often.


Bruce Berryhill
aka  Bob S. Laquer, Purplegoo2, psikill4, whiteboy1, mraging, bagemage, (and a slew you failed to mention)

I've used loads of aliases over the years.  Lots of people have.  What is your point?

OK I did not understand these were all your aliases. So I would better ask : what did Nahee_Enterprise ask you this question ?  :angel1:

Don't be upset. You are your own and first fan and that what's count. Doing fractals is very personal. If you do 100 similar images in 10 minutes by sliding a few parameters and these 100 images are pleasant to you, where is the problem ?

You obvisously enjoy endlessly doing thousands of fractals, but please allow me to "apo"logize : I don't think these images are really art :

http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume021/Gen0002.html

I picked up this page randomly in your site. Why don't you settle on one interseting picture or shape and try to find the best coloring formula, the best gradient, the best effects, etc...instead of doing over and over again the same image with some slightly different parametrers ? :'(

Maybe you could pick the best image from each page instead of publishing what seems to be tons of drafts.

In fact, there are probably hundreds of fantastic pictures on your site, but these are hidden in the mass... :-\

At the end of the day, if you are satisfied with your work and moreover, if you made some (big?) money out of it, it's perfect ;)

This is just my opinion.  O0

Kind Regards

bib said it perfectly :)

I don't think we ever met before.

In general I understand your point, and I really chose the page randomly ;)

BTW, welcome to the forum ! :)

Hi Bruce,

I read this thread here now ...

That´s a never ending story , trying to make it short :

I agree here with lyciums comment > bib said it perfectly
 :-)))
***
To say it with own words: Not Quantity is really important - Quality should have always priority.

Margit

GF,

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.  But each person has their own opinion on this matter.  Part of the reason I kept track of my renders is ya never know what someone else will like.  And since I was gearing up to make one-of-a-kind fractal shirts I figured I'd save everything. 

thanks for adding your thoughts...

Bruce

A bit of objective analysis might be appropriate at this juncture... that is, to say things less perfectly and more precisely.



Surely you might consider yourself biased, and can see that the weight of others' opinions should be greater than your own (at least in matters of aesthetic judgement regarding your own work)?

Beauty is, allegedly, in the eye of the beholder.



Simply counting hands (and this thread has garnered considerably above-average activity) shows that there are really only two, very skewed, camps. Look at it objectively!



With ninety-thousand of them to sift through, one will indeed probably never know!

As an artist you should try to develop a particular style that is your own, and follow that vision until your creation is exactly what you wanted. Only in this way are you intentionally creating something. If I take a photo of every apple, orange and tomato at my local supermarket, what have I created and achieved? What is the true value of a particular piece among these unseen thousands? How about some originality and variety?



You shouldn't save images which are not worth saving (obviously), and if you don't produce these in at least 10:1 ratio compared to ones worth saving, you're doing something fundamentally wrong because you're not measuring relative value (compared to what's possible / "out there"). That much should be logically obvious.

How can you not feel that this practice vastly reduces the overall quality of your work? It really is about quality vs quantity, and here quantity is hurting quality (this is pretty much a fact, which you must convince yourself of if you can't immediately see it because everyone else can!). The mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss was fond of saying about his reluctance to publish, "Pauca sed matura" (few, but ripe). This notion of quality vs quantity being a spectrum of compromise is truly ancient.

---

Even if all these aesthetic and logical arguments are ignored, there are technical issues such as low resolution and lack of anti aliasing that fundamentally limit the potential of all these renders.

Even if these technical issues are ignored, there is the hard reality of fractal art to contend with: it does not get a lot of attention as a whole; there are wise masters of fractal art with tremendous skill, and even their great works will meet few eyes. What chance then does an image in your labyrinthine gallery stand?

Coming full circle, bib definitely said it perfectly, and since the friendly hinting of others has fallen on deaf ears I thought I'd say it frankly with justification: you should consider changing your MO to producing fewer, better fractals. Alternatively, you could join the Orbit Trap trolls posters in producing endless waves of charitably-mediocre and scarcely-fractal images, all the while cursing the world around them for conspiring to not recognise their brilliant art, razor sharp wit and penetrating insight...

i just noticed this on your site:

(http://www.allfractup.com/images/s_rated_01.gif)

sorry, but with so (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume018/Frq024419.html) many (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume012/FRQ17959.html) images (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume002/FRAC6651.html) to (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume025/FRQ35581.html) be (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume016/Frq022559.html) modest (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume014/Frq021308.html) about (http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/General_Use/Volume014/Frq021325.html) you could afford a little more modesty  :-\


those images i linked are from unique and randomly selected image galleries; the last one is basically entirely black! are you just having a laugh?  ???

That is not my opinion, as you have phrased it above.  All I said was what "I found out" concerning quantity versus quality.  And since I believe anything is possible, Yes it is possible to have both (I just have not seen it anywhere yet myself).


I too have a very fast and powerful machine, in fact it rates top of the list in many benchmark tests, including one which a fractal email list recently had.  But what does size in pixels have anything to do with quality ??


I never said anything you stated as being "bad".  Most people that do fractals for a long period of time do so because they do find delight in such things.


I mostly was talking about me and my own thoughts concerning fractal creations.  Why do you feel that I was talking about you ??  Are you asking because you feel paranoid about my statements ??

The only thing I said about you was your incorrect statement concerning T-shirts, and that you should correct the wording so it was more truthful.


I am not like those in most fractal groups, lists, and forums, like those who prefer to alter data based upon the way they want it to be.  I list anybody and anything, no matter how my feelings are, which is why you are there.

As to your thinking I have "disdain", you are mistaken.


Though I know how to use most any fractal image generating application available (and that would be hundreds of them), I definitely am not in the crowd you are trying to put me in.  In fact, they do not want me in their group.     :evil1:

If you care to know, the programs I have used the most are as follows:
  FractInt (http://www.fractint.org/)
  QuaSZ (http://www.mysticfractal.com/)
  XenoDream (http://www.xenodream.com/)
  KPT's FraxPlorer (http://www.corel.com/)


One thing I do know, if you want to advertise your site, which is mainly about sales of your fractals, then you should post such things in the "Commercial Corner" where it belongs.

Surely you might consider yourself biased, and can see that the weight of others' opinions should be greater than your own (at least in matters of aesthetic judgement regarding your own work)?


Bias is not a bad thing.  I do not allow others to dictate what I think of my own work.  Ah yes.  The weight of four people's opinion out of how many users of this forum?  But even if the entire forum were to express similar sentiments it would not change my opinion.  Because as you said, fractals don't get much attention by the mainstream.  So to those relatively few that make and enjoy it, there is a larger number of voices not being heard.  Logically, until all of the voices can be heard (or read) then the opinions of four nay-sayers really doesn't count for much.  Right?

Beauty is, allegedly, in the eye of the beholder.



Simply counting hands (and this thread has garnered considerably above-average activity) shows that there are really only two, very skewed, camps. Look at it objectively!

I have looked at things objectively.  Four people have backed each other up by stating their opinion over a few fractals I have made.  Maybe your opinion will change if you had or took the time to look at all of the ones on my web site?  It might not change your opinion.  Either way you are entitled to express your views.  Simply not allowing your views to become my views does not mean I am ignoring anything.



With ninety-thousand of them to sift through, one will indeed probably never know!

Not true.  While I was at a sci-fi con last year I took some time to see what broadband users can get out of my site.  I was amazed at how quickly the pages loaded.  It was like being on my own PC offline.  Just by running through the thumb nailed pages my visitors are able to see the entire collection within a reasonable period of time.  I will say that some people have more time on their hands than others.  Obviously that could be said (and has been said) of myself.

As an artist you should try to develop a particular style that is your own, and follow that vision until your creation is exactly what you wanted. Only in this way are you intentionally creating something. If I take a photo of every apple, orange and tomato at my local supermarket, what have I created and achieved? What is the true value of a particular piece among these unseen thousands? How about some originality and variety?

I am doing exactly what I want.  It just isn't inline with what you four people think I ought to be doing with my time.  Okay...I'm not intentionally creating fractals?  They're popping out of my computer through what other means?  Even if I were to use a batch processor that initial step still has to be made.  However the method that is being used I am intentionally creating something.  I have been to your Deviant Art page.  There are some okay fractal examples there.  Not much in the way of variety.  You got a mandlebrot, something that looks like an Apo puff/flame, some typical 3D looking fractals.  No offense, but the stuff in your "faves" folder is prettier than your own stuff.  Maybe you should make fractals that look like someone else's idea of what fractals look like.


You shouldn't save images which are not worth saving (obviously),

I haven't saved any that I feel are not worth saving.

and if you don't produce these in at least 10:1 ratio compared to ones worth saving, you're doing something fundamentally wrong because you're not measuring relative value (compared to what's possible / "out there"). That much should be logically obvious.

What is logically obvious is this:  If there is an infinite range of fractal creations then where is the true relative value?  One out of infinity wouldn't have much value now would it?  Neither would 90,000 out of unlimited possibilities.  Neither would the ones that some people toil over, tweaking it for "all its worth".  Relative to that sort of thinking how special is anything we do?  What is perceived as special or bearing "worthiness" or "value" is something that is artificially assigned by the person(s) viewing or possessing said object.  Compared to the limitless possibilities of fractals your arguments are illogical.

How can you not feel that this practice vastly reduces the overall quality of your work? It really is about quality vs quantity,

I do not feel that I have chosen one over the other. 

and here quantity is hurting quality (this is pretty much a fact, which you must convince yourself of if you can't immediately see it because everyone else can!).

The opinions of four people out of billions of others isn't the summation of the those yet to be expressed.  Surely you can see this?

---

Even if all these aesthetic and logical arguments are ignored, there are technical issues such as low resolution

To upload a fractal at 20,480 x 15,360 would be pointless.  To do that 90,000 times over would be equally pointless.  To make average screen filling sizes that everyone online can look at makes perfect sense to me.  So I chose to upload at smaller resolutions as preview sizes only. 

and lack of anti aliasing that fundamentally limit the potential of all these renders.

I like the lack of anti-aliasing of my fractals.  Why should everything be alike?  Where is the originality or variety in that?  Fact of the matter is my fractals really look snazzy at larger resolutions.    

Even if these technical issues are ignored, there is the hard reality of fractal art to contend with: it does not get a lot of attention as a whole; there are wise masters of fractal art with tremendous skill, and even their great works will meet few eyes. What chance then does an image in your labyrinthine gallery stand?

Well...I offer greater variety, I offer them all at once, I offer them to the entire InterNet, and I've been seen by nearly a thousand elementary, middle, and high school students.  I've also been hosted at Georgia Tech two months consecutive where I had full exposure to all the thousands of new students pouring in to the campus.  My fractals havve helped raise charity funds at Dragon Con two years running, as well as numerous other successes.  I've had hits from a many countries all over the globe.  There is some truth to what you have said.  There is relatively little exposure to fractals as a whole.  That does not prevent me from displaying my art, it does not sour my attitude, nor does it impart a sense of futility just because these so-called "wise and masterful" fractal artisans have failed to garner more attention for themselves or the genre in particular.  Where is the logic in limiting my actions based on the accomplishments and failures of others?  If you want to learn more about what I have done with my fractals please consult the Announcement page at www.allfractup.com.

Coming full circle, bib definitely said it perfectly, and since the friendly

I would hardly call any of it friendly.  Not exactly hostile either.  Merely opinions that I should do things the way others do things.  And if I do not fall in line with the others then I am ignoring all the facts presented to me.  Excuse me for not being a Lemming.  A fun game, but I wouldn't want to be one.  That seems to be the gist of things.

 hinting of others has fallen on deaf ears I thought I'd say it frankly with justification: you should consider changing your MO to producing fewer, better fractals. Alternatively, you could join the Orbit Trap trolls posters in producing endless waves of charitably-mediocre and scarcely-fractal images, all the while cursing the world around them for conspiring to not recognise their brilliant art, razor sharp wit and penetrating insight...
[/quote]

I have not cursed anyone for anything.  There is no conspiracy against me.  I am not paranoid about what any one has said on this or any other forum.  There are lots of ways to make fractals.  You have opted to use Irfanview to layer the outputs of teeny programs that mimic the output of more established titles (like apophysis, ultra fractal, etc).  You might have other ways of rendering your fractals.  I can only judge based on what I have seen from your DA page.

Paul,

I will submit an apology to you. 


Bruce

When I registered to this forum a month ago, I did not imagine there could be such interesting and fun threads.

Fractal_Artist, I think I have undertsood your point, and I really appreciate exchanging ideas with you and other people on this thread.

But you have to admit, even if the few people that have expressed here their opinion about your work were quite critical, that you came as a conqueror with this provocative question : how many fractals have you made ?

Introducing yourself in this way is like coming in front of people you don't necessarily know (mostly specialists, but not me) and say : look, I am your master, I hold the world record, who wants to compete ?

This is also probably why the responses have been a bit critical, maybe they would have been different if you were more humble. On the other hand, you seem to have a lot of activities around fractals, and I thank you for that, because I think fractals ought to be better known by a wider audience.

Could you please post your own latest favourite fractals on the forum, to give us a chance to express new opinions ?

Thanks  :)

hello all,

me as site administrator welcomes living threads and discussion, and i do not see any offense here, just public discussion,
and i do hope it stays so, and no one feels offended by statements other make to theirs ....


@Fractal_Artist please submit images to the fractal art contest here on this forum :D

@fractal artis perhaps your question should write : "How Many Fractals have you made with different color palettes ? " :D :D :D
 O0 O0 O0

in my case, you are correct: at first i quietly observed the thread, everyone suggested the quantity/quality problem so i had no reason to chime in. but when FA persisted in brushing off such amazingly diplomatic (and obvious/unanimous) posts as you and GF put forth, he was basically begging for it. frankly i'd say he's been nothing but rude and challenging from the start, to everyone (which is just a few posts ago, easily confirmed).

edit: as you observed, it just isn't art on display (and for sale) here. where's the composition, colouring, clarity, cropping, ... ?

Do you have a problem with rainbows ? :D ;)

It is if you want the truth.


Just how many terrible images do I have to look at before I can safely rule out a massive population of 90,000? It would help if there were a faint glimmer of hope in any of the 6 or 7 galleries in your "general use" (whatever that means) gallery; if you had a single gallery, or one labelled "These are the images I will stand by and not refer you a thousand others if you feel they are lacking in quality", I would have gone there first.


True, you aren't ignoring anyone so much as plugging your ears and saying "La la la la I can't hear you my opinion matters more anyway."


No offense, but I wasn't asking your opinion of my work, and if I wanted one I'd ask a fractal artist. In any case, your judgement proves your (admittedly) biased perception.

Not at all.  What's not to like about rainbows?  :D

Lyceum,

If you are accusing me of trying to sell in the wrong part of the forum then you would be guilty of the same thing.  So would anyone else who links out to their Deviant Art page that also has a market section with fractals or other images for sale.  Now, why would I want to crop my fractals?  The coloring is readily observable unless the observer is entirely color blind.  In which case my greyscale, pseudo-greyscale, and black & white fractals might be more pleasing.  Define composition please.  I am trying to be objective. 

@fractalartist, i really forgot, this was a welcome thread, ( a rather huge one ) , so welcome to the forums O0

Greetings to you too.  Thank you, Trifox.  What happened to Monofox and Bifox? :P

Perhaps you could give examples of these things in your own or someone else's fractals?

When I got started exploring fractals a lot of 'em were saved with the default color scheme.  So what you're gonna see is a bunch of rainbows.  As I got accustomed to the software I started to make my own color themes.  If you dig around a little more, like on the color themes page, you will see more variety.  I must admit I am fond of the Trippy color themes.  If you are looking for great colors that might be the place for you to start.  If you want spindly looking fractals, or fractals that look like pin stripe art, then go huntin' through the Posters gallery.

You can access all three galleries from the General Use page.  My Limited Editions and The Name Game sections are not unique galleries unto themselves.  These are sub-categories within one or more of the three main galleries. 

So anyone who disagrees with your idea of fractal art is not an artist?  Logically that would mean that you are not a fractal artist because you disagree with my fractal art. :)  True enough, you did not ask me to do anything but be more like you.  Or to make the same types of fractals that you do.  Or to waste my time on one style of fractal making in the hopes that someone, somewhere, will cherish it and give me much props.  Excuse me, but the sun will become a habitable space resort before I suck up to anyone.  You demand that I look at things objectively, yet yourself cannot or will not do the same with your own (few) creations.  The ones you like on your DA page that belong to other people are way cooler than what you have done.  I was pointing out the illogical comments you have made about me.  Perhaps if you adhered to your own preachings you would be a more approachable person.

I am curious about the above statements.  Would you mind stating what DPI you print your images at ??

Also, would you tell me what size fractal graphic (in pixel dimensions) you would need to render to print an image at 40-inches by 30-inches at 300 DPI ??

Should I just post links here or somewhere like the gallery?  I'm leery about uploading my fractals here after what facebook pulled.  I'd rather link to the pages or images themselves.

Starting with:

http://www.allfractup.com/Fractal_Catalog/Prints/0001.html  I like the fractal shapes found on the Limited Edition Prints pages.

http://www.allfractup.com/My_Reviews.html  I used to post my fractals on Renderosity.  The reviews you see are copy n' pasted without editing.  These thumbnails can be found as larger versions on my web site.  You should cross reference the color fractals on The Name Game page. 

http://www.allfractup.com/Color_Themes.html  My intentions were good.  What it turned into...well that is another matter.  I began looking for specific color themes.  This would have allowed people to get beyond all those darned rainbows, to choose something that better matched their decor, to search for gifts, etc.  What happened is I lost track of my initial search criteria as I scoured through a butt load of fractals.  So what I have is a mish-mash of accurate and sort-of accurate color themes. 

If you like I can post more links later.  Let me know what you think.  That request seems to garner a lot of replies on this thread :)

I don't mind at all.  I use 100 dpi when I send it to the printers.  I know it is popular to have triple that.  I have sent my fractals at 4096 x 3072 to all sorts of places and the prints came back fine without jaggies.  And before anyone here crabs at me for saying these things I was trained as a pressman.  I do know what I am talking about.  My opinion of the matter is print houses were getting deluged by average people with low quality .JPGs expecting the pictures to look the same way they looked on their computers.  As I recall, several press operators told me they requireed customers to pack in 300 DPI to give them some wiggle room when the picture was (over) enlarged.  At least then the customer wouldn't be too shocked when they saw some jaggies instead of an unusable picture full of jaggies.  My calculator shows it to be 12288 x 9216.  What dimensions do you use to run the same size prints?

Today's inkjet printers usually have three standard DPI output settings:
          normal:   300x300,  or 320x320
   high quality:   600x600,  or 720x720,  or 1440x720
 photo quality: 1200x1200,  or 1440x1440,  or 2880x1440 and up

They also have a draft or economy setting, which is usually at around 90 to 100 DPI, but it is suggested that one never use this setting for printing images.  It's primarily used for printing text and rough drafts.


It has been many years since I worked with offset and 4-color processing, and I do not have much of my handiwork left from those years, but I too have some history with such equipment.


Your calculations above will work for a 40-inch by 30-inch print at 300 DPI.    :)

There are times I will print as low as 150 DPI, but this is usually for large banners which will be seen from more of a distance.  Anytime a client will be framing something for their own wall, then I usually try to print at 300 DPI.

I too was once a user of A. B. Dick machines, but that was before General Electric Company purchased the A.B.Dick Company (which will give you some idea as to how old I and those machines are).    ;)    No particular favorites or least favorite.

I was mainly involved in the technical illustration and graphic arts area, but would sometimes shoot my own PMT's, setup the plates, and do small runs.

This model of fractal production does not work. It just isn't sustainable: after just 10 years you will have produced 390000 fractals if you stick with your "powerful" Duron 1.2 GHz (so no accounting for Moore's law). At this stage a reluctant user forced to view the whole gallery in "just" one day (4 sittings of 2 hours) would have to watch a 10x10 grid of frame-animations at 20 FPS, almost certainly causing permanent brain damage :P


Logically we can conclude that you cannot feasibly at the same time:

1. insist that viewers see the whole gallery instead of judging any particular subset

2. keep "making fractals" at your current prodigious rate...

3. ... for more than 10 years.

Why not... ??

The human race has continued polluting the world, cutting down rain-forests, making biological toxins, increasing the global temperature, and many other things for decades/centuries/millennia...   Why not make hundreds of thousands (or millions) of fractal images which will never totally be viewed by any one individual??

If he has the time, space, and patience to create that many, then that is his problem.     :evil1: