Title: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: David Makin on January 17, 2010, 02:46:00 PM Hi all, using different angles to those normally used:
"On the Reef" (http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/017/b/3/On_the_Reef_by_MakinMagic.jpg) If no picture above then look here: http://makinmagic.deviantart.com/art/On-the-Reef-150724624 (http://makinmagic.deviantart.com/art/On-the-Reef-150724624) Title: Re: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: twinbee on January 17, 2010, 07:11:17 PM Nice pic! - good colouring again. Do you know how similar this is to Rudy Rucker's formula? Here's an example pic I made a while back - some features seem similar:
http://www.skytopia.com/project/fractal/new/full/q30/RudyVines.jpg Title: Re: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: Buddhi on January 17, 2010, 07:22:25 PM This fog effect looks very good. What formula did you used? This is not standard Mandelbulb - shapes are very interesting ???
P.S. David, you should update sign on your images. Now is year 2010 :D Title: Re: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: David Makin on January 17, 2010, 08:51:00 PM This fog effect looks very good. What formula did you used? This is not standard Mandelbulb - shapes are very interesting ??? P.S. David, you should update sign on your images. Now is year 2010 :D I used the latest incarnation of my wip 3D formula for UF which I'm hoping to make available later this evening. bib has been using a slightly earlier version since which I've further optimised and added some extra features. Tonight I'll be adding the ability to colour using *any* UF outside colouring in UF5 - by simply performing the iteration for the surface pixels one extra time through UF's normal loop process - of course I'll have to add options as to how your 3D or 4D value is converted to a complex #z value to be passed to the colouring. Oooops - I forgot to change the signature text in the PSP text tool ;) Title: Re: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: David Makin on January 17, 2010, 08:53:09 PM Nice pic! - good colouring again. Do you know how similar this is to Rudy Rucker's formula? Here's an example pic I made a while back - some features seem similar: http://www.skytopia.com/project/fractal/new/full/q30/RudyVines.jpg Yeah, it's similar in some of the details but the bulbs overall don't get split the way they do with Rudy's formula using this method. Title: Re: Not a standard "bulb" :) Post by: David Makin on January 17, 2010, 09:04:20 PM What formula did you used? Here's the unoptimised non-trig UF code without analytical DE (non-trig as the trig code is left to the compiler): zjk = imag(zri) + flip(zj) r = cabs(zri) ph = cabs(zjk) if r>0.0 zri = (zri/r)^@mpwr ; cos sin else zri = (1,0) endif if ph>0.0 zjk = (zjk/ph)^@mpwr ; cos sin else zjk = (1,0) endif zj = imag(zjk) zri = real(zri) + flip(imag(zri)*real(zjk)) x1 = sqrt(|zri| + sqr(zj)) magn = magn^@mpwr if x1==0.0 zri = magn + cri zj = cj else magn = magn/x1 zri = magn*zri + cri zj = magn*zj + cj endif magn = sqrt(|zri| + sqr(zj)) You may be wondering what that last bit with x1 is for, when recombining the sines/cosines using this method then the result does not have a fixed unit magnitude and rendering without the last "fix" produces a fractal that has spikes everywhere (essentially asymptotes) - it's interesting but I decided to see what happened if the combined sine/cosine result was renormalised before multiplication by the new magnitude. Edit: If you want a name for the formula, I call it "Normalised simultaeneous rotation about z and x" or "Norm.Sim.Rot.ZX" :) |