How many fractals have you personally made?

[Fractal_Artist]

You "sound" familiar.  Like someone I have worked with.

Okay.  So why do you feel the fractals are not art?  Would you show me some examples of what you do call fractal art?

Thanks for the welcome.

Bruce

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 !

[Fractal_Artist]

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

[lycium]

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

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.

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.

But each person has their own opinion on this matter.

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!

Part of the reason I kept track of my renders is ya never know what someone else will like.

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?

And since I was gearing up to make one-of-a-kind fractal shirts I figured I'd save everything.

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...

[lycium]

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.

i just noticed this on your site:



sorry, but with so many images to be modest about 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? 

[Nahee_Enterprises]

Is it your opinion that a person who makes plenty of fractals is skipping quality in favor of quantity?  Is it not possible to have both?

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).

My machines are fast enough to render up to 20,480 by 15,360 DPI.  That is not the sort of thing I do routinely just for the sake of doing it.

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 ??

Why is it so bad to have found delight in making so many fractals?

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.

Was there something I said to you at some time in the past that gives you reason to talk about me like this?

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 know you run a web site that charts and details everything fractal.  Heck, I'm even on there.  Sort of surprising considering the apparent disdain you have for me or my fractals.

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.

Are you one of those snooty Apophysis or Ultra Fractal types?  The ones who prefer to spend needless time on bloated software that takes way too long to render a single fractal that then gobbles up oodles of space?  Because that is the way you are acting...in my opinion.  I don't know who pee'd in your cereal, but take it out on me.

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.     

If you care to know, the programs I have used the most are as follows:
  FractInt
  QuaSZ
  XenoDream
  KPT's FraxPlorer


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.

[Fractal_Artist]

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.

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.

But each person has their own opinion on this matter.

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.

Part of the reason I kept track of my renders is ya never know what someone else will like.

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.

And since I was gearing up to make one-of-a-kind fractal shirts I figured I'd save everything.

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.

[Fractal_Artist]

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.

i just noticed this on your site:




Really?  That's on the index page.  I used to link to a different fractal every week with that "s rating" graphic.  But I settled on one particular fractal.

sorry, but with so many

Yes, I am.  Entirely at your expense.  I'm chuckling as I type.

[Fractal_Artist]

As I was saying to Paul I do not feel there is a lack of quality for the quantity I have produced.

i just noticed this on your site:



sorry, but with so many images to be modest about you could afford a little more modesty 

Just a smidge more modesty right?  Very good.  You picked out six fractals "at random" out of 73,550 uploaded.  You kept your "random" selections in volumes 2, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 25 of General Use.  I suppose to be really chosen "at random" you'd have to open fractals from the two other galleries.  They're all consolidated on one page ya know.  But, the "s rated" graphic has predicted your behavior with some accuracy.   

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? 

[Fractal_Artist]

Paul,

I will submit an apology to you. 


Bruce

[bib]

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 

[cKleinhuis]

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

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

[lycium]

This is also probably why the responses have been a bit critical, maybe they would have been different if you were more humble.

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, ... ?

[bib]

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

Do you have a problem with rainbows ?

[lycium]

Bias is not a bad thing.

It is if you want the truth.

Maybe your opinion will change if you had or took the time to look at all of the ones on my web site?

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.

Simply not allowing your views to become my views does not mean I am ignoring anything.

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."

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.

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.

[Fractal_Artist]

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

I've got lots with different palettes.

Do you have a problem with rainbows ?

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