Logo by Jimpan1973 - 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: Visit us on facebook
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. April 19, 2024, 07:13:56 PM


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: Focus Area Size <-> Zoom Level  (Read 387 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
apeirographer
Forums Freshman
**
Posts: 18


« on: May 12, 2016, 03:37:59 AM »

Greetings,

In my own programs, I do not use zoom levels, but rather specify the limits of the focus area via floating point numbers.  Is there an established equation for converting between the two?

i.e.: An equation that tells me what zoom level is an area 0.025 points wide (real axis) and 0.010 tall (imaginary axis)?  And vice-versa?

Thank you in advance!

Apeirographer
Logged
quaz0r
Fractal Molossus
**
Posts: 652



« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2016, 07:59:50 PM »

"zoom level" is just a more colloquial terminology for the same thing, and i think is also more often expressed as a positive exponent in this context.  so if the size of a view area was 1e-10, some might say a "zoom level" of 1e10.
Logged
apeirographer
Forums Freshman
**
Posts: 18


« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2016, 03:45:07 PM »

Shouldn't a focus width/height of 4.00 (-2.00 to 2.00) be zoom level 1 though?  I get the impression that may be the case with the second video (the one I posted).  After all, it starts out zoomed further out than the (-2.00 to 2.00) boundaries, and the initial zoom level is identified as 0.4, then jumps to 1.6 after a bit but not much more zooming.

That suggests to me that the formula is:

Let m be magnification.
Let w be the width of the focal area.

w = \dfrac{4}{m} and m = \dfrac{4}{w}

Yielding zoom / width pairs as follows:

1 -> 4
1.01 -> 3.96039604
1.05 -> 3.80952381
1.25 -> 3.2
1.5 -> 2.666666667
2 -> 2
3 -> 1.333333333
4 -> 1
5 -> 0.8
7.5 -> 0.533333333
10 -> 0.4
100 -> 0.04
100000 -> 0.00004
1e+10 -> 4e-10
etc.

This would also explain the "flipping" of the sign.  Does this look right to you, quaz0r?
Logged
quaz0r
Fractal Molossus
**
Posts: 652



« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2016, 06:02:05 PM »

i dont know, i was hoping someone else would chime in.  like you, i dont know what everybody else does, i only know what i do   grin
Logged
lkmitch
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 238



« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2016, 06:35:20 PM »

There's no definitive relation between zoom and width or height (of which I'm aware)--it depends entirely on how a given fractal formula is implemented in a given program.  For example, in Ultra Fractal for the standard Mandelbrot set, a magnification of 1 (= 1*10^0 or zoom level 0?) has a width of 4 units and a height of 3 units, for a 4:3 aspect ratio fractal window.  Change the window aspect ratio to 2:1 and now the width is 6 and height is 3.  Or an aspect ratio of 1:2 gives a width of 4 and a height of 8.

So how you relate height or width to zoom level is up to you.
Logged
Adam Majewski
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 221


WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2016, 09:33:53 PM »

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Fractals/Computer_graphic_techniques/2D/plane#Description

HTH
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


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 0.135 seconds with 24 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.009s, 2q)