Logo by Fiery - 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: Did you know ? you can use LaTex inside Postings on fractalforums.com!
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. July 23, 2018, 01:41:56 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] 2 3   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: Auto solve glitch problem  (Read 1614 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Fractal universe
Explorer
****
Posts: 50



« on: May 12, 2016, 12:43:33 AM »

Hi Kalles

There is a bug in the version 2.9.7 of kalles fraktaler 2.
When I click on "auto solve glitch" with "examine zoom sequence", the problem below appear.


* bug dans kalles fraktaler.jpg (246.7 KB, 653x711 - viewed 172 times.)
Logged

quaz0r
Fractal Molossus
**
Posts: 652



« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2016, 08:06:45 PM »

most/all authors of perturbation programs i've seen are using default settings which favor speed over accuracy, probably even more so for zooms.  if you want more accuracy there is probably an option somewhere where you can raise the max number of reference points and such?
Logged
Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2016, 09:01:14 PM »

Interesting.
Can you send me the location?
Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
Fractal universe
Explorer
****
Posts: 50



« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2016, 10:44:14 PM »

Re: -1.296355138173036216808304477845282266265735748447889106496038985761209917380841177445968518215701758678084105701798781194955286791090159889479830250582998616337343672293770610499414537932319513273091525519480957820496859278286357694764845398638622284835930478246909426978498903001292186349332559002364119692765842997347411680020529930794430297889475200868675134070916915029352018955671209679653588455096044586235738194335823043789630623088453676657949865089362217637125034542974484819892882518624751323660120500136532115644867205611992160754276675349948316142781488215964382264146492785725093186522485081128928485363264599339734251203063880701539610046638303626795735718966970641220962923079472132879218084171429125502639157779993043432103141243971131090219953825914905004024872001745764432019897994637060100741704114438981666498439414773127273768682855615943049460249321102817802315841571856105883956688597465218149939352580623597585689908462847383648235816382580470517645800446361062024466323256389226230312616351187419538060225167736803525145232562199571699713437958091003679794587041876469868465856426563926212975296854780647056242705957785494023937014971169623443261919352966951619778850300586466326970568706005442490399114414710530104463493125608296913819151789916280880724413432577930767002163323557996698828262572794499999194869018065415227752694458414200815408162608128472937332894712532633236438374064168748491036172167649190381488090168987338631867626142176553092393627587023711821699750838956897945647744877403406483850925618315252953328987436142781151229876098476397533207189895153754771856587049648790114547938829260964489740063313214749090993166989912043877739160463422052860270972469115318915701047171917880990618003083436720660633950048613362270852364674467190551511460960744443762947808490866715105893507673957973164746095058432375554387135706903601439292278884911936421548663220799245064998695604164093487261179349347853800540569072644950925270588311758385070983686862244455927350856123325710859816597565337333091569397234250743592576434389631290690505531799777246836999955179257209426476184953422200993585637112614339598607545
Im: -0.441851605735196601212848580174986948840096866702890580517816641664137309219631137124274552377733978128686419957669157494088039035922351119632811221778713954178086193458861028284209543020285018565769515482463245803379644163301622266580558324633885400684383926664648595707250845941186242632516809899396314190876372172913204206324576438201859918119458401143921495705079306772286572229419308265992148297977456492889986116205742645363993821848697882610709906258793336239004842943906986210736820978592084207290666236555957482963656063549010444105123098070134336471987534785202927629973161950511592581427203797488045441440026238035076135625264861339753279100714891372407515853098284627171802695919672630737106960344603522635273210944830171135346252462537703505997818763885988466869217773916646359441140614304590841814645837510230426286057813658976772992338117014640045672814945221795097188356817324852849480363813371689059659232967175321254910109114494920069754633824103731891628134989201361537759392931257569337517543481361841545238865829088485855850404668357967323401050343944511551794864978777250158803946591708326816355481561539615842405016841201060211482818918114785749499657615064702167274001250041088644742208013944449418954651669543291476924409842045542521333491935816940422301647922356137533118613929599056439398381818098344974479177393005542332755082083163150701450215288991169921779016395219072435561522108487241990391382526569922293685620041733671097121849429464487621794520020167605266610614577515828657827352106545315040578420525657755525972854022796637807349147592268281748367517361119005099898668920219185722517400901384616477647235736032139186840880432015693914842914632869607777328404595380956495243408171754158478726042799312293183947848336579629235798589776678289925280075378662568941327347464781202650604139064414786204594121158855777979536943325628171806748815008807348214362171459702970449699336203605053062288484913989563224164570214316235959408550401925546639489047738690869625062858315750966130296354830068847624374499751573173110055245096965702203820751345879478548223084264302424284854828105269816428496557088832634046948605
Zoom: 1.49575125084E2126
Iterations: 40,000,000 (minibrot not enough defined), the video will have 100,000,000 iterations.

All keyframes are calculated without auto solve glitches. I prefer render keyframes before, and auto solve glitches after.
picture above: Zoom = 8.38E1028

However, the bug is the same for any location with glitch zone.
Logged

Fractal universe
Explorer
****
Posts: 50



« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2016, 11:53:58 PM »

Here is an example of the worst glitch of this type.
the 2 references + 1 added is a simulation of keyframes after autosolve glitches (always 10 references).


* irrecoverable glitches.jpg (242.38 KB, 669x676 - viewed 122 times.)
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Bachius
*
Posts: 513



« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2016, 12:58:56 PM »

Crap happens...

I have some glitched frames in existing video (simply awesome II HD):
http://sta.sh/01aqqf7kg83r
http://sta.sh/017skb4ouloa

I gave up trying to fix frames and simply upped it directly to YT as is. hurt
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/vnUjXAIIcq0&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/v/vnUjXAIIcq0&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 01:11:56 PM by stardust4ever » Logged
Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2016, 02:59:35 PM »

All keyframes are calculated without auto solve glitches. I prefer render keyframes before, and auto solve glitches after.
The auto correct glitches in the examine function is only adding a limited number of additional references, 5 or 10 I think?
I can see that the areas are filled with previous view, i.e. not updated, so they are at least identified as glitches.
One issue that stardust and some others have encountered is that glitches are not identified because of Series Approximation skipping the point where the glitch occurs.

I rendered the location at 8.38E1028 in 640x360 and it needed 10 references...
I guess you rendered in much higher resolution, so you would need more references than the perhaps 10 that the examine function adds.
Also, these types of references, the spirals from passing the elephant valley, are requiring many additional references in KF, which probably could be improved a lot if only the center of these spirals could be found in advance.
Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
apeirographer
Forums Freshman
**
Posts: 18


« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2016, 04:06:53 PM »

Can I, semi-on-topic, ask whether there's a way to set the settings in such a way that glitches are highly improbable for even lengthy zooms?  Even if at the expense of the rendering speed?  Like maybe tying the number of references to the depth, and having it overcompensate by some multiple?

The example you gave, a 640x360 picture needing 10 references... that's 1 reference per 23,040 pixels.  Would the rendering speed not stay way ahead of most of your competition even if for the given depth and image size you used 50 or 100 references?  And with settings like that or maybe even higher--but still nowhere near calculating even a 10th of the image fully in arbitrary precision--would the likelihood of glitches get low enough to no longer worry about?

Or am I oversimplifying the issues?
Logged
Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2016, 06:05:59 PM »

Can I, semi-on-topic, ask whether there's a way to set the settings in such a way that glitches are highly improbable for even lengthy zooms?  Even if at the expense of the rendering speed?  Like maybe tying the number of references to the depth, and having it overcompensate by some multiple?

The example you gave, a 640x360 picture needing 10 references... that's 1 reference per 23,040 pixels.  Would the rendering speed not stay way ahead of most of your competition even if for the given depth and image size you used 50 or 100 references?  And with settings like that or maybe even higher--but still nowhere near calculating even a 10th of the image fully in arbitrary precision--would the likelihood of glitches get low enough to no longer worry about?

Or am I oversimplifying the issues?
As long as high bailout is used, I haven't encountered one location where pauldelbrot's glitch finding method doesn't work. The issues we rarely find are due to series approximation, which could be checked against some pixels inside the view and not only on the edges, but that would be slower.
So, the glitch finding method is reliable enough I think
Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
Fractal universe
Explorer
****
Posts: 50



« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2016, 06:13:41 PM »

Actually, I compute my keyframes with only 1 reference and the "reuse reference" button locked. at this stage, the glitch areas are normal. I auto solve glitches after (without "reuse reference").
I am noted empirically that areas with the previous view are the max iterations value from 1 to 9 references, but after the last reference, areas are sometime preserved the value, or sometimes a glitched values.
Therefore the bug is at the last reference.
When it stays a visible glitch areas, I begin a second passage of auto solve glitches. So the conservation of the iterations value inside areas is necessary.

With the 2.6.2 version, there is another problem. Auto solve glitches is working normally. But sometimes, one reference (for example the 4th) solve no pixel, the program add the next reference at the same pixel, solve no pixel, and stuck on the same location until the last reference.
With a reference added manually, the problem is temporarily solved until another reference that solve no pixel.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 06:22:19 PM by Fractal universe » Logged

Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2016, 08:53:41 PM »

Actually, I compute my keyframes with only 1 reference and the "reuse reference" button locked. at this stage, the glitch areas are normal. I auto solve glitches after (without "reuse reference").
I am noted empirically that areas with the previous view are the max iterations value from 1 to 9 references, but after the last reference, areas are sometime preserved the value, or sometimes a glitched values.
Therefore the bug is at the last reference.
When it stays a visible glitch areas, I begin a second passage of auto solve glitches. So the conservation of the iterations value inside areas is necessary.

With the 2.6.2 version, there is another problem. Auto solve glitches is working normally. But sometimes, one reference (for example the 4th) solve no pixel, the program add the next reference at the same pixel, solve no pixel, and stuck on the same location until the last reference.
With a reference added manually, the problem is temporarily solved until another reference that solve no pixel.
I think I set the last reference without identifying glitches, because I thought the glitches would be so small they wouldn't be noticed on the last reference...  embarrass
Maybe I should change that, and remove the limited number of additional references?
Yes, since 2.6.2 I added a list of added references, so that the program doesn't try to add it on the same pixel again smiley
Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
Fractal universe
Explorer
****
Posts: 50



« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2016, 09:39:04 PM »

You can leave the number of references (10 is a good number), but with the identifying glitches for the last if it's necessary to make a 2nd (and 3rd) passage.
And continue to reuse center if no glitch is found.

Edit : I tested another auto solve glitches with 2.9.7 version. Sometimes, the glitched iteration values appear in one part of glitch areas before the last reference.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 11:59:52 PM by Fractal universe » Logged

Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2016, 12:10:21 PM »

I tried the automatic glitch solver in the latest version, 2.10, and it is able to add more references in the second round...
Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
Pauldelbrot
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 2592



pderbyshire2
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2016, 08:07:10 AM »

As long as high bailout is used, I haven't encountered one location where pauldelbrot's glitch finding method doesn't work. The issues we rarely find are due to series approximation, which could be checked against some pixels inside the view and not only on the edges, but that would be slower.
So, the glitch finding method is reliable enough I think

So, still working reliably after a lot of battle testing? That's good to know.

P.S. How does KF do as much with series approximation as it does? It often seems to get 60-70% of the iterations, vs. nanoscope's 20. Does it use more terms? (How many?) Or is it because it's checking against the image edges rather than just checking for the error estimate to get to a certain threshold and quitting there? (That might allow being less conservative.)
Logged

Kalles Fraktaler
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1458



kallesfraktaler
WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 30, 2016, 02:56:05 PM »

So, still working reliably after a lot of battle testing? That's good to know.

P.S. How does KF do as much with series approximation as it does? It often seems to get 60-70% of the iterations, vs. nanoscope's 20. Does it use more terms? (How many?) Or is it because it's checking against the image edges rather than just checking for the error estimate to get to a certain threshold and quitting there? (That might allow being less conservative.)
Yes, more terms are used, starting with 10 for 640x360, more for larger views e.g. 60 for 3860x2160, down to 5 for small glitches.
And it is checking against 8 points on the edges (centers and corners), these points are calculated with perturbation from iteration 0 while the approximation is calculated and each iteration is compared for a threshold of 0.00001 for high tolerance and 0.001 for default low tolerance.
Also, my own class floatexp is used for the approximation algorithm instead of standard double datatype.
That is because most of the terms easily reach out of bounds for the double datatype, but later in the process these terms may grow and influence the result (chaotically)
« Last Edit: May 30, 2016, 07:37:57 PM by Kalles Fraktaler » Logged

Want to create DEEP Mandelbrot fractals 100 times faster than the commercial programs, for FREE? One hour or one minute? Three months or one day? Try Kalles Fraktaler http://www.chillheimer.de/kallesfraktaler
http://www.facebook.com/kallesfraktaler
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Auto Log Fractal coloring Help & Support fractalwizz 13 2383 Last post January 05, 2009, 11:56:37 PM
by HPDZ
Auto-log in FractInt Help & Support HPDZ 2 648 Last post August 21, 2009, 07:00:37 AM
by JackOfTraDeZ
Fractal Haze Could Solve Weak-Sun Mystery for Early Earth Fractal News across the World Nahee_Enterprises 0 890 Last post June 13, 2010, 03:38:59 PM
by Nahee_Enterprises
auto embed video modification Fractal Forums News cKleinhuis 0 301 Last post June 02, 2015, 09:16:58 PM
by cKleinhuis
Can you solve it? The incredible sponge puzzle Fractal News across the World claude 9 509 Last post April 17, 2017, 03:38:52 PM
by KRAFTWERK

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 0.214 seconds with 29 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.018s, 2q)