Logo by jwm-art - 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: Check out the originating "3d Mandelbulb" thread here
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. September 20, 2019, 12:06:05 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]   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: comparison of mandelbulber and mandelbulb 3D?  (Read 10424 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
gussetCrimp
Explorer
****
Posts: 47


« on: October 24, 2010, 10:18:20 PM »

I haven't tried either program. But it seems like Buddhi and Jesse have each created incredible, amazing software. Really impressive for single-programmer projects, and obviously both very much labors of love. For those of us "following at home" who live vicariously through your exploits on this board, would anyone working with both programs like to offer a comparison between them? I don't mean "which is better". But what kinds of exploration do you feel that each program lends itself well to? Do their renderings have different recognizable characters that persist even when you change settings? Is it feasible to go to the same location of a particular cube, say, and compare the image that each program generates?

Humbly,
Gus
 
Logged
Thunderwave
Guest
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2010, 03:49:06 AM »

As a first timer to 3D fractals, I found Mandelbulb 3D easy to get into and explore.  It was almost intuitive for me to experiment without needing to read up on what buttons do what.

Unfortunately that is not the case for Mandelbulber; I struggled trying to figure out how to get around.  Some buttons didn't seem to work like I expected or not at all.  Instead of researching and trying to figure out how to get around, (though I did for a while with no luck), I went back to M3D, or another fractal tool.

I am not putting down Mandelbulber, but it just hasn't been easy for ME to work with....
 
Logged
Russ McClay
Explorer
****
Posts: 49



« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2010, 03:45:35 PM »

I haven't tried either program. But it seems like Buddhi and Jesse have each created incredible, amazing software. Really impressive for single-programmer projects, and obviously both very much labors of love. For those of us "following at home" who live vicariously through your exploits on this board, would anyone working with both programs like to offer a comparison between them? I don't mean "which is better". But what kinds of exploration do you feel that each program lends itself well to? Do their renderings have different recognizable characters that persist even when you change settings? Is it feasible to go to the same location of a particular cube, say, and compare the image that each program generates?

Humbly,
Gus
 

I use both with equal glee and enthusiasm.  You are right: both programs are labors of love.
To be honest, Mandelbulb3D might be easier for a new comer.  But Mandelbulber offers
some unique features such as navigate-assisted animations.  A new version of Mandelbulber
has been announced by Buddhi which I'm looking forward to.  In conclusion, both programs
are WONDERFUL and worthy of playing around with. The core concepts and foundations are
nearly the same.  So things you learn in one program can be applied to the other. 
Both offer endless options to please your creativity and curiosity.

Dive in, the water's fine.

Russ
Logged
FractalFoundation
Alien
***
Posts: 25


Infinite Math, Infinite Beauty, Infinite Love


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2010, 06:24:51 PM »

I love them both! I have 2 quadcore computers running all the time, with one program on each machine.
Different things I like about each program:
Mandelbulber:
  • I like the ability to add backgrounds (though I wish they rendered at higher resolution - is there a way I'm missing?)
  • I like the ability to easily make things glow
  • I like stereoscopic rendering
  • I like the ability to save as jpegs
  • I like the control of the IFS fractals parameters - though I really haven't figured out how to use it well yet!
  • I like the ability to run from command line - I hope to massively parallelize my rendering soon!
Mandelbulb3D:
  • I like the ability to edit color pallets
  • I like the ease of navigation
  • I like the left and right arrows for rolling around the camera axis
  • I like the ease of animation
  • I like the ability to preview animations
  • I REALLY like the bezier interpolation between keyframes

I know Buddhi's working on improving the interface in Mandelbulber, and the recent addition of the timeline is great progress. My biggest frustration with Mandelbulber is the interpolation between keyframes, which causes me to lose a bunch of time accidentally slamming into walls and cutting corners. Preview would help, but beziers would be better than splines!

One thing that's a bit challenging is to transfer a fractal from one program to the other. The folding parameters for the Mandelbox seem to be defined a bit differently between the programs, so I've not been able to easily compare exactly the same. No big deal though. 

In general, I am so happy and excited to have these awesome programs to play with and to create unbelievably amazing 3D fractal animations. ***THANKS***  Krzysztof and Jesse!!!
Logged

-Jonathan Wolfe, Ph.D.
Executive Director
http://FractalFoundation.org
Fractals are SMART: Science, Math & Art!
Become a facebook fan at: http://bit.ly/13pEkd
Rathinagiri
Fractal Fertilizer
*****
Posts: 374


« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2010, 08:08:01 AM »

I do enjoy both the programs. A royal salute to both of them, Jesse and Buddhi.

I work on Mandelbulb 3D more.
Logged
kon16ov
Conqueror
*******
Posts: 105



warep kon16ov
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2010, 01:54:16 PM »

Absolutely love both programs.  Big props to both authors.  I'd say the biggest comparison/contrast between the two, for me, is that I use Mandelbulber more for still frames -- I love the lowmem rendering of large pics, and Mandelbulb3D for animations -- I find it easier to navigate, for the most part (unless I get myself stuck somewhere odd and can't get out...). 

I also have found that what I would think are similar settings produce different things, so I love messing with the settings in both, just to see what I can make.  I do like the myriad settings in Mandelbulber under the Kaleidescope IFS and Hybrid -- have made some truly weird things...partly because I have little clue what some of them do.  embarrass  I need to dig out "Mandelball."  I've found it easier to do cut-away renderings in Mandelbulb3D as well as and pretty slick lighting options.

All in all, they're both amazing programs and you can't go wrong with either one...but both is infinitely more fun...so to speak.  Mandelbulb3D works very well under WINE, for the record, since Mandelbulber runs under Linux.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Distance Estimators Comparison 3D Fractal Generation David Makin 0 1578 Last post October 24, 2009, 10:02:58 PM
by David Makin
mandelbulber Help & Support ramblerette 1 585 Last post October 18, 2010, 02:56:02 PM
by ramblerette
Bringing fractals from Mandelbulber to Mandelbulb 3D Help & Support lmnaut 2 323 Last post April 23, 2014, 06:15:22 PM
by taurus
Comparison of different mesh extraction techniques - short survey. (new) Theories & Research russ 0 144 Last post May 09, 2016, 01:38:16 PM
by russ
a_surf silent comparison Mandelbulber taurus 4 1423 Last post October 25, 2016, 03:18:05 AM
by mclarekin

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 0.14 seconds with 28 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.007s, 2q)