this thread is dead please remove

[matty686]

 new version of the sloppy old book
come and get it

its missing a page

but i am working on it as you read this

IT'S MY LEGACY

i wanted to see the public response on how it is written before i write the chapters on space-fill gasket's using smart-objects and super trees

that will be in the second edition in this tutorial we use Photoshop however it would be even cooler if someone would design me some software specifically for this maybe if everyone on the forum likes it

someone more mathematically inclined could do that  hint hint MIT students    
    
hear is the link

https://sites.google.com/site/cryographicscom/Blog

the file is  a PDF

[taurus]

can't say much about the content right now, only skimed through. but i recommend some proofreading. my english is not so good and i found lots of of mistakes at first glance...

[matty686]

interesting apparently the world thinks spelling is more important than content who knew

I have a lot of work to do  maybe  I should go back to 5 th grade and relearn spelling 

this document is a draft i wanted to see if people could understand the concept

the last chapter is completely missing 

[taurus]

ok, your point of view. but i think it is much harder for a book to be taken seriously, when spelling is "IRELIVENT" (quote from your draft) 

[matty686]

point taken thanks I will correct the spelling but that may take years because my friends will have to have time to help I can't spell on my own

version two will have some spelling fixes i promise

[DarkBeam]

How in the world can you call this new?  This is not new, and probably what you get with this method is not exactly a fractal. This is only an attempt to repeat by hand ( heh ) what Apophysis and / or other softwares do automatically. A fractal normally requires a formula or a transformation. Only you are doing transforms by hand instead of with an algorithm. Try to repeat a Menger sponge with this method and see. Best wishes ... Luca

[matty686]

OK for those of you who want to see some examples type "matty686" into the keyword search

[matty686]

yup formulas do there job very well

in fact the are quite useful  for calculating the noise i use to fake the lower iterations

the main point is,  just as a tree is not a perfect fractal  neither are these

but things are pushed a bit on your side two because although your fractals represent the infinite they are just pixels

it's not how you get there that matters its the result

and while I may not be able to do a merger sponge in 3d I can easily tackle a 2d one using smart object substitution witch i have not yet covered   

[Sockratease]

I really like the look of many of your images   

They are very attractive and fun to look at.

But fractals?

I'm not so sure.

Yes, they exhibit self similarity, but not at all scales, and fractals are by definition Mathematical Formulas.

Your work is fractal-like, and certainly has a place on this forum, but can not properly be called a fractal.

All Fractals are Self-Similar, but not all which is Self-Similar is a Fractal.

I used to insist that things like this were a Fractal:


Click For Big

It was made in a fractal generator, using fractal formulas, but everyone here insisted it was some sort of hybrid and not a fractal at all.  I believe the term they all eventually agreed upon was "Exotic Projection" (or some other word that begins with an "E")  (I forgot it because I still like to think of those images as Fractals, despite knowing full well they are not!).

it's not how you get there that matters its the result

Agreed when it comes to a piece of Art!  But Not when it comes to defining what is and is not a Fractal. 

[matty686]

yes Sockratease

they are not fractal but they are so close even I have no clue I have even analyzed the lunacracy  using an open-source  formula  i really don't know what to call them they register the same as fractals

they have rough cost lines and they grow like trees sounded fractal to me but i have now realized how nit-picky the world is I will call them q fractals

i am posting two pictures can you guess witch is the real fractal and witch is the q fractal

[DarkBeam]

You can make fractals from an escapetime formula, a mix of e.t. formulas, or from ifs transforms, or general transforms.
Finally if you transform a shape and not a pixel you get your images.
Somebody invented softwares with baseshapes a long ago; they are Incendia and Xenodream
So that is why you can not say you invented this method...

[David Makin]

Just to echo Darkbeam - you need to check out Xenodream and Incendia (both can do "object" based IFS) and also to read up on L-Systems - the method is nothing new - also check out dragon trees and DTIFS.
Sophisticated use of L-Systems can produce amazing results and it is possible to convert such to IFS with appropriate rule extensions.
See:
http://algorithmicbotany.org/papers/

[lycium]

As with any art it is important to consider getting an
external hard drive
( I am assuming your not stupid and have one)

lol, this "book" is hilarious! 

[lycium]

oh, and regarding the "originality" of recursively (and procedurally/implicitly) instantiated objects, how about this from 1989 (John C Hart): http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.85.8650

[matty686]

ok i think this brings up a bigger issue

it seams that there is a lack of software that does this job in an easy manner and all in one place

photoshop has everything i need

were as these other programs are underdeveloped java projects