Comments on: strange symmetry http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/ Experiments in generative graphics Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:46:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: admin http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/comment-page-1/#comment-38 admin Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:16:16 +0000 http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/#comment-38 rce12: thanks, glad to see you know the old version. lorenzo: ummm, so people actually look at the code... I guess I'll need to start documenting then. In the meantime, if you have any questions just mail me directly. davbol: thanks Dave, it's great to get comments from people whose work I admire. You're right that there's still a tendency for saturating the particle density. As can be seen in certain color palettes, the velocity accumulation grid behaves better and gives less bloom. I'm still working on better rendering and log() is indeed a good choice. However, for the moment it requires too much user interaction for a web based applet. For some structures it works, for others it doesn't. The sqrt() is a good compromise as it gives good results for a wide range of values. To be continued... rce12: thanks, glad to see you know the old version.
lorenzo: ummm, so people actually look at the code… I guess I’ll need to start documenting then. In the meantime, if you have any questions just mail me directly.
davbol: thanks Dave, it’s great to get comments from people whose work I admire. You’re right that there’s still a tendency for saturating the particle density. As can be seen in certain color palettes, the velocity accumulation grid behaves better and gives less bloom. I’m still working on better rendering and log() is indeed a good choice. However, for the moment it requires too much user interaction for a web based applet. For some structures it works, for others it doesn’t. The sqrt() is a good compromise as it gives good results for a wide range of values. To be continued…

]]> By: davbol http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/comment-page-1/#comment-37 davbol Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:31:41 +0000 http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/#comment-37 very nice! and your "weird" formula is interesting :) would it be presumptious to offer an idea? not a critique, take it fwiw... i see that you're converting your accumulation buffer nonlinearly with sqrt() and that works sweet, but still seems to oversaturate if you run it long enough -- so i'm wondering if the response might be logarithmic?, so if you were to scale by log(value)/log(maxvalue) you might be able to run long enough to fill in the "veil" areas of low accumulation before the basins oversaturate? just a thought love the rest of your works too, cheers! very nice! and your “weird” formula is interesting :)

would it be presumptious to offer an idea? not a critique, take it fwiw…

i see that you’re converting your accumulation buffer nonlinearly with sqrt() and that works sweet, but still seems to oversaturate if you run it long enough — so i’m wondering if the response might be logarithmic?, so if you were to scale by log(value)/log(maxvalue) you might be able to run long enough to fill in the “veil” areas of low accumulation before the basins oversaturate? just a thought

love the rest of your works too, cheers!

]]> By: Lorenzo http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Lorenzo Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:01:31 +0000 http://www.wblut.com/2008/03/27/strange-symmetry/#comment-36 Wow...very nice applet...I'll spend some hours on studying the code! so glad that someone is still sharing his work....:D Wow…very nice applet…I’ll spend some hours on studying the code! so glad that someone is still sharing his work.…:D

]]>