"Dave Blandston" <IsN### [at] protonmailch> wrote:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > So, I'm gonna guess that it's a very skillfully applied transform matrix.
>
> What??? There's an easier way???

Ha!
Don't we wish.

It was late and I was working from memory.

And you did go ahead and "do it the hard way", didn't you...   :D
"Each and every pixel in this animation was artisinally hand-crafted from
photons generated with power from a custom-made foot-pedal operated
generator...."

I was probably mixing matrix transforms and Mike Williams' non-linear scaling of
isosurfaces in my head.  A matrix won't use the proper interpretation of 'x',
since it's outside of the function parser.
I suppose you _could_ make an object pattern function and do it the isosurface
way, but that would introduce the added complication of texturing all of the
separate parts of the lettering...

"the slices are not scaled in the x dimension, but rather each
slice is intersected from a character that is created at the correct size for
that particular deformation function value. If the slices were simply scaled,
the inner parts would not match up. This is also what allows for the vertical
deformation."

Ah, going back and watching your animation on 'loop', I understand what that
means and what you're doing.  Very clever, and it gives a very nice effect -
that goopy, squishy effect that the vertical deformation achieves.

You do nice work, Dave   :)

Post a reply to this message