I was so impressed with Norbert Kern's recent blob-code example and image (in
his post of the same name) that I decided to animate it-- with just a slightly
moving and rotating camera, no other changes. The original image was so
beautiful that I wanted to see what it looked like 'in depth', so to speak-- not
knowing what to expect!

Just 150 frames long--which took a while to render, BTW. (Unfortunately, I had
to downsize it from my original 1280 X 720 format, in order to post a smaller
file-size here. The many shifting colors played havoc with video compression.)

Enjoy!

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'blob art by nk.mp4.mpg' (3791 KB)

On 7/13/2017 9:59 AM, Kenneth wrote:
> I was so impressed with Norbert Kern's recent blob-code example and image (in
> his post of the same name) that I decided to animate it-- with just a slightly
> moving and rotating camera, no other changes. The original image was so
> beautiful that I wanted to see what it looked like 'in depth', so to speak-- not
> knowing what to expect!
>
> Just 150 frames long--which took a while to render, BTW. (Unfortunately, I had
> to downsize it from my original 1280 X 720 format, in order to post a smaller
> file-size here. The many shifting colors played havoc with video compression.)
>
> Enjoy!
>
>
>
Very nice.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 13.07.2017 um 12:39 schrieb Stephen:
> On 7/13/2017 9:59 AM, Kenneth wrote:
>> I was so impressed with Norbert Kern's recent blob-code example and
>> image (in
>> his post of the same name) that I decided to animate it-- with just a
>> slightly
>> moving and rotating camera, no other changes. The original image was so
>> beautiful that I wanted to see what it looked like 'in depth', so to
>> speak-- not
>> knowing what to expect!
>>
>> Just 150 frames long--which took a while to render, BTW.
>> (Unfortunately, I had
>> to downsize it from my original 1280 X 720 format, in order to post a
>> smaller
>> file-size here. The many shifting colors played havoc with video
>> compression.)
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>>
>>
> Very nice.

Typical British understatement.

As a German, I'm not making any comment on it, because it leaves me
speechless.

Post a reply to this message

On 7/13/2017 12:03 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 13.07.2017 um 12:39 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 7/13/2017 9:59 AM, Kenneth wrote:
>>> I was so impressed with Norbert Kern's recent blob-code example and
>>> image (in
>>> his post of the same name) that I decided to animate it-- with just a
>>> slightly
>>> moving and rotating camera, no other changes. The original image was so
>>> beautiful that I wanted to see what it looked like 'in depth', so to
>>> speak-- not
>>> knowing what to expect!
>>>
>>> Just 150 frames long--which took a while to render, BTW.
>>> (Unfortunately, I had
>>> to downsize it from my original 1280 X 720 format, in order to post a
>>> smaller
>>> file-size here. The many shifting colors played havoc with video
>>> compression.)
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Very nice.
>
> Typical British understatement.
>

Yes.

> As a German, I'm not making any comment on it, because it leaves me
> speechless.
>

^ ^

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I was so impressed with Norbert Kern's recent blob-code example and image (in
> his post of the same name) that I decided to animate it-- with just a slightly
> moving and rotating camera, no other changes.

Amorphous and crystalline at the same time.

The still image one (kudos must go to Christian Perle as I read back to that)
had reminded me of enhanced pictures of planet Saturn's north pole, while the
box one had me wondering about the soft color changes amid otherwise angular
shapes. Much like ice crystals and spectra. Also appeared both amorphous and
crystalline in a different way, now that I think about it.

http://www.sun.org/uploads/images/Saturn_hexagonal_strom_system_north_pole.jpg

Post a reply to this message

"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:

>
> The still image one (kudos must go to Christian Perle as I read back to that)

Yes indeed; I didn't mean to leave out the original code author.

After the animation was finished, I realized that I should have moved the camera
'into' the blob as well, to get even more reflection changes.

I'm amazed that such a stunning image was created with such a short piece of SDL
code--plus the author's skill and imagination, of course. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

> I'm amazed that such a stunning image was created with such a short piece of SDL
> code

True.  It reminds me of the first time I discovered what gave rise to a Wada
Basin.

http://paulbourke.net/fractals/wada/

Post a reply to this message

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>
> It reminds me of the first time I discovered what gave rise to a Wada
> Basin.
>
> http://paulbourke.net/fractals/wada/

I had never heard of a Wada Basin until now. Fascinating. (And equally so
because the effect was actually given a name!!) It's interesting that the paper
discusses using FOUR touching spheres, but the image examples use only three.
Seems that an odd number of spheres creates a more interesting look than an even
number (my opinion, anyway.) Maybe that's because familiar kaleidoscope images
are usually of 3,5 or 7 repeated 'segments', and I'm just used to that
arrangement. A learned response, in other words.

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:


> I had never heard of a Wada Basin until now. Fascinating. (And equally so
> because the effect was actually given a name!!)

There are SO many things out there, and in my opinion, too few people seriously
investigating them.  They're too busy with the petty things.
Cicero had many wise things to say, and too few know what they were.

>It's interesting that the paper
> discusses using FOUR touching spheres, but the image examples use only three.

"[First thou shalt define a spherical primitive,] then shalt thou count to
three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the
number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count
thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the
number three, being the third number, be reached, then [shalt thou render thine
ray-traced image]"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk

> Seems that an odd number of spheres creates a more interesting look than an even
> number (my opinion, anyway.) Maybe that's because familiar kaleidoscope images
> are usually of 3,5 or 7 repeated 'segments', and I'm just used to that
> arrangement.

Or maybe it's just that you're an odd fellow  ;)

> A learned response, in other words.

Or perhaps there's some "organic" neurobiological response that's more
effectively stimulated with an arrangement of an odd number of objects than an
even number.

There's a great TED presentation by
Al Seckel: Visual illusions that show how we (mis)think

I found it very educational for a whole lot of reasons.

Post a reply to this message

Am 14.07.2017 um 16:11 schrieb Bald Eagle:

>> Seems that an odd number of spheres creates a more interesting look than an even
>> number (my opinion, anyway.) Maybe that's because familiar kaleidoscope images
>> are usually of 3,5 or 7 repeated 'segments', and I'm just used to that
>> arrangement.
> 
> Or maybe it's just that you're an odd fellow  ;)
> 
>> A learned response, in other words.
> 
> Or perhaps there's some "organic" neurobiological response that's more
> effectively stimulated with an arrangement of an odd number of objects than an
> even number.

My guess is that it's not really a matter of odd vs. even, but of primes
vs. non-primes. It just so happens that there's only a single even prime.

Post a reply to this message