 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> "Strange Attractors: Creating Patterns in Chaos (ISBN 1-55851-298-5)"
> by Julien C. Sprott
Excellent Tor! I've started reading this at my job (in secret since I
shouldn't use the internet for personnal use!) and I found it extremely
interesting...
Actually, I decided to try to create a PHP script that will render one
of these Chaotic attractors and I will try to work toward a more fractal
attractor. Eventually, I guess it will be pretty easy to port this PHP
code to OpenGL and have an interactive animation of it. I could even
add a function that would output a povray code to render it...
Now, I haven't read much of the book, but I wonder if it's possible to
make nice looking strange att. in 3D? Then POV-Ray will come handy to
make nice stereographs of the object.
Thanks,
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Xilo Musimene" <xil### [at] ca internet> wrote in message
news:405d1dbc$1@news.povray.org...
> > "Strange Attractors: Creating Patterns in Chaos (ISBN 1-55851-298-5)"
> > by Julien C. Sprott
>
> Excellent Tor! I've started reading this at my job (in secret since I
> shouldn't use the internet for personnal use!) and I found it extremely
> interesting...
I read this at my job too. Is this really personal use, though? If you are a
computer scientist, this newsgroup ranks up there with on-the-job research
because of the technical aspect, particularly if you do any graphical art.
As long as it is computer related, doesn't accessing a site consititute
normal use, keeping up with the field? It's hard to imagine that a company
would have a problem with joining a community of interest to keep your edge
sharp. I know that reading this group has definitely improved my ability to
create 3D images because of all the stuff I've learned from people smarter
than I (and lucky for me that is darned-near everyone!)
--
- Respectfully,
Dan
http://<broken link>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 23:44:43 -0500, Xilo Musimene
<xil### [at] cainternet> wrote:
>> "Strange Attractors: Creating Patterns in Chaos (ISBN 1-55851-298-5)"
>> by Julien C. Sprott
>
> Excellent Tor! I've started reading this at my job (in secret since I
> shouldn't use the internet for personnal use!) and I found it extremely
> interesting...
>
> Actually, I decided to try to create a PHP script that will render one
> of these Chaotic attractors and I will try to work toward a more fractal
> attractor. Eventually, I guess it will be pretty easy to port this PHP
> code to OpenGL and have an interactive animation of it. I could even
> add a function that would output a povray code to render it...
I've whipped up a little program myself that can render these attractors
(among others).
Here are some results:
Manual Kasten's attractor (sin/cos-based):
http://hem.bredband.net/b230591/attractor/attractor1.png
From the book (EAGHNFODVNJCP):
http://hem.bredband.net/b230591/attractor/attractor_2.png
From the book (ETJUBWEDNRORR):
http://hem.bredband.net/b230591/attractor/attractor_3.png
Sierpinski triangle (random-based):
http://hem.bredband.net/b230591/attractor/sierpinski.png
> Now, I haven't read much of the book, but I wonder if it's possible to
> make nice looking strange att. in 3D? Then POV-Ray will come handy to
> make nice stereographs of the object.
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
3D-attractors (and even higher orders) are described in the book. Maybe
I'll do some experiments with them; just to see if the extra dimension is
worth the extra effort.
---
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Edward Coffey
Subject: Re: Strange Attractors by Manuel Kasten
Date: 21 Mar 2004 08:00:32
Message: <405d91f0@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Xilo Musimene wrote:
...
> Now, I haven't read much of the book, but I wonder if it's possible to
> make nice looking strange att. in 3D?
...
Isn't mine (posted to this thread) nice looking enough for you?
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As promised (or at least hinted at) I have given 3D attractors a go.
These were done with POV-Ray (3.5 for Windows).
They all use quadratic functions.
All of them have 500000 points, except quadratic_2_1m.jpg which has one
million points.
One million points is as high as I can go with individually colored
points. Even then I have to disable light- & vista-buffers to conserve
memory (these consume huge amounts of memory, and take forever to generate
with 1M points).
---
FE
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'quadratic_1.jpg' (70 KB)
Download 'quadratic_2.jpg' (70 KB)
Download 'quadratic_2_1m.jpg' (70 KB)
Download 'quadratic_3.jpg' (48 KB)
Download 'quadratic_4.jpg' (62 KB)
Download 'quadratic_5.jpg' (93 KB)
Download 'quadratic_6.jpg' (67 KB)
Preview of image 'quadratic_1.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_2.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_2_1m.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_3.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_4.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_5.jpg'
Preview of image 'quadratic_6.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Fredrik Eriksson" <noo### [at] nowherecom> wrote in message
news:opr48epnpgzjc5hb@news.povray.org...
>
> As promised (or at least hinted at) I have given 3D attractors a go.
>
> These were done with POV-Ray (3.5 for Windows).
> They all use quadratic functions.
> All of them have 500000 points, except quadratic_2_1m.jpg which has one
> million points.
>
> One million points is as high as I can go with individually colored
> points. Even then I have to disable light- & vista-buffers to conserve
> memory (these consume huge amounts of memory, and take forever to generate
> with 1M points).
KICK-ASS!
--
- Respectfully,
Dan
http://<broken link>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
what formulas did you use to create these? and how the hell did you get
1M spheres to render in povray? i tried it myself and the furthest i got
where ~250k before i ran out of memory (512mb availabe), with all but
povray closed...
really nice, especially number 1 & 5!
bye,
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:45:53 +0100, Marc Roth <mar### [at] rothconsultcom> wrote:
> what formulas did you use to create these?
The formulas are the simple quadratic polynomials:
x = a[ 0] + a[ 1]*x + a[ 2]*x*x + a[ 3]*x*y + a[ 4]*x*z + a[ 5]*y
+ a[ 6]*y*y + a[ 7]*y*z + a[ 8]*z + a[ 9]*z*z
y = a[10] + a[11]*x + a[12]*x*x + a[13]*x*y + a[14]*x*z + a[15]*y
+ a[16]*y*y + a[17]*y*z + a[18]*z + a[19]*z*z
z = a[20] + a[21]*x + a[22]*x*x + a[23]*x*y + a[24]*x*z + a[25]*y
+ a[26]*y*y + a[27]*y*z + a[28]*z + a[29]*z*z
The actual coefficients (a[0] -> a[29]) are derived at parse time from the
strings given in the book by Sprott.
> and how the hell did you get 1M spheres to render in povray? i tried it
> myself and the furthest i got where ~250k before i ran out of memory
> (512mb availabe), with all but povray closed...
1. I have 1 GB of memory.
2. For the 1M sphere render, I disable light- & vista buffers. With
7-digit object counts, they can require several hundred MB of memory, and
take far longer to create than it takes to render without them.
They don't seem to cause much trouble for the 0.5M renders though.
Also note that I was able to render Manuel Kasten's original scene (the
one with 2M spheres) without difficulty, but those spheres did not have
individual textures.
> really nice, especially number 1 & 5!
> bye,
> Marc
---
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I read this at my job too. Is this really personal use, though? If you are a
> computer scientist, this newsgroup ranks up there with on-the-job research
> because of the technical aspect, particularly if you do any graphical art.
> As long as it is computer related, doesn't accessing a site consititute
> normal use, keeping up with the field? It's hard to imagine that a company
> would have a problem with joining a community of interest to keep your edge
> sharp. I know that reading this group has definitely improved my ability to
> create 3D images because of all the stuff I've learned from people smarter
> than I (and lucky for me that is darned-near everyone!)
The company for which I work for doesn't share your point of view.
Unfortunately, things have been going a little more crazy than average
over there, I hope things will settle in some time!...
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I've whipped up a little program myself that can render these attractors
> (among others).
> Here are some results:
Nice ones!
I'm currently working on a search-and-study kind of program... Though
I'm having trouble with the analysis part.
The analysis should decide if the current render is nice or not and
mutate the render to make it nicier.
Right now I test for:
1) finite and non-periodic attractors. Ie. chaotic ones!
2) Number of viewport-visible points
3) Fractal dimension
Though I think I misunderstood the fractal dimension calculus... I'll
continue the analysis-tweak tomorrow with a fresh mind! ;)
> 3D-attractors (and even higher orders) are described in the book. Maybe
> I'll do some experiments with them; just to see if the extra dimension
> is worth the extra effort.
I've read to section, it doesn't seem much better than the usual 2D one,
except it's good for adding some depth-culling effect (ie. fog).
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
