ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/fractint/archive/v01.n196

Internet Message Format | 1998-05-10 | 41KB

From: [e-mail] (fractint-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fractint-digest V1 #196
Reply-To: fractint-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


fractint-digest          Monday, May 11 1998          Volume 01 : Number 196




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 06:42:41 -0400
From: "Peter Gavin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

I'm sorry, but when a drawing takes 7 weeks to finish, DOS *IS* faster =
than windows.

Pete
<[e-mail]>

//  -----Original Message-----
//  From: [e-mail]
//  [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Terry W. =
Gintz
//  Sent: Monday, May 11, 1998 4:49 AM
//  To: [e-mail]
//  Subject: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond
// =20
// =20
[snipped]


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:23:27 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Petr Lobaz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

You think of windows menus? It means that you MUST do everything using
mouse, then put your hands on the keyboard, move with mouse, type
another information and so on. I bet that I can work with current version
of Fractint several times faster than with this strange combination of
mouse and keyboard. And to make everything available from mouse control?
This contolling of program would be so SLOOOW. You asked for people who
like DOS command line. Command.com doesn't have such nice features like
for example Bourne Again Shell (bash), but I can work with DOS prompt much
faster than with mouse. Don't forget that many programmers are quite good
keyboard users.

Petr



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:26:24 -0400
From: Lee Skinner <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) fractint v20

Terry,

>>Who today prefers the DOS command line interface to the clarity and
elegance of Windows 95? <<

I prefer the clarity, elegance and speed of DOS!

Lee Skinner

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:26:26 -0400
From: Lee Skinner <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) periodicity=n

Cliff,

>>Because not all of us newbies know about the <G> command.  In fact, thi=
s
newbie doesn't even know what 'periodicity=3Dnnn' does in the first place=
 <<

Newbies should first execute the command "Fractint makedoc", print out
fractint.doc, and then spend a little time studying the documentation. Lo=
ts
of good stuff in there!

Lee

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:32:26 -0500
From: Janet Preslar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

Just my two cents worth . . .

I have not generated more than a dozen fractals in more than a year because I
could not afford to give up the time on my old and very slow machine which
forced me to choose between making a fractal or doing all of the other things I
use a computer for. Yet I have kept up with this list, and read each message, in
the hopes that one day I would upgrade my hardware and be able to catch up with
the rest of you.

So last month I did just that. I now have a PII/333, 8M of video RAM, a 19"
monitor AND a video card that is not compatible with FractInt. Now I did my
research on video cards, asking for advice from this list, and I got a few
answers about what works but none on which cards don't work. So I bought the
system which (I thought) best suited my needs. I have asked for and received as
much help from the list as it apparently is capable of giving. And I've found
that there are at least two other users with the same card (Diamond Fire GL
1000) who are equally as frustrated as I.

I have installed Display Doctor which says that I now have 59 modes available
that FractInt cannot communicate with. I am seeking help from both Diamond and
SciTech, but I am none too optimistic.

My question is: if FractInt continues to be a DOS program, what is going to
happen as the rest of you upgrade and find that fewer and fewer video card
manufacturers provide any sort of VESA or DOS support? From all I can tell, that
is more likely to happen than is the move to Windows. I vote for someone taking
Terry up on his offer to help.

Sorry for the harangue, guys, but my frustration level is rather high these
days.

Janet


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:06:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: Re: (fractint) Filtering images with Fractint

On Sat, 2 May 1998, Weldon Morgan wrote:
> Part of the reason I became interested in Fractint had to do with the
> possibility of improving the resolution of photographic images through the
> use of fractel technology.  As I understand it, one can use the fractel
> algorithm to simulate the pixel information that does not exist in the
> original image.  Does anyone on this list have any information on this
> process, or can point me in the right direction

I haven't heard of the idea.  Sounds interesting.

There's going to be a finite limit to your improvements, though, even
if it's possible to do this at all, on information-theoretic grounds.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:06:24 -0400
From: Jack Valero <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

At 01:48 AM 11/05/98 -0700, Terry Gintz wrote:
>Now that I am out of the shareware market, perhaps people won't accuse me
>of having "vested" interests in the following criticism.
As you don't seem to have made a concentrated marketing effort,
I doubt any such accusations would be warranted or worth
considering.

>With all the hype I have read about the greatness of Fractint, why is it
>so hard for its programmers to get a real handle on Windows programming?
I have the impression that it is not that they can't; it is that
they just haven't been interested. Instead, they have concentrated
on adding features and improvements. Given a choice between these
or a more modern interface, I personally prefer the former.

>Is it because to understand Windows coding, you have to like Windows?  It
>all goes back to the original demand for maximum speed, and the apparent
>overhead of Windows that makes graphics "unacceptably" slow.  Like the
>DOS interface, this notion is obsolete.
<snip>
>..  I have some reservations about whether the
>screen-draw time is even an issue these days, as I have a Windows program
>that draws Fractint's opening screen(the Mandelbrot set) in true color in
>4 seconds or less(800X600 at 233 Mhz) without the extensive optimization
>that Fractint uses(like symmetry and periodocity.)
I actually like the Windows and Mac interfaces but I also still like
MS-DOS. I am not a Luddite but because I hate compulsive consumerism
I still use an antiquated 486-DX 100 with 20 megs ram and a 550 hard
disk. I keep considering upgrading but for the graphic work I do,
a middle road Pentium seems only to be about twice as fast in
real world terms. 8 hour renderings would only take 4 but this
is still too long to sit and watch. I cope quite well by running
them overnight.

GUI programs are certainly easier to use and much friendlier than
DOS based ones. Still, even my tired computer is a miracle compared
to my early 64k 8080(?) boxes with 5 meg hard disks. But whereas my
old WordStar word processor used 90k (not a typo) of disk space
current wps typically use 20 megs or more and this is typical of
powerful gui based programs. In reality, for core functionality,
my current wonder box is no more powerful, bigger or faster than my
old systems. As very much a former programmer, I realize that it
doesn't *have* to be this way but in the real world it is. Programmers
understandably find it easier and faster to use high level languages,
libraries, etc than assembly. It is also tempting to forget about
optimization because it is so easy to rely on today's typical
machine speeds to compensate for their lack. Windows is not nearly the
encumbrance some would have us believe, but it does add another
layer of code to be executed, etc, etc. This has to slow things
down at least a bit. I suspect there are a lot more users in similar
circumstances than we would like to admit. So for me, sometimes there
is still room for old-style dos programs.

But if the mantra is "upgrade, upgrade, upgrade" I agree with most
of what you have said. Dos lovers will undoubtably regale you with
stories of keyboard speed vs mouse but they are ignoring the amount
of time invested to make all those arcane and illogical key
combinations second nature. Besides, when the image rendering takes
so long, how significant is a second or two of entry speed saved?
(Not to mention that gui programs can, and do, offer keyboard
equivalents as well)

>Or are there other considerations we aren't being informed about?  Is it
>the screen draw time, or plain stubbornness, or just incompetence?  I
>don't throw this out lightly.  I've used WinFract some in Windows 3.1,
>and that was hardly a graceful multitask promoting program.  Numerous
>bugs made it crash or mess up Windows.  The help file was much
>abbreviated from the full DOS version, which made it hard to understand
>some features without reading the DOS help file.   No attempt to upgrade
>this poor showing to a Windows 95 program.  Even less attempt to include
>what the DOS version of Fractint now includes.
Again, my impression is that WinFract was a quick port by a single
person intended only to give a taste of fractals to the Windows
restricted user. I never had it corrupt Windows although it
did occasionally crash. But no program I have ever used extensively
(dos or windows) has failed to crash for me at one time or
another. In the Fractint world, WinFract might almost be
considered an aberration. I agree that in general WinFract is
a terrible example of Windows programming but that's because
underneath it all, it isn't really a Windows program. It is
unfair to base your complaints on it.

Fractint is not evenly remotely related to perfection and I am
not married to it. But of the fractal generators I have used
it seems to have the greatest flexibility, the most options, the
best documentation and an absolutely huge and active following.
This has made Fractint not so much a program as an experience-
not a bad thing. This notwithstanding, I frequently find
features in other Windows fractal generators that I dearly
would love to see in Fractint. Bottom line- no single
program is likely to become all things to all people
but Fractint has been a brave effort.

>The problem I have now is
>deciphering much of the abstract(optimizing) code that Fractint has
>accumulated over the years.  Maybe there is a master decryption log to
>explain all the routines in Fractint's source code,  because as it is
>distributed now, no one programmer could understand it all(without a log
>book.)  If there is any attempt to keep a Windows 95 version current and
>maintainable, complete documentation for all source code, as well as
>program options, is necessary.
This time, I think you are understating the problem. I have
managed large teams of personnel, motivated by salaries, and
it was difficult enough to keep them on track. Trying to control
a group of unpaid programmers separated by geography, time
and programming philosophy may approach the miraculous!

I am not minimizing the efforts of the Fractint programmers
when I say that Fractint owes its status not to its coders,
but its users. It is far from perfect but it has depth. You
should not be surprised if its users defend it passionately.

Regards - Jack

visit our fractal gallery: http://www.globalserve.net/~jval/phractal.html

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:16:01 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

I for one would very very much like a fully (more or less) functional Winfract.

Since most of my Winders programs use "hotkeys", I'm assuming the mousely
objections could be overcome. A Shift+key combo comes to mind.

Now...I also like to run Fractint under DOS...but....there are times when I'd
prefer to stay in true Winders and multi-task. Why....I could let Winfract
render in the background while chatting!!!! or posting all those pars and
frms!!!!  I can live without color cycling in a Winfract version, but the
addition of being able to construct a color map would be a very useful one. I
know I can do that quite nicely in some of the existing winders-based fractal
programs.....but NO sliders please!!! a nice little pallet like we have now.

Think of the very simple need to view all the pars posted to this
list........wouldn't it be nice to have them rendering while composing
scintillating comments to the authors? All problems with winders
aside.......multitasking is better than using at a single DOS app, no matter how
fast.

Angela

Petr Lobaz wrote:
>
> You think of windows menus? It means that you MUST do everything using
> mouse, then put your hands on the keyboard, move with mouse, type
> another information and so on. I bet that I can work with current version
> of Fractint several times faster than with this strange combination of
> mouse and keyboard. And to make everything available from mouse control?
> This contolling of program would be so SLOOOW. You asked for people who
> like DOS command line. Command.com doesn't have such nice features like
> for example Bourne Again Shell (bash), but I can work with DOS prompt much
> faster than with mouse. Don't forget that many programmers are quite good
> keyboard users.
>
> Petr

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:18:25 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) periodicity=n

Lee...

I did that after Bob Margolis suggested it to me off line.  But...this is one of
those chicken and egg things for a newbie like me....I don't know about makedoc
until I read the documentation....which I can read after I use makedoc......and
I learn about makedoc from the documentation......and .....

Angela

Lee Skinner wrote:
>
> Cliff,
>
> >>Because not all of us newbies know about the <G> command.  In fact, this
> newbie doesn't even know what 'periodicity=nnn' does in the first place <<
>
> Newbies should first execute the command "Fractint makedoc", print out
> fractint.doc, and then spend a little time studying the documentation. Lots
> of good stuff in there!
>
> Lee

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:39:29 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

Jack...

I think your comments were right on!!!

I'd like to add that when I'm going to seriously work on fractals, I'm always
going to choose the DOS version of Fractint. But there are often times when I'm
in "mess around mode" and a Winfract that could at least "see" all the new pars
would be my choice......even with it's other current limitations.

Angela


Jack Valero wrote:
>
> <<snipped>>
> I actually like the Windows and Mac interfaces but I also still like
> MS-DOS. I am not a Luddite but because I hate compulsive consumerism
> I still use an antiquated 486-DX 100 with 20 megs ram and a 550 hard
> disk. I keep considering upgrading but for the graphic work I do,
> a middle road Pentium seems only to be about twice as fast in
> real world terms. 8 hour renderings would only take 4 but this
> is still too long to sit and watch. I cope quite well by running
> them overnight.
>
<<snipped>>

 Besides, when the image rendering takes
> so long, how significant is a second or two of entry speed saved?
> (Not to mention that gui programs can, and do, offer keyboard
> equivalents as well)
>
<<snipped>>
 I agree that in general WinFract is
> a terrible example of Windows programming but that's because
> underneath it all, it isn't really a Windows program. It is
> unfair to base your complaints on it.
>
> Fractint is not evenly remotely related to perfection and I am
> not married to it. But of the fractal generators I have used
> it seems to have the greatest flexibility, the most options, the
> best documentation and an absolutely huge and active following.
> This has made Fractint not so much a program as an experience-
> not a bad thing. This notwithstanding, I frequently find
> features in other Windows fractal generators that I dearly
> would love to see in Fractint. Bottom line- no single
> program is likely to become all things to all people
> but Fractint has been a brave effort.
>
<<snipped>>

>
> I am not minimizing the efforts of the Fractint programmers
> when I say that Fractint owes its status not to its coders,
> but its users. It is far from perfect but it has depth. You
> should not be surprised if its users defend it passionately.
>
> Regards - Jack
>

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:27:27 -0400
From: Lee Skinner <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) periodicity=n

Angela,

>>..I don't know about makedoc until I read the documentation....which I
can read after I use makedoc......and I learn about makedoc from the
documentation......and .....<<

Fractint comes with a very short file called fractint.doc.  If one reads
it, it tells how to create the full documentation file using makedoc.

Lee

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:25:51 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) periodicity=n

Lee...

The operative word in your message is "IF."

Picture yourself a newbie.....you check

1.  The documentation at Spanky (really good)
2.  The help that pops up under F1 (also good)
3.  The read.me file that comes with Fractint (which says very little)

I'll bet if you try that yourself you'll be unlikely to figure out that the
makedoc feature is available. I just went thru that drill. IF you can spot the
makedoc.doc file in the listing of stuff that makes up Fractint and decide to
read it, you are home free.  Personally, I never saw it until Bob told me about
it.

BTW, I think Fractint's documentation is MUCH better than many (make that most)
commercial graphics programs I own. When I see the word "intuitive" in a
program's advertising hype....I think....Ut OH, lousey documentation, eh???? The
stuff from Metatools tops my list of good, but obscure programs.

Anyway, I think the addition of a line or two at Spanky about the makedoc
feature would be very helpful for new users. To me the obvious place is right
under the "GET FRACTINT" words. The F1 help that comes with Fractint allowed me
to figure enough out to be able to start working with the program, but it would
have been nice to have had a printed version I could refer to as well. I just
never knew it was available.

Angela



Lee Skinner wrote:
>
> Angela,
>
> >>..I don't know about makedoc until I read the documentation....which I
> can read after I use makedoc......and I learn about makedoc from the
> documentation......and .....<<
>
> Fractint comes with a very short file called fractint.doc.  If one reads
> it, it tells how to create the full documentation file using makedoc.
>
> Lee
>

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:50:39 -0700 (MST)
From: Kerry Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20

> >>Who today prefers the DOS command line interface to the clarity and
> elegance of Windows 95? <<

While it may be personal prejudice, stubborness, idiocy, or all of the
above, I perfer DOS programs to Windows, at least, DOS Fractint to other
fractal programs.   One issue for any fractal program to consider:  batch
mode.  Fractals now being rendered can be so big and take so long, that
running batch is the only practical way to do it.  I don't believe that
this is limited to DOS programs, but many windowing programs don't have it
as an option.

Kerry Mitchell

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kerry Mitchell
[e-mail]
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:48:22 -0700
From: "Mike and Linda Allison" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Double Exposure Dragons Formula

Beautiful, Paul!  I like that one even more!

Thank you!
Linda


>comment {
>This formula applies the "double exposure" rendering method
>to the Julia sets of Newtons's solution of (w*w-1)*(w*w+c)=0.
>The coordinates for the Julia sets were picked off two of the
>midgets from the pars included with the Dbl_Expos_Newt1
>formula.  The second par I made especially for Linda (Gumbycat)
>who really liked the image with the midget that was used for
>that Julia set.




- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jiho Kim <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: fractint v20 and other stuff

There's no doubt that the windows version of fractint would be a great
benefit for all of us who use win 95/nt, but you can't get around the
speed of DOS for renderings that take weeks (for those who can get away
with not having a computer for weeks or have dedicated machines of
fractint)... especially for those working on their own formulas with
relatively big zooms and high iterations.

And would it be fractINT anymore?

Also, is there a way to compile formulas into some sort of code that will
execute more quickly?  I'm not really programming savvy...  So, I wouldn't
know.  But, from what I DO know, it's possible to make some your own
implementation in C, but you'd have to recompile...  Since I don't have a
C compiler, I can't (besides the fact that I haven't learned C...).  So,
can someone make a compiler which would just a formula compiler which can
be just called from fractint, theoretically?

Also, how will win 98 and nt 5 affect fractint multitasking abilities?
HAL probably would sitll be a problem in NT, but I don't really know
anything at win 98.  Will it handle DOS memory usage better?  Also, can
someone explain to me (privately, if needed) why fractint doesn't perform
well under win 95 (like when you swap out of the dos program into
something else) for certain video modes?

Just more annoying questions,

Jiho




- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:49:46 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) nova frms

Geoff,

 - I seem to have lost the Nova frm's.
 - I especially need "DMJ-NOVA-SPI-DEC-I".

    http://www.fractalus.com/misc/dmj-pub.zip

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  http://www.icd.com/tsd/ (temporary sanity designs)
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/ (fractals are my hobby)

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:53:47 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) periodicity=nnn on menu

Tim,

 - Would folks like to see the commandline control periodicity=nnn
 - promoted to menu status?

I would.  It's critical for a lot of formula types (especially convergent
iterators like Newton's method fractals).

 - To play devil's advocate, why would you want periodicity=nnn in a
 - menu since entering it via the <G> command is so easy?

Because pressing a single key for it, or even two keys, is a lot easier
than typing p e r i o d i c i t y = 0  :)  I can't count the number of
times I've misspelled it and received a complaint from FractInt.

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  http://www.icd.com/tsd/ (temporary sanity designs)
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/ (fractals are my hobby)

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:31:05 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Spanish Tile

From one of Paul Carlson's formulas....

wiz_spanishtile    { ; Angela Wilczynski 5/9/98
                     ; from a Paul Carlson formula
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=frac_ml.frm
  formulaname=MyEqn_Julia
  center-mag=-2.9976e-015/1.33227e-015/0.5612156/1.3333/180
  params=1/0/5/0.05/5/30 float=y maxiter=1000 inside=253 outside=summ
  viewwindows=1/1/yes/0/0
  colors=000R9Q<29>zzm<28>58f26e25g13i12k00m<12>34Q00N<15>znZ<13>S87L97EA7\
  <2>D5IC4MB2QA0UE3X<8>mUw<10>A0K<7>m0K<11>O0DM0CK0BH0AA0A<6>mwz<10>00C<8>\
  00N62O<8>m0K<14>ZDFYEEWDC<6>KA0<8>zzm<12>A00A03A06A0A<3>K5IN6KO7NQ8Q
  }

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:24:08 +0400 (MSD)
From: "Tony Hanmer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Some wishes

Hi from a Fractint user of about 8 months - fabulous program, though dangerous
for a fanatic like me!

I'd like to see:
Zoomable L-System types (I WANT to compile a huge detailed dragon curve)

A utility to start off with, say, the smallest zoom box of a screen, in one of
the corners, and calculate the rest of the whole screen, box by box (yes, I know
that's 400 or so gifs), seamlessly, AND then paste them together in one huge
image.  (I did this myself with 144 gifs, and the result at 35 MB is great, but
it just about drove me crazy compiling it in Photoshop.  Like I said, fanatic.)

A dragon curve with rounded corners, e.g. as one continuous line!  PLEASE!

Other variations of the dragon curve - try 2 folds in each direction, or 1
right 2 left, etc.  Is there a 3D analogue of  the beastie?!

A much larger scren, mono, for L-system types:  e.g. 10 000 x 15 000 pixels...
Viewable only in other programs, of course, if necessary.

Other fractals or objects to include in Fractint (I can't do the math but I have
ideas), from The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Geometry:
Appolonian Gasket, p 3
Blancmange curve, p 17
Spirals:  Archimedian p 8, logarithmic p 68, Fermat p 74
Gaussian primes, p 85
Harmonograph, p 92
Perron tree, p 129
Koch's Anti-snowflake, p 136
Packing circles rigidly, p 167
Poincare's circle, p 189
Triangular tessellations, p 258
spiral-similarity tessellation & spirolaterals, pp 239-241
Versatile tessellations, p 269
Some pretty weird stuff there...


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:58:49 +0200
From: Joe Pearson <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

Non-programmer, new fractint user speaking.  Also, general hater of
Microsnot bloatware and the assumption that users will always go out and
buy faster machines, bigger screens and bigger hard disks.

There is no compelling reason for a GUI, Windows version of fractint.
All we need is for the DOS version to support:

- - Calculation in the background while working in other applications
- - Long (i.e. descriptive) file names
- - Access to all video modes that are supported by the PC the user would
like to use
- - Help menus you can keep open while using the program
- - A COMPLETE restructuring of the current 'x', 'y', coordinates, etc
menus, as well as all the options that are accessible by 'g' only, and
therefore can't be checked.  I respect the fact that this is the way
they've grown up and what long-time users are used to (and so it's very
important to keep the current menu system as an option), but for a new
user it's pretty confusing.  Of course, moving to windoze is not an
automatic cure for confusing parameter settings, the developers still
have to do the work to structure the dialogue boxes logically!
- - A more intuitive (and that means what I personally expect!!) way of
using the mouse to do zooming.  For example, click-and-drag to select
the area, handles on the zoom box to stretch it and rotate it.  This is
the one area where a mouse interface adds some value (although it would
be nice as another way to pick files from a list, too).

A move to Windows is not much use if it doesn't deliver the above.  But
how many of these requirements can be met in the DOS version?

Joe

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:11:47 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

Terry,

Your comments on the DOS and [future] Windows version of fractint were
interesting and I especially appreciate your offer to help with the Windows
95 version, but I must take exception to the following:

[snip]
>>With all the hype I have read about the greatness of Fractint, why is it
>>so hard for its programmers to get a real handle on Windows programming?
[snip]
>>Or are there other considerations we aren't being informed about?  Is it
>>the screen draw time, or plain stubbornness, or just incompetence?
[snip]

This is quite unfair. Fractint is a patchwork quilt written over the years
by many different programmers, all who donated their time for no charge.
From what I've read, most all of them (as well as most users) would love to
see it ported to 32 bit Windows. I'm sure the reason it hasn't been done
yet has nothing to do with what you have said, but is simply a matter of
time. I'm sure Tim and most everybody else who has contributed to fractint
have 40 hour a week jobs and simply cannot find the time necessary for this
huge project. Anyway, there is also a fracint developers mailing list and
these questions should probably be discussed there.

>>(Who today prefers the DOS command line interface to the clarity and
>>elegance of Windows 95?

This just goes to show that clarity and elegance are in the eye of the
beholder. What could be more clear and elegant than:

command  [parameter1]  [parameter2]  [/switch1]  [/switch2]

Actually, I agree that the concept of windowed, graphical operating systems
is an elegant one, but the Windows 95 implementation of this concept leaves
a lot to be desired.

Nick



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:24:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: [e-mail] (Paul and/or Joyce Carlson)
Subject: (fractint) Silver and Gold Newton Formula

comment {
 This formula applies my double exposure stalks rendering to
 Newton's solution of (w*w-c*c)*(w*w+1/(c*c))=0.  This equation
 has an unusually rich variety of images.  I've included four
 pars that give a sampling of the variety.  I've used two color
 ranges (siver and gold) in all the pars which I think looks
 quite nice with these images, but I welcome other colormaps
 for these.

 Paul Carlson
 }

frm:Dbl_Expos_Newt2 {; Copyright (c) Paul W. Carlson, 1998
    ;
    ;   real(p1) = a factor controlling the size of the stalks
    ;   imag(p1) = minimum iterations
    ;   real(p2) = convergence test distance
    ;   imag(p2) = value of |w| for bailout
    ;   real(p3) = number of color ranges
    ;   imag(p3) = number of colors in a range
    ;
    z = bailout = iter = range_num = dist = 0
    c = pixel
    csqd = c * c
    icsqd = 1 / csqd
    sc = sqrt(-icsqd)
    a = csqd - icsqd
    w = sqrt(a / 6)
    stalk_width = real(p1)
    skip_iters = imag(p1)
    cdist = real(p2)
    num_ranges = real(p3)
    colors_in_range = imag(p3)
    index_factor = (colors_in_range - 1) / stalk_width
    :
    w2 = w * w
    w = (3 * w2 * w2 - a * w2 + 1) / (4 * w * w2 - 2 * a * w)
    ;
    IF (iter > skip_iters)
    IF (abs(real(w)) <= abs(imag(w)))
        min_dist = abs(real(w))
    ELSE
        min_dist = abs(imag(w))
    ENDIF
    IF (dist == 0 && min_dist < stalk_width)
        dist = min_dist
    ENDIF
    IF (|w + c| < cdist)
        bailout = 1
    ELSEIF (|w - c| < cdist)
        bailout = 1
    ELSEIF (|w + sc| < cdist)
        bailout = 1
    ELSEIF (|w - sc| < cdist)
        bailout = 1
    ENDIF
    ENDIF
    IF (bailout == 1)
    z = index_factor * dist + range_num * colors_in_range + 1
    ENDIF
    range_num = range_num + 1
    IF (range_num == num_ranges)
        range_num = 0
    ENDIF
    iter = iter + 1
    z = z - iter
    bailout == 0 && |w| < imag(p2)
}

dent2m01           { ; Copyright (c) Paul W. Carlson, 1998
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=dbexnwt2.frm
  formulaname=dbl_expos_newt2 passes=t
  corners=2.60831858285/2.60826892397/-3.31059200001e-005/3.310\
  59200001e-005/2.60826892397/3.31059200001e-005
  params=0.1/25/1e-007/1e+020/2/125
  float=y maxiter=2000 inside=253 outside=summ
  colors=000zz0<123>aG0zzz<123>VVV000<3>000
  }

dent2m02           { ; Copyright (c) Paul W. Carlson, 1998
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=dbexnwt2.frm
  formulaname=dbl_expos_newt2 passes=t
  corners=4.2295373/4.2103373/-0.0128/0.0128/4.2103373/0.0128
  params=0.1/10/1e-007/1e+020/2/125
  float=y maxiter=500 inside=253 outside=summ
  colors=000zz0<123>aG0zzz<123>VVV000<3>000
  }

dent2m03           { ; Copyright (c) Paul W. Carlson, 1998
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=dbexnwt2.frm
  formulaname=dbl_expos_newt2 passes=t
  corners=4.18407772960462/4.18407766763212/-4.13149999200574e-\
  008/4.13150001074116e-008/4.18407766763212/4.13150001074116e-008
  params=0.1/25/1e-007/1e+020/2/125
  float=y maxiter=2000 inside=253 outside=summ
  colors=000zz0<123>aG0zzz<123>VVV000<3>000
  }

dent2m04           { ; Copyright (c) Paul W. Carlson, 1998
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=dbexnwt2.frm
  formulaname=dbl_expos_newt2 passes=t
  center-mag=+0.53134409219500000/+0.84715435134499990/4508.941\
  /1/122 params=0.1/0/1e-007/1e+020/2/125
  float=y maxiter=2000 inside=253 outside=summ
  colors=000zz0<123>aG0zzz<123>VVV000<3>000
  }


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

End of fractint-digest V1 #196
******************************