Today has been quite inspiring for a number of reasons, but the fun started happening with a really good (albeit 10+ year old) TED Talk by Ken Robinson regarding creativity and education. As you may well know with internet exploration, I was not searching at all for this TED Talk, but happened to stumble upon its mention in an article about techies homeschooling their kids that I was given among my lousy search engine results. Randomness is it’s own form of creativity, and that’s one of the things that makes certain fractals so delightful. But rather than the computer generating all the wild creativity and fun, it can be much more enjoyable to do it yourself.
My astute readers may note I have written a more complete description of the actual algorithm for fractal flames in another article. This article is more about improvements to the general process in the software for rendering fractal flames.
Having been creating fractals for a number of years, I have grown considerably interested in making software that allows me to create these structures. Not considering CPU vs GPU, there are a couple of common approaches, and I have had the pleasure of trying them all out. After toying with various software and examining their inner mechanisms, I’m now familiar with how each of these programs render fractals.
Addiction to creating fractals can be a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, you are creating the most liberal art in the universe – pure color and shape – without so much as a single relation to a controversial topic. On the other hand, the artwork never provides complete gratification. It drives you to want to see more and more (and spend hours on end rendering it). The fine details are the main attraction and the source of endless entertainment.
There is an enormous potential in fractal design, and I’d like to see it manifested. However, fractal creation can be inherently slow or spotty in appearance depending on the type of fractal being rendered and the software used. Out of disappointment, I’ve pondered the details of the process and how to improve it. What follows in this article is an overview of those thoughts and an analysis of some of the solutions I’ve been dreaming up.
Some time ago, I made comparisons between different types of art software available. I compared Krita and Gimp, then I compared Krita and PaintToolSAI. Now it’s time to look at what the pros use. I’ll begin with procedure, explain the gaps in free software, and then discuss how ClipStudio Paint fills in those gaps. Finally, I’ll throw in alittle bit about what I think of Toon Boon Harmony.
The Gimp is arguably the most popular free software for non-vector digital art and image editing. (Inkscape is the best free program for vector graphics in my opinion.) Some time ago, I analyzed Paint Tool SAI, comparing it with the Gimp, and the results are in. But SAI has an unrelated, nay, a mirror image in the FOSS world trying to do what SAI does in a better way: Krita. Krita is a cross-platform open-source free software tool for digital art. In fact, I’d argue that, in light of what Krita has to offer, Gimp may be considered the best for image editing and not for art creation. But here’s a run-down comparison of the two.
Anyone who explores the internet long enough should already be well aware of frequent image re-posting. While for some things, this is acceptable, in other areas, it leads to the ever louder cry of “art theft” and helps keep the lawyers active in the courts in D.C. and the halls of the copyright office. It is rather easy to copy a 2D image, and with Adobe CS 6, it is easy to remove a watermark. While images with watermarks removed may not be an exact copy (due to the algorithm for image correction and the style of watermark), the average naked eye won’t notice. But what’s more important is that a work with possibly a great deal of time put into its production (depending on if we’re talking about amateur photo or something like a realistic digital painting, etc.) is now available to everyone, and unfortunately, allows for just about anyone to take the credit. This tends to tick off artists and has lead to a whole lot of bickering and lawsuits.
Interestingly enough, what one might call the “calamities of Flatland” have yet to hit the 3D world. But here’s how that could change…
As a young child growing up, the world is new, and that’s probably the closest most people will ever be to seeing things how they truly are in an objective – as opposed to subjective – sense. That is not to say they will not view things in a subjective sense, only that this is as close as they will be to both the objective perspective and to the unbiased perspective. I refer specifically to the earliest of ages, before one has enough experience to have an opinion.
Last night, I quickly put together a video about how Julia transforms work in iterated function series flames. By “Julia”, I mean julian, juliaq, julia3D, julia3Dz, etc. – The transforms in JWildfire labeled with “julia” (except salamander and one other, I think). I know Apophysis has many of these as well.
You may have been wondering why I haven’t written in awhile…
Like web design, like anime, like most digital art out there, the key to good IFS (iterated function series, i.e. “fractal flame”) is making borders. This used to elude me, but recently…