Idea for a new G-Force....

[GrammyJo]

Hello.

I LOVE G-Force sooooooooo much!!! It continues to enthrall me when I have the time to just sit and watch. Even when I can't do that it's always on since I use the screen saver too. Of course the ss isn't nearly as 'expressive' as when there's music 'directing' it, but it's still sooooooooo awesome!

My question is to Andy...
Would it be possible to create a 'Christian' themed G-Force...one with morphing Christian symbols (cross, fish, etc.)? I'd try it myself IF I was a genius (trust me here....I'm NOT! LOL) Speaking AS a Christian and profoundly 'moved' by G-Force I can tell you that having it centered around a Christian theme would be HIGHLY desirable, not just to me but to ANY like minded person(s) 'out there'. I know you'd have NO problem getting people to purchase it!

Please consider this Andy. Now I'm NOT talking about a generic 'spiritual' version. It's obvious that MANY people consider GF an almost spiritual experience now (to which I can relate). So IF you were to consider this please don't include any other religions (their symbols, etc.) in a Christian version. That would basically render it 'null and void' for those of us who ascribe to the Christian religion! (Nothing against other religions but I couldn’t use another religions version any more than they could use mine).

Thanks for the time and here's HOPING.....

[Linvincible]

yuck
please let the software be free of any religion or sect-ish concepts

Grammy, you can add your own images as background for gforce by adding any image you want in the "sprites" directory of G-Force
you can also get rif of any waveshape that your beliefs would not sponsor by deleting the corresponding files in the "waveshapes" directory

L'invincible

[markofkane]

I don't see a problem with someone creating religious flowfields, and have it an an option to install.

[JayPro]

Free Yourself...by ::gasp:: Andy O'Meara:
/*


In his novel Mere_Christianity, C.S. Lewis writes:
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg - or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us."

There's many good sites, but http://www.ccci.org/whoisjesus/interactive-journey/ is a good site that can introduce you to what being a Christian is really all about.

*/


Aspc=1

// There's a 1 in 50 chance a0 will evaluate to be .01, otherwise, it's 0
A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) )"

D0="clip( sqwv(x * 10) * sqwv(y * 1.5) + sqwv(x * 2) * sqwv(( y - .25 ) * 10) ) * a0 + .99" //I believe this is the cross outline (see below)-- JwPro


srcX="x * d0"
srcY="y * d0"

Vers=100

---------

As suggested above (unless I'm wrong), I believe that there's a 1 in 50 chance that every time this loads you'll see a cross mid-screen.

[Rovastar]

yuck
please let the software be free of any religion or sect-ish concepts

Hehe

L'invincible,

When Andy first created his visualization he wanted to call it something that reflected where he draw his inspiration to create it.

As Andy has (last time I spoke to Andy on the subject anyway) strong Christian beliefs he named the vis G-Force and do you know what the G stands for - 'God'. So really it could be called "God Force" .

Honest truth there.

So G(od)-Force is not free from "any religion or sect-ish concepts" at all.

I am sure Andy will confirm this if you are a doubting Thomas.

So GrammyJo there already is a Christian theme.

[willrob]

There is a waveshape called Cross in my WS folder, but the Toolbar doesn't display it (nor many others); so I assume it's not longer compatable with G-Force.

I couldn't get Free Yourself to work. It's a Flowfield, right? I tried it as a waveshape also, but it lacks the necessary metas.

[JayPro]

Will-

Yes, it's a FlowField. maybe the problem is that each time it loads for you, you're only seeing the pixel spread instead of the outline.

Maybe if you isolate the field and then lower the value of 50 in A0 to, say, 10, you'll see it.




Also, I wouldn't give up on some of your problem waveshapes. Check the file for syntax issues. Then fill in any missing/flaky Meta values...

The Rule of Thumb as Taught Me by Erich Kodotai:

For a Pure WaveShape (i.e. solely within the "ZXC Key" WaveShape slide show): Meta="reactive=4 detail=4 density=4 morphable=4"

For a Pure Particle (Sound-Reactive or Not...BTW toggle the "Y" key to activate and "K" to remove): Meta="reactive=1 detail=3 density=3"

Of course if you want a WaveShape to do either, you can leave the Meta as it was written by the config author.



EDIT: I understand that having VectorC give you error messages over your Waves---assuming on my part that it has---can be frustrating.
It's been for me, which is why I remain at v3.0.1.

Andy tells me not to get wrapped around the axle over the modernized syntax (if you wanna call it that); but I kinda have to if I want to see how I can catch up vis a vis my waveshapes---and also some FF's, a few of which aren't of my authorship BTW---that aren't working right/at all in 3.1>.

Yes VectorC tells me I need (float) this or (int) that...

...yadda yadda yadda...

...but how do you and I correct our mutual problems aside from the following?:

A. Learn C++ and see how that figures into the updated code (IMO time-consuming and not really the right way to approach things)...

B. Deluge Andy with a virtual dungload of configs for him to tweak up to snuff (IMO not a sporting thing to do given how busy he is right now) ...

or

C. Wait for more configs that come with a whole lotta slashed-out commentary that tells what this or that new fnc actually does.

So let the rotten tomatoes come flying straight at my face for saying this for the "infinitieth" time, but...

We need---especially now with this updated language---better config programming documentation for those who suffer from differing levels of math/programming deficit disorder .

To be fair to Andy, though, he has addressed this more than once and for now can't pull off anything short of a full-fledged C++ tutorial.

I'm okay with that. Having some self-taught C++ under my belt, it'll be interesting to see if ultimately I can solve my own particular dilemmas. More self-teaching, I suppose and it's back to the Dummies manual.

[Rovastar]

Maybe if you isolate the field and then lower the value of 50 in A0 to, say, 10, you'll see it.

To get the 'cross' to apper you need to understand some of what is written in the config.

Discliamer: I do not have G-Force on this machine at the moment and I have not tried this config out but the following should work.

Code: Select all

Aspc=1

// There's a 1 in 50 chance a0 will evaluate to be .01, otherwise, it's 0
A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) )"

D0="clip( sqwv(x * 10) * sqwv(y * 1.5) + sqwv(x * 2) * sqwv(( y - .25 ) * 10) ) * a0 + .99"
//I believe this is the cross outline (see below)-- JwPro


srcX="x * d0"
srcY="y * d0"

Vers=100

// There's a 1 in 50 chance a0 will evaluate to be .01, otherwise, it's 0
A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) )"

Lets break down AO to work out when the one in 50 chance of getting 0.1 happens.

rnd(50) - selects an real number (numbers with decimals like 3.187, 23.672) between greater than 0 and less than 50.

flor(rnd(50)) - the flor command 'rounds off' to the whole number
3.245 will be 3 and 4.899 will be 4 and 0.1777 will be 0

So flor(rnd(50)) will produce whole numbers or integars from 0 to 49

clip (flor(rnd(50)) ) - the clip function is a little odd. It does this

clip(myx) given a value I'll call it myx

if myx is less than 0 then the result will be 0
if myx is between 0 and 1 return the value x
if myx is greater than 1 return the value 1

So
clip(-32) = 0
clip(-0.1345) =0
clip(-2.334) = 0


clip(0) = 0

clip(0.123) = 0.123
clip(0.778) = 0.778

clip(1) =1
clip(1.0001) = 1
clip(2.1173) =1
clip(23) = 1

so from this we know that the value sent to the clip function is
"flor(rnd(50)) will produce whole numbers or integars from 0 to 49"
so whole numbers from 0 to 49
clip(0) = 0
clip(1) = 1
clip(2) = 1
clip(3) = 1

etc, etc

So only 1 time in 50 will clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) = 0 when the rnd value land between 0 and 0.99999999

and if you finish the equation for A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) )"
when rnd(50) = 0 to 0.999999

For this example I will use the value rnd(50) = 0.1777 (to force numbers between 0 and 1 use rnd(1))

then

A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( 0.1777) ) ) )"
A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip(0) )"
A0 = "0.1 * (1- 0)"
A0 = "0.1* 1"
A0 = "0.1"

We are interested in only this value we are interest in the 1 in 50 chance so if you replace

A0=".01 * ( 1 - clip( flor( rnd( 50 ) ) ) )"

with simply

A0 = "0.1"

then you will get the cross all the time.

I repeat I have not tried this but from working out the one line I belive this to be correct.

Also if teh scene is not working make sure that everything is on seprate lines. This is all one line beginning D0

D0="clip( sqwv(x * 10) * sqwv(y * 1.5) + sqwv(x * 2) * sqwv(( y - .25 ) * 10) ) * a0 + .99" //I believe this is the cross outline (see below)-- JwPro

Or make it two seperate line like in my code quote above.

so the overall version could be:

Code: Select all

Aspc=1

// Always 0.01
A0=".01"

D0="clip( sqwv(x * 10) * sqwv(y * 1.5) + sqwv(x * 2) * sqwv(( y - .25 ) * 10) ) * a0 + .99"
//I believe this is the cross outline (see below)-- JwPro


srcX="x * d0"
srcY="y * d0"

Vers=100

So there is no C coding skills in what I did there just some maths and applied functions which we have all the explainations for.

[Rovastar]

Andy tells me not to get wrapped around the axle over the modernized syntax (if you wanna call it that); but I kinda have to if I want to see how I can catch up vis a vis my waveshapes---and also some FF's, a few of which aren't of my authorship BTW---that aren't working right/at all in 3.1>.

I must admit I don't know much about the waveforms only ever briefly looked at them.

But I am sure I can explain what is going wrong in the FF's if you let me know which ones you are having a problem with and why.

[willrob]

Rovastar's version works for me. The cross appears more with certain waveshaps, and can get buried by others. But when it's visable, it defines a frozen segment of the flowfield/waveshape interaction. While all else is in motion, it's a silent center.

JayPros advice on changing the meta data revived all the waveshapes that I discovered were not showing up on the toolbar—a condition I assumed meant there was something wrong with them. When opening them to make the meta change, I discovered that many of them were not in Plain Text format. That alone would be a problem. Since my only source for them has been the G-Force included set and the Extras web page, I have to assume they were incorrectly saved by their creators.

[JayPro]

That settles it then....

Given my druthers, I'd commision Rovastar to create an online G-Force code manual. I guess it can't be explained without delving into at least *some* math; but he explained the FF we're discussing here in a way that even *I* can get.

Will-

Thanks for the props on solving one of your two issues. You brought up the fact that the extras files might not be in plain text.
Initially I was going to say that it might be more in the way they were uploaded into the archive; but on second thought, it would make sense that Andy (or whoever the uploader might be) would place them in "as is".
Don't forget, either, that a lot of these Extras files go back quite a bit. Indeed, the .txt (good) vs .rtf (bad) thing only surfaced with the advent of OS X, what with Jag/Tiger/Panther using .rtf as the default text file.
Thankfully, TextEdit has an option (plus a handful of shortcuts) to convert the aforementioned format to Plain Text; so you realy don't need third-party text editors (some of which can be buggy) to do the job.
I don't, however, think that TextEdit has a batch editing capability; so I suppose you will need something like TexEdit Plus after all.

Hope this helps.