Every year I stop by to suggest to add a central server with a genetic algorithm to take GForce to the next level and blow everyone's mind...
Last year I suggested it with this thread here: http://www.soundspectrum-forums.com/vie ... +algorithm some awesome people even gave it a shot, I sponsored the server, but the entire thing was shut down by the fact that soundspectrum either felt threatend by it or didnt feel like supporting it so it got burried (even though most of the development work was already done to test it as a prototype). Read the entire thread...
Too bad... we were so close. Instead I see soundspectrum rolling out new products that are similar than the existing stuff out there, when the mind blowing breakthrough stuff is 90% developed (for a prototype).
Than the year before I tried it with this thread here:
http://www.soundspectrum-forums.com/vie ... +algorithm
And than again another year before that with this thread here:
http://www.soundspectrum-forums.com/vie ... +algorithm
I keep coming back every year, because there is only so much you can improve with GForce... ok they rolled out a new product but I guess I still hope that sometimes they would give this a try... just for a prototype.
At least the history is here in this forum if someone else goes out and does it first, no one can at least say that it wasn't suggested to them.
Anyway I don't really expect an answer, and I know soundspectrum's position on that but who knows time, opinion and many things change where they might be willing to give it a try one year. I have been suggesting this now for probably 7 years now.... and I'll be back in a year probably....
So lets give it another try...
Moderators: BTT, andy55, b.dwall, juxtiphi
-
JayPro
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York
Where shall I begin?
IMHO one does not place onesself in particularly good stead with a community like ours when one rears his head ever so occasionally only to carp about what he thinks SoundSpectrum *does not* or *will not* offer instead of regularly contributing opinions on what they do or can.
That said, I might fairly glean from the original poster's comments that gee whiz, this should be the easiest thing in the world to do: just set up the right computer network/whatever, lock up together without restroom privileges a few poor schlubs who can afford/tinker with the software needed to soup up G-Force in that direction and voila.
Yes, I was part of one admittedly interesting, yet ultimately concept-relegated discussion on how we could go about doing this; but that's all it was. However, this seemed to be construed on the part of the original idea-bearer as an all-out green light. If so, then I am somewhat taken aback at what I see as an apparent lack of foresight, if not of sheer presumption.
Surely he must realize that the work needed to keep existing SoundSpectrum products on par with the constant new developments in both platforms is enough of a strain on the company's small group of developers. And, as has been explained by other knowledgeable posters in the three threads he cited, (actually two and a half, in that the last one garnered but a single response, perhaps owing to what was even back then the ever-growing tediousness of the discussion) it would take more than simply a bunch of serendipity-stricken techno-wonks who just happened to have the resources and wherewithal to pull this off.
BTW..."So close"?(!!??) Somehow I would think this to be the outright declaration of one harboring the notion that with maybe two willing collaborators on board this enterprise would thence blaze its way to completion hitchless. Well, a journey of a thousand miles does begin with a single step...except that in this case the step was being carried out by a scant few over-eager beavers, while those who had previously registered their misgivings etc. were rightfully withholding judgment on the wisdom of carrying out this venture, all things duly considered.
But what gets me more than anything is the rather clearly expressed insinuation on the part of the fellow who started this thread that his magnificent brainchild
was kiboshed because someone in the company's upper echelon--no names, mind you...just someone--may have been threatened by the mere shadowy existence of its collective possibilities. How any inference, assertion or logical extrapolation along these lines can hold H^2O without proof escapes me.
They didn't feel like supporting it? IIRC, Key responded in one of the threads rather enthusiastically, which to me indicates a certain willingness to go along with the whole thing. But just like most others who contributed to this theoretical application, he would have to be more concerned with the real-time issues that normally beset existing products awaiting the final touches.
But again, it simply redounds to priorities and, as I suggested earlier, the plain ol' ways and means to do it.
And not only that, but were it I instead of Andy at the helm of all this, I'd perhaps be somewhat resentful--at least inwardly--of a thinly-veiled accusation that OTOH quite manifestly smacks of intellectual bullyism (I cite the conclusion of this thread's first post's second paragraph). Otherwise I'd grant it all the due unworthiness of further comment that it so richly deserves.
I'll end this way. As I said at the start, to just poke one's figurative head in the door every quarter calendar year just to see whether we're hard at work with that "mind-blowing" new capability that will take GF into regions that the Hubble telescope can't penetrate...and to perhaps lurk otherwise...is kind of starry-eyed at best. Matter of fact, some would probably say annoying, especially if that's the only thing that such a one comes here to post about.
So, paraphrasing the title of this little thread about a redundant subject, I say let's try some long-term patience with the way SoundSpectrum handles its overall affairs. Meanwhile, I most respectfully suggest that this self-acclaimed disciple of genetic algorithm development should try twisting the arms of the folks at draves.org into getting their dog-eared artificial life-based products to work on my machine properly again...
...since it would seem to me that his interest in any other aspect of SoundSpectrum's apps is radically nominal at best.
IMHO one does not place onesself in particularly good stead with a community like ours when one rears his head ever so occasionally only to carp about what he thinks SoundSpectrum *does not* or *will not* offer instead of regularly contributing opinions on what they do or can.
That said, I might fairly glean from the original poster's comments that gee whiz, this should be the easiest thing in the world to do: just set up the right computer network/whatever, lock up together without restroom privileges a few poor schlubs who can afford/tinker with the software needed to soup up G-Force in that direction and voila.
Yes, I was part of one admittedly interesting, yet ultimately concept-relegated discussion on how we could go about doing this; but that's all it was. However, this seemed to be construed on the part of the original idea-bearer as an all-out green light. If so, then I am somewhat taken aback at what I see as an apparent lack of foresight, if not of sheer presumption.
Surely he must realize that the work needed to keep existing SoundSpectrum products on par with the constant new developments in both platforms is enough of a strain on the company's small group of developers. And, as has been explained by other knowledgeable posters in the three threads he cited, (actually two and a half, in that the last one garnered but a single response, perhaps owing to what was even back then the ever-growing tediousness of the discussion) it would take more than simply a bunch of serendipity-stricken techno-wonks who just happened to have the resources and wherewithal to pull this off.
BTW..."So close"?(!!??) Somehow I would think this to be the outright declaration of one harboring the notion that with maybe two willing collaborators on board this enterprise would thence blaze its way to completion hitchless. Well, a journey of a thousand miles does begin with a single step...except that in this case the step was being carried out by a scant few over-eager beavers, while those who had previously registered their misgivings etc. were rightfully withholding judgment on the wisdom of carrying out this venture, all things duly considered.
But what gets me more than anything is the rather clearly expressed insinuation on the part of the fellow who started this thread that his magnificent brainchild
was kiboshed because someone in the company's upper echelon--no names, mind you...just someone--may have been threatened by the mere shadowy existence of its collective possibilities. How any inference, assertion or logical extrapolation along these lines can hold H^2O without proof escapes me. They didn't feel like supporting it? IIRC, Key responded in one of the threads rather enthusiastically, which to me indicates a certain willingness to go along with the whole thing. But just like most others who contributed to this theoretical application, he would have to be more concerned with the real-time issues that normally beset existing products awaiting the final touches.
But again, it simply redounds to priorities and, as I suggested earlier, the plain ol' ways and means to do it.
And not only that, but were it I instead of Andy at the helm of all this, I'd perhaps be somewhat resentful--at least inwardly--of a thinly-veiled accusation that OTOH quite manifestly smacks of intellectual bullyism (I cite the conclusion of this thread's first post's second paragraph). Otherwise I'd grant it all the due unworthiness of further comment that it so richly deserves.
I'll end this way. As I said at the start, to just poke one's figurative head in the door every quarter calendar year just to see whether we're hard at work with that "mind-blowing" new capability that will take GF into regions that the Hubble telescope can't penetrate...and to perhaps lurk otherwise...is kind of starry-eyed at best. Matter of fact, some would probably say annoying, especially if that's the only thing that such a one comes here to post about.
So, paraphrasing the title of this little thread about a redundant subject, I say let's try some long-term patience with the way SoundSpectrum handles its overall affairs. Meanwhile, I most respectfully suggest that this self-acclaimed disciple of genetic algorithm development should try twisting the arms of the folks at draves.org into getting their dog-eared artificial life-based products to work on my machine properly again...
...since it would seem to me that his interest in any other aspect of SoundSpectrum's apps is radically nominal at best.
"God is syntax."
JayPro - you know I don't really care about your opinion and you can keep defending this all day long why its not being done. And if you think it's that hard to do well than it never gets done.
Fact is to do a prototype, to prove the concept, it is not that hard to do. I probably know more about these algorithms than you do so just leave it at this. It would have required probably less than one man week of development on soundspectrum's side (very very conservative guesS) to have a fully working prototype which could have been enjoyed by anyone here on this forum. It didn't happen for whatever reason. There were a couple phone calls and the thing was shut down... but lets leave it at that. You don't know the details.
What I don't get about you JayPro is, that on one hand you boast about community and how important that is, on the next phrase you call your community members that put countless hours into this "some poor schlubs who can afford to tinker...." - Simply very disrespectfull!!
And by the way you yourself were one of those poor schlubs who decided they can afford some time and commented in my threads. You either have a very bad memory or something else going on but you just don't make sense to me and to the world.
Than what your draves.org comment has to do with anything I don't know.
Anyway I think its time to send out an email of this central server based genetic algorithm to the ITunes etc. of this world.... all I can say to you is JayPro... you can write whatever you want at the end its actions that count. The moment the first company starts offering a service like this you'll get what I have trying to convince soundspectrum for the past 5 years.
The Genetic Algorithm even makes sense from a business point of view: Today web2.0 you need communities that leverage themselves to create a better service... something where the interactions directly create a benefit for everyone "SUBSCRIBED", something where the more that subscribe, the better it gets... look at UTube, all the social networking and community sites.. hundrets of examples out there. If you can charge subscriptions for belonging to that community and the more that join the better it gets... you have a cash cow that's impossible to stop.
My suggestion has the potential to change soundspectrum into so much bigger, so much more community driven than it has ever been. It would become a living organism that continuously evolves... and it would blow everyone's mind seeing what will and can happen. It would create a system no competitor can match... community driven services like this is a winner takes all system. Whoever does it first will be the winner.
So instead of giving a shot at this I see soundspectrum rolling out other products, diversifying... another visualizer... instead of building on what they have G-Force and shoot it to the moon... at least giving it a try before someone else does.
When emailing with andy about this long time ago.. he thinks that its too individual that it would work... I think its not. But if I am right the potential would be amazing.
Giving this a shot makes sense from a business point of view (software companies have to go towards communities, getting subscriptions instead of constantly chasing new sales. Diversifying by adding another product is what they taught in business schools 10 years ago)
Anyway the window is closing and time is running out to make this happen.... at the end I don't really have much to lose...
---------------
Hmm just checked that other comment... "sounds like electric sheep" wow it really seems like someone has done it!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM THRILLED
Check out these images here.... that is what I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR FREAKING 5 YEARS!!!! Definitely need to look into that to see how they've done it. G-Force is ideally setup to do it... looks like someone else was faster!!! Anyway since someone has done it already, I won't be bothering you guys anymore... the next year.... After 8 years of suggesting, finally someone made it a reality...
Check out this screenshot of their top evolved "config" - hate to say this but that pretty much blows away anything else I have ever seen...
[/img]
Fact is to do a prototype, to prove the concept, it is not that hard to do. I probably know more about these algorithms than you do so just leave it at this. It would have required probably less than one man week of development on soundspectrum's side (very very conservative guesS) to have a fully working prototype which could have been enjoyed by anyone here on this forum. It didn't happen for whatever reason. There were a couple phone calls and the thing was shut down... but lets leave it at that. You don't know the details.
What I don't get about you JayPro is, that on one hand you boast about community and how important that is, on the next phrase you call your community members that put countless hours into this "some poor schlubs who can afford to tinker...." - Simply very disrespectfull!!
And by the way you yourself were one of those poor schlubs who decided they can afford some time and commented in my threads. You either have a very bad memory or something else going on but you just don't make sense to me and to the world.
Than what your draves.org comment has to do with anything I don't know.
Anyway I think its time to send out an email of this central server based genetic algorithm to the ITunes etc. of this world.... all I can say to you is JayPro... you can write whatever you want at the end its actions that count. The moment the first company starts offering a service like this you'll get what I have trying to convince soundspectrum for the past 5 years.
The Genetic Algorithm even makes sense from a business point of view: Today web2.0 you need communities that leverage themselves to create a better service... something where the interactions directly create a benefit for everyone "SUBSCRIBED", something where the more that subscribe, the better it gets... look at UTube, all the social networking and community sites.. hundrets of examples out there. If you can charge subscriptions for belonging to that community and the more that join the better it gets... you have a cash cow that's impossible to stop.
My suggestion has the potential to change soundspectrum into so much bigger, so much more community driven than it has ever been. It would become a living organism that continuously evolves... and it would blow everyone's mind seeing what will and can happen. It would create a system no competitor can match... community driven services like this is a winner takes all system. Whoever does it first will be the winner.
So instead of giving a shot at this I see soundspectrum rolling out other products, diversifying... another visualizer... instead of building on what they have G-Force and shoot it to the moon... at least giving it a try before someone else does.
When emailing with andy about this long time ago.. he thinks that its too individual that it would work... I think its not. But if I am right the potential would be amazing.
Giving this a shot makes sense from a business point of view (software companies have to go towards communities, getting subscriptions instead of constantly chasing new sales. Diversifying by adding another product is what they taught in business schools 10 years ago)
Anyway the window is closing and time is running out to make this happen.... at the end I don't really have much to lose...
---------------
Hmm just checked that other comment... "sounds like electric sheep" wow it really seems like someone has done it!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM THRILLED
Check out these images here.... that is what I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR FREAKING 5 YEARS!!!! Definitely need to look into that to see how they've done it. G-Force is ideally setup to do it... looks like someone else was faster!!! Anyway since someone has done it already, I won't be bothering you guys anymore... the next year.... After 8 years of suggesting, finally someone made it a reality...
Check out this screenshot of their top evolved "config" - hate to say this but that pretty much blows away anything else I have ever seen...
[/img]
-
JayPro
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York
I thank you for challenging my altogether uncivil post, which was composed under physical circumstances that evidently clouded my judgment in a number of ways, as you rightly pointed out.
I'll try to address your points by point if not by paragraph.
1. My initial puzzlement over why you've been limiting your postage to repeatedly "check and see how we were progressing with your ideas" (lame attempt at a self-paraphrase) admittedly got me somewhat animated. My criticism, however over-the-top it was in retrospect, was targeted to why you seemed IMO focused on this one thing to the exclusion of everything else G-Force has to offer.
2. Okay. I jumped the gun massively before understanding that you were in heavy private communications with others about this thing and it just didn't work out. I'm genuinely sorry for that. It was wrong for me to second-guess intent...it's a nasty habit that I try to sublimate on a daily basis.
3. I'll be more than happy to leave be any argument you and I might have over how much we (don't) know about algorithms and such (I fot a 66 on a high school sequential math final with a tutor's help) . It wasn't my intent to disparage your overall intent; and I try not to get into the business of denegrating (sp) those of others. Again, I fault myself for making a litany of unfortunate subjective comments in the midst of disability-related physical discomfort and the desire to sleep it off that it yielded.
3a. I was not "schlubbing" (my terminology) members of the board who regularly contribute to SoundSpectrums programs, anyway. Why indeed would I insult myself? I do, as you say, have an occasional memory lapse along with a few other foibles that I'm sorry you've ostensibly encountered thru my previous rant. But I'd like to think that a closeted hubris keeps me from trying to compare myself with others in any light, good or bad.
4. Scott Draves is the chap behind Electric Sheep and other applications that use the kind of things you're interested in. Perhaps you might be interested in courting his expertise and initiating a free exhange of ideas between his company, yourself and us to hasten the realization of the goal you seek.
4b. I appreciate your citing my partaking of any discussions we've had about this. We went a long way in discussing *theoreticals*; but it's a shame so little IMO seemed to be able to get off the ground.
I'll end with this and maybe we can call a truce. I never meant to say that your ultimate wish cannot or could not be realized within this application. Again, maybe the correspondence you had off-forum with others at SoundSpectrum might have soured your experience to the point of bridges getting burnt. I don't know; and I'll say no more of it.
On the whole this enterprise looks quite fascinating and I actually look forward to seeing it re-initiated. Perhaps as we enlarge and diversify over time, you might (if you still wish) find yourself a most valuable player in taking GF to the lofty heights you envision.
Truce?
I'll try to address your points by point if not by paragraph.
1. My initial puzzlement over why you've been limiting your postage to repeatedly "check and see how we were progressing with your ideas" (lame attempt at a self-paraphrase) admittedly got me somewhat animated. My criticism, however over-the-top it was in retrospect, was targeted to why you seemed IMO focused on this one thing to the exclusion of everything else G-Force has to offer.
2. Okay. I jumped the gun massively before understanding that you were in heavy private communications with others about this thing and it just didn't work out. I'm genuinely sorry for that. It was wrong for me to second-guess intent...it's a nasty habit that I try to sublimate on a daily basis.
3. I'll be more than happy to leave be any argument you and I might have over how much we (don't) know about algorithms and such (I fot a 66 on a high school sequential math final with a tutor's help) . It wasn't my intent to disparage your overall intent; and I try not to get into the business of denegrating (sp) those of others. Again, I fault myself for making a litany of unfortunate subjective comments in the midst of disability-related physical discomfort and the desire to sleep it off that it yielded.
3a. I was not "schlubbing" (my terminology) members of the board who regularly contribute to SoundSpectrums programs, anyway. Why indeed would I insult myself? I do, as you say, have an occasional memory lapse along with a few other foibles that I'm sorry you've ostensibly encountered thru my previous rant. But I'd like to think that a closeted hubris keeps me from trying to compare myself with others in any light, good or bad.
4. Scott Draves is the chap behind Electric Sheep and other applications that use the kind of things you're interested in. Perhaps you might be interested in courting his expertise and initiating a free exhange of ideas between his company, yourself and us to hasten the realization of the goal you seek.
4b. I appreciate your citing my partaking of any discussions we've had about this. We went a long way in discussing *theoreticals*; but it's a shame so little IMO seemed to be able to get off the ground.
I'll end with this and maybe we can call a truce. I never meant to say that your ultimate wish cannot or could not be realized within this application. Again, maybe the correspondence you had off-forum with others at SoundSpectrum might have soured your experience to the point of bridges getting burnt. I don't know; and I'll say no more of it.
On the whole this enterprise looks quite fascinating and I actually look forward to seeing it re-initiated. Perhaps as we enlarge and diversify over time, you might (if you still wish) find yourself a most valuable player in taking GF to the lofty heights you envision.
Truce?
"God is syntax."
ELECTRIC SHEEP:
Ok I gave electric sheep a detailed test.. also here are some details...
http://www.fundacion.telefonica.com/at/ ... raves.html
Its similar to the concept I suggested but not entireley... they haven't implemented yet the the full genetic search, however the stuff that is implemented gives a glimpse of the possiblities.
Also the way their system is built up is focused to much on a GA... its easy to implement a GA but from a visualization point of view, using the same approach GForce would be A LOT BETTER SUITED because of several reasons...
Also not having music is a major drawback.... and the largest drawback is the limitation to 640x480... I say it again GForce has all the incredients..absolutely all of them to take that same principle and simply take music visualization to the next level.
The electric sheep guys are going in this direction but they lack the solid logic and component foundation GForce has, also the real time rendering and resolution....
Some more GA visualizations... imagine a supercharged GForce...
Or here a utube video (the quality sucks but it gives and idea of the possibilities)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8_akjShe4g
TRUCE is fine.... sorry about my posting too.
Ok I gave electric sheep a detailed test.. also here are some details...
http://www.fundacion.telefonica.com/at/ ... raves.html
Its similar to the concept I suggested but not entireley... they haven't implemented yet the the full genetic search, however the stuff that is implemented gives a glimpse of the possiblities.
Also the way their system is built up is focused to much on a GA... its easy to implement a GA but from a visualization point of view, using the same approach GForce would be A LOT BETTER SUITED because of several reasons...
Also not having music is a major drawback.... and the largest drawback is the limitation to 640x480... I say it again GForce has all the incredients..absolutely all of them to take that same principle and simply take music visualization to the next level.
The electric sheep guys are going in this direction but they lack the solid logic and component foundation GForce has, also the real time rendering and resolution....
Some more GA visualizations... imagine a supercharged GForce...
Or here a utube video (the quality sucks but it gives and idea of the possibilities)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8_akjShe4g
TRUCE is fine.... sorry about my posting too.
-
JayPro
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York
The only other drawback to what I actually see--not counting other pros or cons--is the lack of any ability to choose a thematic palette to work with.
Edit #2: ...or the lack of any option to create one based on colors of my choosing.
I mean that using an example of Milkdrop, which I've seen ported in a rudimentary way to the Mac. It will allow for the invention of presets, which are inclusive of color, background and waveshape. The problem is that every palette in a Milkdrop preset seems to share the same polychromatic characteristics.
I may be digressing; but that's what I see. I'll check out the UTube clip and see if I may be wrong.
Edit: The palette issue could also be a Windows thing, in that the color manager (whatever you call it) may be designed to do its thing in only a certain way??? Bad description from a layman, I gather.
Edit #2: ...or the lack of any option to create one based on colors of my choosing.
I mean that using an example of Milkdrop, which I've seen ported in a rudimentary way to the Mac. It will allow for the invention of presets, which are inclusive of color, background and waveshape. The problem is that every palette in a Milkdrop preset seems to share the same polychromatic characteristics.
I may be digressing; but that's what I see. I'll check out the UTube clip and see if I may be wrong.
Edit: The palette issue could also be a Windows thing, in that the color manager (whatever you call it) may be designed to do its thing in only a certain way??? Bad description from a layman, I gather.
Last edited by JayPro on Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"God is syntax."
That is because Milkdrop lacks the concept of independent color palettes as far as I know (somebody correct me if I am wrong). The colors are generated in code and that produces very chemical like results in many cases. Still there are artists that manage to create nice colors in MD anyways. G-Force is more advanced in this way since set of colors can be created independently.JayPro wrote:... The problem is that every palette in a Milkdrop preset seems to share the same polychromatic characteristics.
-
JayPro
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York
Come to think of it...
G-Force does indeed have at least something relative to genetic agorithms or hybridization schemes...the Flowfield Union.
As the name suggests, these are implemented at various times during the program's run to "marry" two flowfields together. Now, depending on the flows being united, sometimes the results are breathtaking, and others not.
Even more interesting than this, the Union config syntax allows for A and D variable combinations, both of which use the (rnd) command to showcase how radically different one single Union config can be with each subsequent call-up...plus the fact that D's can implemet A's, which in turn can have as many randomness factorizations as the config designer wishes to have.
As the name suggests, these are implemented at various times during the program's run to "marry" two flowfields together. Now, depending on the flows being united, sometimes the results are breathtaking, and others not.
Even more interesting than this, the Union config syntax allows for A and D variable combinations, both of which use the (rnd) command to showcase how radically different one single Union config can be with each subsequent call-up...plus the fact that D's can implemet A's, which in turn can have as many randomness factorizations as the config designer wishes to have.
"God is syntax."
Re: Come to think of it...
I don't know much about flowfield unions (and quadrants, whatever they are?), but am interesting in learning more about these. I did a search of the forum, but am still confused. Could someone give a simple exlanation of unions and quadrants?JayPro wrote:G-Force does indeed have at least something relative to genetic agorithms or hybridization schemes...the Flowfield Union.
As the name suggests, these are implemented at various times during the program's run to "marry" two flowfields together. Now, depending on the flows being united, sometimes the results are breathtaking, and others not.
Even more interesting than this, the Union config syntax allows for A and D variable combinations, both of which use the (rnd) command to showcase how radically different one single Union config can be with each subsequent call-up...plus the fact that D's can implemet A's, which in turn can have as many randomness factorizations as the config designer wishes to have.
Is it possible to write scripts to control calling specific unions and quadrants with intervals and durations of my choosing? Also is it possible for a script to call random unions and quadrants?
Any info, especially an example script, would be much appreciated.
-
JayPro
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York
Youd hafta ask chkman about quadrants.
Unions are simple config files that use one parameter called ALFA, which serves as the catalyst for smushing the two effects together.
They can use A and D variables just like Flowfields to generate some randomness.
A folder containing Unions should be in your GF package already; but if not, here's an interesting, yet simple example.
// "It's Only Reality" by Andy O'Meara
A0="2" // Mode
A1=".4 + rnd( .5 )" // Base radius
A2=""
A3="1 + 1 / ( .05 + rnd( .95 ) )" // Gradient
ALFA="A3 * pos( r - A1 * ( 1 - sin( A0 * theta ) ) )"
Vers=250
BTW XY cords can be implemented as well, or you can even mix the up.
Unions are simple config files that use one parameter called ALFA, which serves as the catalyst for smushing the two effects together.
They can use A and D variables just like Flowfields to generate some randomness.
A folder containing Unions should be in your GF package already; but if not, here's an interesting, yet simple example.
// "It's Only Reality" by Andy O'Meara
A0="2" // Mode
A1=".4 + rnd( .5 )" // Base radius
A2=""
A3="1 + 1 / ( .05 + rnd( .95 ) )" // Gradient
ALFA="A3 * pos( r - A1 * ( 1 - sin( A0 * theta ) ) )"
Vers=250
BTW XY cords can be implemented as well, or you can even mix the up.
"God is syntax."