Serious Idea about iMap Pref

Discussion forum for G-Force users

Moderators: BTT, andy55, b.dwall, juxtiphi

Post Reply
User avatar
JayPro
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Huntington Station, Long Island, New York

Serious Idea about iMap Pref

Post by JayPro »

I've come to enjoy noodling around with the "t"-based formula in the Docs ensuring that a stable (i.e. non-cycling) colormap will load with maximum arbitrariness...if that makes sense LOL.

That said, would it be possible to add a similar parameter that keeps cycling palettes out of the mix? It detracts from the experience...and I don't really want to anyone to risk a one-way ticket to seizure city...and lotsa ppl with my disability are prone to them from one degreee to another. But that's neither here nor there.

Anyway, let's suppose that for the aforementioned stable palettes, I would have something like this:

iMap_S=trwv(i+.0314*t) Edit: This is my formula and not the wrap-based example in the Docs, which IMO I find too rapid-fire.

Then I can use the existing default for the ones that cycle thusly:

iMap_C="i^2.5" ...or whatever else you want based on the ideas put forth in the Docs.

Is this feasible? I'd hope so very much.

Edit: I have an additional idea. Perhaps there can be a way to make for better iMap performance for *stable* maps that use (wrap), and perhaps even other funcs like (clip), (flip) or (sqrt).

The reason I say this is that since using "t" in iMap is for all intents the same as making a stable map cyclable (depending on the factor and function assigned it, of course), doing so to one that already uses something like wrap runs the risk of creating visually jarring transitions.

For instance, I used a stable HSV palette that uses wrap in the formula. Applying "t" in iMap did cause it to cycle and change on reload (good thang), but the wrap brought about an unwanted---yet admittedly expected---change from a smooth, sensible color cycle to absolute black (bad thang).
Can this be addressed, too? FYI, this whole thing is why I tend to steer clear of using wrap(t) and the like in whatever cycle maps I dummy up.

Post Reply