• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
fir

fractal result by accident

42 posts in this topic


i dont know how to count a dimension do you know how to count this based on that picture?

 

Fractals are not pretty pictures: They are subsets of R^n with certain self-similarity properties. So you have to start by defining a subset of R^n in some way. A picture doesn't help much.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See:

 

https://www.google.no/search?q=moire+pattern&espv=210&es_sm=119&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=4KTzUqDvDOrMygPYhoGIBw&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=898

 

On any of those pictures:

 

Since the TV that I use with my computer has a resolution that doesn't quite match up with the natural resolution of the graphic card, I get Moire patterns exactly like yours when I have zoomed completely out.  When I zoom in, the pattern disappear.  The pictures are static.  (CTRL + mouse scroll on Mac to zoom, or what you have configured.  Not sure how to activate on Windows any more.)

 

You will probably not see the same result, unless you pick a resolution that does not quite match up with the resolution on the screen, but the reason is the same: ALIASING.  Aliasing makes Moire patterns.

 

Aliasing happens when you show high frequency data on a low(er) frequency medium.

 

Have a look here: http://www.svi.nl/AliasingArtifacts

 

Even TV / video producers avoid having certain clothes to avoid aliasing effects.  You don't often see clothes with high contrast horizontal stripes, for instance: http://www.assetmediagroup.com/what-to-wear-for-video-shoot.html

 

so, explain me - you think that underlaying image is something 'less

fractal' and only presenting it on the pixelgrid makes it looking fractal-like?

I do not see the reason to belive that underlying image is something much simpler that the thing you see on the grid (for hihg frequenzy palette I think it is more complex than the thing you see)

so if this is not true i do not get why to force me to belive in this.;\

-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to give it another try:

 

Unfortunately it is poor quality, but you get the point.

 

the last didnt work, the third was interesting

 

what point? the difference of opinions was on the topics if

1) this is a fractal

2) if this is a result of an interference (related to 'presentation artifact')

 

above with such moire there was two drawings interfering, in my example  algorithm i just calculate the pixel color with given not

complex function then set pixel and i just doubt (and tend to disagree)

if the resulting  'fractal pattern' comes from the discretization to grid values, imo it seems that underlying 'fluid' function has it implied

 

it may be related to some "inner" interferency of parts of its math formula

but probably is not related to screen presentation artifacts

 

but do not matter i doubt this is worth talking to much, i was interested 

more if this specyfic ball fractal-like moire - like object has a specyfic name

 

(as to moire i was not denying that it may be somewhat related but i said that moire seem to be a whole family not the specyfic one, and maybe there is some specyfic name,

as to being a fractal i am not seeing if this is a worse object to

being fractal that for example 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpinski_carpet

which seem to be somewhat resemblin this ball i was talking about here)

Edited by fir
-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Fractals are not pretty pictures: They are subsets of R^n with certain self-similarity properties. So you have to start by defining a subset of R^n in some way. A picture doesn't help much.
It kind of does, to dismiss it as fractal. Even if the term "subsets of R^n" produces a "Huh, WTF?" reaction inside you, you can still very clearly see that the pattern is not self-similar.

 

If this was a fractal, there should be little concentric circles inside the pretty colorful concentric circles. No such thing as even a single odd pixel that doesn't fit into the pretty gradients can be seen in the original picture, nor when you zoom in.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


Fractals are not pretty pictures: They are subsets of R^n with certain self-similarity properties. So you have to start by defining a subset of R^n in some way. A picture doesn't help much.
It kind of does, to dismiss it as fractal. Even if the term "subsets of R^n" produces a "Huh, WTF?" reaction inside you, you can still very clearly see that the pattern is not self-similar.

 

If this was a fractal, there should be little concentric circles inside the pretty colorful concentric circles. No such thing as even a single odd pixel that doesn't fit into the pretty gradients can be seen in the original picture, nor when you zoom in.

 

If sierpi?ski carpet is a fractal i see no reazon for this to be not fractal ;\

we should ask some mathematician good in fractals, for answer why  ifsierpi?ski is a fractal this  ball is not ;\

For me it looks like a interferency of circular vaves made by sierpi?ski like raindrop

-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As everyone suspected, it's just a Moiré pattern. Here's my attempt at producing it:

#include <cstdio>
#include <cmath>

int main() {
  std::puts("# ImageMagick pixel enumeration: 800,800,255,srgb");

  for (int j=0; j<800; ++j) {
    double y = (400.0 - j) / 360.0;
    for (int i=0; i<800; ++i) {
      double x = (i - 400.0) / 360.0;
      double z2 = 1.0 - x * x - y * y;
      double distance = (z2 >= 0.0) ? std::sqrt(z2) : 0.0;
      double color = std::fmod(1000.0*distance, 1.0);
      int r = 256 * color;
      int g = 256 * color;
      int b = 256 * (1.0 - color);
      r = r > 255 ? 255 : r < 0 ? 0 : r;
      g = g > 255 ? 255 : g < 0 ? 0 : g;
      b = b > 255 ? 255 : b < 0 ? 0 : b;
      std::printf("%d,%d: (%d,%d,%d)  #%02X%02X%02X  srgb(%d,%d,%d)\n",
                  i, j,
                  r, g, b,
                  r, g, b,
                  r, g, b);
    }
  }
}

I compiled that code and then executed it, passing the output through `| convert TXT:- output.png' (`convert' is a command-line utility, part of ImageMagick). The output is this:

output.png

 

 

[EDIT: If you replace 1000.0 with something like 250.0, you'll get an image much closer to the original in this thread.]

 

Very good work! I see the central part is probably

 

distance = sqrt(1-(x*x+y*y))

 

do you know maybe what klind of function it is id drawed z=f(x,y)

of just z=f(x,0); ?

 

Im rarely doing mathematics so i forgot the thing

 

As to moire pattern I suspect this could be treated set of infinite number of moire interferentions - but those interferentions are purely mathematical not 'presentation aliasing' artifacts

Edited by fir
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is fun. I think I remember the formula for the last video from aregee. Had copy the link manually, but the resolution is really bad, therefore...

C# code (console app, copy paste, add reference for System.Drawing)

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Drawing;
using System.Drawing.Imaging;
using System.Text;

namespace Moire
{
    class Program
    {
        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            int width = 640;
            int height = 480;
            var scale = 50.0;
            scale /= height; // adjust for resolution
            var xh = width / 2;
            var yh = height / 2;
            var bitmap = new Bitmap(width, height);
            for (int y = 0; y < height; y++)
            {
                var yy = (y - yh) * scale;
                for (int x = 0; x < width; x++)
                {
                    var xx = (x - xh) * scale;
                    var value = xx * xx + yy * yy;  // f(x,y) = x^2 + y ^ 2
                    value = value % 1.0;            // mod, though Hue should actually wrap anyway
                    var color = Hue((float)value);
                    bitmap.SetPixel(x, y, color);
                }
            }
            bitmap.Save("image.png", ImageFormat.Png);
            bitmap.Dispose();
        }

        #region Color functions
        public static byte ToByte(float value)
        {
            return (byte)System.Math.Max(0, System.Math.Min(255, System.Math.Round(255f * value)));
        }

        public static Color FromFloat(float r, float g, float b)
        {
            return Color.FromArgb(ToByte(r), ToByte(g), ToByte(b));
        }

        public static Color Hue(float hue)
        {
            float oneSixth = 1f / 6f;
            float h = hue - (int)hue;
            int index = (int)(h / oneSixth);
            h = (h / oneSixth) - index;
            var q = 1f - h;
            switch (index)
            {
                case 0: return FromFloat(1, h, 0);
                case 1: return FromFloat(q, 1, 0);
                case 2: return FromFloat(0, 1, h);
                case 3: return FromFloat(0, q, 1);
                case 4: return FromFloat(h, 0, 1);
                default: return FromFloat(1, 0, q);
            }
        }
        #endregion

    }
}

Playing with the scale:
scale = 10
MoireScale10_zpsf2704063.png
scale = 20
MoireScale20_zpsc4e29252.png
scale = 50
MoireScale50_zps2d1c360c.png

 

nice, good work

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If sierpi?ski carpet is a fractal i see no reazon for this to be not fractal ;\

That is like saying: If a circle is round, I see no reason why a square should not be.

 

A Sierpinski carpet (or triangle) has the "stereotypical look" of a fractal, which your image just doesn't have. Note that looking like a fractal doesn't make an image a fractal, but not looking like one at all rules it out pretty safely.

 

If you look at a Sierpinski triangle starting at level 1, it has the look of a filled triangle where an upside-down triangle has been cut out (it works if you start with the level-0 triangle too, but I find the similarity more striking if you start at one subdivision). That exact same pattern is visible in each of the three smaller filled triangles around that cut-out triangle, and in each of the three even smaller triangles inside these, and so on. You can repeat this ad infinitum, and it will always look the same.

 

If you look at your image, there are circles and rings, and yes they are somewhat similar, arranged in a somewhat repeating texture. But that's where it stops. If you zoom into one of the circles, it doesn't turn out being an orb with many smaller circles and rings. It's just a circle.

 

This, too, is a regular, repeating pattern, but it is not fractal:

 

XceBm.png
 

we should ask some mathematician good in fractals, for answer why  ifsierpi?ski is a fractal this  ball is not ;\

Well, one mathematician already gave an explanation a dozen or so posts above.

Edited by samoth
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If sierpi?ski carpet is a fractal i see no reazon for this to be not fractal ;\

That is like saying: If a circle is round, I see no reason why a square should not be.

 

A Sierpinski carpet (or triangle) has the "stereotypical look" of a fractal, which your image just doesn't have. Note that looking like a fractal doesn't make an image a fractal, but not looking like one at all rules it out pretty safely.

 

If you look at a Sierpinski triangle starting at level 1, it has the look of a filled triangle where an upside-down triangle has been cut out (it works if you start with the level-0 triangle too, but I find the similarity more striking if you start at one subdivision). That exact same pattern is visible in each of the three smaller filled triangles around that cut-out triangle, and in each of the three even smaller triangles inside these, and so on. You can repeat this ad infinitum, and it will always look the same.

 

If you look at your image, there are circles and rings, and yes they are somewhat similar, arranged in a somewhat repeating texture. But that's where it stops. If you zoom into one of the circles, it doesn't turn out being an orb with many smaller circles and rings. It's just a circle.

 

This, too, is a regular, repeating pattern, but it is not fractal:

 

XceBm.png
 

 

Probably when increasing the palette frequency inifinitely you will get infinite level of depth in such circle patterns - you ignore this thing or you do not understand? Im not sure but maybe there can be stated that if you will get any small rectangle area you will find a circles in it (though maybe some vaves may be much  smaller than dominant one

 

for me i may repeat it seem this is not worse fractal than sierpi?ski carpet

 

I wonder if 3d version of it could be obtained? maybe someone will know? (this is maybe more 2d than 3d and i wonder if real spheric 

3d versiion surface is obtainable and which formula?)

 

PS Alvaro could ypu maybe rise up the visuals by inventing more colorfull palette here (more like unbird did)? (I cannot work on this today but would be curious if this could be more colorfull)

Edited by fir
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

for me i may repeat it seem this is not worse fractal than sierpi?ski carpet


I have no idea why you still think your image is a fractal. The way I see it, what you plotted is a couple of hundred concentric circles, which when sampled with a regular grid result in a spectacular moiré pattern. It's not like we are saying your image isn't pretty: It just has little to do with fractals.

I found this link: http://www.nahee.com/spanky/www/fractint/circle_type.html (Notice the "not a fractal" part.)

 

 

I think it is unrelated to sampling on the grid- all in all this is well defined 

F(x,y) function for x,y are real,  - so sampling to a grid is not important imo, it just blurs the details, dont you think?

 

Very good info in this link, (i was searching for such references) though here is written ". The resulting image is not a fractal because all detail is lost after zooming in too far. "

Im not sure if this is true, if one will raise the frequenzy of palette

i think the detail depth will probably increase to infinity - so it probably depends how you  define this construct 

-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

for me i may repeat it seem this is not worse fractal than sierpi?ski carpet


I have no idea why you still think your image is a fractal. The way I see it, what you plotted is a couple of hundred concentric circles, which when sampled with a regular grid result in a spectacular moiré pattern. It's not like we are saying your image isn't pretty: It just has little to do with fractals.

I found this link: http://www.nahee.com/spanky/www/fractint/circle_type.html (Notice the "not a fractal" part.)

 

 

I think it is unrelated to sampling on the grid- all in all this is well defined 

F(x,y) function for x,y are real,  - so sampling to a grid is not important imo, it just blurs the details, dont you think?

 

Very good info in this link, (i was searching for such references) though here is written ". The resulting image is not a fractal because all detail is lost after zooming in too far. "

Im not sure if this is true, if one will raise the frequenzy of palette

i think the detail depth will probably increase to infinity - so it probably depends how you  define this construct 

 

Your function F(x,y) is a continuous function, but when you create your image you sample F(x,y) at discrete points. Each pixel in the image is a sample point of the function. In your first post, for example, you sample F(x,y) at roughly 950 discrete points along both the X and the Y axis. The interference is not in F(x,y) itself, but comes from sampling it at discrete points.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. Here's my last attempt at trying to explain why this isn't a fractal. This is an image similar to what you posted:

 

output1.png

 

This is what happened after I zoomed in a bit and I used anti-aliasing:

 

output-1.png

 

You got to low frequenzy paltette (*)- I was saing about this, (more than once i think and I see some ignore it ;\ - ) the details will appear if you increase it - if you will ignore this we will not agree here

(same thing with sierpi?ski on mandelbrot if you do only 5 iteration steps

you will get finite complexity)

 

(*) and maybe to low sampling frequenzy too, if this pattern vanishes

indeed maybe the grid sampling is needed - i dont know if this distortion to circles are so small that this grid sampling shows it

 

 

 

anyway this is strange - do antyaliasing destroyed most of the pattern but leaved some horizontal and vertical line ones? if the rest vanished why the vertical horizontal are still visible?

 

what way this antyaliasing works here? average of many subsamples per pixel?

 

on the other way this not changes too much:

if underlying shape is such smooth, indeed the grid sampling should be included in algorith - but this do not change to much only adds some module to formula - sample the result with rectangle grid

 

 you think infinite complexity is not obtainable this way?

Edited by fir
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your function F(x,y) is a continuous function, but when you create your image you sample F(x,y) at discrete points. Each pixel in the image is a sample point of the function. In your first post, for example, you sample F(x,y) at roughly 950 discrete points along both the X and the Y axis. The interference is not in F(x,y) itself, but comes from sampling it at discrete points.

 

 

Dont think so, Could you explain this, lets say that you are taking

some point x, y = 0.1776527, 0.23876 You say that color value of this point depends on the grid resolution? IMO F(x,y) values are grid independant

-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your function F(x,y) is a continuous function, but when you create your image you sample F(x,y) at discrete points. Each pixel in the image is a sample point of the function. In your first post, for example, you sample F(x,y) at roughly 950 discrete points along both the X and the Y axis. The interference is not in F(x,y) itself, but comes from sampling it at discrete points.

 
Dont think so, Could you explain this, lets say that you are taking
some point x, y = 0.1776527, 0.23876 You say that color value of this point depends on the grid resolution? IMO F(x,y) values are grid independant
Interference does not happen in one single sample point. It is the interaction between neighboring sample points. You cannot say anything about interference in one point. It is irrelevant what the value is in one point of the function.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


what way this antyaliasing works here? average of many subsamples per pixel?

 

Yes, I took 200 random samples inside each pixel and averaged the colors.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another example of moire pattern. If you have an LCD monitor, scroll slowly across Alvaro's second image above. You get an interference pattern as well, and the scrolling speed changes the frequency of the fringes. I don't know if this will work with a CRT monitor since they use electron beams instead of a discrete crystal lattice.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0