Posts Tagged eye-candy

Why I don’t use Photoshop or Gimp?

There’s a big discussion involving fractal images and Photoshop, with several different points of view, but the main one usually is that if a fractal image is manipulated in Photoshop (or Gimp, or any other software like that) “it’s not a true fractal image anymore”.

I’m not interested in this technical discussion – each side of it has its own correct assumptions, but I’ve decided not to use Photoshop or any other image manipulation softwares because to me I feel that with them it’s much simpler to create something interesting with virtually no effort, I guess this is the same way I don’t like how Apophysis is misused by most of its users nowadays – the random, automated way to create an image or a batch of images. With Photoshop/Gimp etc. sometimes I feel the same happens.

Yesterday I gave Gimp another try (I really can’t get used to that interface!) but mostly to try something like the Droste effect which is quite interesting. I found that there is a plug-in for Gimp that does that effect (and many others) called MathMap, and it can give some interesting fractal-like results in regular pictures. I couldn’t make it work (I need an older version of Gimp it seems, and I’m using Windows), but I found some other quite interesting plug-ins that can make very nice effects and changes to your fractal images in a very easy way. I might even post some of these attempts here just for fun, the map to sphere stuff for example is really interesting mostly because I need some fractal that can look like a planet/world for a logo/icon to be used here, and an animated ” fractal planet” spinning using one of my own images will definitely look nice. But the easiness to make a fractal look “better” with a few default settings of a plug-in is what makes me go away from these image editors and not even try to use them. Not even for a simple sharpening, which gives a nice effect with images that have lots of details.

Other day I found one of these links named “amazing fractal images” (or some variation of that) and there was a bunch of images of “fractal animals” – lions, birds, dogs, whatever. All had a fractal texture applied to the original images of the animals and one that doesn’t know fractals might think that the fractal software generated a true fractal image that was shaped like a dog – it didn’t, it was just a simple dog image with some Apophysis image “pasted” on top of it working as a texture, blended with the original image. You can actually see some of these here. Is this person a good fractal artist? No, he’s just someone that knows how to work with layers in Photoshop, and this is much easier to find than someone that can really make a (traditional) fractal from scratch. I remember when I found these images. In the first image I was like “wow, that’s nice” and while looking at about the 3rd or 4th I was like… “boring!…”. It won’t take you more than a few minutes to replicate that kind of effect, much different than waiting 50 hours for a real fractal image to be rendered.

Edit: with a few more clicks, I found the culprit: a plug-in named Fractalius. Annoying, really annoying. I didn’t know it was that easy.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You don’t need drugs to enjoy fractals

Some of these older images were made during a period in my life where I was taking a lot of strong painkillers (not for “recreational purposes” I can assure you), and people that knew that often asked me if some of these images were “drug-influenced”. I don’t know, really. I don’t think so. Maybe some were, some of these images that when I saw them 5 years later I just said “ouch, it looks like crap!”. When the “purple haze” went off, I saw the real image(s), I suppose. Not many images were like that, I should say. Those that were discarded when this new gallery format started, were discarded for a lot of different reasons, including plain old suckiness.

I never deliberately did anything “special” before making any image neither I did any image after doing something specific like finish reading a book for example and make an image inspired by that, or did drugs (alcohol also being a drug, of course) just to create a fractal. Some images were inspired by some other stuff, of course, mostly their names. But not deliberately. Neither I did any image to look “trippy” or “psychedelic” or something on purpose (this is why I’ve never used the “animation” feature of UF despite it costed me a few more bucks when I registered it). Fractals are just like that, sometimes.

I really have no idea if these images can or will enhance your drug-of-choice’s trip or if when you’re on something you will see something different than me. With a little or no effort you can see the same objects/things I did and get the same “feel” while looking at one image, and you will even understand most of the cryptic names, but as I’ve said some people will never see even the basic bits in some images.

These images weren’t made to be seen under the influence, but you can try that. But… in some cases, the results are really… weird to say the least, even without any “extras”. Like this image, done not so long ago (years after the painkillers, BTW):

Alive

It's alive!

Look at one of the spirals, either one. Noticed something? Cool, isn’t it? Now look at the text bits right above/below the image. See? No drugs required, I told you.

PS1. If you didn’t see it, I won’t tell you what happens, go find it yourself. If your mind isn’t open for new experiences, you won’t see it (OK, just kidding!). Hopefully it works in the smaller version of the image, but I’ve tested on both, the big original image and this one.

PS2.: I think that this effect depends on the combination of colours chosen for the image. I haven’t tried it with different colours, but I think I’ve seen similar images (some are quite popular) with similar effects and they all had unusual colour schemes.

PS3.: That was a lot of bullshit talk just to present a nice effect. Must be the drugs that did that.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

About the images, part IV

It’s also important to mention some other details about the images: what kind of images you can expect to find here.

I’ve discovered this amazing site, Orbit Trap, and I agree with their thoughts and views in many points and by reading some of these posts I decided to restart/resume my fractal creations. At some point in a certain post about “art” (or something) there they mention how most of the more appreciated images (in art “communities” sites like Deviant Art) by a certain “respected” group of fractal artists (doesn’t an amateur artist deserves respect as well?) aren’t really fractals. As mentioned in a certain previous post here, to be considered a fractal the image must have certain technical qualities (the more, the most “pure” a fractal is, I suppose), and to me, the most important visual characteristic of a fractal is the self-similarity. Whenever I see one image with that characteristic, immediately I tend to associate it with a fractal – be it just a picture of a cauliflower or something done in Ultra Fractal.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share

Tags: , ,

Bad Behavior has blocked 94 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Mundo Fractal is Stephen Fry proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache