building block formula with Gnarly- an AHA moment

[Jayce Cruel]

Hello!

I wanted to pass this along to you...I hope I don't ramble too much, or garble this up...

I was taking a look at why the gnarly didn't produce the results I had intended, and generally playing/testing the building block formula, when I was struck by an "AHA!" moment (very rare for me, let me tell you): the Z in the gnarly wasn't changing because it wasn't initialized to anything other than pixel, and doesn't change when "Real Gnarl" is set because it resets the Z in the gnarly to a previous copy of z (before the equations, mandras tweaks, etc. happen). So I simply changed the z initialization parameters from the default settings, and voila! The "hybrid gnarl/equation" results I initially wanted happened!

So, the gnarl shape _can_ be altered by changing the parameters in the initialization section of the formula (of course, it can also be changed with the gnarly parameters as well). It also is changed, in a sense, when you play with the bailout parameters, but (so far) not with the equation parameters or mandras tweaks. The equation and mandras parameters will change the "coloring", but not the actual "shape", like the initialization parameters and gnarl parameters do.

Just so you can understand what I'm talking about, I've attached a upr with 2 layers, showing how the initialization parameters can change the default gnarl shape. For both, the gnarl is set to "vine" (my personal favorite), and the gnarl parameters are all set to default. The initialization parameters are the only thing that have been changed to change the gnarl shapes (I did play with the basic mandras tweaks and bailout values in the second one, just for better "coloring", but they don't affect the "shape")

So, I believe, in a sense, the gnarl addition performed what I was looking to achieve. I was hoping to use the other mandras tweaks, as well as the equation parameters to do the same thing, but I'm not sure it's possible, due to how Z is basically "overwritten" every loop iteration when the "real gnarl" parameter is set. However, if I can use the initialization parameters to change the shape, I think that should be good enough.

What do you all think? I really would like to hear others' opinions...or you could even toss me a UPR to show me your take on the formula. If you think it's good enough, maybe I can include it into the public database (should I add hints to the parameters first if I do so?)

Thank you for reading my rambling "AHA" moment

-Jayce Cruel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[FractAlchemist]

AhAAAA! It's always a pleasure to read someones AHA moments. I wish I had more time  to try out your formula, but that's how it is. Please keep aha'ing though....I am sure it will be heard in other places too....Evie

--
Eveline Berkman

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?username=fractalchemist