Project17

[gravitymindofgod]

Thankyou so Much for these spaces to contemplate our nature, Much Love.

[DeepZoomNet]

@gravitymindofgod Glad you like my work. Nature is a pretty amazing thing to contemplate, isn't it? And to think these abstract things are just floating out there with no tangible substance, just what our minds make them be. Amazing.

[AllFractUp]

I have seen three of your videos so far and this is the best one yet.

[DeepZoomNet]

Thanks! I have a few others that I just love a bit more for various reasons, even if they are not quite as pretty, but this one is definitely quite gorgeous.

[FractAlkemist]

excellent! nice colors too! cool music.

[DeepZoomNet]

Thanks! Glad you like it. I was thinking of you while I was selecting the colors. Not too much blue...

[j9dz2sf]

0.2691947205051341926758056159­7649595 + 4.4054451979255574909825234875­645044e-3 i ?

[DeepZoomNet]

EXCELLENT question!

Yes, your coordinates are essentially correct.

There are no secrets when zooming in like this.

[fractalwizz]

awesome - so worth the 522 hours

[DeepZoomNet]

Thanks for the comment. Glad you like it!

Of course, that 522 is with the 9X oversampling. It could have been done in 1/9th the time, but would have been too noisy.

[anisometropie]

Why don't you start from 2:05 and then go further in another video ? instead of always starting from the entire set.

[DeepZoomNet]

Ah, yes, that would be nice, wouldn't it! But this took 522 hours to calculate as it is, and it gets exponentially longer as you go in further. The last few video frames were taking 1.2 hours each. So it is purely a technical limitation, not an artistic one. It would be nice to be able to go further.

[anisometropie]

I don't understand why it take so long for the last ones. Since all the previous step are already calculated, and the further we go, the less point in the complex set we use.

[KesavaAVP]

Simply because more iterations are needed as you zoom in, and also because the further you zoom in, the more precicion you need, which results in much longer rendering times. The iterations are by far the most important factor.

[fractalzooms]

when calcuating a fractal image - the higher the magnification of the set, the more numbers there are after the decimal point. so the deeper you go the longer it takes.....

teamfresh

[DeepZoomNet]

It is like Kesava and fractalzooms said, it it two things. The deeper you go, the more digits you have to keep track of in the arithmetic, and at higher magnifications you have to iterate the underlying equation more to get a useful image.

Each frame uses the same number of points, 640x480 in this case, so it doesn't get easier as you go.

[DeepZoomNet]

Actually there are ways to reduce the calculation time by generating a larger image than needed and then digitally zooming into it with interpolation techniques. I have done that in some other videos. This one doesn't use that approach. And even with that, it still takes longer and longer and you zoom in more.

[UberMari0]

Gorgeous!!! Love the music too.

[DeepZoomNet]

Thanks. I got lazy with the music and just used an off-the-shelf royalty-free thing from Sony. But I love it too, very eerie. It's the first time I've used any music with what almost qualifies as singing.