Iterated Dynamicshttp://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/project/feeds/rssIterated Dynamics is an open source fractal generator based on the DOS fractint program.Updated Wiki: Homehttps://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/wikipage?version=6<div class="wikidoc">
<h1>This project has <a href="https://github.com/LegalizeAdulthood/iterated-dynamics/">
moved to github</a>.</h1>
</div><div class="ClearBoth"></div>legalizeTue, 24 May 2016 20:00:55 GMTUpdated Wiki: Home 20160524080055PUpdated Wiki: Homehttps://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/wikipage?version=5<div class="wikidoc"><h1>This project has <a href="https://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=https%3a%2f%2fgithub.com%2fLegalizeAdulthood%2fiterated-dynamics%2f&referringTitle=Home">moved to github</a>.</h1></div><div class="ClearBoth"></div>legalizeTue, 24 May 2016 20:00:20 GMTUpdated Wiki: Home 20160524080020PUpdated Wiki: Homehttps://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/wikipage?version=4<div class="wikidoc">This project has <a href="https://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=https%3a%2f%2fgithub.com%2fLegalizeAdulthood%2fiterated-dynamics%2f&referringTitle=Home">moved to github</a>.</div><div class="ClearBoth"></div>legalizeTue, 24 May 2016 20:00:05 GMTUpdated Wiki: Home 20160524080005PCommented Unassigned: 4 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image. [15]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/154 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image.<br />That pretty much says it. Under Win 8.1. <br /><br />I was initially tickled to get 4 of my 8 hyper-threaded cores fully occupied, but the four images saved by each of the instances of the program were essentially the same -- with some corruption by the other instances' images. <br /><br />I suspect you may know this, but I wanted to document it in the list of issues.<br /> - Hal Lane<br />Comments: Please [open an issue on github](https://github.com/LegalizeAdulthood/iterated-dynamics/issues) and attach the PAR files that are saving as the same image.legalizeTue, 24 May 2016 19:58:53 GMTCommented Unassigned: 4 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image. [15] 20160524075853PCreated Unassigned: 4 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image. [15]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/154 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image.<br />That pretty much says it. Under Win 8.1. <br /><br />I was initially tickled to get 4 of my 8 hyper-threaded cores fully occupied, but the four images saved by each of the instances of the program were essentially the same -- with some corruption by the other instances' images. <br /><br />I suspect you may know this, but I wanted to document it in the list of issues.<br /> - Hal Lane<br />Hal9009Thu, 19 May 2016 02:08:22 GMTCreated Unassigned: 4 simultaneous copies of Fractint for Win beta 5 w diff PARS all save the same image. [15] 20160519020822ACommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/11Hi Richard,<br /><br />maybe you have read my mails about multifractals.<br />As preliminary versions run well with fractint for<br />windows I wonder, if it is possible to increase<br />the size of the internal buffer, as I get a<br />"Buffer overrun" error if I try to load<br />multifractal_10.<br /><br />Sincerely, Albrecht<br /><br />Comments: The parm file supplied generates an image using only 1 frm (magnet) and consequently is the best source.legalizeFri, 12 Dec 2014 19:12:21 GMTCommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11] 20141212071221PCommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/11Hi Richard,<br /><br />maybe you have read my mails about multifractals.<br />As preliminary versions run well with fractint for<br />windows I wonder, if it is possible to increase<br />the size of the internal buffer, as I get a<br />"Buffer overrun" error if I try to load<br />multifractal_10.<br /><br />Sincerely, Albrecht<br /><br />Comments: Reference image rendered from supplied parameter set and mfr_13.frmlegalizeFri, 12 Dec 2014 19:10:54 GMTCommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11] 20141212071054PCommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/11Hi Richard,<br /><br />maybe you have read my mails about multifractals.<br />As preliminary versions run well with fractint for<br />windows I wonder, if it is possible to increase<br />the size of the internal buffer, as I get a<br />"Buffer overrun" error if I try to load<br />multifractal_10.<br /><br />Sincerely, Albrecht<br /><br />Comments: Updated formula file. Use these parameters: ``` 80000-16 { ; Patterns ; Time 0.12.04.86 Reso 1280/1024 ; Deep Zoom into 80000-03 ; First image from DOSBOX SVN-Daum X64 reset=2004 type=formula formulafile=mfr_13.frm formulaname=multifractal_13 function=sin/exp/exp/sin passes=t center-mag=-1.27390770772130300/-0.00000022474730471/24945.14/1/-90 params=4.123234345456565/0.3785210730307932/80000.64595749994/14235.4911\ 0306016/152048.0404808001/384.1604894012091/384.0048200059491/256.100768\ 3000996/512.1007683000993/768.1007683000987 float=y maxiter=3071 inside=maxiter periodicity=0 rseed=-2436 colors=000A80<3>540430220110zh3<35>A70860750<3>110wON<3>_EDUCBO99<2>622D\ L6<2>351gy2<38>AF09E08D0<3>580570450<3>010LKXEDM76BSQO<38>433333322<3>00\ 0pOa<3>MAGF6A735eFo<2>A3DJ57<3>612301pUn<49>636535424<3>000VO2<13>C90 } ```legalizeFri, 12 Dec 2014 17:37:17 GMTCommented Issue: Buffer overrun [11] 20141212053717PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: Thanks for your continued assistance on helping me diagnose this problem, Hal. I am thinking that when I return to this code that I would like to address this issue and any outstanding crashes and then make that the first release of Iterated Dynamics that is not a beta.legalizeWed, 22 Jan 2014 23:37:34 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20140122113734PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: > ...in the (often buggy) v options screen. If this screen appears at all ..., the aspect ratio is 1 rather than 0.75, so changing that value to 0.75 then causes the zoom box to show correctly proportioned when rotated. - [Simon_Snake Oct 1, 2012] Since the "v" screen is so buggy, I've always avoided it. If I understood you correctly -- you're saying that the "v" screen can show a correctly proportioned rotated zoom box (after an initial correction of the X-magnification to 0.75). I've not tried this to verify my understanding of what you said, because I don't enjoy trying to use the "v" screen. ;-) To work around the Fint4WinB5 rotated zoom box aspect ratio problem, I: 1. avoid the "v" screen, and 2. after rotating a zoom box and hitting <Enter> I then (on the "z" screen): 1. reset X-mag to 0.75, and also 2. reset Skew to 0 3. I do the immediately preceeding two steps after each rotation -- if I need to see the correct fractal region (and not the distorted one.) Occasionally this isn't recessary, but most of the time it is. 4. I use a low resolution and "g[uess]" mode for Passes on the "x" screen to speed up seeing a preview of the just-rotated image to see if I need to make further zoom and/or rotation adjustments. This gives a correct aspect ratio view of the correct location in the complex plane as far as I can tell. The above steps are how I calculate around half of my "variations" on Jim Muth's images I post on my web site: [http://www.emarketingiseasy.com/TESTS/FOTD/jim_muths_fotd.html](URL) I use DOS Fractint for the other half. I always check Fint4WinB5's rendering of Jim's FOTD against his version to verify that Fint4WinB5 is doing it correctly. Other than the times when it shows an all single color screen -- fortunately relatively infrequently -- it essentially always gets Jim's images correct. The only differences I've ever seen between a DOS Fractint image and the same Fint4WinB5 X-magnification-adjusted image was at extremely high magnification images, where some of the single pixels in a "grainy" area might be slightly different in location and density. - Hal Lane Hal9009Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:47:49 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20140122044749PCreated Unassigned: Workaround found for FOTD that fails to render [14]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/14Richard, I've discovered one reason why certain of Jim Muth's <br />FOTDs do not render in Fractint for Windows beta 5 -- and <br />a temporary workaround for this particular problem. <br /><br />E.g.: Jim's original PAR file for his FOTD for Aug 5, 2013<br />(pasted below) has one of its parameters specified as:<br /><br />/1000000000000/<br /><br />The fractal renders as an all black screen with this <br />original parameter specification. <br /><br />When I change the format of the value (not the <br />numerical value itself) to:<br /><br />/1.0e+012/<br /><br />then the fractal is rendered as expected, and appears<br />like the image on Jim's web page:<br />http://www.crosscanpuzzles.com/Aug13/080513.html<br /><br />My workaround is included below as a parameter set named: Anti-Minibrot-2<br /><br /><br />START PARAMETER FILE======================================= <br /><br />Anti-Minibrot { ; time=0:01:30.00 F130805.PAR<br /> ; F130805.PAR Fails to be rendered in Fint4WinB5<br /> reset=2004 type=formula formulafile=basicer.frm<br /> formulaname=FinDivBrot-2 function=recip passes=1<br /> center-mag=+0.3007751526060126/-0.0201684395807311\<br /> /2.544126e+010/1/47.5/0 params=5/1000000000000/0/0<br /> float=y maxiter=1500 inside=0 periodicity=6<br /> colors=000`bf_ZgZUhYQiXLjWHkVClU8mT4nW5kY5i_5gb5ed\<br /> 5bf5`i6Zk6Xm6Up6Sr6Qt6Oq8Mn9LlAJiCIfDGdEFaFDZHCXIA\<br /> UJ9RK7PM6MN4JO3HP2GU9GYFGaMGeSGiZGmdGqkGuqGywEqoI9\<br /> 8CihAa`8VU6NM4FF277LMGIIDFFBCC9996664332yHnlDc`AUO\<br /> 6KC3Ay0Js0Hn0Fi0Ed0C_0BV09P07K06F04A03501tUVSFFnXU\<br /> jURfSPcPN_NLWLJTIHPGFLECIBAE98A767443225Yg4Vd4Ta4R\<br /> Z3PX3NU3LR2JO2HM2EJ1CG1AD18B0680450223Sf2MY1GP1BH0\<br /> 58a`KtYVSHFQ3pK2eF1VA1L50AwUcrR`nPYjNVeLSaJPYHMUFK\<br /> PCHLAEH8BC68845422Se`LVRELI7A9ovKkrIhnHejGbgFZcDW_\<br /> CTXBQTAMP8JM7GI6DE59B3672331lqNW_FGI7uSppQllOhhMdd\<br /> K``IYXGUTEQOCMKAIG8FC6B847zzztt0ee0SS0EE0EoKCgHA`E\<br /> 8TB6M84E52728gA7c96_86X75T64P54M53I42E32B2171030MC\<br /> WKATI9QG8NE7KC6HA5E84B638425212D8BB799688566454343\<br /> 22111bjfZfbWbZTZWQVSMRPJNLGJHDFE9BA677333r1Aj08b07\<br /> V05N04F02701Gunjo0mVdDkmBfhAac9XZ7SU6OP5JK3EF29A14\<br /> 5W0CS0AP09M08J07G06C04903 }<br /><br />Anti-Minibrot-2 { ;t=1:30 F130805.PAR Fixd: Fint4WinB5<br /> ; F130805.PAR<br /> ; <br /> ; This fix repairs an all black image in<br /> ; Fractint for Windows beta 5 (Iterated Dynamics)<br /> ;<br /> ; "Fix": changed parameter format from: <br /> ; /1000000000000/ to: /1.0e+012/<br /> ;<br /> reset=2004 type=formula formulafile=basicer.frm<br /> formulaname=FinDivBrot-2 function=recip passes=1<br /> center-mag=+0.3007751526060126/-0.0201684395807311\<br /> /2.544126e+010/1/47.5/0 params=5/1.0e+012/0/0<br /> float=y maxiter=1500 inside=0 periodicity=6<br /> colors=000`bf_ZgZUhYQiXLjWHkVClU8mT4nW5kY5i_5gb5ed\<br /> 5bf5`i6Zk6Xm6Up6Sr6Qt6Oq8Mn9LlAJiCIfDGdEFaFDZHCXIA\<br /> UJ9RK7PM6MN4JO3HP2GU9GYFGaMGeSGiZGmdGqkGuqGywEqoI9\<br /> 8CihAa`8VU6NM4FF277LMGIIDFFBCC9996664332yHnlDc`AUO\<br /> 6KC3Ay0Js0Hn0Fi0Ed0C_0BV09P07K06F04A03501tUVSFFnXU\<br /> jURfSPcPN_NLWLJTIHPGFLECIBAE98A767443225Yg4Vd4Ta4R\<br /> Z3PX3NU3LR2JO2HM2EJ1CG1AD18B0680450223Sf2MY1GP1BH0\<br /> 58a`KtYVSHFQ3pK2eF1VA1L50AwUcrR`nPYjNVeLSaJPYHMUFK\<br /> PCHLAEH8BC68845422Se`LVRELI7A9ovKkrIhnHejGbgFZcDW_\<br /> CTXBQTAMP8JM7GI6DE59B3672331lqNW_FGI7uSppQllOhhMdd\<br /> K``IYXGUTEQOCMKAIG8FC6B847zzztt0ee0SS0EE0EoKCgHA`E\<br /> 8TB6M84E52728gA7c96_86X75T64P54M53I42E32B2171030MC\<br /> WKATI9QG8NE7KC6HA5E84B638425212D8BB799688566454343\<br /> 22111bjfZfbWbZTZWQVSMRPJNLGJHDFE9BA677333r1Aj08b07\<br /> V05N04F02701Gunjo0mVdDkmBfhAac9XZ7SU6OP5JK3EF29A14\<br /> 5W0CS0AP09M08J07G06C04903 }<br /><br />frm:FinDivBrot-2 { ; Jim Muth<br />z=(0,0), c=pixel, a=-(real(p1)-2),<br />esc=(real(p2)+16), b=imag(p1):<br />z=(b)*(z*z*fn1(z^(a)+b))+c<br />|z| < esc }<br /><br />END PARAMETER FILE========================================= <br /><br />Hal9009Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:25:00 GMTCreated Unassigned: Workaround found for FOTD that fails to render [14] 20130809042500PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: I am not sure why but the problem is shown in the (often buggy) v options screen. If this screen appears at all (it often causes a "buffer overrun" crash), the aspect ratio is 1 rather than 0.75, so changing that value to 0.75 then causes the zoom box to show correctly proportioned when rotated. Hope that makes some sense. SimonSimon_SnakeMon, 01 Oct 2012 21:08:43 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20121001090843PCreated Issue: Formulas using fn1(x*x) [13]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/13In the formula parser, using fn1(x*x) and setting the function to ident gives different results on the dos fractint compared to beta 5. It is as if the parser is treating the parameter as just x, not x*x.<br /><br />This can be demonstrated here:<br /><br />http://www.fractalforums.com/index.php?topic=11980.0<br />Simon_SnakeMon, 01 Oct 2012 21:02:38 GMTCreated Issue: Formulas using fn1(x*x) [13] 20121001090238PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: Re: > Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction > by a factor of 1.3333... It seems that the two potentially most useful observations about the aspect ratio problem in Fractint for Windows beta 5, are: - that the default M-set image that's created by Fractint for Windows beta 5 when starting up the program has an X Magnification factor ( z > F6 screen ) of 0.75 in order to achieve an undistorted image, while the DOS version has an X Magnification factor of: 1.0, and - that Fractint for Windows beta 5's zoom box distorts when rotated ( <PgUp>, <Ctrl><KeypadPlus>, <Ctrl><KeypadPlus>, etc. ) and the image specified by the distorted zoom box is distorted. DOS Fractint's zoom box is undistorted while rotated and creates an undistorted rotated image. I've put screen caps of this behavior onto a web page for a quick overview of the problem: http://www.emarketingiseasy.com/TESTS/FOTD/Rotated_zmBoxes_DOS_Fint4Win_beta5.html or http://tinyurl.com/zoom-boxes - Hal Lane ---------------------------------------- Hal9009Sun, 17 Apr 2011 03:47:50 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20110417034750ACommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: Unfortunately, my carefully spaced table columns were collapsed by the comment system. Here are the tables again, using non-collapsable periods instead of spaces: "On the properly proportioned Mandelbrot set initially calculated by default at 640x480 -- on the <TAB> screen (and on the more complete z > F6 screen and z > F6 > F7 screen) are: ....................F4Win-b5 . DOS Fractint ............................X . Y .... X .. Y top-l............... -2.5 1.5 .. -2.5 1.5 bot-r............... 1.5 -1.5 .. 1.5 -1.5 Mag:............... 0.6667 .. 0.6667 X-Mag-Factor: 0.75 ... 1.0 . . . "On the 90 degree rotated 640x480 Mandelbrot's <TAB> screen (and more complete z > F6 screen and z > F6 > F7 screen) are: .........................F4Win-b5 . DOS Fractint ..............................X .. Y ........ X .. Y top-l: ................. 1.5 1.5 ..... 1.0 2.0 bot-r: ................ -2.5 -1.5 .. -2.0 -2.0 bot-l: ................ -2.5 1.5 ... -2.0 2.0 Mag: .................. 0.5 ! .......... 0.6667 X-Mag-Factor: 1.3333 ! .... 1.0 - Hal LaneHal9009Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:12:11 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20110411031211PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: > When you say too wide, are you referring to the image dimensions or the region in the complex plane? > If the latter, does the <TAB> screen show the proper region coordinates? Good questions! Notes: - All procedures done and data taken while using the default 640x480 GDI video mode (F5). - Fractint for Windows beta 5 == F4Win-b5 On the properly proportioned Mandelbrot set initially calculated by default at 640x480 -- on the <TAB> screen (and on the more complete z > F6 screen and z > F6 > F7 screen) are: F4Win-b5 DOS Fractint X Y X Y top-l -2.5 1.5 -2.5 1.5 bot-r 1.5 -1.5 1.5 -1.5 Mag: 0.6667 0.6667 X-Mag-Factor: 0.75 !!!! 1.0 These values all match -- except the X-Mag-Factor -- and the images are identical in appearance and pixel size. Rotating this default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees in Fractint for Windows beta 5 using: <PageUp> <ctrl>+<Keypad+> <ctrl>+<Keypad+> <ctrl>+<Keypad+> etc. ... repeat until you rotate the zoom box 90 degrees. <Enter> calculates a distorted Mandelbrot set in the same 640x480 pixel window. The largest circular "bulb" of the M-set (tangent to the main cardoid area) has become an oval. This figure should not be distorted (and remains circular in DOS Fractint.) On the 90 degree rotated 640x480 Mandelbrot's <TAB> screen (and more complete z > F6 screen and z > F6 > F7 screen) are: F4Win-b5 DOS Fractint X Y X Y top-l 1.5 1.5 1.0 2.0 bot-r -2.5 -1.5 -2.0 -2.0 bot-l -2.5 1.5 -2.0 2.0 Mag: 0.5 !!!! 0.6667 X-Mag-Factor: 1.3333 !!!! 1.0 It appears that the authors of DOS Fractint have left the Magnification the same during the rotation, whereas F4Win-b5 changes the fractal's Magnification from 0.6667 to 0.5 . The ratio of two program's *extents* in the Y-direction in the complex plane for the rotated M-set is: F4Win-b5 / DOS = (1.5-(-1.5)) / (2.0-(-2.0)) = 3 / 4 = 0.75 The ratio of two program's *Magnifications* for the rotated M-set is: F4Win-b5 / DOS = 0.5 / 0.6667 = 0.75 So, these ratios correspond as expected. But the ratio of two program's *extents* in the X-direction in the complex plane for the rotated M-set is: F4Win-b5 / DOS = (1.5-(-2.5)) / (1.0-(-2.0)) = 4 / 3 = 1.33333 Note the discrpancy in the ratio of extents in the *X-direction* between the two programs when compared to the ratio of Magnifications and ratio of *extents* in the Y-direction. Since the ratios of the extents in the complex plane in the X and Y directions for the two programs aren't the same, this means that the fractal calculated by the two programs will be different. I believe that the cause of the distortion may be related to where the corners of the rotated "zoom box" are located after its rotation. When the 90 degree rotated zoom boxes of the two programs are compared, the dotted lines' corners are in different places and the zoom boxes have different aspect ratios. Assuming that the corners of the zoom box correctly indicate where in the complex plane the image extent will be calculated corresponding to, I see that the different locations of the zoom box corners will cause the aspect ratio of the 90 degree rotated image to change from the original in F4Win-b5. Basically, the aspect ratio of the zoom box in Fractint for Windows beta 5 changes as it is rotated. This then selects a stretched (squashed) aspect ratio for the calculated rotated fractal. The zoom box in DOS Fractint keeps its aspect ratio during its rotation and the calculated rotated image maintains its aspect ratio. Additional Factoid ---------------------------- If after a 90 degree rotation of the zoom box, I go to the F4Win-b5 "Image Coordinates" screen with: z > F6 and change the "X Magnification Factor" from: 1.3333 to: 0.75 the aspect ratio of the M-set is corrected -- the oval is returned to a circle. However, the overall size of the M-set is reduced. The circular bulb has gone from its original ~80 pixels to ~60 pixels -- that is, the overall (corrected aspect ratio) M-set is reduced in "pixel size" by a factor of 0.75 in *both* X and Y in the 640x480 window from the original size of the unrotated M-set. Presumably this can be corrected with a compensating increase in the entire fractal's Magnification by 1.333. - Hal Lane -----------------------Hal9009Mon, 11 Apr 2011 14:53:17 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20110411025317PEdited Issue: Buffer overrun [11]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/11Hi Richard,<br /><br />maybe you have read my mails about multifractals.<br />As preliminary versions run well with fractint for<br />windows I wonder, if it is possible to increase<br />the size of the internal buffer, as I get a<br />"Buffer overrun" error if I try to load<br />multifractal_10.<br /><br />Sincerely, Albrecht<br /><br />legalizeSun, 10 Apr 2011 19:11:21 GMTEdited Issue: Buffer overrun [11] 20110410071121PEdited Issue: Buffer overrun [11]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/11Hi Richard,<br /><br />maybe you have read my mails about multifractals.<br />As preliminary versions run well with fractint for<br />windows I wonder, if it is possible to increase<br />the size of the internal buffer, as I get a<br />"Buffer overrun" error if I try to load<br />multifractal_10.<br /><br />Sincerely, Albrecht<br /><br />legalizeSun, 10 Apr 2011 19:11:05 GMTEdited Issue: Buffer overrun [11] 20110410071105PCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Comments: When you say too wide, are you referring to the image dimensions or the region in the complex plane? If the latter, does the <TAB> screen show the proper region coordinates?legalizeSun, 10 Apr 2011 17:59:25 GMTCommented Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20110410055925PCreated Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12]http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/workitem/12Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction <br />by a factor of 1.3333... <br /><br />Thus, a reduction of the "X Magnification Factor" (<z>, <F6>) of 0.75 must be entered <br />for *every* fractal to have its aspect ratio be correct. Note that even the Mandelbrot <br />set initially calculated by default has had its "X Magnification Factor" set to 0.75 <br />in order to have its appearance correct. <br /><br />I attempt to calculate every one of Jim Muth's FOTD fractals with beta 5 (except <br />Mandelbrot-BC3 images) and this aspect ratio problem has been present <br />for every fractal calculated. <br /><br />An apparent side effect of the above problem is that when one rotates an image (with the <br />aspect ratio set correctly) 90 degrees (without resizing it), is that the aspect ratio <br />of the rotated image becomes incorrect and must be corrected by again setting an <br />"X Magnification Factor" of 0.75. <br /><br />Also, the dotted "zoom box" rectangle aspect ratio appears to be incorrect during and after <br />rotations. (This is more noticable when the "zoom box" is smaller than its full size.)<br /><br />Try rotating the default Mandelbrot set 90 degrees to see the resulting aspect ratio <br />error in the fractal that's created: <br /><br /><PageUp><br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+> <br /><ctrl>+<Keypad+><br />etc., ... until your rotate the zoom box 90 degrees.<br /><Enter> <br /><br /> - Hal Lane<br /><br />Hal9009Sun, 10 Apr 2011 07:38:25 GMTCreated Issue: Every fractal rendered by Fractint for Windows beta 5 is too wide in the X direction. [12] 20110410073825A