neoglasms - AVS Forums

fholborn

25th January 2003 23:24 UTC

neoglasms
An attempt to create evolving forms. As it began to take on elements of hand-blown glass making, I focused on that and enjoy the results.

anubis2003

25th January 2003 23:38 UTC

Originally written by fholborn in comment:
interesting new forms evolve over time, even after several hours.

Several Hours!!!:confused: Sorry, but I don't have that much time.:p Looks nice though. Upon looking at the code in your superscopes it looks like you just made up stuff. I'm not sure about your movement. And I wouldn't say that forms evolve. It's just random numbers. Nice overall effect, but it needs something else.

fholborn

26th January 2003 07:35 UTC

Hey, anubis, thanks! I did hack at those scopes a lot to get the desired effects. If you're still interested, here's a cutaway view (avs attached) of one "dna strand" (scope) and how it interacts with the sigmoid forming function.

As for evolution, yeah, wishful thinking I guess. What I do like is the way the forms combine into illusions, like watching clouds. And with all the overlapping variables (several of which are accelerated at different rates and modulated by music volume), I'll probably never see the exact same image twice -- after the first few frames anyway. The randomized inits are an attempt to get a different effect on each launch.

anubis2003

26th January 2003 15:02 UTC

Yeah, it looks nice, but you are making it sound more complex than it is(DNA Strands???). Try making it beat detective by rerandomizing some of the variables on beat.

Tuggummi

27th January 2003 10:09 UTC

Ah the good ol:

sin(r*t)

I remember using it myself too, especially with the "Spiral Graph Fun" example superscope :)
But it really doesn't evolve and nobody doesn't have the patience to wait for several hours for a preset to get going. I think (based on my own style of viewing preset) the overall time of people viewing ONE preset is about 5secs to 2minutes.

Evolving avs... now that would be something, but this isn't it. It just increases the value used to multiply R.

Raz

27th January 2003 15:55 UTC

Yup, nice idea but it just isnt so.