I'm curious...I've just begun to experiment with post processing some fractals. Now, I am wondering if there is a point in the process that it no longer would be considered a fractal?

How far is too far? : )

Too far - this is just a matter of personal taste (IMO). Although this question might be the subject of some near-to-religious discussions - I always see it as a matter of taste. Personally I like to reproduce my images at any size and therefore do not post-process except for sharpening or creating a frame for the web presentation of the small JPEG. I like Terry's heavily PP'ed images and MDC's UF-Bryce combos and many pure UF images - just to name a few examples from both sides of the PP discussion.

Thanks for the answers : )

So, changing the fractal's colors...textures and maybe tiling...collaging are also acceptable?
All can still be considered a fractal...and can be placed in the fractal gallery here.

I'm glad...this is good to know!

chuckle Unlike some of the (not-to-be-named) R'osity galleries which focus on a specific program, most folks who do fractals are very open-minded, IMHO. With so many different fractal creation prgrams, and so many ways of handling the output, we pretty much take the artist's word that something is a fractal. So, post away with whatever you've got!

I also use Photoshop on some of my fractals. Some I post in the Fractal Gallery and some I post in the 2D Gallery. Just depends on how I feel about the image and how it strikes me in terms of it's "place of belonging". Sometimes I even use fractals in Bryce! Mind you, I generally place those ones in the Bryce Gallery :) hehehe, not intending to confuse you :)

The final result is what counts, IMO. I've post-pro'd many images in many a program. Lately, I've been trying to avoid it, just to see how well I can work the program (UF, primarily- though I did add some tile a few days back). I'm more inclined to post-pro in in my landscape programs. Just another opinion. In the final analysis, it's how satisfied you are with the work.

In the gallery I sometimes see a single note by the artist saying "UF3" Maybe I'm wrong but as in the case of fractalexpo there seems no way just one program was employed. Mind you I find it commendable whether one can use 100 programs or just one to produce artistic fascination. I have gotten similar results to the free form fractals by using the displacement function in photoshop to create the dynamic free form shapes. What I would like to know is how some of those textures/tiles/materials are applied.

A classic example of rtfm I just read the tutorials by Janet Parke Its TWOO ITS TWOO One can mat,frame,multilayer etc. with UF3 Transformation codes apparently need to be gleened elsewhere and applied. The exciting new effects that brought me to explore fractals again is really a result of a remarkable group effort.

Welcome back into the land of fractals and kaleidescopes donhakman :) Yes, UF seems to be a very, very remarkable program. I am brand new to it so am still unaware of the potentials it has other than what I see folks here accomplishing.