I was about to put this one in the fractal gallery and it occurred to me that it might not belong there. In my opinion it does belong belong in the fractal gallery because it was rendered in Ultrafractal. What do you think?

I'd say fractal gallery....but I really can't cause my jaw's still on the floor.

This is one spectacular image! IMO, it belongs in the fractal gallery. It was rendered in UF, so that is where I think it should go. Beautiful image, Keith.

Gawd, it's gorgeous, and I think it belongs in the fractal gallery. Bringitin may use images to create coloring formulas, but those images also follow traps set by UF. The placement of the images is computed using fractal formulas, within a fractal program. I can assure you that if I used the same pictures and bringitin to create a fractal, it would look nowhere near this lovely.

Where ever you place it , it will e a delight for the eyes! Such a bunch of beauty!!

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12416&Form.ShowMessage=1952770

A beauty, Keith! Panny, I like your explanation! I just opened a discussion thread on the gallery guidelines. Nick

The focus is on the flowers' photo, the fractal program is only the program that "mixed" the image... => I'd say "Mixed medium".

It's created in a fractal program and fractals are part of it's beauty so you could say the fractal gallery...but Remember the focal point story from a while ago,what's the focal point here?At first you are tempted to say the flowers but for someone else it might be the fractal swirls around the flowers.Is keith as the creator allowed to decide what the focal point is or are we who did not create it decide that for him? I would say let the creator decide that,Mixed medium or fractal gallery both are ok in this case.

I think thats a "Mixed medium".

In my opinion, it belongs in the fractal gallery.

I want to point out that I will be happy to put it where ever it belongs. I think that imported images are borderline. I could take a picture of something unrecognizable and stuff it into an array with "bring it in" and no one would know the difference. I could even upload it to the UF database, which would be a bad idea due to file size, but it could be done. I agree that it should be the call of the the artist. When I look at the image, I see spirals that are decorated with traps made from an image. It's as much a fractal as it would be if it were decorated point orbit traps, which, by the way, is what most of the image is. It's a tough call

lol according to the mod's 'made-up' rules, it belongs in the mixed media gallery ... and if ya look any further and follow their leads, you come to the point where YOU are the one who decides where it should belong ... so it's all up to you Keith IMO if you look at nature, flowers are fractals too, so are leafs so it belongs in the fractal gallery :-))

A little off topic~ HOW THE HECK DID YOU DO THAT? Anyone mind telling me how "bring it in" works? Feel free to IM me~ I've been out of the loop for a couple months now, and this is absolutely amazing!! Elizabeth

Isn't this going back to the same thing that has been discussed so many times? It's wrong for someone to use a 3D shape in an image. It's wrong to use photos or anything like that and post them into the "fractal" gallery. If you get down to it, probably 99% of the images in the "fractal" gallery are not all fractal. A little tonal changes in a paint program, a little sharpening or maybe even a blur or two. All of these are not "fractal", if you are looking for purity. This discussion seems to go back to the point of, " I used UF to make it ". Which is fine, but what if someone else preferred to use a paint program to do the same thing? According to that line of thinking, if you don't have UF you may only post "pure fractal" images, simply because the program you are using doesn't have the graphics capabilities of UF. So, if someone wrote a fractal program and incorporated a 3D generation engine; the resulting images would still be fractal? Personally I think it should be up to the artist. People go through different stages of learning, but usually they return to fractals or they post somewhere else. Mostly because that is where they feel most comfortable. William

Elizabeth, I am not exactly sure how "bring it in" works but what it does is turn turn an image, like a photo, into a coloring formula. In my image I took a picture of some flowers and used "bring it in" to create a UCL from the picture. Keith

lol 'bring it in' means like importing an image to your fractal program, and create a fractalized image with it see sample vv a mondrian fractalized image of a picture containing skyscrapers

Bring it in reads the pixel information from a graphic file and translates it into a 2dim array in UF. This array is read within a direct colouring UCL - a pixel is translated into a pair of coordinates of this array and the appropriate colour value is returned.... There are lots of possibilities for "post processing" there - when you check out my faces series in my gallery you can see what is possible when you "enhance" such a UCL by additional ideas...

It is a very interesting discussion about fractals: I don't believe "The Flower" it is a mathematical fractal. And now I remember me a Artist name Karin Kuhlmann Her work is the same. The technique: Flower photo with Fractals. Digital imaging with Kais Powertools and Corel Photopaint. See her website: www.karinkuhlmann.de/DigitalWorlds/Flowers2/flowers2.html I think a fractal is only a mathematical fractal. No manipulation. That is the end of the Fractal gallery?

Surely not. As long as artists are allowed to decide...

Sure! But I think a fractal is only a mathematical fractal. That's the question and discussion!

If fractals are only about math then there would be no fractal gallery. If they are only about math then I would have nothing to do with them. The math is only a means to an end for me.

When I see the beauty of a well done fractal image, that being an image composed of one or more fractals and/or/or not other items of interest... I do not think at all of the math. I only think of the wonder that has escaped from another human being in the "eye" of their art.

Attached Link: http://markch85712.home.mindspring.com/utility.html

Hmmm....just thought I'd add my 2 pennies here. First....thanks to everyone who finds BringItIn useful. As someone has pointed out, BringItIn generates a custom coloring algorithm. Long time users of UF will know what that statement means, but non-users or beginners might not. In short, any fractal can be broken down into two basic parts, the formula that is used to generate it and the method used to determine how the pixels on the screen are colored. For example, the now famous formula z = z^2 + C is an example of a fractal formula. Basically, fractals work, by assigning two numbers to every pixel on the screen, and then for each pixel on the screen use those numbers as a starting point in an iterated process. Since theoretically, the computer could do this until the sun burns out, we need to specify when to stop and move on to the next pixel. This is done in one of two ways. We specify a condition based on the values of the numbers we are calculating, if this condition is met, in general the pixel is labeled an "Outside" point. Instead, if we hit a pre-determined number of iterations, then the pixel is labeled an "Inside" pixel. The first and simplest coloring algorithm for the Mandelbrot set was to color Inside pixels black and outside pixels white. Another simple coloring method, is to color Inside pixels black and then color outside pixels based on how many iterations we needed to perform before we determined that the pixel was Outside. More complex algorithms, use the values of the numbers at each iteration and then determined the colors based on certain functions applied to those values. These in general are called Trap Coloring methods. There are numerous examples of these types as well as hybrids in the UF formula database. To make a long story short, the coloring algorithm that BringItIn generates, is a very simple Trap Coloring method, and only differs from other coloring methods in how it calculates the color of each pixel in the screen. Basically it determines the color based on a value in a table. So theoretically, the algorithm does not even need to be associated with a picture. It could use a table filled with random colors, which might produce interesting textures. In other words, a picture generated from UF with a layer that was created by BringItIn is as much a fractal as any other picture generated by UF. I look at Keith's picture, and I guess that he used a basic Julia formula. Used BringItIn and a picture of flowers and created a custom layer in UF. Perhaps he tweaked the variables for that layer until he got what he wanted and then added other layers for other effects. It looks to me like the object pictured has a fractional dimension as well as incredible self-similarity. So it looks like its a fractal. I've uploaded XD pictures that probably weren't even fractals, but I didn't know where else to put them. Off topic, if anyone has figured out some nice modifications to the basic formula generated by BringItIn and would like to share them, I'd be more than happy to incorporate them into a new version. I'm considering adding some parameters to the formula that use the iteration information to merge colors in the gradient with colors in the picture and see if interesting effects can be produced with that. I have to find the time. Take care everyone

Mark, It is good to hear from you. Thanks for your explanation. And thanks for BringItIn. I do have one request for BringItIn. It would be great if it had a rotation option like standard orbit traps has. Thanks again, Keith