At this time I don't plan to do any further updates to apophysis.ucl. There are other things that I'm much more interested in. I don't know about the plans of others.

Mark

If you are trying to render really large images then you don't want to export then to Ultra Fractal.

There's a line in the Animation render script that reads... Renderer.Filename := 'c:renders' + Format('%.2d', j]) + '.bmp'; For the script to work the c:renders folder has to exist, or you need to change that text to point to an existing folder. Then it should render all of the frames needed to create the animation.

The format of UGR gradients and MAP files is very different...have you actually tried this? Apophysis can save gradients as MAP files ("Save as Map file..." on the pop-up menu in the Gradient editor).

Ultra Fractal 2.0 can't do flames at all because the formula uses language features that were introduced in Ultra Fractal 3.0.

Are you sending your posts to the list in HTML format? It doesn't like that. Try plain text. Mark

With all respect I absolutly do not agree with Wub and > Marcusbacus. You have to put some efforts, some > skills, some artistic taste to an image. Well then you are actually agreeing with me. I said my flame images took less effort than my (better) UF images, not that they took none. > With randomly generated images sooner or later they will > look the same ,and what more important they will loose an > author own style. > And I think this is main problem with Apophysis. I wasn't encouraging people to rely on totally random flames. Apophysis isn't going to pop up with a great image on its own. Of course it takes some effort to develop a personal style with flames, perhaps more effort than with Ultra Fractal because your choices are more limited, and flames already have a "style" of their own. > But the reason that more and more people use Apophysis is > that is very easy to get "nice" images without any effort. Well maybe, and some people are going to settle for "nice" random images (and I guess there's no reason that some people shouldn't settle for that). But that's not the program's fault: it's just a tool. Mark

I was sceptical about flame fractals to begin with as well (though I liked the look of the algorithm, I hadn't seen much that impressed me in the way of "finished" images). When I started making flame images they seemed too easy: if I didn't spend as much time on them as with my UF images how could they be as good? I've grown out of that a bit (but I've been doing basically nothing but flames for a couple of years). It's the result that counts, not how much effort an image took to make, and I think the variety of flame styles in the fractal gallery shows that there's plenty of room for individual creativity to shine through, even with "single layer" flames. I also think that the variation in quality shows that Apophysis isn't doing all of the work. Mark

I don't think there's any great harm in ratings, votes and "wonderful" comments, as long as you don't take them seriously. They spread a little pleasure in a perfectly safe and legal way. As to "constructive criticism", well there's nothing more annoying than getting it from someone you don't know or whose work you don't respect. And let's face it, there's no point trying to turn this place into a serious art forum--not with all those naked plastic ladies around! PS as an Aussie I have issues with both Yanks and Poms.

It was a poor attempt at humour.

Attached Link: http://www.apophysis.org

My how this thread has grown since I last looked in. I'd hate to sound like a grouch, but discussion of the Apophysis 2 beta really should be confined to Apophysis mailing list. Beta means "unfinshed" (and that includes the documentation). It's not meant for general release yet and the price you pay to get it is an obligation to join the list. Everything that's been said here could have been said on the list, and it's welcome there. As to tutorials, I'm happy to put links to other people's tutorials on my own tutorials page (and I expect there'll be a link to that appearing in the list messages soon), but I'd prefer that they weren't advertised outside the list. It may be a mean streak in me but I sort of feel that people who can't be bothered joining the list don't deserve help. Mark

The drawing method does affect the final image. For rendering use "multi-pass" or "one-pass". "Guessing" does as the name suggests (it guesses the color of some pixels), and it can result in less accurate images and nasty artifacts when it guesses incorrectly.

The export bitmap option has been replaced by Render to Disk. You can reduce the sample density and/or image size to render quickly, and to produce an image of low quality (like bitmaps exported form 1.01). Any futher questions should be directed to the Apophysis list.

The link to the beta appears in messgaes actually sent to the list, not the confirmation and welcome messages.

Attached Link: http://www.apophysis.org/

Join the Apophysis mailing list. Every message on the list has a link to the beta at the botton, so wait for a message to appear or post one yourself. The idea of making the beta only available to list members is so that they can be kept informed of updates, post bug reports, and also so they can read whatever I have to say about using the program (since documentation is very sparse at the moment).