Hey all! Now I know that the Gallery guidelines that were placed a couple of months ago, may have seemed to some a bit extreme. As I had stated before, this was to discourage the many images that were MOSTLY 3D/etc. compositions, and BARELY fractal. It was also a result of a forum discussion, and the many IM's I received on it. However, there are now questions raised about non-fractal imports into fractal programs, and vice-versa. So...I'm asking for your opinions. Ultimately, this IS a Fractal Gallery, but...where do we draw the line, yet again? Any suggestions would be much appreciated :) Thanks, Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

Pandora's Box.

lol define a fractal please smile

Does the rendering engine or the content determine the gallery? When Xenodream is able to export 3D objects in the next version (hopefully) and that is rendered in Bryce, where does it belong? The flip side is that I can create an image in Ultral Fractal that has no repeating elements. Does the Fractal Gallery need to expand to include "Mathematical" art, whatever that is?

I'd like to have "Mathematical Art" included. Many many UF images are no fractals because they miss the self-similarity or other fractal qualities...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I think that anything that could be done with fractals should get the chance to be posted in the fractal gallery. It's not important if the final image was created in a fractal program or composed in photoshoppsp.It shows the beauty of fractals and what could be achieved with fractals or fractal programs. In cases where you come in a grey area [fractal or mixed medium] It should be left to the creator to decide if he wants to share in mixed medium or the fractal gallery. heshe created something that did not exist before and now we are going to tell himher where it belongs. You don't know his thougts when creating the image and you don't know what he was aiming for yet you are telling him what the focal point is.I would say leave things as they are and in the grey area leave it to the creator,the important thing is sharing something beautiful and where heshe wants to share it...well.

exactly Brian smile

Then we are exactly back to where we were before.

I think the fractal gallery should include mathematical art in addition to fractal stuff. I think "bring it in" images are fine here if they contain a fractal or mathematical element. That said, I also don't think that images being in the wrong gallery is that big of a deal in the first place.

I agree completely with Jock.

See what happens when you open pandora's box. The gallery is going to go back to the way it was before the rules were changed.

well actually ya made up some rules, and so you should stick to it ... and treat everyone the same, which ya don't ... as i recall it correctly, you moved my design called 'emptiness' even though it was all a fractal, to the mixed medium gallery, because what you saw as the focal point was text ... now there is someone in the fractal gallery who uploaded a design titled 'initials' and then you don't move that to the mixed gallery even though the focal point according to your rules is text where do YOU draw the line, we all are fractal artists and feel we belong in here, even when we ad something else other than fractals to our designs if you take a look at the poser gallery, they don't move those designs to the mixed gallery one, even though other programs than poser alone are being used then you write out a contest called fractal magic, and you accept mixed media designs to it as well, how do your rules work then??? so either you stick to it, or acknowledge this was all a big mistake... but if you stick to it, make rules which are understandable, not just write a few lines, and when someone wants to discuss it, withdraw by saying, read this and that at the following addies, then lose it, and say: these are the rules, so it's over and done with from the artists point of view, you are absolutely wrong, Nick, we are the ones who set the focal point, not you...

I have a problem with calling a digital image "multimedia" because it contains elements from different software. If a Vue or Bryce image contains a Poser figure is it still not primarily a Vue or Bryce image? All software output is digital and mixing the output of different wares does not make it multimedia. Using a digital image as part of a collage of acrylics, cloth, bark etcetera; yes that is multimedia. Trying to change the traditional definition of the word as it applies artistically I think wrong. Perhaps a new term is applicable here; does "multidigital" ring any bells? As to what comprises a "fractal" image, one that is primarily fractal in theme! My two stivers worth. Mike

I think that the guidelines should stand as they are but they should also be recognized guidelines, not rules. Most of us are conscientious enough to do the right thing. We should be the ones to decide where our images belong. It shouldn't be up to someone else to decide what goes where. Keep the guidelines but let us do our own policing. Keith

Pandora's box? Yes, I knew this would get ugly...

I started this thread because of the recent questions raised.

Barbara and I thought we had the perfect solution with the idea of 'focal point' in deciding what should stay and what should go. Now, mind you, the guidelines were put in place because of member concerns over 3D/etc. in the Fractal gallery. I repeat this because it was artist's complaints that demanded a change...not us. We try to do the best we can, and we try to be fair. We are not on a 'power trip', nor do we care to be popular. We are doing our job the best we can.

Basically, I have to admit, we hit a wall. What do we do in cases of the 'Bring it in' UF thing, and the XD/3D output cases? I can't say...I'm just not sure anymore. We are not perfect...far from it. We do not have all the answers...if we did, we would have no problems and aLOT more free time. Further, I have seen images produced by fractal programs lately that just do not seem to be fractal to me. So, the best way, IMO, was to open the discussion again.

We really don't want to see a free-for-all in the Fractal gallery, as it was turning out to be before. But, we do have to address the recent questions, and this is the best way we can...by asking for opinions of the Fractal artists that post here.

Whether we are liked or not, is not our concern. We are only concerned with the forward advancement of the Fractal Community.

So...What do you want to see? Let's get to a conclusion on this, please.

Thanks,

Nick and Barbara

And to Harmen-
I still stand by my decision to move your 'emptiness' image according to the current guidelines. Honestly, though, some sites will delete an image without even notifying the artist. I only 'moved' your image, and sent you an IM to notify you. That was very fair.
Also, I have said before that some images may be missed, and to let us know if there is an image that does not comply with the guidelines. Again, we are not perfect, and things can be missed.

As for the Magic contest-
Once a contest is active, the rules cannot be modified. So, yes, it was my mistake that I did not clearly explain what was allowed. So, even 'mixed medium' types must also be approved.

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

In answer to your question Nick perhaps UF and Xenodream shouldn't be in the fractal gallery and should have their own galleries? It becomes a fine line to decide that an image doesn't belong somewhere because it uses or is capable of using an add-on piece of software designed for it. UltraFractal doesn't create pure fractals but it is sold as a Fractal Generator so I don't see how you can get around the issue of using Bring-it-in. We have a unique problem in our gallery as it seems most Renderosity galleries are software based (Vue, Poser, Bryce etc) they don't have these issues we have. Perhaps some of our fractal software not longer fits the 'Fractal' criteria and deserving of standing alone? Just a thought :-)

It doesn't really matter to me. I'm content to go with "majority rules." However, it does seem to me that bashing the coordinators of this forum is counter-productive. They're between a rock and a hard place, as all moderators/coordinators are when trying to find a happy medium on an issue where the outcome is only going to please a minority. Too many "non-fractal" type images brought complaints. Too many "rules" brought different complaints. New rules will bring new complaints. There is no easy solution, so why not give Nick and Barbara the benefit of the doubt and recognize that they are trying to find the best possible solution. It's not an easy job, as this thread shows. :) Cia

I want to see fractals and fractal like images. That means anything made with xenodream and fractal-like artrage images. What I don't want to see is poser mixes, tons of plug-ins, filters, tubes, and other postworked to death gimmicks. We are all supposed to be mastering our software and techniques, so why all the extra postworking to make an image? Yeah, I know, separate arguement, but that's what started this whole pandora's box in the first place. ;) There will never be separate galleries for certain fractal generators because the ownership of this site doesn't care enough to improve the html. If they ever restructure the galleries (yeah, right), then they need to get rid of the software related galleries all together. What this place needs is a fractal gallery, abstract gallery, digital landscape gallery, 3D digital art gallery..... Instead of argueing whether it's a fractal or not, why not just say it's a certain type of artform and post it that way and forever end this stupid arguement about it.

Confining my thoughts to the status quo for the moment... UF and XD in particular include non-fractal shapes, but they are mathematical not hand-drawn or imported, and many people aren't sure which is which anyway, so it makes sense to post them here unless the artist wants to put them in 2D, 3D or whatever. UF with Bringitin or XD with picture mapping are typically doing texture mapping onto a fractal shape or formula, so in most cases it's sensible to post here. But for example if you just map a photo onto a cube I don't think many would really want to see it in this gallery. Yes, the time is fast approaching when the XD release version will export 3D meshes. My opinion is that they will generally belong in the appropriate other galleries such as Bryce unless they feature obvious fractal structures. However, meshes are not ideal for high resolution fractals so that will likely be a minority of such renders. Regards, Garth

I think Garth's point about exported 3D meshes in Bryce is valid. As devil's advocate, do XD images without obvious fractal structures belong in the fractal gallery? I would prefer to see them here, but would that be following current guidelines? Do Celtic knots from UF belong here? Do lkmitch's great images belong here? I think that they do belong here. That broadens the concept of this gallery to include mathematical art.
I would like a clear ruling on this point.
Even more specifically, I would like to know if KnotPlot objects rendered in Bryce could be posted here.
One other point, some of the procedural textures in Bryce have an uncanny resemblance to the SFBM ucl textures.

Message edited on: 10/05/2004 03:37

lol as you said: this is a FRACTAL gallery ... so even in a FRACTAL [magic] contest, mixed media images aren't allowed!!!

Grab a dictionary and look up the word fractal. You'll be surprised at the answer, it's not what you think it is, at least not the way Mandelbrot defined it back in 1975.

yup i know, Jef ... but thing is, this mod made rules for this fractal gallery and tries to get away with it with a contest ... he speaks in contradictions and has no idea what he is talking about ... also treats everyone differently here, moves images around whenever he seems to have time for without negotiating first or when he has the mood for it, and when ya speak out your opinion about it, he treats ya like a kid or trashes yer opinion or warns ya ... and i don't care if you ban me for this, Nick...

WOW! Lots of opinions. I'm glad I'm not in the shoes of our two moderators. This is a hard call. I'll just go along with the general consensus and final rules. If my images get moved, so be it. Seems that as software gets more and more sophisticated, it will be even more difficult to decide where images belong. Marion

"but thing is, this mod made rules for this fractal gallery and tries to get away with it with a contest " If you're still referring to the Fractal Magic contest, you can quit blaming Nick for that one. My company is sponsoring the contest. I'm the one who brought the idea to Nick and Barbara because I wanted to do something for the generous people of this community. If you want to do any bashing on the contest, I'm your gal. :) Cia

Personally, I'm happy with the gallery no matter what rule changes. I enjoy looking around to see what can be accomplished and the different styles. Though a bit confused though by the rules (could be the ditzy in me) and they leave a few grey areas. Such as bring-it-in, xenodream mapping and 3-d issues. I even looked up the definition of fractal and checked the 'what is a fractal' on the main page. I'm suprised to see a few of mine don't even qualify as 'fractals'. I like to construct things in UF, so they don't normally repeat or look like the typical fractal. So how do you decide? I'll put my images wherever they need to go, just hope I understand where that is, lol. Man, do I feel for Nick and Barbara trying to figure this out! Such a fine line and so many varied opinions. Someone will be unhappy no matter what the rules are. Good luck you two :)!

oh look, thats not the point ... point is that if ya have a fractal gallery the mod made up rules for whether something is a fractal or not, and in his eyes non-fractal images should be moved to another gallery or not, and then when ya accept mixed media images in a fractal contest for the fractal community, you should say, they aren't accepted as well... hope you read that in previous messages :-)) as i remember correctly, in a previous contest, some time ago, some design wasn't accepted either, because of that...

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=569309

Image link and thumbnail show KnotPlot work.

I think it falls somewhere within the realm of celtic knots, kaleidoscopes, XD and spirograph.

I will try posting an image and see what happens.

I will abide by the decisions of the moderators.

Harmen- Apparently YOU didn't read what I said previously: "Once a contest is active, the rules cannot be modified. So, yes, it was my mistake that I did not clearly explain what was allowed. So, even 'mixed medium' types must also be approved." That means that I have to accept images that may be 'Mixed Medium'...since it IS a Fractal contest, as long as Fractals are a part of the composition, I have to accept it. I mistakenly left out the 'focus' part. I admitted it was my mistake... And further...you keep saying "The Mod made rules..." The rules came about because of complaints....I did not just do it for the hell of it. So, now it's open for discussion again...how about some constructive feedback, please. Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

ZZZzzz Not constructive but it sums up how I feel about this subject perfectly. Matt.

Hi All, looks like you're all doing well. :) and I hope you truly are! Sorry to add to this fray, but I can't sit and lurk any longer on this topic. Simply, I miss not seeing artists like Longrider when I cruise the fractal gallery. It would be a delight to see some of Little Red's work gracing our community again. Searching for an "fractal" artist whose style I remember but whose name I do not is now impossible as so many images are going outside the fractal gallery. Learning from our wonderful fractal artists happens in this forum more than any other place. Mixed Media does not have a forum and if it did, there are so many other art types that "fractal" imaging conversations would not work as well as they do here. I can remember and thoroughly enjoyed old discussions on how art "mixtures" were created. How a fractal was pulled into bryce and caused a simple 3D image to become magnificent. Vclaszlo, Dreamwarrior, I feel for you both. This is going to be one tough decision. A decision that you can either bear the brunt of for many moons to come or one you can put to a vote and let each one of us deal with our own feelings on the subject. If it does come to a vote then please consider these definitions within our perceptions of "Fractal Art": Artist: A person whose work shows exceptional creative ability or skill Art: The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty Fractal: Many mathematical structures are fractals; e.g. Sierpinski triangle, Koch snowflake, Peano curve, Mandelbrot set and Lorenz attractor. Fractals also describe many real-world objects that do not have simple geometric shapes, such as clouds, mountains, turbulence, and coastlines. I know these discussions are sometimes upsetting but on the postive side we see each others opinions and reasonings (if we're lucky) and are thereby given an opportunity to grow within our understandings and even possibly our art just a little bit more. Well, am going back to lurking for a wee bit :) wave to me now and again!!

I personally would like to see the "other" style images in the gallery again. Simply for the inspirational aspect. You know, "wow, great idea. Wonder how they did that?" And you go to work trying to figure it out. Along the way you learn so much. This problem will never be completely solved. Once new rules are made, new routes around them will be created. I'm just glad I'm not the ones having to make this decision! Old rules, same rules, or new rules, we'll go along with the majority on this issue. William

First of all, thank you for your support. This IS a tough call and the truth is, it could be a neverending discussion. We all know that. Keith, you said: "We should be the ones to decide where our images belong. It shouldn't be up to someone else to decide what goes where. Keep the guidelines but let us do our own policing." I just want you all to understand our position. If we did that, and all members, after reading the "suggested" guidelines decided their images belong in the fractal gallery anyway... What would be the point? We would be back to where all started, the gallery would be full of those images people complained about in the first place. We cannot "suggest" rules and not enforce them. We either place rules or we don't. With that said, if the general concensus is the guidelines should be revised, no problem. We are not here to make your lives difficult... only ours, lol :))) But, I think we should think about two things seriously: - We cannot change the rules or guidelines or whatever everytime someone comes up and says they don't like them. - Once we reach a decision, we have to assume our part in it and accept its outcome. Would you like to open this for voting? No problem. We truly want the best for our fractaland :) Barbara

My crafts - My Freebies - My Store - Delightful Arts

As long as nobody defines what a fractal is we will never have a successful decision.

• When I create a red square on a black background with UF, then this definitely NO fractal.
• When I create a very nice geometric design with UF - again, no fractal but an algorithmically created image content.
• When I zoom into the outer regions of a Julia set and leave the fractal borders and spirals - again no fractal is seen there.
  The outsides of a Mandelbrot set or a Julia set behave like a pixel formula - one iteration then the calculation is bailing out...
• A spiral made by a trap colouring often looses self-similarity and scale invariance, because you can zoom into a branch part and do not see infinite repetition of patterns any longer - even such a spiral might be no fractal.

So far this kind of images is allowed in this gallery. I LOVE to see images generated with fractal generators. I seldom visit the Mixed Media gallery. I do not mind KPT Materializer or effects from Painter on fractals. Images from UF or other generators are my interest. I'd like to see them in one place, not in ten. I like to be inspired - not only by infinite spirals but also by Gnarls (often no fractals either!).
So IMHO we should concentrate on the software and not on the results only. Andreas

Message edited on: 10/06/2004 02:28

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I've read all these responses again.

So, I am wondering if the only way to solve this is to decide that the only images that can be in the fractal gallery are ones that come directly out of a fractal program with no postwork of any kind/type added; not even frames, sharpening, color enhancement, lighting enhancement, or layering several images together to make a new image, etc.
All images using another graphic program must be in Mixed Medium. Seems that there would be no further debate about where images belong.

Another thought: I believe most of us use these other graphic programs to enhance our fractals. So maybe we could all make a mass exodus out of the fractal gallery and into the mixed medium gallery and then we could all be in one place again. Marion

Message edited on: 10/06/2004 09:48

Yay for Marion. That's a bit harsh, but shouldn't we all be trying to master our generators, instead of leaning on postwork to cover our short comings? How many people approach the creation process with that much intent, or instead stop midway because they know of X amount of postwork tricks that will yield a good image? We all want to help each other, but how do you help someone that cannot afford photoshop or paint shop pro when that's what you lean on to create your artwork? When you started learning fractals, did you want to learn from the people that have mastered the software, or the ones that just get by and use postwork to make their images? That's another thought that people overlook here, and that's why I'm adament on no postworking of my artwork (frames/fonts only, for print reasons).

So, the idea is to become a fractal master? That's where i've been going wrong! I better quit Jedi school and enrol in the tight arse academy of fractal snobbery... If I want to make a UF image, I will. If I want to make an Apophysis image, I will. If I want to make a Xenodream image, I will and if I want to make a Photoshop image, I will. If I want to make a UF image and then rape the shit out of it in Photoshop, I will. Anyone that doesn't like it, doesn't have to look at it. Matt. (My interest has suddenly rekindled).

Is it postwork if you are using a newer version of software with more features? Those added features are postwork to someone that has not upgraded yet. I do understand the artistic and intellectual challenge of limiting yourself to a certain set of tools but software's capabilities are a moving target. What is currently postwork may not be with the next version upgrade. Ultra Fractal did not always have the features of the current version. I guess we would need separate galleries for each software upgrade (not!).

Yay, Matt, thanks for avoiding the points I made, that's okay, everyone else does also.

I thought I did...I'll try again. The truth is that there are a lot of people that just aren't proficient enough in their chosen fractal generator to make what they want and probably never will be. Whether it's a lack of time, patience, savvy or any other reason. Post-work balances the equation so they can put their vision on the screen. As far as i'm concerned as soon as you add a signature to an image you have post-worked it, unless you add it inside a fractal generator. Saving an image in one format and then converting it in an image editing software is also post-work. Putting a frame on an image in an image editing software is yet again post-work. So to say you are adamant on NO post-working is folly because you clearly are post-working. Trying to figure out a limit for post-work and laying down a set of rules is pointless because people view it from different perspectives. As far as i'm concerned if you used a fractal generator in the process of making an image then it deserves to be in the Fractal Gallery...Anything else is just a waste of my time. If people want to post fractals with poser figures or anything else in them then they are welcome to...If I or anyone else doesn't want to see them then they just don't have to look at them... Moving them from gallery to gallery is pointless. It takes the same amount of bandwidth wherever it is placed and just makes more work for people. If there's a fractal in it...It belongs here! Matt.

The box is open. I think it would help to address specific questions. 1. Do images created from UCLs generated by BringItIn and other image importers (BringItIn isn't the only one) belong in the fractal gallery? 2. Do all XD images belong in the fractal gallery? If not, where should they go?

1. Yes 2. Yes (Going back in my box).

Oh, please no post processing discussion again!

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I agree. The post processing discussion is a dead end. I don't consider BringItIn to be a post processing issue

I already addressed framing and fontwork in an earlier comment, but if you want to overlook that and call that post working, then by your definition I'm guilty. Problem is, that's not what this thread is about. Nobody has problems with an artist signing the name of the art and their own name on the image. The topic of this thread is all the plugins, add-ins, and filters that are posted onto the image after rendered, or bring it in process in UF. Let's stick to the issues, please. The other thing about this thread that I find mind boggling is the decision that is going to be made affects the entire gallery, but people are not getting involved, or write "Zzzzzz" until I play devils advocate and ruffle feathers. Everyone that posts images here should be weighing in on this thread, but there's only silence from the bulk of them. They don't want to post their comments, that's fine, but let no complaints be heard from them when the dust settles. If the rule is made to allow any type of postworked image, then that's the way it's going to be. I have no problem living with that, because it's a wise decision to obey the rules of the site. Rebellion gets you nowhere. All I'm doing is throwing my viewpoint into the decision so that all sides can be looked at. Btw, you consider it postwork changing a png to a jpeg because the site doesn't allow png's? That's really interesting.

Don't be too serious...

I was happy with this gallery before someone became unhappy with fractal/poser mixes. I could accept this kind of images even if I never would create such images. I do not know how many complained about the mix. And I would like to know the number of fractal artists here. Perhaps we all (or nearly all) were happy without the strict guidelines (are guidelines rules and laws? Or only helpers for decisions?). I would like to keep the freedom we had before...

Andreas

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

To Keith/Deagol: 1. Yes, 2. Yes, I even would not mind Fractals from Artmatic or Bryce.

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

The topic of this thread is all the plugins, add-ins, and filters that are posted onto the image after rendered, or bring it in process in UF. Let's stick to the issues, please. I disagree that this thread is about filters and plugins...the way I read it it's about objects other than fractals being added in fractal compositions. If you have a landscape made out of different fractals and a poser figure dancing in the center of it the poser figure is what the image is about with the fractals just used as background....and if that landscape is made in UF using 5 layers of different fractals it's just as postworked as 5 layers of different fractals put together in PS. I don't think anyone has the right to tell me (or anyone else) that my work isn't as valid or artistic as theirs is because I use filters for different effects. I think an anonymous vote by the artists that post their work here is a perfect solution (some people are uncomfortable voicing their opinion). That way majority rules and not just a few that complain the loudest and Nick and Barbara can stop taking flak about being the ones who instituted the 'guidelines'. I happen to think it should all be posted here. So that's my weigh in...;o)

Treat people as if they were what they ought to be...
And you help them to become what they are capable of being.
                                                                ~Goethe~
R.I.G.H.T.S.

I agree with valcali. Let's vote. Valid votees are those that have more than three (?) images in this gallery...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Or is it voters???

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I'll go along with that. Voters...Votees receive votes don't they?

Message edited on: 10/06/2004 14:57

So a filter and a plugin isn't an object other than a fractal? I think we need to clear that up before we vote.

• So a filter and a plugin isn't an object other than a fractal?

It seems so. A filter effect is different from including a poser figure or a cute kitten... (Sorry Maria...)

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

How so? Both are additions to the fractal that weren't created by the generator.

Yes, but do you see a difference between those two kind of add-ons? I do, btw.

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

So certain add-ons are allowed, and certain ones aren't? Do you see my point? That's different standards.

Different standards for different kind of add-ons... That's only natural.

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

So lets define them clearly and vote.

No more layer merge modes. No fbm. No Celtic knots. No transformations. No external gradients in Apo. All add-ons? Better to allow more rather than less!

I don't think splitting those hairs really matter. Effects are way different than objects added to an image, and if effects aren't allowed then you do indeed get into layer merge modes...that's an add on too despite what program you use to do it. The vote could simply be to have the freedom to post fractal images as we used to or to keep the added guidelines that we have now. I can't believe the majority of artists here don't want the freedom to post what they create using fractals. Art is forever evolving and fractal/digital art is no different. I always thought there was a certain freedom of expression inherent in the artistic community and as art evolved artists embraced those changes...went beyond the bounds. How can you possibly put all these boundaries/rules on vision and imagination...it stifles creation.

Treat people as if they were what they ought to be...
And you help them to become what they are capable of being.
                                                                ~Goethe~
R.I.G.H.T.S.

There is another kind of post processing that is used here. I'm talking about people who add ... POEMS! to their work.. Hey people that poem is not a fractal! And don't get me started on those descriptive titles! OK I'll shut up now.

LOL!! Oh, please tell us more!

I don't know, I had stopped posting here for a few month's when that rule was implemented? I should be asking you why you did it in the first place. This arguement never seems to die. If this isn't clearly defined and the line drawn in the sand, then this is going to happen again in a month or two from now. This needs to be finished, right here, right now. Both this arguement and the hot 20 have gone on far longer than they should have. Make a decision and lets vote on it so that this will forever be ended.

I am guilty of adding a poem too... Like this urchin guy... BTW - working with the mouse instead of using the keyboard exclusively - allowed or not?

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I say anything that isn't made using a graphics tablet shouldn't be allowed. After all it's the closest thing to a pen, pencil or brush etc and we are making 'art' aren't we? ;O)

No decision will ever be final. New software will be created. A different mix of people will join and leave the Renderosity community. Change happens. I vote for more. More diversity! Use the thumbnails to pick and choose. Filter to your heart's content.

Maybe there should be a choice in the Genre: drop down list during uploading to specify "No Post-Processing".

Seems the bulk of the comments want that. My vote here and now is drop all restrictions in the gallery. Let people post any way they want. If people want to post pure images, they can do that. If people want postworked images in any way, they can do that.

Don't decide too early. I count 20 different posters to this thread, but not all posted some kind of vote. But we have a lot more artists in the fractal gallery...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

This is a tremendously important decision that affects posts in huge ways, but judging by all the wise cracks, people aren't taking it serious. They want to make a joke out of it, I don't care anymore. I'm done with it. All I ask is for people to never make another thread about this again, it's really getting sickening to see the division, and if they bring it up, then that's division also, which is just as bad.

Well, looks like we are going at it again. ;)) I have noticed that only a minority of people who post to this gallery have made any comments or expressed their opinions. Andreas said: "I was happy with this gallery before someone became unhappy with fractal/poser mixes. I could accept this kind of images even if I never would create such images. I do not know how many complained about the mix. And I would like to know the number of fractal artists here. Perhaps we all (or nearly all) were happy without the strict guidelines (are guidelines rules and laws? Or only helpers for decisions?). I would like to keep the freedom we had before..." I agree 100%. I never had any complaints about the mix of figures or animals or poems. Who are the complainers and why aren't they speaking up now? I believe we let freedom of expression prevail/no strict guidelines, or do like I stated in my earlier post above. Marion

I think from now on I had better simply post to "other apps" and be done with it. Mike

My goodness, there so many different discussions here, it's hard to tell what's what anymore!! I agree with Marion's comments. I was happy with things before complaints brought these new restrictions. As to post processing, a touch of sharpening, color contrast, gamma correction, all these can take a nice image and turn it into a fabulous image. I don't agree that it is just to cover up an inadequate piece of art. Those who do not have ultra fractal and work with flames in PSP or PS like to create some kind of background if they don't want a plain black background. According to the new rules, the flame is focus of the image, and the background and/or framing only enhances the image. If artists are to be restricted and constricted, it seems to me to put a real damper on their enthusiasm, at least for posting here in the fractal gallery. No offense taken, Andreas. :) I deleted all the picture tube images from my gallery except for one. I enjoyed it for a while, but came to realize that the source of the tubes can't be verified, so I haven't used them lately. I'll abide by whatever rules y'all decide to make. If pixies and fairies and kittens aren't fractal, then I'll be posting more in MM and other galleries here at Renderosity, as it's really left a bitter taste in my mouth to see all this bickering going on. This used to be a much happier place. I have enough on my plate in my personal life without feeling like I am being stifled and can't place an image that I thought was 80 or 90% fractal in the gallery that has been my comfy home for over 2 years now. This hobby is one of the few things that brings me any pleasure these days, and it saddens me that things have changed so much. I'll go along quietly once the decisions are made, but I don't think it will be quite as much fun anymore. This gallery has been my cozy haven for so long and I am a tad uncomfortable at having to venture out into unknown territority. C'est la vie.

Since i'm one of those peolple who posted images with other things than fractals i feel the need to say this.I understand that there where many complaints about that and that the rules had to be redefined. Altough I think that my images do belong in this gallery I will post most if not all of my images to the mixed medium gallery.I want to be free in my creations and I don't want my imagination to be limited. I liked this gallery and i thought I contributed something nice to it but since the rules changed that means the majority does not feel that way. I want to focus on creation and ,I don't want to think will this be allowed or not while doing that,I takes away some of my pleasure when creating my images and that is the main reason why i'm doing this. So I will post them in mixed medium because that's the way i want them to be. I love fractals so i still will come over to check out some of the beautiful pure fractal composition from all of you. Later,we still cool,and don't forget the software is the tool to create it's not about the software but about what you have craeted and the pleasure while doing that.IMO.

I presume everybody knows by now just how divisive a topic like this is. How it takes away from any enjoyment of the work and puts each render through some fascist meatgrinder of prohibitions. Damn, does anybody really want to work with that amount of angst over their shoulder prejudging their work? PostWork aside-- if you don't like it don't do it-- if it's forbidden, I will simply lie about it. There 8is the option of a very simple rule-- a fractal for the purposes of this gallery is a work whose predominant percentage was rendered in a Fractal generating program. Period. If there's a poem, so what, it isn't going to take up over 50% of the fractal, if it does, put it somewhere else. Likewise with those creation in Vue and Bryce. At some point we have to decide whether we want to die in the sterile gettho of purity or open up to the growth and fertility of Fractals as a real art form-- capable of change and evolution. Them's my thoughts and I have a gallery pretty evenly divided between Fractal and Poser and have-- up till now, had no problem knowing which went where. Queri AKA Emily

What a long standing discussion and each time the different types of artists come together on fractal definitions, differences, purism or not purism I learn new things. It's one of the things that I have always enjoyed about this forum. Explanations on how colouring within fractal generators work, insight into other artists preferences, drivers, creative processes... aside from some bits of frustration this is a pretty cool thread. It was not really so long ago that we did not have our own forum or gallery here! How excited we all were to get it! Why not have one rule? and have that rule called "inclusion" or "expansion"? Yes, that puts us back to the way we were before the rules. Arguments abounded back then too - approximately one good one every 4 to 6 months :) You cannot have a decent community without passionate discussions and differences! Especially an artistic/creative community. Is it not the passions and differences that help drive us? inspire us? light the proverbial fire under our butts? I really hate the thoughts of anyone turning their back on this community. There is so much here that is worthwhile! Lets celebrate and enjoy our differences.

Marion said "Who are the complainers and why aren't they speaking up now?" I was one of those complainers, maybe the main one. I have been very reluctant to jump into this with both feet because I experienced some real ugliness the last time around, coming from me and getting it back. Nothing about this place was worth that and I don't want to go through it again. I enjoy a good healthy discussion, like firefly has described above. I'll make another attempt: I was delighted to see the rules. I think that the fractal gallery has become more interesting as a result of the rules and I think that they should stay. I still see plenty of mixed medium images in the fractal gallery and I think they are fine there. I can handle the gray areas. Before the rules though there were some blatant non-gray area images showing up in the fractal gallery. I can think of one specific image, from one of the more controversial artists here, that was a Bryce image, plain and simple. It was a desk or vanity from the Bryce free stuff area that had a flame mapped on to the drawers. This same artist was kicking out one image after another like this and putting them into the fractal gallery. On top of that he was getting a lot of praise for his Bryce images in the fractal gallery. I'll be honest, I felt like I was being cheated. As you know, I like to build abstract scenes with UF and here this guy was pulling stuff from the Bryce free stuff area, mapping a half assed flame on it and getting high praise for it in the fractal gallery. That bugged me. Right or wrong, it bugged me so I complained. That's just one example. Renderosity has provided galleries for Poser, Bryce and mixed medium images and that's where those images belong. The hair splitting gray area images should be left up to the artist to place where he or she thinks that they should go. I think BringItIn is a gray area. I guess that's the trouble. Someone else might think that mapping a flame on to a desk is also a gray area. Keith

I brought up the poems and I was actually kidding about it. Also, my vote would be that if a fractal program was used at all then it should be allowed in the gallery. Also, if a program like Bryce is used but the focus of the image is clearly something algorithmically generated, it should also be allowed.

A fractal is a geometric pattern that is repeated at ever smaller scales to produce irregular shapes and surfaces that cannot be represented by classical geometry. Fractals are used especially in computer modeling of irregular patterns and structures in nature. A fractal can be made by various types of programs, not only generated by Ultra Fractal, Fractal Explorer etc. also with Bryce you are able to make irregular shapes which we gather under the name of being a fractal. Some of us aren't really happy with the outcome, and make different kind of designs with these fractals, using Photoshop, Painter or equivalent. As we are all fractal artists, we belong to this fractal community and are very creative with our designs. So no matter what we do to flourish up our designs, we do still belong in here and are able to upload our designs into this community. As programs become more complicated, and we are able to make designs which could in the end look like something as if it is NOT made with a fractal program, we surely love to stay in this community, were we are able to upload our art. So what if we ad some poser images, or do some pre-processing in adding a picture to our designs, the design will always be a fractal to start with. So what if somebody stands up and thinks everything else than what he/she produces on his/her screen trash, he/she may find 20% of the designers who stand by his/her opinion, then the moderator makes rules, and at the end the other 80% are unhappy. Then all of a sudden this same person stands up and 'Bring In' something else added to his program, and wonders why it isn't been seen as a fractal. Let's get everything back as it was before there were these guidelines, everyone was more happier, and more creative, it all didn't work in the first place. What are rules in a fractal community if even the moderator doesn't obey them. Yes, he can say, that in a fractal contest the rules cannot be changed, after the contest is active, but wasn't he the one who made these rules of something being a fractal or not, and then has a contest? All of a sudden, the rules didn't seem to bother him nomore, he accepted mixed media designs. So his violation of these rules made up by himself, establishes this discussion. So we will have it back to the old again, and enjoy everyones contribution to their expression of art, it's up to he artist himself whether something is called a mixed media, fractal or anything else. No restrictions or rules, just do what we all do, having fun sharing our approaches of designs, with the basics of a fractal. Have a nice week, Harmen

Applaus, Harmen...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Thanks everyone for expressing your views, and keeping this discussion going. Unfortunately, there are a lot of members who have not spoken up here, and I know some never even peek into the forum. Barbara and I are working on setting up an anonymous vote, as we would like to get as many involved in this as possible. It is the opinions of the members that count. The rules came about in answer to complaints, as it is our job to do our best for the Community. We tried what we thought was the best possible solution, and did in fact get some positive feedback on it. Maybe it wasn't the majority, we may never know for sure, but hey we gave it a shot. Barbara and I only want to do what's best for the Community, and that is all I've ever tried to do from the day I started here. Thanks, Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

Fair enough, Nick. I won't have a problem abiding by the result of a vote. Matt.

Hi Nick, what about telling us how many complaints or complaining artists there were and how many different artists have posted more than e.g. three images in the fractal gallery? The second part should be answered easiest via SQL... Regards, Andreas

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Thanks Keith for stating that you were one who complained. I understand your complaint and know who you speak of. Most of us know. I'll go along with the results of the voting. And I too, would like to know just how many complaints there really were. It seems that if the complaints were from a minority of the artists here, they could have been handled in such a way as to prevent such an uproar of changing rules and restrictions. Oh well, enough said. Marion

I don't think the amount of complaints matter now do they? Really? What matters is that a large, knowledgeable and reasonably "nice" (ahem) threaded discussion has ensued and is resulting in the forum going to vote on a matter near and dear to them This same argument will surface again in a few months (I'd be almost disappointed if it didn't) in spite of the voting. But you know what? At the end of the day we are lucky to be heard and considered. This is still a pretty nice place to be. I also think that it's pretty cool that we can set rules, learn that maybe our original thoughts/reasonings weren't all that we'd hoped and reset the rules. Hope you all have a great day :)

Firefly---If the number of complaints doesn't matter, then there would be no need for this to even go to a vote, IMO. The fact that this has become such a hot topic implies that there were LOTS of complaints. That is why I wish to know the number of complaints. Like I said above, if there were only a few, say 3 or 4 out of all the artists here, it seems it could have been handled in such a way that this would not have become the hot topic it is at present. Marion

I would like to feel comfortable here as an artist and not only as attendee of a discussion workshop...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Hi everybody, I haven't recently contributed to the gallery and to this thread yet but I would like to say that to put a border between what is fractal and what is not is an almost impossible job. Some have talked about softwares, plugins, etc. If you consider that most CG softwares and their plug-ins, add-ons, etc. always use maths and often fractal maths, this fight is irrelevant. The only difference between, let's say Bryce, or Zbrush, or Painter brush engine, Redfields, etc. and UF, Xenodream, etc. is that fractal generators claim their origin and the other ones usually don't. In this last case, how it is programmed is users' last concern. What they care about are the aesthetical results. But this is also what explains that often you will get the fractal effects from a lot of softwares. Personnally, I am a person who likes her creative freedom and nobody will succeed to put me in a can I don't want. Rules are the worst enemies of creation and invention. I feel myself enough creative to program my own stuff in UF. But I will also post-process if the job is more easily or more quickly done in another software. I don't reinvent the wheel when I know it exists. And as said, there is no fractal purity. Why I should care about it? But I also consider I have enough judgment to know where to post my images. Presently my gallery outside photographies is almost empty. But I used to have some in the 2D gallery and some in the fractal one. When I had doubts, the 2D what my choice. Personnally, I don't like being punished and constrained because some people lacked judgment. Miche D. returning to lurkdom.

There is a difference between painting a fine portrait of a canine companion and painting a table full of dogs cheating at poker. I know that some people think paintings of Elvis on black velvet are fine art and hang them in their parlors. There is just no accounting for artistic tastes. That said, I must tell you that some years ago I was thrilled to find Renderosity with a lively and engaging Fractal Gallery, whose members welcomed me and invited me to keep posting. I know I wasn't very good then, and didn't even know how to make a simple frame, but the warmth and encouragement were there. Everyone who could open a fractal generator was happily welcomed. I, too, felt some distress at finding PSP tubes and Bryce primitives mapped with oversaturated fractal images, and especially distressed to find them highly praised and voted into the Hot20, until I saw who was doing the voting and praising. Mostly these images were from fractal newbies who brought their fan clubs with them from other genre, and those fans were used to galleries with many more members, so they all voted for their buddy's efforts without thinking of the impact on our small gallery. Perhaps, given enough time, the tube craze would have died down by itself. As to postwork, some of our artists use extensive postwork that makes their images even more 'fractal' than when they came out of the generator, and most of us use some form of sharpening, resizing, framing or signing, which, minimal as it is, is still postwork. I have become somewhat more philosophical over time. I have come to realize that the Hot 20 is not about how good the art is, but about how popular the artist is. I never look there anymore. I value each comment I receive, knowing that someone took the time to click for a larger image and look at my work and leave their thoughts. I think this discussion and the previous ones that brought on the rules have been incredibly valuable in making people think about their own images and what they are trying to say as artists. I do think that the moderators should not be moving people's images without consulting them and negotiating with them, and that should only be done if there is a specific complaint against them. I will be glad to have choices to vote on, but I hope they are better than the last Renderosity vote choices I participated in that specified only 3 things, none of which I particularly liked, lol.

Fractals will always amaze me!

Well, I think that Renderosity is so kind to allow fractals of any kind here as it is primarily Poser orientated website and like software. The moderators are doing a bang up job and staying unbiased. I am guilty of using plugins on fractals to create a more pleasing image and or for weird effect. I personally like the pure fractal image no matter whatever fractal software. I am so happy that I have met so many wonderful artists here in the Renderosity community, and count on many as good friends although we never met in person. I came to Renderosity for the Poser content and learned of Apophysis. I have had trouble going back to Poser because of my desire to create fractals. shhh'

THANKS RENDEROSITY and all the fine people here

Hi all I think it's great to see all the views here. That's the nice thing about our forum. As far as the number of members complaining that brought about the rules...well, I wish I still had all the IMs that accrued over time. Unfortunately IMs over 6 months are deleted now. A few I still have, some I remember, and sadly, there are a couple that express one thing in IM while saying the exact opposite in the forum... Either way, I respect the privacy of the artists that IM me, and will not present their names. Looking back, it is true that a couple were transient members... It was however that thread that was started, in addition to the IMs, which eventually led to the placing of the guidelines. Barbara and I thought we had the best possible solution, and of course it backfired. Anyway, we will have an anonymous vote (it will be set up using the contest form, and I will have it up at some point this weekend). So let's give it a shot and see what happens...I know I'm curious... Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

Hi Nick,

Would it be possible to announce the voting in the GALLERY with a gif image and a link to the voting page? I'm not sure all of our members know we even have this nice forum.

Message edited on: 10/08/2004 01:51

Fractals will always amaze me!

Thanks Vivian I did plan on putting the anouncement in the gallery header to link to the voting page. Some may not know about the forum, although the link to the forum has been there for ages :). But I'm sure others just simply avoid it, too. I am ever hopeful for a good turnout ;) Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

Call me sleepy - I didn't know about the "Guidelines", went looking for them, found them and found them vague but understandable. Lately I create abstracts that don't look like a spirally traditional fractal but I create them with a fractal program and so I feel that they belong here. Sometimes I post-process them but not to the extent that the sense of the original is lost. IMHO my stuff belongs in the fractal gallery and I would be annoyed if someone moved it elsewhere.

Sharron

Nick, I'm sorry that you think the guidelines have backfired. I don't agree. I think they are working well, but you probably see a lot more backfire than I do. I was hoping there would be some agreeable modification to the guidelines, like allowing us to move our own images when prompted by you. If it is all or nothing, please consider the implications and backfire of removing the guidelines: Everything is fair game. I own a copy of Bryce now and if I choose to map a flame on to an object and stuff it into some obscure corner of my image, it's fair game in the fractal gallery. If I take a picture of a natural fractal, like a flower, tree or coastline and don't do anything with it in a fractal generator, it's fair game. Any abstract image that looks like it might have been made with a fractal generator would be fair game. I mean, if there are no guilelines then there are no guidelines, period, and I'll put whatever I damn well please into the fractal gallery. It would be a huge mistake to eliminate the guidelines all together. If you do then you might as well rename this forum to "the complaining about the fractal gallery forum" because it will never stop. Even if you say something like, "This gallery is open to all fractal related images" it would be better than nothing. A statement like that would open up the gallery to everything and anything, but when people complain you would have something in writing to make reference to. I'll go with the flow, but whatever you do, Nick and Barbara, define this gallery in writing. Keith

Amen.

So long as you used a fractal generator to make a fractal during the process of making an image then, yes, I believe you can post whatever you like in the gallery, Keith. The trouble with rules is that once you start laying them down to any specific degree then you have to keep adjusting them. It starts with no Bryce, no Poser, no tubes and then it's no Bringitin and no Xenodream and just keeps expanding with every new thing that comes out. Eventually you have a fractal gallery with only 3 people in it because the rules forbid any creativity in combining applications and only those that can be bothered to read through the long list of 'donts' can post anything. The way I see it, this is an art gallery and as such the image always comes first. So what if we get a few postings that don't really belong here? Who is it really hurting? In the past i've got just as annoyed as other people about some of the postings that don't belong here but i've changed my mind about it. In the big picture it doesn't affect my art or my enjoyment of this gallery, it can even be used to gain inspiration. Keith, I believe you have been influenced by non-traditional fractal art in the past...Fractal Spheres? After I started posting Bryce images with fractal mapped spheres in them you went all out to try and accomplish the same thing in Ultra Fractal, and succeeded brilliantly. Unfortunately with the new rules we have here now my original images would have never been allowed to be posted here. You probably wouldn't have seen them and a whole series of UF sphere images probably wouldn't have happened. At least not back then... That isn't a creative environment, and I don't want to be in an environment like that. A friend of mines favourite saying is "If you want the rainbow, you have to put up with the rain" and it couldn't be truer in this case. Matt. (and people say I can't be eloquent...)

If I were to post the attached image to the fractal gallery without comment, I doubt it would attract much notice, even though it's actually a crop of a satellite photo.. Personally, I don't think the whole subject is that big of a deal, but it will be interesting to see the vote this weekend, and how the choices are presented to us.

Paul, I remember someone posting a photograph of a canyon on Mars in the fractal gallery once. Despite this blasphemous gesture the world didn't stop spinning, brimstone didn't rain from the sky and Satan wasn't reborn amoung us. In fact I think we looked at it, some of us commented on it, and then we all moved on to the next gallery image. It wasn't really that big a deal considering it should really have been in the photography gallery. Strange how times change. Matt.

Matt, I agree. We shouldn't take this stuff so seriously ;-)

There is a photo of cauliflower in the gallery with 8 comments and over 80 views. Someone posted a scanning microscope image of a golfball's surface awhile ago. These images are of interest to some and are a negligible effort to bypass for those not interested.

How long is the voting period going to be open?

You hit the nail on the head, Encrypted! So what if it is not pure 100% fractal?? You will probably know the minute that you see a thumbnail, whether or not you are interested in clicking on it to see the full size image, right? So if an image isn't as "fractalian" as you prefer to look at, you'll probably just pass it by and go on to the next page of thumbnails. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to look at every single image in the fractal gallery, much less mixed medium, poser, terragen, bryce, photography, etc. etc. So if an image just doesn't trip your trigger, then go on till one interests you enough to view full size. Seems like a no-brainer to me, anyway. Like Paul and Matt said, it's not that earth-shakingly important. :))

Matt, good points. You have a good memory. I forgot that I have you to blame for all of those spheres. Paul, good to hear from you. Honest, everyone, I don't care what happens. I am not nearly as caught up in this place as I used to be. I just think that some kind of definition for the gallery should be written down. Even if it states that any image from any source is OK. If it's written down then we accept the terms, whatever they are, and move on, or move out if we don't like the terms. When someone complains, we point them to the definition. If the definition has gray areas or it is ignored it doesn't matter, let it go. BTW, I think Paul's example belongs in the fractal gallery. It's as pure a fractal as a fractal can be :) Keith

The interesting thing about this thread is that people seem to keep implying that they are being told how to make their art. That's so far from the truth. Nobody has told a single person how to create an image or stifled anyone's creativity in any single way. All that's been said is that if you "choose" to make a certain type of art, it should be placed in a certain gallery, that's all. Judging by the bulk of comments, people want absolutely no rules to the fractal gallery. I hope people are really weighing the consequences of anarchy, because that's what the gallery will be without clear cut guidelines. I don't care what label you put on it, whether it's "artistic freedom," "non-stifled creativity," or whatever else you label it, it'll be anarchy, and that's a bad way to go.

Anarchy?? LOL These guidelines/restrictions have only been in effect for a couple months and the fractal gallery has been here for years without them. I don't think it was in anarchy. ;o)

Treat people as if they were what they ought to be...
And you help them to become what they are capable of being.
                                                                ~Goethe~
R.I.G.H.T.S.

I'm actually not opposed to a 'general guideline' (note I didn't say rules) for fractal images as long as it doesn't restrict creativity and drive people away from the gallery. Forcing them to change galleries because suddenly their images don't fit is unfair. I believe the only guideline we had to go by before was "Any and all types of fractal images accepted". I can't remember the exact wording but it was something like that. I think this type of statement with a bit more definition would be enough of a guideline. Don't ask me what it would say though because i've been trying to think of it all day and haven't got a clue... Matt.

Oh for crissakes.

Where is my eyeroll icon?

Get rid of the damn rules and if someone deems a fractal a fractal, or if it has fractal IN it, then let the person post it in the fractal section. My God this is just trivial pettiness at its excruciating worst.

Mindy

Message edited on: 10/08/2004 23:28

LOL...;o)

Treat people as if they were what they ought to be...
And you help them to become what they are capable of being.
                                                                ~Goethe~
R.I.G.H.T.S.

LOL @ Mindy There wasnt anything wrong with the way the gallery was before. There was a diverse array of images that i really enjoyed. If i didnt like the thumb of a particular image, then i just didnt click. How hard is it to just bypass an image you dont want to look at? The fractal compositions of artists i liked, i dont see anymore because they arent allowed in here. I dont go to the mixed medium gallery, why should i have to go there when i want to look at fractals, no matter how theyve been used. That is what this gallery is for.

Hi all! The voting page will be posted Monday night. Sorry for the delay...it's been a busy weekend. Trivial or not...I see nothing wrong with getting everyone's input as to the content of the Fractal Gallery. If it goes back to the way it was, then at least we know we got the majority vote on it, and any complaints can be directed back to the vote results :) Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

I think you have the patience of a saint, Nick. You're a good moderator trying to implement the will of the people. The problem is that the pettiness and holier-than-thou attitudes of those fearful of embracing art for art's sake undoubtedly makes your job virtually impossible. Because no matter what is decided, the flat-earthers will whinge loudly, as they always do. They'll see their sacrosanct "pure" fractals as an abomination when tampered with. They know nothing of art, all they know is their own narrow, dogmatic beliefs which have not a thing to do with the meaning of art.

The obsessed concern of some people as to whether or not something constitutes a "pure" fractal makes my stomach roil. This kind of thinking is a bone in the throat of anyone hoping for fractal art to ever attain legitimacy as an art as opposed to a mathematical exercise or ego-driven pursuit. Anyone who deems it necessary to define art by their own narrow standards, or define what a fractal should be and how it should be made should be ignored with a relentless vigilance. All it does it narrow the playing field and frighten away any artist with a scintilla of innovation.

Trying to please the majority in itself is not a bad thing; it only becomes dangerous when the majority are the equivalent of a Mandelbrot Taliban. I hope the true meaning of art prevails, although every time I read a thread like this one, one of many discussions I have seen, my hope for that kind of healthy, logical thinking dwindles to the size of an atomic particle.

Mindy

I agree with you, Mindy. Let's face it: with all the great programs out there (free and otherwise), it is relatively easy to create beautiful fractals. In my mind, where it starts to become art (rather than just the product of an algorithm) lies in what the artist does to and with the fractal beyond that point. (That's my personal take on it: I know that not everyone shares this viewpoint.) :) Cia

Hi Mindy,

I am a purist. But for my own works only. I do like to view works that are post-processed. I just don't like to post-process my own works because I still dream of having them all in a really large format on the wall. Two of my works are rendered and printed to 50x50cm - I love the sight...
What I do not like here at the gallery are images that have no real fractal/algorithmic character anymore. But it is near to impossible to me to define this. Therefore I'd like to have guidelines, not rules for this gallery. I'd like to have this gallery as a meeting point for those who call themselves fractallers/fractal artists/fractomaniacs/... I do not want to have this gallery "spammed" by images that e.g. would better fit to e.g. Digital Comics.
So let us vote and not crusade...

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

well then your a mathematician, Andreas, not everyone is so gifted and can program a formula which produces a graphical presentation, there are other ways to produce a fractal as well, by combining several programs with each other to get a presentation on their screen, those are called fractal designers .... and for those people is room in this gallery as well, whether you like it or not ... you just gotta live with it, or this gallery will be quite empty... LOL

Reckon I'll put in my thoughts on all this stuff, too. I'm really of two minds about the whole deal. On the one hand, I like the diversity of things being done with fractals but on the other hand it'd be a shame to see the fractal pages become a catchall and just some miscellaneous "other" genre. I agree with Keith about some of the more obvious "mis-postings". I'm certainly not a fractal "purist" and I suppose many more traditional fractallists weren't too pleased to see all those mega-layer compositions that I or Keith, Maria and others have done using all fractals to make scenes with a quasi real-life look to them. The main thing I think that separates fractal art from the others here is the "do it yourself" quality even when one makes fractal scenes. There is no "freestuff" available and we have to make everything "from scratch". Need a sphere? Gotta come up with 4-10 layers of design and shading/masking layers to make one. Need a fractal building or a giraffe like Maria has made so well before? Gotta go and find all the right fractal shapes and make the masks, textures and clips yourself and layer it all. Need a dock? I had to come up with shapes, textures and some flames to the tune of 90 layers just to make that. Took me a month and a half solid to figure things out and make "Vancouver Sunset" last year. Having a vision for an image and taking the time to realize that vision causes one to become more proficient with whatever "fractal software" they use. If we had all sorts of "freestuff" we would never learn really how to use our programs better and would just paste in what someone else took the time to figure out. We see this with much of the Poser and some of the Bryce stuff here where there is this big long list of credits under the image where they used "free" or bought stuff someone else made. Many are stunningly beautiful compositions and amazingly artistic and I enjoy them but they are, IMO, partially the fruits of someone else's labors unless the artist made everything themselves by really learning their MEDIUM. Therein lies any "purity" that fractal art may have - they all have to be made from scratch. There are many places to learn programs like UF, XD, VOC, Apophysis and others and hundreds of great artists who are glad to help, but in the end, one has to "do it yourself". I think that there is a big difference between "post-work" and the use of a second or third "medium" to add shapes to an image. The hair splitting is just "lawyer talk", IMO. Adding texture or kaleidoscoping/mirroring/texturing a flame or other fractal is just post-work or "editing", IMO, and I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. When I take a picture of my wife I'm not taking a picture of the background scenery and all the naturally ocurring fractals like trees in it, I'm taking a pic of HER and the background is just there. SHE is the focus, the subject. If I wanted a pic of the scenery, I'd leave her out of it, no? There is a gallery for Poser works and anything that uses that program - or MEDIUM ought to go there since it was set aside especially for the users of that medium to show all the possibilities of that program. When I see an image like that, however beautiful, the first thing that comes to mind is Poser even if there are a ton of fractals in the background. One's eye is drawn first to the Poser figure and later to the background. Fractals and fractal looking images can be made with all sorts of programs. Look at the neat "fractals" Harmen makes with - I think - Artmatic on his Macintosh rig. Makes me want to buy a Mac - if I could afford one! LOL Likewise, many fractal looking things can be done with Bryce - check out "araffaell"! I remember Bryan Smith(smithgiant) being dissed pretty bad for not using "fractal" software to make fractal seeming images and he did some incredible pieces of art. I certainly couldn't tell what was used and the same with Harmen's stuff - they sure look "fractal" enough for me. But when one starts making rooms and furniture, the overarching vibe says Bryce to anyone who looks. There again, a special gallery has been set aside here to show what can be done in that medium as well. Why wouldn't one want to post their images with Poser or Bryce aspects to the galleries where they could be most appreciated by artists familiar with those media and the difficulties and skills required to produce an image with them? I certainly am not an authority on what it takes to use those programs, though I do know when I like an image. Not to mention it would get more of artists exposed to what can be added to those images with fractals and maybe we wouldn't be such a minority after a while. But at the same time there is the question of change or stagnation of this genre. I've enjoyed most of the supposedly "mis-posted" images immensely and to not have seen them would have left my life a good bit less enriched. After the guidelines happened, I made efforts to make sure to periodically check my favorite artists' from the fractal pages galleries and have seen some amazing stuff but it IS a hassle and takes more time than many of us have. Maybe one should not let their creativity be constrained to the boundaries of a certain genre just because they want to post to a certain gallery? I think we should all just "let 'er rip' and make the images that come naturally from our souls and not be so worried about "where do I post this"? or "does it fit in"? Post it where you HONESTLY know it fits and who cares WHERE it is as long as its in one's gallery page? The important thing is THAT IT IS. I guess one problem is there are so many programs to make fractals, too. Maybe change the name of the gallery to "Fractal Art" instead of "Fractals"? To constrain it to nothing but spirals would be a dead end, IMO. How many can you make before they all look the same? It occurs to me the gallery would then display a very fractal-like "self similarity" and we'd miss out on seeing some pretty cool images. Anyhow, Just my couple a cents - I sure hope whatever "guidelines" we come up with will be accepted and everyone can get back to what they do best - make awesome pieces of digital art! I think many of us need to also realize that - at least in my case - we are allowed to post here for free and as such are "guests" in the "house" of the corporation that has given us all this opportunity and, as with any visitors, we have to follow the rules they put forth because they own this web-space. Hope no one gets ticked at me - just my opinions - and I'm in no way dissing anyone's work. Heck, I'd be in the MM and Bryce gallery occasionally, too - if I could figure out how to use Bryce and find a really fierce looking dragon tube! lol I'll be happy with whatever the guidelines become. I lean a bit towards keeping it like it is, but it's really no biggie one way or another. Rick :?)

A well-reasoned and thought out response, Rick. Glad you posted it. :) Cia

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12416&Form.ShowMessage=1962805

Hi all! The link is to the voting anouncement thread. We'll get the link posted in the headers and elsewhere tomorrow. Thanks to everyone for sharing your thoughts on this! Some very good points were made. Whatever happens...happens :) Have a great day! Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

i am sorry Andreas, i misread your intentions, so please ignore the following phrase: and for those people is room in this gallery as well, "whether you like it or not ... you just gotta live with it", or this gallery will be quite empty thanks Rick, sometimes i do think that my designs belong somewhere else, for some of the things i can do with Artmatic can be done in Bryce, Terragen, Mojoworld etc as well. What my space images in the Mixed Media gallery are concerned, under my alias 'darkchrystal', those are a mixture of everything in Bryce, Terragen and Artmatic, and therefor i can't upload them in here... i do love to post-process quite a lot, i am not satisfied with what artmatic or some other programs i use to make fractals, alone gives me, my latest designs show the fractals i use, on the bottom to make them big ones sometimes i get apo images from my Sharon and manipulate them intensively in photoshop lol ya can even scan a wishbone and make it look like a fractal in photoshop, there are various tricks to make anything ya want i admire those who makes fractals out of a formula... lol i was writing this and saw when refreshing the post of Nick time to vote, i reckon :D

Rick, thanks. You have stated my feelings exactly.

I think this sentence of Rick illustrates my point quite nicely: "I've enjoyed most of the supposedly "mis-posted" images immensely and to not have seen them would have left my life a good bit less enriched." I think enlarging the fractal umbrella, instead of restricting it, embraces the true meaning of art. I have no argument with those who eschew post processing. That is their choice. I don't judge it, I just enjoy the end results of whatever methods they choose to employ. I don't care what tools they use, their vision is what counts to me. I don't care about the limitations they put upon themelves---artists do that--it is the limitations one puts on others that bother me. I think we are so obsessed with terms and names and titles and rules that the art gets crunched underfoot.

What a fabulous post, Terry. Very eloquently stated.

Andreas,

I think we'd have a hard time defining what "digital comix" mean to each of us. They used to call Warhol's art "comics", too, and look down their noses at it. Now you'd need to have a hefty bank account to even touch one of his scribblings on a cocktail napkin.

I say that if someone puts a mandelbrot in the middle of Spiderman's cape, it should be embraced in this gallery. Even if someone thinks it's crap. And even if it is.

M

Message edited on: 10/12/2004 23:20

This thread isn't about making more restrictions. In fact it was created because some thought they were too many restrictions. So if you think the gallery shouldn't be restricted, why not express it as a vote? I mean, that way you opinion will count for the results. I know this topic is tiring (believe me, WE know), but if we don't do anything about it, we get complaints. And if we listen and try to get the community involved... we get complaints as well. I think this is a wonderful place and we should start seeing the bright side of it. Barbara

My crafts - My Freebies - My Store - Delightful Arts

You're right, Barbara. A moderator's job is a thankless one: no matter what you do, you're blasted for it. :)

I think Renderosity is a wonderful place, too. That was never the issue....not to me, anyway. This forum and website is just a microcosm of what goes on in all fractal and/or art communities.

I hope that this vote or exercise results in lessening the restrictions, which some people do unfortunately seem to favor. That was the concern, and about which some of the commentary was based.

@Terry: I wish you wouldn't complain, but again show your art here... The top lists are lists of friendship and fashion. Just ignore them. I left them all because my images have not enough popularity... But my making fractals does not aim at entering those lists... At least not very much :-)

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Terry, It's your call. I have already left this place twice (maybe 3 times?), if that makes any sense. What I found out is that the world still turns, or in other words, nothing changes. I would think that there is some place here for you to display your art. With all of the different topics and genres I can't imagine anyone allowing Renderosity to narrow their creativity, but do what you need to do to be happy. Don't be too proud to come back if you want to. Another thing that I learned is that the turn around in this place is so quick that after a few months only a few people even knew that I was here and left. Whatever you do I hope it is good for you. Keith

It was a very close vote and because of that we will have 1/2 our population happy and 1/2 not so happy (understatement I know). All communities struggle when trying to find their "norm" and/or acceptable zones. We don't always like the results but if we're up to it we stick around and try to keep the "other" opinion in view and on friendly coffee talk status. I too also understand the need to get away from things here for a time - I've done the same thing myself. Sometimes it is a good thing! However, I found out that guidelines I like or dislike not withstanding, I really do like the community we have here. The diversity, the lively discussions and the willingness to share. Those are the things that hold the appeal of renderosity to me, this forum/gallery in particular. I can post art anytime in many places completely to my own specs and guidelines. But it gets lonely out there. Good luck to you cruelanimal and I hope you find what you're looking for. Perhaps that journey will one day bring you back again like it did me.

Hi again Terry, it seems that you are right to some degree. But as far as I know your abstract images would be very nice under "2D & Fractal" like many of my geometric images soon. I just miss your art here and since FractalWorld at Yahoo no longer stores attachments I only have the choice between a crowded inbox and/or no longer seeing your images. So my wish is - please come back and accompany me in the 2D gallery. Kind regards, Andreas

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

I've not seen anyone complain about Terry's or Andrea's images, so I fail to see the need for some self-imposed exile. The argument that I've seen is not about fractal purity, or post-processing, but having something like a poser image with a fractal in the background. Hasn't it been said that images done in fractal progams, with or without, post-processing are fine for the fractal gallery? If there is a need to worry about fractal "purity", then one might as well argue about what is "good" art, for all the good that will do. As has been said, no images will be moved without the author being contacted first, so why not live daringly and challenge authority and post your images anyway if you think they belong in the fractal gallery? Ken...

Hi Ken, convincing words IMO. Andreas

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Ken "The argument that I've seen is not about fractal purity, or post-processing, but having something like a poser image with a fractal in the background. Hasn't it been said that images done in fractal progams, with or without, post-processing are fine for the fractal gallery?" Thanks :) I don't know why this post-processing issue keeps coming up. I have never discouraged post-processing. Post-processed fractal images are very welcome here. But, if you throw in a Poser babe, fairy, 3D object or whatever into it, and the focus turns to those added items, then they belong in 'Mixed Medium' or elsewhere. Terry I looked at the images you posted in 2D, and they would have been welcome here. Nick

Nick C. Sorbin
Staff Writer
Renderosity Magazine
......................................................................................................
"For every breath, for every day of living, this is my Thanksgiving."
-Don Henley

Hi Terry, I have seen your comeback. And now with Nick's answer you could perhaps come back tro the fractal gallery... And then - welcome back :-)

:rolleyes::sad:
Joy of Frax

Glad you care about the community enough to stick around Tery :) You're needed here!