HOME | DD
phoenixkeyblack — Phonetix Flame File
by-nc-sa
Published: 2007-08-13 16:26:15 +0000 UTC; Views: 2659; Favourites: 18; Downloads: 466
Redirect to original
Description
The Alphabet for people who just can't be bothered with my Pixel Tutorial [link]
And Bully's Special Prize.....I've named them phonetically (the English version), which my dad taught me when I was about 5.
Related content
Comments: 16
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hi, I got your Email and I will have a play with version 9, but I'm really far behind with rendering ... I only made this to see if I could ...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
>,< If I had a cluster, and time, I would still be behind in my renderings too. I have nearly 100,000 (well, probably many more) flames "yet" to be rendered. If I were to set up a batch of all my flames in all my files I'd die an old old man befor being close to done
Of course, any of the computers listed here would WAY better render time
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Drooling ... But would they really render faster?
I use flam3 and I thought sticking a shedload of memory in would speed things up, but as it allocates a set amount based on size the process is no faster. I can render more fractals simultaniously now but not faster, and I think my processor limits the number I can do. The most I have run at once is 10, they were all at 2000x2000 and at a quality of 10,000.
I have 4Gb of memory (although both XP and Vista only show 3.25), and my processor is an AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ ...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, it is all down to the "floating point operations" speed of a comuter. Apo is essentially a calculator program that uses colour instead of numbers to show the calculations. Ram makes for bigger pictures at one time, but it is the raw 'spead of calculation' that determins render time
<.< a home computer maxes at I think 1 or 3 TFlops, and a good super computer I think I read is around 30 GFlops (30, 000 TFlops). So, yea, if you crunch the numbers 30,000 times faster, your renders would finish well ahead of the tea steaping
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Just need to get a super computer then, no problems ...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Very cool, thanks very much for this!
I had a hard time with the tut as I wasn't doing the shrink to 10% properly, and the other problem I had was the move thing. You have it in the tut as move 0.1 instead of 1.
I had given up on it until I saw this and then took each Transform off one by one and then rebuilt it.
I had fun playing with this, scaling transform 1 up by 525 (not percent, just type the number in the scale up/down box) gave me a hallway type of effect, scaling it up again by 525 gave me the "Matrix Screensaver" type of effect (have to scale up once at 525 (or some high value you choose) and let it update, then again to get the Matrix look. For some reason I couldn't just scale up 1050 and get the same effect, although that produced a pretty cool effect too.
Great job on getting this to work!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You know what happened, I cheated, I'd already made the 'A' and tried to restage each part for the screenshot....and I forgot to change that number..... I may redo the tutorial, I've just got a set of DVD's that teach you to use Photoshop....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
no need to redo the tutorial, just edit the deviation comments and add the note to reflect that oversight
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You know I keep forgetting to press the reply button...so all my return messages appear twice...Doh!
I might just do that...sounds easier.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
lol I used to do that too. One other note I would suggest adding is to tell the user to put 1000 in the scale up/scale down box and press the scale down icon to get the shrink to 10%. I was using 10 so it never worked for me until I saw how the transforms looked in your flame file and then figured it out.
(I'm kinda slow, I know 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I might just do that....sounds a lot easier.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This must have taken you absolutely ages. Thank you it will be very useful. Roz
👍: 0 ⏩: 0