Here's an update on what's been going on. I've been trying to figure out how to visually show others how to create simple types of fractals. At first I tried breaking it down through equation, but it was brought to my attention to try and display it as a geometric figure. This is still proving difficult for some fractal types like the Mandelbrot set. However, I feel like I'm on the right track. In the end I could also choose one type of fractal to focus on if I feel that course of action is necessary.
Jumping back to 3D design, I've been working on an animation of the journey through a fractal. I'd like people to be able to hold the physical fractal in their hands, but also be able to look and see what it's like if you were to venture inside of it. I like the idea of how this 3D printed object will be small, but in fractal theory it continues on forever containing an endless space inside of it. The biggest challenge I'm facing right now with this test animation is creating a complex enough fractal, and the strain it puts on my laptop. In my recent animation attempt I ended up here. It looks as if it's falling apart, so I need to revisit my formulas.
Lastly, I've been thinking about how to condense my thesis into a 140 character statement for @designologue. Currently I'm thinking along the lines of, "I'm creating digital and physical media that others can interact with to show the chaotic yet structured basis of 2D and 3D fractal design."
it may be that the beauty and complexity of fractal images, such as is shown here, is good for the wow factor, and less good as a means of leading others into understanding how these things work.
ReplyDeletelead from the familiar to the unfamiliar. simple to less simple.
one-dimensional fractal (fibonacci).
the suggestion of geometrical proof/demonstration (found at sometheoryofsampling) is not so different from the demonstrations in Stephen Wolfram's A New Kind of Science. why exactly is that hard to work with?
maybe it was this post ?
ReplyDelete