I follow Pickover on twitter, and he made this suggestion today

"A simple formula produces strange and unpredictable forms ⁠— wispy, chaotic ghosts composed of 10 million points. "

here's the link he provided

https://fronkonstin.com/2017/11/07/drawing-10-million-points-with-ggplot-clifford-attractors/

and the formulas are incredibly simple

I'm contemplating writing a new mapping formula. I could write this as a transformation in a uxf file, or use Plug-In Transformation from Standard.ulb and write a UserTransformation to go in my ulb file.

So far, I don't see any advantages to doing it one way or the other. Comments?

I have a problem. I tried using perturbation theory for the Magnet Mandelbrot type I fractal, but after going a quadrillion zooms, the image becomes... well, you know what happens.


The code:

Magnet1Mandelbrot {
;
; Magnetic Mandelbrot set type 1. Use Switch Mode to select a
; magnetic Julia set.
;
init:
z = @start
c = #pixel
x = real(z)
y = imag(z)
i = sqrt(-1)
loop:
z =

Has anyone tried to make a fractal from the Jenkins-Traub algorithm?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenkins%E2%80%93Traub_algorithm

Does anyone know how to write the colouring algorithm in the following link: https://fractalforums.org/index.php?topic=368.msg27841#msg27841
into Ultra Fractal code? Some help would be appreciated.

The compiler objects to the continuation character in the example below, says it's not a valid character there. The truth is that the comment is not allowed there (should it be allowed there?), and the error message is wrong.

param enum F
caption = "F"
enum = "a" \ ; comment
"b"
endparam
It's fine without the comment.

param enum F
caption = "F"
enum = "a" \
"b"

This is wonderful, at the left of the JPEG we have SlopeTMan in as.ufm created in 2006 and at the right of the jpeg and we have a new version that i'm doing in these days, look the difference of the slope color, in the right is correct but in the left no, or better, it's correct also in the left, because in fractals there are always new combinations, but in the right is the correct use of the 3D

Hi all,
I write this because some time ago while i was working on my formulae i don't know how, probabily with a strange combination of keybord, i don't know, but i was able to use the funzion BLOCK SELECTION, i don't know if you know what i mean, closing UF i lost that and i didn't able to replicate because UF doesn't have block selection.
So i ask if it's possible to insert this function

I'm confused. What should go in place of * in the code below? Or is this not the way to do this?

class cTweak {

public:
import "common.ulb"

func cTweak()
cTransform = new @cUT(***)
endfunc

complex func go(complex v)
return cTransform.Iterate(v)
endfunc

protected:
UserTransform cTransform

default:
UserTransform param cUT
caption = "c-tweak transform"
defa

Is there a way to set formula parameters programmatically, be displayed in the GUI and allow further manual tweaks?

Eg I have a formula parameter set q1,.., q8 which I give random values programmatically but then want to tweak manually.

I'm debugging a new formula. All the printing so far is in the constructor. I get many more lines of printing than I expected, some of the same things over and over.

I thought that the constructor was only invoked once.

When is it really invoked? How can I avoid the excess printing?

I've been having problems with what I believe are artifacts. They seem to have some connection with function settings, particularly exp, and cotan, cotanh, tan, tanh, cos, cosh, sin, sinh.

Here's an example from om.ulb, featuring a transform which maps according to various combinations of functions:
artifact1 {
fractal:
title="artifact1" width=1024 height=768 layers=1
credits="Ot

The Absolute Julia transformation is made by taking a fractal and mapping each coordinate to its square root.

Absolute Julia {
transform:
#pixel = sqr(#pixel)
}

I have a formula and want to add a new parameter to it without breaking past fractals. The formula has a version number in it, such as this declaration in the default section:

int param v_SFormula
caption = "Version (SFormula)"
default = 100
visible = @v_SFormula < 100
endparam
If the new version of the formula has "default = 101", how do I put in the ne

I was able to make input fields based on numerical values and Pull downs with Text Choices that equal values. I have a two questions.

I know ultrafractal is specialized programming language so I know it has limitations and I would like to find out if this is even doable...

If I want an input value to be text... would I be able to program it where that text gets printed on the Fractal

Hi folks,

I've been off UF for some time, and trying now to update the formula DB for UF6. I am getting a message after the download is complete that a txt file cannot be created, access denied, and when I dismiss that, the install process hangs. I have a screenshot of the message, which I attach. Any ideas? Never had anything like this happen before.

Also, in trying to update the v5 data

Does anyone know how to write a formula for this fractal?
I've seen it called a teardrop or mandeldrop fractal, but after much experimentation have been unable to recreate it.

There may already be a formula for this in the database, but I couldn't find one.

Is there an emacs mode file for editing UF formulas?

I attempted to implement a perturbation method for this fractal:

w <-- w/z
z <-- z^2+w^2+c

but it does not give the right result. Suggestions anyone?

MandelFoamPT {
init:
#z = sqrt(-1/2)
loop:
#z = #z^2 + #pixel
bailout:
|#z| <= @bailout
perturbinit:
#dz = 0
w = sqrt(1/2)
perturbloop:
wo = w
w = w/#z;
#dz = 2*#z*#dz + sqr(#dz) + wo^2 + #dpixel
default

Seems like the outer iteration variable is reset in the inner loop.
Example below.

class Bug {
static func printCoeff(int K,int M)
$define DEBUG
int i=0
int j=0

while(i<=K)
;print("i1=",i)
while(j<=M)
if i>0
; never get here, i is reset to 0?
print(i, " ", j)
endif
;print("i2=",i)