Forums | MacLife

Fractographer doesn't use AltiVec or SSE3. The main reason for this is the fact that vector processors often only support single precision floating point numbers for a lot of the functions. I use double precision numbers because they are much more precise. (since fractals are basically a graph of how a miniscule difference in the parameters can change the result by a huge amount, more precision is always good. )

Another reason why it's so slow on that particular function is because of all the exponents. I optimized certain exponents specifically (such as e^exponent, complex^2, complex^real), but that particular fractal contains 4 exponents, 3 of which make use of a tangent inverse, a sine, cosine, power, and square root. (complex^complex is even more, well, complex!) You'll notice that none of the other fractals that I have for download come anywhere near the time to render.

Mr. T wrote:

mo' ron wrote:

24FPS is too low for me. It's actually one thing that kind of bugs me when I watch a movie at the theatres. I don't notice it as much at home on a smaller TV.

I actually prefer 24FPS over higher framerates.  It could be that I'm just used to it, but to me it gives the film a bit of a "fantasy" quality.

Yeah, I agree it's a bit odd to watch a movie that is higher than that, it's also one of the things that distinguish some TV shows (I noticed that Alias and Lost are in a lower than 30FPS for at least some of the scenes) from movies. But, I think that's just because people have been "conditioned" to think that way.

Yeah, that certainly makes sense.  Also most professional apps (particularly 3rd party apps) are C++ since it's faster and more portable (albeit a bit more complex) which might indicate that the best is yet to come.  However, Apple has probably figured out a way to get the compiler to work with Cocoa, and they've probably been getting nightly releases up till the day of the keynote, so the beta is probably not that much better than what Apple had been using.

Mr. T wrote:

Yeah, that certainly makes sense.  Also most professional apps (particularly 3rd party apps) are C++ since it's faster and more portable (albeit a bit more complex) which might indicate that the best is yet to come.  However, Apple has probably figured out a way to get the compiler to work with Cocoa, and they've probably been getting nightly releases up till the day of the keynote, so the beta is probably not that much better than what Apple had been using.

With real world performance tests from Macworld showing a 1-2x MAX performance gain, I'm not so sure about Apple getting it to work with Cocoa.

iMovie is sometimes even SLOWER than the G5 with certain iMovie tasks.

yeah, while the TV is displaying 29.97 real frames, some frames may be duplicated to provide a film-like 24 fps feel to it.

If I make a slideshow at 5 fps, even if I render it at 29.97 it's still obviously going to look like 5 fps because of the duplicated frames.

I always do this with edited DV tape because it gives a more film-like feel to it, even when watching on a TV. It gets rid of the whole amateur home video look when you render at 24 fps.

Usually, DV at 29.97 FPS will look just dandy. The ''annoying'' part of DV is the lack of depth compared to film. That is one thing that if not dealt with will give a very amateurish looking video. Add to that AV kills comment and you've covered several bases.

avkills wrote:

Wolf355 wrote:

Usually, DV at 29.97 FPS will look just dandy. The ''annoying'' part of DV is the lack of depth compared to film. That is one thing that if not dealt with will give a very amateurish looking video. Add to that AV kills comment and you've covered several bases.

Well most of the lack of depth is caused by not having a Pro-level camera so you can do cool things like depth of field and rack focuses.

-mark

Actually, I was refering to the format. Even a Betacam digital has the same problem....and they're what now...euh about 100 000.00 for a well equiped one

Last edited by Wolf355 (2006-01-19 10:20 pm)