# FA Fractal Policy



## Samuel (Dec 15, 2008)

I have recently found out that FA no longer considers fractals, and in particular, Apophysis-created fractals, acceptable material. I am very new to the Admin decision process, but this strikes me as wrong, and I want to fix it somehow. I believe that my work ( I am Osiris of FA) in fractals is artistic, takes up much time, and is independently made. I do not steal anyone's ideas or use pre-generated material in my art--if I do, I clearly mark it as such. While I will not claim that my work equals to drawings in any way, I believe it has its own value. I will argue that my work cannot be copied with ease (it may take several million years to create the same effect, even if one knows how to create the fractal--much as with sculpture or photography). The Apophysis fractal program allows one to produce random fractals, that can then be molded. This means an infinity of possible colorations, shapes, etc. The program also has multiple angles of view, and of fractal itself. Not to mention all the possible changes one can create through "programming" the fractal, mutating it, changing its entire structure, or even applying another art program to it. Also, unlike certain Poser and Photoshop works, my fractals have their own distinct "style" in that my work is distinct from other works by different artists. WHile I do not ask to be recognized (goodness knows, without porn that is impossible), I would very much like for my art to be accepted on FA. I would like to see any opinions or advice anyone can give me on this subject.
Osiris of FA.


----------



## Charkonian (Dec 15, 2008)

Why should this even be discussed?

What reason could they possibly have for banning fractals? Because it's computer generated? So what? Moving sliders to a particular point still shows skill, you know. Just because this medium has a smaller range of variable possibilities (Not to say as if that value could even be calculated) in regards to a pencil or tablet-based drawing, that's no reason to discount it.

... this is stupid.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

I agree wholeheartedly. As I have said many times, I respect the admins decision and insight on this matter, but it is highly misconstrued. Fractals are not simply clicking three or four buttons like they seem to think it is.

Even if it was such, it's still art that others enjoy, art that belongs somewhere. Who cares how it was made? As long as it's not illegal and people are enjoying it, then it should be allowed. Especially when it's a fairly difficult art to learn in the first place.

I am still talking to the admins on this, and am 100% willing to start up a petition if I need to. I just hope the admins see our cause.


----------



## uncia (Dec 15, 2008)

Samuel said:


> I have recently found out that FA no longer considers fractals, and in particular, Apophysis-created fractals, acceptable material.


Just a quick word, aside, that that's not a simple "it used to be OK, it's not anymore" case: fractals (both 2d and 3d) have gone from "deleted on sight" to "definitely OK" with all shades in between including "OK, by default/inaction".
There should be definitive clarification in the pending AUP update this week, anyhow.

Regards,
David.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

This was brought up many many months ago in the forums.
When someone >.> <.< >.> *sammyfox*

started crying to the admins about terragen.
because terragen was stated as a renderer program it was deemed unfit to be allowed to FA and must be reported on sight if found.
durring one of those discussions i started a thread about apothysis but because the admins didn't want another fire fight on their hands i requested it be deleted.

right now as i know anything generated,rendered with a program for a sole purpose "apothysis,terragen" are not allowed as far as i know and i hate it.

I want to load up and make more fractal compilations with my friends again.

:iconthorfax:
:iconkingrondo:
:iconosiris:

all my good friends which make stunning and spetacular fractals.

however maybe it would be wise the admins do like a limiter on fractal uploads like 5 per day or something like that.

the whole reason this issue was brought to the attention of the admins was for the same reason i started the thing about whirled and its snapshots.

people all complained about fractals not being art and were *flooding* the site.

I hope that this is resolved soon because i grow personally tired of having to chase down the nay sayers that fractals are not art.


----------



## Adrimor (Dec 15, 2008)

^ Or, if they're flooding the site with 'em, put a summary-area minimum length...flooding generally requires a lot of uploads in a short time, right?


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

Samuel said:


> The Apophysis fractal program allows one to produce random fractals, that can then be molded.


And Apophysis has been previously covered in many prior discussions to Fractals, and it was found that the source material from the fractals is generated using mathematical algorithms to create the source. At that point, all you're doing is modifying a computer generated submission to customize it further as opposed to creating anything by hand.

If you can create a fractal from scratch without the use of a computer generated tools and achieve the same results I'd be interested in knowing. And yes, I'm aware of the "Poser" arguments and trust me, my opinion for "Poser" art on this board and site are rather well known.



			
				The New AUP said:
			
		

> *Generated Art, Renderers and Characters *
> Submissions which are pre-generated or contain computer generated content (e.g. game screenshots) are not permitted. This includes customizable characters (e.g. Warcraft, Spore) or_ creations assembled using pre-created criteria and/or programs where the user input is primarily adjusting values (e.g sliders, values, seeds) and the computer then generates content._


This is a section from the new AUP launching this week. If you'd like, please tell me how Apophysis is distuinguished from the rules as stated above?


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

It doesn't, Dragoneer. My argument, however, is why you have that. Art is art. FA is an art site. A LOT of people enjoy fractal art, it's different and allows a break from millions of cock.

If people enjoy our art, and people aren't getting harmed from it, it should be allowed. It doesn't deviate from that rule, but it is a LOT more complex than just that. It takes time. It's not something you just simply "do".

If you think about it, you don't allow screenshots for Warcraft or Spore or anything, however, I've seen that SL customized SS's are allowed. Is this biased? Seems that way.

Look, all that we're asking is to allow to keep doing from what we're doing. It's not illegal, and people are getting enjoyment out of it. It's not something worthlessly slung around.

I am 100% willing to start a petition and have as many people on FA to look at it to see just what the general populous says. All I'm asking for is a chance.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> I am 100% willing to start a petition and have as many people on FA to look at it to see just what the general populous says. All I'm asking for is a chance.


I'm not interested in a petition, and online petitions don't amount to much. You want things changed, you want to persuade us, have people voice their opinion. A real opinion. Just signing an online form does not carry weight.

The reason we came to the "no generators" policy was due to constant abuse by uploaders. Fractals are an art, yes, an art derived from mathematical equations. If you create your fractal completely by hand we'd be willing to accept it. However, fractals created by fractal generators (e.g. Apophysis) are not given the nature of the program. If you can create a Mandelbrot set without using an application or fractal generator, and you have the geometric knowledge and skillset to pull it off... power to you. We'd allow that. If you're using a generator or PC app to create the geometric seeds to do so... no.

We're not anti-fractal. We're anti art generator.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

You know Dragoneer, from what I have seen from the admins so far, if I could get every fur on this site to write a 3 paragraph essay on why they personally think it should be allowed, that 'real opinion' you're talking about, you'd just wave it off like you all have done so far.

Think about this. In-essence, you're pretty much saying if I coded a program like Apophysis with my own code, GUI, etc. etc. and made art with it, that would be okay. However, isn't that the same thing as Apophysis? Why yes it is.

But whatever, I see you guys don't care about the better part of the community's opinion, so I guess I'll just leave it as is. All I can say was that I was hoping for a bit more.

You also dodged my "You make exceptions for Second Life, so why not for fractals" point.


----------



## AlexInsane (Dec 15, 2008)

I personally find fractals to be some of the most beautiful artwork that I've found here on FA. While it's all well and good to have furry art, it all starts looking the same after a while.

You may as well say you're completely against fractals if you're not going to allow Apophysis-generated images. And THEN, if you want to go whole hog, why not just ban the use of Photoshop on FA as well? Seeing as how you can alter art and even CREATE art with it, no doubt it's a art-generator too, after a fashion.

No, I don't mean that.

If you want to stop abuse by uploaders, then why not create a limit on computer-generated fractals? You could set it at a maximum of 3 computer-generated fractals a day or maybe five a week. 

Please bring back the fractals. I know you care about the amount of space it's consuming, but I don't, because fractals...I like them.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod.

i'm not a mod or admin but your starting to get a bit offensive.
why not cool down.

I agree completely with Neer on this.

while maybe submitting the fractal is not allowed.
what about art that uses the fractal.
would that be ok.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> You know Dragoneer, from what I have seen from the admins so far, if I could get every fur on this site to write a 3 paragraph essay on why they personally think it should be allowed, that 'real opinion' you're talking about, you'd just wave it off like you all have done so far.


No, we'd probably open it for consideration. Contrary to popular belief, we do listen and take feedback rather well. If you look at what we have done -vs- just the negatives you'd see that. If you think we all sit around and completely ignore the community you're completely mistaken.



kewlhotrod said:


> Think about this. In-essence, you're pretty much saying if I coded a program like Apophysis with my own code, GUI, etc. etc. and made art with it, that would be okay. However, isn't that the same thing as Apophysis? Why yes it is.


And yes, we have let people who've created their very own fractal creators post their work (within reason). The point is, like Terragen, almost of a fractal's work is composed by the program. The application does all the work, and you adjust and make changes within the UI as necessary. You're not physically creating something from scratch, but a seed.



kewlhotrod said:


> But whatever, I see you guys don't care about the better part of the community's opinion, so I guess I'll just leave it as is. All I can say was that I was hoping for a bit more.


Half a dozen people are not the "better part of the community's opinion".


kewlhotrod said:


> You also dodged my "You make exceptions for Second Life, so why not for fractals" point.


Because we'd gone over that several times in the past. Second Life is not with full exception, and trust me when I say it's not on my list of favorite things. However, in a world where resources are completely free and plentiful it would be much easier to just say yes to everything.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

Neer.
give hi mthe pink
you know he deserves it

XD


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

Nanakisan said:


> Neer.
> give hi mthe pink
> you know he deserves it
> 
> XD


Pinking is reserved for special circumstances.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> Pinking is reserved for special circumstances.



oh come on you know you wanna.

or better yet

GREEN HIM!!


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

yeah anyway.
fractals are techincally impossible to do 100% accurately without a computer.

however.
what if apophysis created the option of making a fractal from scratch would you then allow it.


----------



## Rhaen (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Think about this. In-essence, you're pretty much saying if I coded a program like Apophysis with my own code, GUI, etc. etc. and made art with it, that would be okay. *However, isn't that the same thing as Apophysis? Why yes it is.*



Not really.  You've made this new program, so it would be alright.  Except you didn't make Apophysis.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

Rhaen said:


> Not really.  You made the program, so it would be alright.  Except you didn't make Apophysis.



however it would still do exactly the same thing as apophysis
and would then fall under generator


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

Nanakisan said:


> yeah anyway.
> fractals are techincally impossible to do 100% accurately without a computer


Not impossible, just highly improbable.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> Not impossible, just highly improbable.



true

I do tons of vector works that most people require a mirror to produce what i make by eye alone on paper.

if i was bored enough i would probably sketch a fractal out.
the mandlebrot series is actually the easiet because 98% of it is all circles


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Actually, it is impossible, Dragoneer. Without a computer you can not generate the correct code for the true definition of a fractal, lol. That would be awesome. The true definition of a fractal is an image that is neverending. The patterns are always reproducing themselves, and are therefore endless. Anything other than that has an end, such as a drawing, for example. 

Also, Nanakisan, if I understand what you're saying about "giving him the pink", lets not start throwing childish ban ideas around. I'm stating my opinion and side. That's all.

So, Dragoneer. If I could somehow make a thread and have people explain why or why not we should allow fractals, and it became popular enough and had enough info and user inputs on it, you might consider it?

If so then I've got a thread I should probably start making. Only thing is I'm worried if it'll get enough traffic in it's correct sub-forum. Lol.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

Nanakisan said:


> I do tons of vector works that most people require a mirror to produce what i make by eye alone on paper.


One of the primary issues we've seen with fractals is because they're so easy to make people tend to upload them. By the dozens. We've seen some galleries with hundreds (literally) of fractals. 

Generator clause aside, there comes a point where if you can create a hundred of anything in a single day it stops being unique.


----------



## Rhaen (Dec 15, 2008)

Nanakisan said:


> however it would still do exactly the same thing as apophysis
> and would then fall under generator



It would functiont he same way, but I'm making a point against his using the creator of the program as rights to post.  

That being said, I see both sides of the issue, and feel.. don't we have worse things to get upset about?  :/  Let the guy make his fractals, he isn't infringing on anyone's work.


----------



## Nanakisan (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Actually, it is impossible, Dragoneer. Without a computer you can not generate the correct code for the true definition of a fractal, lol. That would be awesome.



actually with enough time and precision and the use of a ruler,protractor,compass you can make a standard Mandelbrot by eye using circles only.




> Also, Nanakisan, if I understand what you're saying about "giving him the pink", lets not start throwing childish ban ideas around. I'm stating my opinion and side. That's all.



awhile ago someone in the offtopic thread asked about text colors and such and he got his name turned pink by Neer


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

I would love if my name was pink, lol. That would be sick. 

Anyways, to truly and properly make an actual fractal, even with the use of those tools, it's impossible.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Also, Nanakisan, if I understand what you're saying about "giving him the pink", lets not start throwing childish ban ideas around. I'm stating my opinion and side. That's all.


Pinking is more of a forum in-joke, and has nothing to do with banning. Pinking just... makes your username pink. That's all.



kewlhotrod said:


> So, Dragoneer. If I could somehow make a thread and have people explain why or why not we should allow fractals, and it became popular enough and had enough info and user inputs on it, you might consider it?


Yes, but you'd also have to be prepared for people to also shoot down your idea and state exactly why they felt fractals would be a bad idea. Each side should be able to voice their opinion.


----------



## AlexInsane (Dec 15, 2008)

Rhaen said:


> It would functiont he same way, but I'm making a point against his using the creator of the program as rights to post.
> 
> That being said, I see both sides of the issue, and feel.. don't we have worse things to get upset about?  :/  Let the guy make his fractals, he isn't infringing on anyone's work.



What we have here is artistic liberty vs. waste of resources.

Dragoneer probably enjoys looking at some fractals, but if you have lots of people submitting lots and lots of fractals to the site, it's just taking up room that other art could be using. Admittedly, said artwork could be stick figures with macro penises and breasts the size of Jupiter, but hey, who cares, right? At least its FURRY.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Absolutely. If you haven't noticed yet, I have yet to disagree with your side either. I am fully prepared to take in both sides. I'm a very open guy. Well, in any case, we'll see how it goes. Hopefully we can get enough traffic to it and whatnot. That's all I'm worried about.


----------



## Whitenoise (Dec 15, 2008)

Perhaps you fractal artists could simply compromise by figuring out a way to make dog boners out of fractals. I can't imagine the FA administration could turn that away  .

How 'bout it Dragoneer, if someone managed to make fractal art that looked like an infinite expanse of rainbow dog boners, would they be allowed to post it?


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

LOL. I think I might just go for that one. xD


----------



## EternalUndeath (Dec 15, 2008)

Honestly, this entire thing has gotten ridiculous, and way out of hand.

Dragoneer, I know you're a reasonable guy. Doesn't FA have a policy about only being able to submit a certain number of SL screenshots, so that people don't utterly flood FA with them? Honestly, a lot more people have SL characters than fractal generators, and even less people actually use them on a consistent basis. Surely you could put a similar restriction on fractals that you put on SL shots, instead of banning them altogether.

I have faith in FA to be fair about all this, at least...


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Yeah, I addressed that in my new thread, Eternal.


----------



## Adrimor (Dec 15, 2008)

Whitenoise said:


> Perhaps you fractal artists could simply compromise by figuring out a way to make dog boners out of fractals.


Sig'd.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Lmao. xD

That would make quite a sig.


----------



## Adrimor (Dec 15, 2008)

Aye. -=points=- ^^


----------



## Aden (Dec 15, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> The reason we came to the "no generators" policy was due to constant abuse by uploaders. Fractals are an art, yes, an art derived from mathematical equations. If you create your fractal completely by hand we'd be willing to accept it. However, fractals created by fractal generators (e.g. Apophysis) are not given the nature of the program. If you can create a Mandelbrot set without using an application or fractal generator, and you have the geometric knowledge and skillset to pull it off... power to you. We'd allow that. If you're using a generator or PC app to create the geometric seeds to do so... no.



The reason we came to the "no generators" policy was due to constant abuse by uploaders. Photography is an art, yes, an art derived from the inner workings of a camera. If you draw your picture completely by hand we'd be willing to accept it. However, pictures created by photo generators (e.g. a Canon DSLR), are not, given the nature of light. If you can create a portrait without using a camera, and you have the artistic knowledge to pull it off... power to you. We'd allow that. If you're using a camera to place the colors on the picture for you... no.


----------



## Rhaen (Dec 15, 2008)

Whitenoise said:


> Perhaps you fractal artists could simply compromise by figuring out a way to make dog boners out of fractals. I can't imagine the FA administration could turn that away  .
> 
> How 'bout it Dragoneer, if someone managed to make fractal art that looked like an infinite expanse of rainbow dog boners, would they be allowed to post it?



Here comes the great Cub Porn Fractal Debate of 2008.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

LOL. I was waiting for someone to bring that up. xD

+3 for you.


----------



## Rhaen (Dec 15, 2008)

You could even restore FAP: Fractal Art Porns.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Lmao... xD


----------



## Thorfax Goldwings (Dec 15, 2008)

Something like this could make admins very unpopular and very unliked to many people, including me. Just when i find something that i am good at and that people respond to, these admins try to take it away from me. How is this any different from making a drawing using one of those how-to-draw books as a guide? Not very. People do things different than what is in the book. It is the same with what a bunch of us fractal makers do. Sure it generates a starter for you, but i change it around. If this isn't allowed, than why is it allowed to post art that you made using a how-to-draw book? That is my opinion.


----------



## AlexInsane (Dec 15, 2008)

The last thing the admins worry about is being unliked.

It's their JOB to be unlikeable.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Alex does have a point, there. 

However, I for one enjoy the admins' company at times. n.n


----------



## Lonely Gabu (Dec 15, 2008)

Dragoneer and fellow Admins, coders, the staff of Fur Affinity, fellow fractal artists, and random furs/people that love the site. I disagree, and would like to add that I think "Fractal's" is more of an art form regardless of its point and click deposition. What is art?

To define art is to understand that it contains the following:
Personality 
Definition 
Utilization of Space (Positive and Negative space)
Body (Better known as composition)

Just like most art itself, my creations have all the above and I work really hard manipulating an image to get something nifty in the end. To define a piece of art it is to have both negative and positive space and be able to create a composition. What we do is manipulate a coded alga-rhythmic equation that through a series of changes, stretches, and etc. creates a final image. Some of us go as for as to focus and clean up them after wards, using other computer art programs such as GIMP, and Adobe Photoshop. Even to go as far as to layer the image to create a grander finished product.

To remove such art means all art from the site should be removed. Abstract art has always had its place here on the FA and it would mean a slap in the face of many real artists and viewers who share that non/anthro art should be allowed here and is on the FA. This is a tool of expressing one's talent of artistry. So in my opinion even though I am relatively new to this, it would be unfair to remove them from people's main page's and to ban such beautiful looking types of art. Many artists in the past were called "Spirit Mongers" and "Minion's of the Devil" for producing art that no one understood or saw as art. Many years later, their art was appreciated and brought to the plateau of creative understanding and non ignorance. Don't let this be a similar case. (Also just to clarify not saying all art should be removed, just using it for the point that I am trying to make.)

I am and always will be an abstract artist who will use tools like Apophysis and others at my disposal to make images that make people think or just enjoy to see. Each fractal has a life, a story of its original composition which to me is this:
Going through the program and selecting an equation line that suits me visually. From there manipulate the edges of each triangle in a pattern that creates different images every macro centimeter which changes definition on the x, y, and z axis. Sounds like art doesn't it? Its called perspective. From this point I manipulate the equation to bend lines, to sculpt them in the way a person would put a brush to paper and start his composition. Adding and subtracting at a whim, just like an eraser and pencil, I go through and change the image before I even begin to color and fill the negative space.  From there, through another series of changes, stretches, manipulations, create something profound in my eyes as an abstract artist. I color the image in a series of random color coded spectrums and select the one I see fit. My pallet complete, I render the image to finality. Just like an artist draws an image and fine tunes it digitally, so do I. Add things that create depth and balance before completing the said image. It takes me several hours just to complete one full composition. Create something from a basic line and a bunch of triangle's or to start a new, contains all four aforementioned items. Is this Art I ask? Sounds like art to me. 

However I would declare organizing a method of putting restrictions and regulations on "Spamming fractal's" thus. 

>For instance, take a real good look at a series of images and lets say someone posts, a different color fractal with a different shade background repeatedly on their page. Since each piece is just a redundant statement, I would consider it spamming.
>Instead of removing their pieces they could place them in scraps, thus alleviating people's pages. 
>Those that do massive posting, regulate them to only do so up to five times. (Bearing the person explains each change as something different to place more on said page.)
> For claity, not saying that 5 only in a day but 5 similar pictures using the program and on their main page in a single day. (Like I know some people could only post on the weekends but like 5 on their main submission page per day of creation i.e "I created this one December 10th, I created this on November 30th etc.)
> Each case being individually looked upon and discussed with the artist before any action is taken and explained. (This is a given, this is normally done as is by staff.)

 I do believe that some order such as the one I stated should be followed on or agreed upon because all art on the site has rules, right? Rather then to disallow this art, I rather regulate it as I said. 

This is art. And to ban it would be unfair to abstract artists such as myself who work creatively with this great art tool. Art has always been a way to express freedom to vent through any medium poetically and ever since I started, I have enjoyed to spending time on each fractal and to go with the flow. To stifle this, I think would be a greatest inconvenience and infringe on the rights of every abstract artist on the site. Making the statement "this is not art" which would means their is no such thing as art.

So please as long as the "Spamming Rule of thumb for Fractal's" is set in place, and those rules are followed, I think everyone on the site would be pleased and will continue musing as they have done so since the sites creation.

As an artist, I will continue to do so and just hope that the right decision is made on this crucial matter. Thank you for listening and if you disagree with my statement, feel free to rebuttal it in anyway. (As you could tell I feel very strongly on this matter because this effects my art and I will make my opinion known. I am willing to argue this because it is an art form that is great to use. Even to hybrid like I have done to incorporate two things. )
Thank you.


As always,
Azu Gabu
~Lonely Gabu~


----------



## Arshes Nei (Dec 15, 2008)

You guys like Fractals, you should really try Alchemy: http://al.chemy.org/download/version-history/

It's a lot more interaction and can produce some really fun art.

http://al.chemy.org/forum/sketches/topic48.html


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

TYVM for your words, Gabu. It is greatly appreciated.

Haha, that is pretty awesome, Arshes. Sadly enough, from looking at the gallery and nothing else, you seem to need the ability to draw. THAT IS NOT ME. xD

Still looks BA, though.


----------



## uncia (Dec 15, 2008)

EternalUndeath said:


> Dragoneer, I know you're a reasonable guy. Doesn't FA have a policy about only being able to submit a certain number of SL screenshots, so that people don't utterly flood FA with them?


aside: "utterly flooding" shouldn't really be a consideration, either way, since it's easy to address that through staffing measures.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Dec 15, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> TYVM for your words, Gabu. It is greatly appreciated.
> 
> Haha, that is pretty awesome, Arshes. Sadly enough, from looking at the gallery and nothing else, you seem to need the ability to draw. THAT IS NOT ME. xD
> 
> Still looks BA, though.



Actually you should try it, it's not really a drawing program in the traditional sense. People have taken it up a level, but it's almost like...rorschach where the interaction with the program (ie you can use sound to manipulate the shapes) into something that can resemble a creature or whatever and you can decide to take it to the next level.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

That is pretty sick. I might have to try that. :3


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 15, 2008)

Rhaen said:


> Here comes the great Cub Porn Fractal Debate of 2008.


Okay, now exactly where in the fucking fractal do you even look for signs of maturity? I mean, I can't even tell if a fractal is a boy or a girl, let alone a minor...

Maybe fractals are like a turtle. You have to flip 'em over and stick a finger down... wait. WAIT! I am so not finishing this train of thought.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Oh Lawd, please don't. >.>

xD


----------



## Whitenoise (Dec 15, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> Okay, now exactly where in the fucking fractal do you even look for signs of maturity? I mean, I can't even tell if a fractal is a boy or a girl, let alone a minor...
> 
> Maybe fractals are like a turtle. You have to flip 'em over and stick a finger down... wait. WAIT! I am so not finishing this train of thought.



Do it Dragoneer, deep down you know you want to :] .


----------



## TakeWalker (Dec 15, 2008)

Just because people like something doesn't make it acceptable. FA users like SL screenshots, pictures of animal genitalia and other AUP violations. Do we allow them? Hell no.

Fractals, in my (highly uninformed) opinion, are no more art than a mathematical equation is a story.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

Incorrect. You guys DO allow SL screenshots and a few other AUP violations.

And your opinion is your opinion, and that is good that you're willing to share it. However, fractals are more art in a lot of peoples eyes than a lot of other artwork. It differs from person to person, however. Thanks for the input.


----------



## Aden (Dec 15, 2008)

I _thought_ I made some semblance of a point above, but I guess not since it's being ignored. :C


----------



## Takun (Dec 15, 2008)

not art:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/Fractal_Art_Nederland.JPG

art:
http://fc08.deviantart.com/fs24/f/2007/319/5/0/Nills_made_in_Furry_Dollmaker_by_Inspectornills.jpg

lulz....

Anyway...I can see both sides...


----------



## AlexInsane (Dec 15, 2008)

Takumi, that second picture is CLEARLY not art.

I mean, it doesn't even have TITS.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 15, 2008)

xD


----------



## Takun (Dec 15, 2008)

AlexInsane said:


> Takumi, that second picture is CLEARLY not art.
> 
> I mean, it doesn't even have TITS.




STOP FLAMING MY CRAPPY STYLE CLEARLY RIPPED FROM SONIC.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 16, 2008)

So, basically...

Webcam shots of cats doing nothing interesting with unfunny illiterate caption: ok
Three people upload some swirls: *NO*


----------



## Takun (Dec 16, 2008)

Eevee said:


> So, basically...
> 
> Webcam shots of cats doing nothing interesting with unfunny illiterate caption: ok
> Three people upload some swirls: *NO*




MY CAT IS CUTE, >:C


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 16, 2008)

Eevee pretty much hit the nail on the head, there. xD

But I digress, I love LOLcats as well.


----------



## Stratelier (Dec 16, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> FA is an art site....


If I may clarify that point . . . FA is first and foremost a *furry* art site, remember, and to put it bluntly... fractals aren't furry.  Now this does not strictly mean they should or should not be allowed, but nobody try to play the old "because it's art" argument by itself, it's not enough.

Fractals are an art form yes . . . but they aren't user-"made" in the same sense as drawings or paintings (even the nonfurry ones), and from the enforcement perspective it's near impossible to actually _prove_ whether a given fractal work was rendered via user-made equations or stock equations (with or without user-supplied parameters).  It is a very difficult matter to define the correct wording for -- fractals are easily described with the same wording as character "kits" or "generators", and FA site staff have had to deal, repeatedly, with violations of the latter.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 16, 2008)

FA is SUPPOSED to be a furry art site. However, look at all the music, stories, photography, and normal artwork. It has deviated over time, and is no longer constrained to such.

However, if you look at the main fractal artists here on FA, it is pretty plain and obvious that they put effort into it, and messed around with it. If you simply accept what the random gives you, it shows extremely. And a few of those mixed in with hundreds of tried and true submissions should be allowed, anyhow. They'll just be overlooked for others to continue their actual fractal artwork that took time for showcase.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 16, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> However, if you look at the main fractal artists here on FA, it is pretty plain and obvious that they put effort into it, and messed around with it.


It is?

What is involved in this process, exactly, and what do completely random fractals look like?


----------



## foxystallion (Dec 16, 2008)

Is the music on FA furry? Rarely - but it is art created by furrys, which is why it is here.

Almost everyone nowadays will agree that photography can be art. Consider, though, that there are only 6 or 7 user selected parameters when a photograph is taken of a pre-existing scene with a point-and-shoot camera: the camera latitude, longitude, altitude, azimuth, and elevation, and the time that the button was pressed.  The first three parameters specify the location of the camera, and the next two parameters specify which direction it is pointing.  A seventh parameter available on many cameras is zoom focal length.  Every Apophysis fractal has more than 6 or 7 user selected parameters.  Artistically skilled selection of these 6 or 7 camera parameters makes the difference between an image that is boring and one that is fascinating.  It doesn't take a lot of parameters for artistic skill to make a real difference.


----------



## Samuel (Dec 16, 2008)

So far, Foxystallion made many excellent points. Thank you. And, for Dragoneer--
It is quite clear that my fractal are male. I mean, I even have a submission CLEARLY labeled "cock". As for spamming the site. In all my time here on FA, I have seen more cheap photoshop renders, stolen artwork, copied artwork, BAD fanart, LOLcats, and poorly made photographs than fractals. My suggestion would be simple--if you want to attack something that is CLEARLY lazy and shos no effort, start with things that are just plain ugly. Because this is all it comes down to, ultimately. Fractals are just not furry enough, and not artistic enough. Generated? I am sorry, but words on this very page are generated--if you can put them together pixel by pixel, argue with me. If not, stick to your machine helper, and please, stop this nonsense. How many fractal artists are on FA, compared to, say, people who post random useless crap that has no meaning to ANYONE, and is barely entertaining enough to merit a GLANCE? 
And to answer the question posed a while ago, a parabola drawn in rainbow pencil is art. Gay, but art.


----------



## LoveCube (Dec 16, 2008)

1+1=2

There, art.


----------



## lilEmber (Dec 16, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> Pinking is reserved for special circumstances.



I'm pink! :3

Also, I think fractcles are great, but you're right neer, using a generator (no matter what it is creating) is not art.


----------



## Samuel (Dec 16, 2008)

LoveCube said:


> 1+1=2
> 
> There, art.



YOU FORGOT TO MAKE IT RAINBOWY!!! Therefore, it is not art. 
Quite simply, you cannot make fractal art without a generator. While this may seem to you a BIT weird...An actual fractal would take many, many years to create by hand(say, a couple lifetimes to get started). Years none of the furry fandom has. It is like making a Blotch picture pixel by pixel. Meaningless, tiresome, and ultimately produces nothing that could not have been done easier. Yes, the generator is a shortcut, just as a camera is a shortcut--painting a scene from memory would take a while, now wouldn't it? Similarly, instead of handwriting a poem, and scanning it in, writers use a word processor. So much easier. Generators, however, fall into two categories I recognize.
Painfully obvious--motivational poster generators, LOLcats, much of Photoshop, Spore, and most if not ALL terrain creation software. These are not original, because they bring nothing NEW to the table, and are merely repeptitive in nature. If you have seen ten LOLcats, you have seen the whole of them. If you found ONE Motivational poster...You found all of them(sorry, but while I love BOTH, I believe there are better ways to post them).
Original--Music making software, Notepad word processor, Fractal-creation software, and a number of 3D creation programs(yes, even Krystal ones, as overdone as they are). These, I believe, bring something new every time. ANd, yes, you CAN randomly press buttons on each one, and produce something. That something will be called crap, and will most likely be ignored. Simple as that. EVery rule has exceptions, friends. And, I think that in the long run, fractals are an original artform that, generator or not, is colorful and new each time. If you allow someone to type up nonfurry poems without handwriting them, and allow 3D software that puts Krystal up for display ninety percent of the time, as WELL as music programs that often consist of nothing BUT moving around sliders...
Well, argument beaten to death, really. Enough drama. Let me keep my pretty colors please, Mr Dragoneer.


----------



## LoveCube (Dec 16, 2008)

To me art is conveying emotions in a tangible form. That can be expressing an emotion through drawing a figure in an excited pose with certain facial expressions, jamming away on your guitar in a tragic song or taking pictures to capture the loving moment between two lovers gazing into each other's eyes.

Calculating variables in a program can create wonderful images of insane detail and coloring. I won't deny it's an image and a creation, but it holds no emotional value. It's just 'something pretty'. Adjusting variables to create an image stands very far from conveying feelings into a drawing, which is what I call art.

Music and photography is very much capable of conveying it all, not to mention drawing by hand. Numbers and maths however exist in pure logic without any emotional attachment to it. I don't see how it's possible to create something that triggers someone's emotions beyond an "Oooooh pretty colors" with fractal art, sorry.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 16, 2008)

Incorrect, Lovecube. Fractal artwork portrays plenty of emotions when the user actually makes a good fractal.

For example, a fractal artists' fractal could depict his current mood, and it shows exceedingly in the image. 

Fractals show more emotion than many other things. It just takes an open mind to see it.

Also, a random fractal looks something along these lines, I haven't touched anything since opening it, and this is at 100 quality:







Now, please compare that to something that actually took time to create, such as this old fractal I made in Apophysis a while ago. I'll even go so far as to post a screenie of the actual program with it, and not just the image. Do note that this is at 100 Quality and not the normal 8000 I normally finally render at, which in itself takes hours upon hours to do:






I am going to post this in both threads.


----------



## foxystallion (Dec 16, 2008)

LoveCube said:


> To me art is conveying emotions in a tangible form...
> Numbers and maths however exist in pure logic without any emotional attachment to it. I don't see how it's possible to create something that triggers someone's emotions beyond an "Oooooh pretty colors" with fractal art, sorry.



You are obviously not a mathematician!  

Until very recently, jazz conveyed no emotions to me.  That didn't mean that jazz wasn't art - it merely meant that I didn't get it.   (Thanks cloudtigerbb: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/cloudtigerbb/ )  OK, to you, fractals are just pretty colors.  That is a personal statement; you don't speak for everyone.


----------



## foxystallion (Dec 16, 2008)

The word "generators" has been thrown about wildly without definition. 

Please define the word "generator".  The AUP does not define it.

Be very careful with your definition so that you don't inadvertently define "generator" in a way that makes cameras "generators".  When you take a picture with a point and shoot camera of an existing scene, there are only six or seven user selected parameters (latitude, longitude, altitude, elevation, azimuth, time, and sometimes zoom focal length), yet such photography can be art. Apophysis has far more user adjustable parameters...

The lens of a camera performs a mathematical operation on the light waves passing through it called a two dimensional spacial Fourier transform.  This produces an image on the CCD array.  The camera's computer reads the numerical data from the CCD array, processes it (sometimes very elaborately, such as using facial recognition) and creates an image data file such as a JPEG. The user merely points and shoots - which is setting only 6 or 7 parameters.  Why isn't the camera a "mere generator"?  

Why isn't photography forbidden by the AUP "generator" ban provision?  Simple: anyone who would claim that photography can not be art is a self evident idiot, and few people  want to be known as idiots.  

Unless carefully defined (which it currently isn't), the "generator" provision of the AUP is defective and should be reformed.  The way things are now, we have the Red Queen from Alice In Wonderland claiming that words mean whatever they want them to mean, and that Apophysis may be a prohibited "generator" but that cameras are not.  Sorry, but words do have meanings, even though this interferes with the pleasures of arbitrary and capricious administrative decision-making.


----------



## Adrimor (Dec 16, 2008)

foxystallion said:


> Unless carefully defined (which it currently isn't), the "generator" provision of the AUP is defective and should be reformed.  The way things are now, we have the Red Queen from Alice In Wonderland claiming that words mean whatever they want them to mean


Hmm...


> 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
> 'The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
> 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.'
> Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them -- particularly verbs: they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'
> ...


So that's where the extra donations went to...


----------



## Skittle (Dec 16, 2008)

There should be no problem allowing fractals. There are bigger issues to deal with than going around and dealing with fractals. If you get whiney about someone spamming them, unwatch them. Really, there are people running around here treating this place like it is myspace and they are worried about a form of real art? Come on. Fractals are ART. Let them stay.

And the issue of them being generated by a program and such. People make 'art' using things like Poser that use already created models and such and just adjust their positions and what not. That is allowed but not fractals, wtf? Seriously. Wtf.


----------



## Adrimor (Dec 16, 2008)

^ Can't fap to fractals. That's been discussed already, and seems to be the only basis.


----------



## humbird0 (Dec 16, 2008)

Fractals are beautiful, require effort to make, and are hardly controversial.
They're not illegal, so why ban them?
That's my opinion.


----------



## TakeWalker (Dec 16, 2008)

Allow me to (attempt to) make a second point.

The big issue seems to be whether or not said fractal is generated, as there are both basic generators and ways to create them entirely from scratch (as well as adding/altering the fractal after creation, etc.) So let's say a fractal would be allowable if it wasn't created via generator, extra work aside.

How can we tell?

Using SL as an example, the difference between original work and vendor can be difficult to ferret out, but it can be done. Screenshots of others using a bought character can be provided, thus proving the offending submission to be nothing more than a pre-generated screenshot and thus an AUP violation. Is this kind of double-checking possible with fractals?


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 16, 2008)

The case, Take, is that you shouldn't have to be able to tell.

To revert back to point one; it's discrimination. If people enjoy it, and it has a place, then it should be allowed, no matter how it is made.

However, I would hope more users put more effort into it, and they all do. 

And if we HAD to, it is quite easy to tell the difference between a randomly generated fractal between a good fractal that's had it's tweakings. See my post with the images for examples.


----------



## Stratelier (Dec 16, 2008)

TakeWalker said:


> Using SL as an example, the difference between original work and vendor can be difficult to ferret out, but it can be done.


If I may play the "takes a thief" card... in short, you have to actually KNOW about fractals to tell the difference between the two.



> ...screenshots of others using a bought character can be provided, thus proving the offending submission to be nothing more than a pre-generated screenshot and thus an AUP violation. Is this kind of double-checking possible with fractals?


Not really, especially when you don't already know what you're supposed to be looking for.


----------



## TakeWalker (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> The case, Take, is that you shouldn't have to be able to tell.



_What._



kewlhotrod said:


> To revert back to point one; it's discrimination. If people enjoy it, and it has a place, then it should be allowed, no matter how it is made.



*NO*

_Stop it_.

If you want to talk about what people enjoy, try uploading a song by a signed artist. You'll get numerous positive comments -- people will enjoy it -- before the submission is deleted so fast your head will spin. People enjoy music that gets played on the radio. Does that mean we should allow uploading of it here? Hell no.

This isn't about what the users want, it's about what the admins will allow. It's about what's permissible under the AUP. It should be about trying to convince the powers that be that the AUP ought to be changed, but your arguments are nonsensical at best, so I don't see that happening.

And before you go accusing me of being on some nonexistant crusade to have fractals banned, let me just say that if the pro-fractal side had sent someone more capable of arguing its case, I might have been more sympathetic from the get-go.


----------



## Eevee (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> To revert back to point one; it's discrimination. If people enjoy it, and it has a place, then it should be allowed, no matter how it is made.


Oh no you did'n.

This is not Happy Murryiffle Upload Anything Pretty Affinity.
This is not Photobucket.
This is not Myspace.
This is not Cute Overload.

This is an *ART SITE* for furries.  It is for displaying things _you created_.  It is for artists more than anything, not people who like to look at pretty pictures.  Whether other people enjoy it or not is entirely irrelevant.

Don't pull the discrimination card, jesus.  That's just tacky and obnoxious.


----------



## Aden (Dec 17, 2008)

*kewlhotrod*, I love your enthusiasm for fractals, and I agree with you. However, your arguments aren't doing much to convince the opposition.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

TakeWalker said:


> _What._
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*NO*

_YOU Stop it_.

You are incorrect. The reason admins won't allow something like that is because unless said artist with his music is an actual member of this site and originally made his OWN work, then that is against MAJOR AUP violations and even real legal laws. This is different.

Also, all of us have kept this thread civil, and you come in here becoming a cynical ass about it. Honestly, if you aren't going to take the TIME to read the GOOD points on both threads, your opinion obviously is very biased, as you don't attempt to see both sides.

Chill out, and learn a little grace and civility. It's been working well so far, don't lower yourself to ruin it.

Also, to further my point, the "fractal crusade" did not send only one person over to voice his opinion. If you *pay attention* you'll notice TONS of input from almost all fractal creators, and MANY non-fractal creators alike. If it was JUST me that wanted to keep fractals here, then I wouldn't bother. I'm honestly not even voicing my opinion for my own greater good, but for the cause of those that seem to greatly enjoy the artwork.




Eevee said:


> Oh no you did'n.
> 
> This is not Happy Murryiffle Upload Anything Pretty Affinity.
> This is not Photobucket.
> ...



Also, at the time I typed this, discrimination wasn't really the term I was looking for. I was thinking more of biased, and the way I was saying this was because of the multiple exceptions for all other things that should go against the AUP violations, but don't. I do apologize for the misunderstanding, and do understand that this site is meant to showcase what _you_ have created.

I also believe the overlying meaning of that point was that you could simply churn a random generated fractal and post it. That's not what I was getting at. I *was* talking of those fractals that really are "created" and not generated. The ones that actually take time to make.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Also, at the time I typed this, discrimination wasn't really the term I was looking for.


Instead of _"discrimination" _let's go with _"the fractalpocalypse"_. Because frankly, that's just an awesome term.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 17, 2008)

TakeWalker said:


> *NO*
> 
> _Stop it_.





kewlhotrod said:


> *NO*
> 
> _YOU Stop it_.


AND THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS!


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Wow...

You know... Honestly... I want to see if I can't get that term tugged around.

That just rolls off the tongue so smoothly... "Fractalpocalypse... Fractalolocalypse..."

Nice one. xD

Also, to the latest post... LOL.


----------



## Renard_v (Dec 17, 2008)

What about the hundreds of people on FA that just use free or public domain loops to make music? In theory they're "generating" just the same way that people using fractal generators are. You start with source material and mold it, and just render the final product.

This part of the AUP leaves a lot of stuff wide open and is a huge grey area.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Dec 17, 2008)

Why not compare apples and oranges since they're just fruit anyways?


----------



## StainMcGorver (Dec 17, 2008)

Wait, is there a program that makes fractals? Or are you doing it all by hand.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Heh, it is impossible to do a true fractal by hand. You HAVE to have a code.


----------



## Alkora (Dec 17, 2008)

Let me say this one little bit before I give my opinion on this matter...

I am no longer a staff member of FA and do not, in any way, represent the views of any of the FA staff...

You people are forgetting that this is a _furry_ art website...And while there may be other non-furry art, the type of accepted content is solely up to the admin's discretion. If they need to cut something to attempt to reserve resources, who are we to gripe about it? It's a free website...they don't require you to pay for the features. If you want to display that kind of thing, maybe you should consider getting a DA account...


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

That point has already been brought up and shot down before. I'd search for it and quote for you why that's not a good reason at all, but I'm extremely busy trying to fix my PC atm, and I believe said comment was on FA, which is currently down.

I can see that view as in a normal sense, but think of it. If it was simply up to whatever the admins wanted, if this site started that way where nobody's greater opinion counts, this would simply be another power-abused, power-hungry site and would be no popular than a personal generated forum.

The idea of coming together and sharing ideas, opinions, and alike qualities is what makes FA, FA.

If it was restricted ONLY to furry art, then that would be a lot more applicable, but it isn't, so it doesn't really go too well.

Thanks for the input, however.


----------



## Alkora (Dec 17, 2008)

I kind of happen to know that it was founded as a furry art website...seeing as how I was the one who created it and all...

Just saying...

And it's not that no one's opinion counts...it's that there are certain things that don't _belong_ here...and again...you don't own the website, the admin's do...this is a community, yes...but ultimately it's the admin's decisions that deem what is acceptable content...quit griping already lol



kewlhotrod said:


> That point has already been brought up and shot down before. I'd search for it and quote for you why that's not a good reason at all, but I'm extremely busy trying to fix my PC atm, and I believe said comment was on FA, which is currently down.
> 
> I can see that view as in a normal sense, but think of it. If it was simply up to whatever the admins wanted, if this site started that way where nobody's greater opinion counts, this would simply be another power-abused, power-hungry site and would be no popular than a personal generated forum.
> 
> ...


----------



## Alex Cross (Dec 17, 2008)

While what you're saying is true, that doesn't necessarily debunk Alkora.



> The idea of coming together and sharing ideas, opinions, and alike qualities is what makes FA, FA.



So you've mentioned ideas, opinions and alike qualities. Okay, we got that down, but what about the art? FA, in a sense, doesn't restrict art per se, but they create reasonable boundaries so that you'll see mostly furry art. They've made exceptions, though.

When people go onto a furry art site, what do you think people are expecting from said site? Furry media, furry art or at least some visual representation of anthropomorphism, not necessarily fractals.


----------



## Arsenic Cherries (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Heh, it is impossible to do a true fractal by hand. You HAVE to have a code.



I've seen you argue this point a number of times, even when someone said that you can do precisely that BY hand with a pencil and protractor, and create a Mandelbrot Set entirely out of circles. What more do you want? Ah yes, a *true* fractal. The elusive "true". Nothing else matters if it's not true and pure. Think about what you're saying here.

Your true argument irritates me. And you know why?

You've said a "true fractal" by definition is infinite. And yet a fractal generator, or an artist who draws one by hand can only create the _illusion_ of an infinite image. Because creating a static infinite is impossible. 

What I believe you mean is an *implied* infinite nature. 

Not that this matters one way or another, as I am neutral to the actual submission of fractals. They're beautiful things, I will admit that, and your image is proof of that. 

What this whole thing boils down to is each person's definition of art. And since *you* do not run FA, *your* definition of art is irrelevant. What Dragoneer and other FA staff decide is art is allowed. Anything else is not. 

Because when we get into the definition of art, every person has a different idea of what art is. I'm sure you've seen how often there are people who insist that _drawing in a digital program like Photoshop, Painter, Open Canvas, etc is not art. _As I produce every single piece of my art from scratch in any and all of the programs above (I own all of those and Sai Painter), I would be offended just as you are, if someone said it was not art. HOWEVER.

If I were on a website whose rules stated that digital creations of any form were not allowed, because they do not see digital art as a form of art, I would respect that because I do not run that site.

You seem to be suffering from a case of entitlement. "I want this, and in order for me to be happy, you have to allow this/provide this for me, or I won't like you/will go away/will be unhappy". You get FurAffinity for *free. *It is not your right to post whatever you want here. It is your _privilege. _You must follow the rules, whether or not you agree with them. And if they piss you off, then go somewhere else.

The point here is? Respect the rules. Try to change them if you're allowed, I have no issue with that. However. If someone in charge is not swayed by your case, no amount of "proof" it should be changed will do anything to change it, and you need to respect that.

As for the fractals themselves, as I pointed out before, I don't care either way. My personal opinion on them is that were they uploaded and I saw them, fine. If they were not, also fine.


----------



## Steel Froggy (Dec 17, 2008)

Renard_v said:


> What about the hundreds of people on FA that just use free or public domain loops to make music? In theory they're "generating" just the same way that people using fractal generators are. You start with source material and mold it, and just render the final product.
> 
> This part of the AUP leaves a lot of stuff wide open and is a huge grey area.



This is /exactly/ what I was thinking...
Truth though, ban one thing and you may as well ban another. Allow one thing, and you may as well allow another.
x_x </end renard responce>

It's like what somebody else was saying, how if you didn't create it by hand blahblahblah. With photoshop ((my main medium)), I do a lot of photo modifications. Would that not be allowed?
Essentially, you could take the same picture I or anyone else started with, run it through the same filters, layer styles, possible brushes, plugins, ecetra ecetera, and create the same or a similar outcome.
However, it's still artwork.

Even with music ((and my high lack of knowledge of the subject)), given the same instruments/programs/loops/etc, you could theoretically create the same or similar outcome. Hence why we have cover's of songs.

To summarize, really the only medium that would leave is well, traditional artwork, and even that..

Unless my point is totally headed in the wrong direction here, sorry.



P.S. I WANT A PINK USERNAME OMG. xD xD
*late reply from furevers ago*

P.P.S. I'm also kinda neutral against fractals, but I voted yes and I wouldn't mind if they stayed. :3
I do have to have to agree with a limit and/or posting the source equation as a compromise, as I personally see that's the only way any of us are going to get anywhere.

Well, without fractals just being fullout banned.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Arsenic Cherries said:


> I've seen you argue this point a number of times, even when someone said that you can do precisely that BY hand with a pencil and protractor, and create a Mandelbrot Set entirely out of circles. What more do you want? Ah yes, a *true* fractal. The elusive "true". Nothing else matters if it's not true and pure. Think about what you're saying here.
> 
> Your true argument irritates me. And you know why?
> 
> ...



You are absolutely incorrect. Please, know what a fractal is before you come in here and attempt to explain it. A fractal, before it is EXPORTED to a static image, is infinite. ONLY a fractal flame algorithm can recreate this task in this day and age. Nothing else.

An example can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phoenix(Julia).gif

Make something like that, where you take a magnifying scope and zoom in to 1,000 times and have the same pattern with no loss of quality.

Also, if you would have paid attention in any of the threads, it was stated that this does not boil down to whether a fractal is art or not, it boils down to whether it should be allowed to keep.

You are correct in the fact that the admins have the final say in what is and what isn't, however, just like a real government and pretty much anything in life, people have a right to appeal their case. As long as nothing comes to harm of it, it is generally what is requested. We are doing what we are allowed to. Nobody here is "griping", we're only attempting to see our case rectified and our point taken.

Also, if you were to pay attention yet again, I said that this is NOT about me. I rarely post fractals myself anymore. It's for the idea and enjoyment of those that DO look/make fractals. Don't try to pin this as a selfish act, because you are gravely mistaken. 

Please, take a review of what has been said way before. A lot of this is simple reiteration, and it's quite frankly annoying when people won't take a time to read up on something before simply diving headlong in.

I thank you for your time, and hope you come to understand.


----------



## Steel Froggy (Dec 17, 2008)

Kewl, you /do/ need to calm down /juuuuuuust/ a little bit..


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

What? I'm making no personal attacks of any sort, and am simply placing my thoughts down for others to see. I'm not angered or even flustered at all. I was simply stating information. o.0

I do apologize if it seems that I am coming off a little bit rough, but I AM trying to clear this issue ASAP so we can have the AUP update soon. But honestly, if it seems that I am being disrespectful, that is not on purpose, heh.


----------



## Steel Froggy (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> What? I'm making no personal attacks of any sort, and am simply placing my thoughts down for others to see. I'm not angered or even flustered at all. I was simply stating information. o.0
> 
> I do apologize if it seems that I am coming off a little bit rough, but I AM trying to clear this issue ASAP so we can have the AUP update soon. But honestly, if it seems that I am being disrespectful, that is not on purpose, heh.



lol You just.. have strong opinions. =)
You're not the only one though, so it's okay. xP


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Well, true. I have strong opinions and clear facts. However, that does not disclose me from the opposite side of the arguments at all. I take in both sides. I can actually agree to a few points posted for the opposing view.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Dec 17, 2008)

Steel Froggy said:


> This is /exactly/ what I was thinking...
> Truth though, ban one thing and you may as well ban another. Allow one thing, and you may as well allow another.
> x_x </end renard responce>



Can someone explain to me how this comparative "if this is banned, you must ban that too" even a valid argument?

One thing can be banned and not the other considering it is a privately run site. You can argue about fairness of the ban, but quite honestly I think what Dragoneer is asking for and for the rest of the administrative team to review is the validity of Fractals being here on its own merits, and not the finger pointing of "well that's not fair that THIS is here". It doesn't say why Fractals should be allowed, other than you pointing at some other genre, that doesn't equate imo.


----------



## Whitenoise (Dec 17, 2008)

This thing's still going? I solved this problem pages ago :[ .


----------



## Steel Froggy (Dec 17, 2008)

Arshes Nei said:


> Can someone explain to me how this comparative "if this is banned, you must ban that too" even a valid argument?
> 
> One thing can be banned and not the other considering it is a privately run site. You can argue about fairness of the ban, but quite honestly I think what Dragoneer is asking for and for the rest of the administrative team to review is the validity of Fractals being here on its own merits, and not the finger pointing of "well that's not fair that THIS is here". It doesn't say why Fractals should be allowed, other than you pointing at some other genre, that doesn't equate imo.



Yes, that is very true. =)
Arguing the fairness of the ban, that's an excellent way to put it, thank you. x3


----------



## Emil (Dec 17, 2008)

> Can someone explain to me how this comparative "if this is banned, you must ban that too" even a valid argument?



This might be just me, but Id find it humorous if that argument just led to the opposite of its intended purpose. Which is to say, the banning of several things, instead of the allowing of one.


----------



## Steel Froggy (Dec 17, 2008)

Emil said:


> This might be just me, but Id find it humorous if that argument just led to the opposite of its intended purpose. Which is to say, the banning of several things, instead of the allowing of one.


Well, that was also related to if this isn't banned, don't ban fractals either.

.. Which I suppose essentially it's the same thing just different wording.


----------



## Stratelier (Dec 17, 2008)

Steel Froggy said:


> Well, that was also related to if this isn't banned, don't ban fractals either.
> 
> .. Which I suppose essentially it's the same thing just different wording.


Right.  But this thread is about *fractals* on their own merits.  If anyone wants to discuss the merits of something else, put it in its own thread.


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Also, to add to the previous statement that the admins will utilize complete and total power of the site for whatever they want...




Dragoneer said:


> This is not Dragoneer Affinity, I'm sorry. FA is mostly run as a democracy, and I carry the "veto" vote as needed. I rarely exercise said power. Decisions that are made are done so_ with the best interest of the site_, not _in interest me. _You can ask yak, you can ask Damaratus, you can ask previous admins. While I've made my fair share of mistakes, I've had my own opinion and own ideas shot down more often than not. At worst I'd be accused of being a procrastinator -vs- being an imperialist.
> 
> I have the power, but that doesn't mean I'm going to see here and try to find a way to piss off the entire community. I'd never do that, at least never intentionally.


----------



## Dragoneer (Dec 17, 2008)

kewlhotrod said:


> Also, to add to the previous statement that the admins will utilize complete and total power of the site for whatever they want...


Did you even READ what I wrote?


----------



## kewlhotrod (Dec 17, 2008)

Dragoneer said:


> Did you even READ what I wrote?



Umm... Yes.

That was letting the other people who thought that it was solely based upon your decision (which in a way it is), you will not act upon such power unless it is needed.

I think the way I may have phrased the post might have got you confused?


----------

