I’m really not able to follow the code here, but it looks like the same sort of idea. I’m assuming that’s a 16x16 tf?
That’s the default but users can specify a size up to 256x256 and down to 1x1.
The output seems to be more strongly dominated by primaries and secondaries than I’d expect, so I’m not sure if there’s a difference in our approaches. Then again, it’s hard to tell when things are random…
That would probably be due to the contrast setting being turned up high (>50). It’s a cut-and-normalise clipping combo which chops off higher and lower values before scaling the remainder back to the 0-255 range.
I hate to ask, but for sake of making sure we’re on the same page regarding the 2D interpolator, could you do me a favor and if possible, run a test pair with a fixed tf for normal and hard variants of your setup? I’m really lost in g’mic.
You’re better off using the GIMP plugin so you can see what’s going on if you’re using the command line version for now, but I can give you the command that you need:
fx_blend_bomb 0,16,16,0,73.1,0,0
Keep the two 16s constant; the fourth option is the smoothness and it should be 0 for hardbomb and 2 for bomb. Insert ‘display’ into the command’s code to see what’s happening, if you try: …1] fi display f... "i(
… then you’ll see that the TF matrix is an RGB image if the last option is 0 and an RGBA image if it’s 1.
Exploiting processing error sources to produce remotely-referential derived images? Now we’re talking!
I love such broken textures myself. I can go a bit further: