Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: My Parametric image examples from 1984-88

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Colorado USA
    Posts
    283

    Default My Parametric image examples from 1984-88

    Video taping laser shows back in 1988 was not like what is possible today. My apologies for the quality. I mentioned this in another thread discussion with Buffo today when I learned my Quickshow 3.0 had a new 4.0 release with new features...including parametric images like I (and possibly others) used to do way back then. I am really excited about Pangolin's new addition to their Quickshow for these reasons and because it is far, far easier to do now compared to back then on an Apple IIe. https://www.photonlexicon.com/forums...are-the-values



    Parametric images shown in this video were first debuted by me in December 1984 (in conjunction with Showlasers, Inc.) in Dodger Stadium for the six finale shows in L.A. of Michael Jackson's Victory Tour. At the end of these two video excerpts from my 3 year run of Christmas laser shows in 1988, is a photo taken from Dodger Stadium's laser control central atop the 30 ft. laser scaffolding sitting smack over Dodger Stadium's home plate looking toward the stage. For these 6 finale L.A. shows the tour had Showlasers (photonbeam) add a bunch more high power lasers for stadium beam bounces and stage left and right laser graphic scrims. You can see the stage left speaker columns to the right of a white screen. The speaker column scaffolds were covered with scrim material, not yet raised. I did the graphics for these shows. The normal stage lasers for stage effects and the fiber-optic-pumped, color modulated laser acrylic sword Michael used were the standard tour complement Good times.
    Last edited by lasermaster1977; 07-28-2018 at 22:08.
    ________________________________
    Everything depends on everything else

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Mill, SC USA
    Posts
    1,408

    Default

    Interesting, thank you for sharing!

    By “parametric images”, do you mean combinations of multiple source images by automated mathematical modeling? If so, what is the advantage over sequential drawing of images? Smaller jumps?

    -David
    "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,488,805

    Default

    "Parametric Images" refers to the geometric, concentric-spiral, abstract-looking shapes. Like a spiral raster, but with angled lines instead of a smooth, curving line. (See his other post in the 15K scanner thread.) Pangolin recently released a features video for Quickshow 4.0, and at about 6 minutes in they talk about these new parametric images and how you can create abstracts using the new tool. Except they're only "new" to Quickshow, because people have been doing them in various ways for a very long time. (Still cool looking though...)

    Adam

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Colorado USA
    Posts
    283

    Default

    David, thanks, happy to share.

    Quote Originally Posted by dkumpula View Post
    Interesting, thank you for sharing!

    By “parametric images”, do you mean combinations of multiple source images by automated mathematical modeling? If so, what is the advantage over sequential drawing of images? Smaller jumps?

    -David
    Basically, yes. Parametric derived images from multiple parametric derived functional equations that have harmonic or very close to near harmonic relationships that are applied to a base image or where the base image already has multiple functional parameters. The term "automated mathematical modeling" to me can be translated as "the ideal" or can consist of "pre-programmed mathematical or methodmatical modeling".

    The advantage? To me there is no meaningful difference if the effect is the same, although there can be some small nuance in the effect that is lost by doing "smaller jumps". To me, it becomes a far more meaningful difference only in terms of what amount of work had to be done to achieve the same result.

    Please understand, one of the things that literally blows me away is what can now be achieved with today's computers and laser image control software given the computer's clock cycle speed, op-codes, available memory and high-speed I/O options (USB, Ethernet) and today's closed-loop galvo and laser diode or DPSS intensity speeds. There is so much I do not know how today's software products actually do what they can do.

    That said, I really don't know which is better. I only know how I used to do it (doah!).
    ________________________________
    Everything depends on everything else

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Mill, SC USA
    Posts
    1,408

    Default

    That’s a really pleasant description, thank you. Perhaps I am too focused on the mechanics of the “how” as opposed to the result. I think I have the functional equivalent in mind in my “software paradigm”, although I am not quite sure and will have to dig a bit more.

    This said, I fully agree with you that modern software is amazing at what it can do. Heck, the early Amiga stuff was mesmerizing! I suppose the challenge is to encourage the artistic expression while making the execution as simple as you possible. Make it too easy and people get lazy. If “haste makes waste”, perhaps “ease makes cheesy”.

    David
    "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Colorado USA
    Posts
    283

    Default

    That’s a really pleasant description, thank you. Perhaps I am too focused on the mechanics of the “how” as opposed to the result.
    Amazing! We think a like. I derived most of my geometric image solutions by thinking about the mechanics of the moving image then coming up with a solution to achieve that. If it wasn't that, then it came from spending hours and hours and hours twiddling knobs of analog wave form phase-locked generators and associated free running wave form generators looking for "the amazing", finding it, then making note of the harmonic relationships. Here's an example:

    For the triangle, square, pentagon, octagon parametrics, I wrote a Basic program where it would generate 128 interations for "n" XY point pairs of a polygon, of a given radius, with a given starting point in a circle of 360 degrees, but each calculated XY polygon vertex point, with each vertex repeated "w" times for "wait" points, and each calculated XY point would be reduced in radius by 1/128. This produced one "image" (as I called it) with "n" x 128 XY points, plus a frame speed-code, beam ON after the first few XY wait points, with a frame ending with a beam OFF code. In short, for example, this produced a full scale pentagon scan that is amplitude modulated by a uni-polar ramp wave that has a 128:1 frequency ratio to the pentagon's frame rate. (I think I described that right)
    ________________________________
    Everything depends on everything else

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •