Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Newsgroups: net.graphics,net.math Subject: Re: Mandelbrot set problem Message-ID: <1110@mit-vax.UUCP> Date: Sat, 9-Nov-85 16:47:50 EST Article-I.D.: mit-vax.1110 Posted: Sat Nov 9 16:47:50 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 07:00:44 EST References: <2346@flame.warwick.UUCP> Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 21 Xref: watmath net.graphics:1259 net.math:2506 In article <2346@flame.warwick.UUCP> kay@flame.UUCP (Kay Dekker) writes: >How should one choose the maximum number of iterations for any particular >region of the complex plane? Sure, one can always pick a value that's >"big enough" for any particular view ("big enough" meaning, intuitively, >that not too many pixels are marked as lying within the set when in fact >they aren't), but having such a large value makes the browser far too slow >when that many iterations aren't needed. The "browsers" that I've seen choose a maximum number of 1000, and I think it's arbitrary. The programs also check, on each iteration, whether or not |z|>2. It seems to me, you could increase the maximum iterations to any number. That way, you could intelligently evaluate points that require more than 1000 iterations, while also including those that require less. The only problem is that you increase your wait -- I think that 1000 was picked because they figured that was "long enough." -- -Charles