On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Martin Peach wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
You have seen a lot of analog equipment and you know that it does time-wise
sampling. analog vs digital is not what we are debating.
Analog equipment works continuously in time. Digital is almost always
clocked. If your eyes are c
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Martin Peach wrote:
>
>> No. The spokes just look blurred. Have you? If you try it at night under
>> a streetlamp then you get the effect. I'm sure I have analog eyes ;)
>
> You have seen a lot of analog equipment and you know that it does
> time-wise
hi all:
thanks for asking about this music/visual. a few things that i should
say/clarify about the visual.
the visual is made by one of my close collaborator called Oli
(http://yesyesnono.co.uk), we perform quite regularly in london (under the name
of cracktux) and whereever we get to play. a
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Andy Farnell wrote:
There are some other interesting effects if watching a spinning wheel
made of black and white spokes, some people see colour flashes at
certain speeds where the cones are tricked into firing instead of the
rods. But I've never seen the wheel spin backwa
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Martin Peach wrote:
No. The spokes just look blurred. Have you? If you try it at night under
a streetlamp then you get the effect. I'm sure I have analog eyes ;)
You have seen a lot of analog equipment and you know that it does
time-wise sampling. analog vs digital is not
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Charles Henry wrote:
Vision doesn't work exactly like a camera.
Right. Somehow I confused two things. A maximum frequency is only called
Nyquist if it involves sampling and aliasing. There are several maximum
frequencies that can be computed for the eye for different cir
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Martin Peach wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
wheel. When you accelerate it beyond a certain point, it will begin to look
like it's going backwards instead. This is because the wheel speed,
together w
Hallo,
Chris McCormick hat gesagt: // Chris McCormick wrote:
> Chun, I am really interested in what tools you used to make this. Has it
> been exhibited or screened anywhere?
It was performed at Make Art in Poitiers this year. The video is not
Pd, though: Chun's partner Oli uses Processing here.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 02:01:13PM +0200, Steffen Juul wrote:
>
> On 24/10/2007, at 13.33, Ed Kelly wrote:
>
> >Chun did a cool thing - it would be interesting to know how the
> >video was made. Look up 'chun lee glass cloud' on youtube.
>
>
> Wicket -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ-6_9ah
On 24/10/2007, at 13.33, Ed Kelly wrote:
> Chun did a cool thing - it would be interesting to know how the
> video was made. Look up 'chun lee glass cloud' on youtube.
Wicket -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ-6_9ahw08
___
PD-list@iem.at mailing
My theory is that the brain automatically 're-frames' the image when you move
your eyes. Here's a point - the eyes never move smoothly unless tracking a
moving object to keep it stationary within the field of vision. They always
dart about.
Cinema would not work if our eyes were digital, since t
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:48:32 -0500
"Charles Henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > That won't work in sunlight for example.
> > >
> > > Haven't you ever seen it? (in sunlight that is)
>
> As implied, I'm 99% positive I've seen it before. You might still be
> able to convince me that I haven
On 10/22/07, Roman Haefeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 17:33 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> > On 10/22/07, Martin Peach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> > > >A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
> > > >wheel. When
Charles Henry wrote:
> On 10/22/07, Martin Peach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>>
>>> A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
>>> wheel. When you accelerate it beyond a certain point, it will begin to look
>>> like it's going backw
On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 17:33 -0500, Charles Henry wrote:
> On 10/22/07, Martin Peach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> > >A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
> > >wheel. When you accelerate it beyond a certain point, it will begin to look
On 10/22/07, Martin Peach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> >A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
> >wheel. When you accelerate it beyond a certain point, it will begin to look
> >like it's going backwards instead. This is because the wheel
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>A very simple way to explain aliased frequencies would be: spin a bicycle
>wheel. When you accelerate it beyond a certain point, it will begin to look
>like it's going backwards instead. This is because the wheel speed,
>together with the repetitiveness of the wheel's ap
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Jason Plumb wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
The most rapid change you can have in a signal is an alternance of two
values: e.g. +1, -1, +1, -1, +1, -1, ... which has S/2 frequency.
Woah, that's a *super* good way to remember that. Thanks. I love examples,
and that's great!
> That's cool, makes sense. Since I now understand that I'm dealing with
> a graph/display issue, maybe I need to do some heavier lifting? That
> is, unless somebody can suggest a better way, I guess I'll try and do
> block-synchronized snapshots, somehow walk/traverse the fft results
> myself an
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> The most rapid change you can have in a signal is an alternance of two
> values: e.g. +1, -1, +1, -1, +1, -1, ... which has S/2 frequency.
Woah, that's a *super* good way to remember that. Thanks. I love
examples, and that's great!
Charles Henry wrote:
>> Any other
> Any other ideas?
Another option is to use the 'plot as points' graph. You will get all
the points that way, even if the size is too small.
>
> I'm a bit new to FFT in the pd context, but I think I grok Nyquist --
> Sampling at S can, at best, yield the S/2 frequency (where S is the
> sampling
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Jason Plumb wrote:
I'm a bit new to FFT in the pd context, but I think I grok Nyquist --
Sampling at S can, at best, yield the S/2 frequency (where S is the
sampling rate). But how does this relate to block size in the DFT? Your
original statement sounds like the max freq
Ed Kelly wrote:
> It is really just the pixel-resolution of the graph. The graph size is
> 252, but the FFT size is 4096 ( giving 2049 points within the Nyquist
> frequency ).
HmmmI think I follow...but if that reason holds, if I expand the
graph to 256 and use a block size of 512, it shoul
this makes sense,
Ed
Lone Shark "Aviation" out now on http://www.pyramidtransmissions.com
http://www.myspace.com/sharktracks
- Original Message
From: Jason Plumb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: pd-list
Sent: Sunday, 21 October, 2007 6:06:53 AM
Subject: [PD] Spectrum graphing
Hi.
I'm building a super simple but reconfigurable GOP spectrum graphing
abstraction, but got some weird behavior early on. Please see my example:
http://noisybox.net/computers/pd/questions/freq_graph_work3.pd
The magnitude computation and dividing by the block size I got from one
of the help
25 matches
Mail list logo
