Perlin noise documentation #51
Comments
|
Yeah, it has been like that for many, many years. Also see this discussion in the old forum. Processing's noise function is a java port of the noise implementation by the german demo group farbrausch as used in their 64k demo Art (2001). And indeed it's not really Perlin noise even though the documentation and all the introductory books claim it is. I assume this claim is actually made to keep things simple for beginners at the cost of some accuracy in the description. However it may lead to confusion later on, as it did for me in the linked thread, when I used real Perlin noise in a GLSL shader and suddenly got different results. I see you have already filed processing/processing#2549 as well which got fried. Perhaps updating the documentation is the quickest and easiest solution here. However, I think an alternative, possibly better, solution to this would be to add a noiseMode() method with two parameters VALUE (default) and PERLIN (or optionally even include a SIMPLEX mode). That way the results of the noise() method could be set from an external noiseMode() method, similar to the rectMode(), textureMode() methods already used in Processing. That way while in noiseMode(PERLIN) the noise() method would actually provide Perlin noise for those who need it. But at the same time all existing sketches would remain consistent (given the default noiseMode(VALUE) setting) without requiring any code changes, as noise() is used in a lot of sketches. And then these changes could be reflected in the documentation. The only downside of the latter solution would be that someone would have to write a Perlin noise implementation, add a new noiseMode() method, add noise-related constants and finally add and update descriptions in the reference. In short, it's much more work while lacking some urgency, since this issue is traditionally only raised by "noise purists". Also, I don't know how Processing's dev team feels about such a proposed solution. Anyway, that's my $0.02! :-) |
|
I'm up for AmnonOwed's solution using the noiseMode(). |
|
I'll discuss noiseMode() with the group. For now, and related to the Issue title, I'll fix the documentation first. |
|
If you would implement a noiseMode, then it would be nice if changing the mode won't have to much impact on the scale. So not like the image where one is much bigger then the other.
|
|
After discussion, we decided to not implement noiseMode() and to keep noise() as it is. More noise features is a good candidate for a Library or examples to share with the community. I will adjust the description in the reference in the next round of editing. |
|
OK, group. I tagged the following to the end of the
I am closing Issue #51 out, but I can make further edits to it if there are reasonable corrections or a persuasive dissenting opinion. |
Friday May 30, 2014 at 05:44 GMT
Originally opened as processing/processing-web-archive#423
The documentation for the noise() function claims that it is a Perlin noise implementation. Actually, the noise function it implements is value noise [1], which is not nearly as good for most applications as real Perlin noise (see a comparison at [2]). The documentation should be updated to reflect this, especially given the frequent confusion of value noise and Perlin noise and the fact that Processing is probably for many their first introduction to the concept of continuous noise functions.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_noise
[2] http://imgur.com/guiiWRU
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: