Russell,
As to your 3D pixel question, we'll hopefully get to that... but just a moment ago, in the Fractint 20.02.5 program file, I saw this icon named 'MAKEFCFG.EXE'. "Hmm... what's that do?" I wondered, even as I reflexively gave it a click... Suddenly a small dos screen opened, quickly closed and a file named "fractcfg.old" appeared in the folder. No big thing, but as I then opened the program, I discovered that my choice of video modes is now severely constrained: F2 to F10 and SF1 to SF3 are my only remaining options. I deleted the .old file, but the former functionality has not returned. Any suggestions?
You need to restore the original fractint.cfg file. Either from a backup or from the latest developer's zip file.
As to the original question, ideally a 3D pixel would allow us to write/render formulas such as
M3D { Zrng = (-2,2) a = Xpt(3Dpix), b = Ypt(3Dpix), c = Zpt(3Dpix) snip Gerald's formula is innovative and ingenious, but ad hoc. A built-in 3D pixel would surely save rendering time and ultimately provide many more options for resolution, colors and so forth.
Of course, there are a lot of ramifications to this idea; but even the most basic implementation would be a good start, and it would be fun to see where it eventually leads...
Given that, conceptually, it isn't any harder to iterate through a volume than it is to iterate through a plane, what you suggest is possible. However, I'm sure the devil is in the details. For example, what points would be displayed? We only have a 2-dimensional surface to display on. If we are going to display an x-y plane with a fixed z value, then Gerald's formula is an acceptable solution. Take a look at the julibrot type. It may be more along the lines of what you have in mind. It might be possible to expand it to use the formula type. Jonathan