This is what you get when you attach a voronoi3dBvector
(with a get position and a constant scalar) to the
density shader input of a cloud layer.The light pink
color is caused by the sun and atmo settings,but why the
other colors? Any ideas,anyone?
oh geez....how long did that take you to render??...
I am also interested in your terrain......
as per the colors...try rendering it with default atmosphere to see where the colors are blending and where are they mixing (if they are)
Cool!
Must be some weird math at work, eh? ???
Interesting effect ;D
The Voronoi 3D A Vector gives a something similar.
I wonder if this is a general case for all vectors used in this way You get similar results if you feed the Vori A or B vectors into a colour function :-\
I am away to try something psychedelic with perlin.
The colour should disappear as soon as you put a 'length to scalar' or 'luminance to scalar' in between.
But somehow the colur makes sense ,-)
dhavalmistry:rendertime was34m14s,the terrain is a variation of the power
fratal with 2 color adjust nodes you requested in the other thread here with
negative displacement. ;)
As for the color i could get rid of it already,but i thought maybe we can find
a way to utilize it to colorize the clouds.
calico:thanks
Mr_Lamppost:tried the A vector too ;D.If you find something please post it.
Volker Harun:haven't played with these two yet,but as mentioned above i was
hoping for a coloring-clouds-method rather,so if you can make up something
please let us know.
You have seen in the image section the Gradient Hack by Efflux et al.? It builds colours by using the Mix Colour function.
If you multiply (colour) such a Mix Colour with the clouds density shader, it might look nice ;D
I presume that this is finally the dawn of surrealism in TG2!?! Very good find!
Attached is an image that has a saturation-glitch (red dot).
hey Volker....is there a way to control where and what color are being mixed??
Well, I used here the clouds' density shader for mix control (to blend the two fractals) More dense clouds means more colour from one fractal and vice versa.
The fractals themselves have the possibility to use 2 colours (default is black and white). And of course the fractals can define some shape to mix their colours.
ah...thanx...will give it a atry
In my opinion J Meyer's observation is a very powerful tool.
You see in the rough preview, how the light iluminates the 'city' very colourful. Now think to turn off the clouds' 'Primary' - they are invisible, but the light changes the colour.
Fancy illumination! I am going to love this! ;D
Thanks for the heads up and the nodes graph Volker. ;D
I'm off for some more surreal experiments.
Now I know who this (1 hidden user) is ;D
;D but i noticed 2 more at least ;D
Well umh,that took me really out there,heehee.
Lucy in the sky...
Very cool ;).
Looks like you have moved on a bit while I was away but I will post this anyway ;D
From these examples at appears that any vector passed to a cloud layer at the density input is treated as if it were three separate layers, one Red, one Green and one Blue.
The first three are variations on this;' the first is some mad banded Perlin stolen from one of my other experiments (I said I was doing something psychedelic), the second is three power fractals using different random seeds and the third is three Cloud density fractals again using different seeds.
The forth is the same density fractal copied three times, the only difference being that the coverage is slightly adjusted on each. This last one looks as if it has possibilities.
TGD included: simply connect the output of each build vector to the cloud layer density input. Nothing very complicated but makes it simpler; saves you (Or anyone else), creating the basic nodes :)
Thank you very much Mr_L these look very promising especially the first and third
and i'll definitely look into the tgd later today.Maybe this will help to understand
better how to control certain aspects. :)
Thanks, Mr. L. These really are interesting and look like more fun. How much can we take? :o
Here's another one ;D
An extension of the Perlin bands, this time using the same seed but putting the three colours out of phase. Another tgd because I had to make adjustments to the Coverage Adjust in the cloud layer to get the effect I was after.
The edges of the bands are quite sharp but I imagine this could be fixed with a little experimenting with Edge Sharpness and Density.
I wonder if someone could develop this one into aurora?
Heeeey one more to play with,great. ;D
The build to vector proved to be helpful and took me
closer to what i'm looking for,hopefully.
mind sharing the secret j meyer???
This sky by j meyer makes me think of Dr. Seuss, for some reason.
This is all really cool stuff. Great experiments! These techniques might be useful for achieving an iridescent cloud look: http://www.atoptics.co.uk/droplets/iridim0.htm
- Oshyan
Indeed, the correct lighting settings and contrasting Cloud/Scattering Colour should be used.
Not that much of a secret endless hours of testing rather. ;D
A tgc is attached.
Dr.Seuss? Ain't that the author of the grinch?
Iridescent clouds,fascinating.
P.S.:Mr_L today i noticed the numbers you used in the first nasty perlin,
i like that,good choice,but where is the 23? ;D
Quotemind sharing the secret j meyer???
Looks like a Power Fractal – Perlin Ridges with a little negative colour adjust. At least for the green component. ;)
EDIT:- Oops someone else was typing, I usually get a warning if this happens ;D
Oshyan Interesting site; Will we be seeing these effects in TG3?
Who knows what greatness TG3 shall bring. ;)
- Oshyan
OK Cloud Fractal but I was right about the ridges ;D
I am just looking at your red component. The subtlety gets lost in the mix.
23?
You know that if by the time of TG3 the current R,G,B rendering core was replaced with an unbiased Spectral Renderer then TG3 would be able to do internally things that are not possible now such as iridescence and polarization and my preference would be for it to be BSSRDF based rather than the more common and less accurate BRDF but I wonder weather TG3 will in fact be Physically Correct it may or may not happen, but it would be nice.
Regards to you.
Cyber-Angel
you two seem to be obsessed with number 23 just like Jim Carrey :D
thanx for the tgc
Mr_L:there are other things as well i'm not satisfied with yet.
2 more renders in the works and much more testing i guess.
As for 23 i thought you might have read R.A.Wilson books
also.Judging by dhavalmistry's comment the 23-riddle/mystery
hype seems to be pretty common meanwhile. ;D
dh:no problem ;).
great work guys keep it up, some interesting effects coming along here.
23 well thats another story, been obsessed with it for oh about 23 years. I live 23 miles from junction 23 on my nearest motorway. Theres 23 roundabouts between my house and Avebury Stone Circle. And Somerset is Military Area 23 in the UK (I'm told ;)) Theres so much more about 23, gets very kabalistic and Illuminati but most of it is well covered by RAW
Richard
;D I really like such stuff! ;D
Found one more this afternoon.Would like the colors stronger
and maybe more though,oh well...
yea I have similar setup rendering right now....but this looks better than mine....I wish we could do something about the colors....it automatically takes purplish and yellow color
This time i've used power scalars instead of the multiply nodes
and one constant scalar has been set to a negative value.
Those last two are interesting, I wouldn't mind seeing your density fractal ;)
I'll post it later today.
Here comes the tgc and while you're at it you might want
to look at the cloud layer also. ;)
Played a little with the vectorclouds-rainbow,nastyPerlin
again,but mixed with voronoi.The nodes view is rather
chaotic at the moment so i'll post an image later on.
Thanks for the clip :)
I had been playing around trying to duplicate your function; I could see it was based on low octave Perlin Ridges but I wasn't getting the desired result. I could have spent forever finding the correct settings so thought why re-invent the wheel and asked to see yours ;D
That last one is completely mad it looks like some tacky 70s disco 8) I am looking at the lighting on the ground and it looks like you have created a solid layer with areas of coloured transparency sort of like stained glass. My spell check just corrected my dodgy typing to "Stoned glass", which is probably nearer the mark.
This looks like another new direction to add to everything else that has been going on recently.
Interesting thread. Never saw this before. By the way, a while back I tried using vectors to create colours on surfaces:
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/media/folder_148/file_1473044.jpg
Hahahahaha,Stoned Glass,good one! Hope you don't mind
me using that henceforth.
You're welcome of course.There's nothing wrong asking
for a file as far as i am concerned.
I had that(searching for the right settings) happening
myself occasionally and have wasted hours and hours and
for some i'm still searching.Sometimes you have a very
small area/range,with color adjust for instance,where
things happen, or special combinations of settings found
by accident and it would be close to impossible for
someone else to replicate from just the node view or
a vague or unintelligible description.
Colorful spikes you got there.
Started a few experiments with vector colors on surfaces
as well,but nothing worth to mention yet.
Other than rubbish typing that needed spell checking I can't take the credit for "Stoned Glass", so feel free. :)
Thanks for the TGD. Have you looked at the Glass from above?
This is where your Ridged density went:
http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=2722.0
I only took a short look from above in the preview when i tried
something else on saturday,but since i'm busy with some other
stuff i got sidetracked and didn't render yet.
Just saw your image(s) on the other thread and i'm happy to see
that you managed to get something good out of it.
Made this one just for fun same node set up as the one
used in post #34.
You can get nice color variations using a rotate vector
either before or after the build vector btw.
what are those blue dots??
I really don't know.Obviously it's due to splitting,but
why that happens and why you get dots on some occasions
and lines(see post 34) or clustered dots on others i got no idea.
Perhaps Matt could explain that,although i'm not sure
if i could understand it. ;)
I am having a quick look at using the Rotate Vector, not sure how this works yet :)
The blue dots look to be a manifestation of a long standing GI bug. This is a known issue, more commonly found as red or purple(Magenta) areas. The last update was a huge improvement but the problem has not gone away all together.
The blue dots are easily produced with a dense atmosphere and bright light source.
It May kill render time but try higher quality and Atmosphere Sample settings. You may just get high quality Blue Dots but must be worth a try. ;D
As for the rotate vector, if you find something let me know,please.
And for the blue dots see attachments.
Hi again,
made some quick tests with Mr.Lampposts file posted
here http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3093.0
Found nothing really new as for the coloring in the
meantime,but maybe someone else can contribute something,
hopefully.With the aforementioned file you can get pretty
cool results,but also pretty much unwanted artifacts.
Some examples attached.
Nice experiments :)
I was also getting strange artefacts, I assume that some of the less conventional ways of defining cloud density are not properly clamped.
have an animation on the go just now that uses Rotate Vector t o vary the cloud density. 8)
I'm still trying to get clear picture of the whole cloud thing
in my mind,but it will take some more time and experimenting
i guess.
Some other artefacts seem to be connected to lighting,like
the dark line that shows up and moves when you move the
sun.A shadow thing maybe.
Good luck with your animation.
This one consists of three 2D cloud layers furnished with the power
scalar/build vector setup mentioned earlier in this thread.
cloud altitude: 1e+008
9.4e+007
9e+007
depth:50
sharpness:0.1
density:0.1
wispiness and softness:0.5
all other values at default
Then there is 1 power fractal connected to the color and luminosity
inputs of a surface layer that's adjusted by 2 color adjusts and hooked
up to the background object.
Now combine that with a starfield and you're ready to boldly go where
no onehas gone before. ;D
And the same with the clouds set to 3D.
Ion Storm anyone?
Anyhow, i think those blue spots are disfiguring it a bit. Try what happens if you do a vector multiplication with a vector set to 1,1,0.1, or maybe even 1,1,0? That way we'll quickly see if they're created by the vector, or that it's something else
In case you're refering to the last 2, the blue spots in these
are provided by the power fractal connected to the background
and i like them. ;)
As for the vector multiplication feel free to contribute that your-
self,please.
I would if I'd have consistent acces to TG2. But currently, another scene is eating up the litle time I've got to use it. I hope I'll get more time in the weekend.
That's ok,we don't have a deadline.
Sorry this has taken so long, A couple of months back I re-built my PC and didn't have anything installed to compile the animation frames into an AVI. :-[
All I am doing is taking the Density Fractal of the cloud layer and passing it through a Rotate X Vector. The amount of rotation animates from 0 to 360.
http://www.ironworld.org/mr_lamppost/TG2/anim/Rotate_X_Vector.avi
I forgot to turn of GI and am not going to render it again seeing as you can still see what is going on ;D
Here is a nebula test I did in an attempt to get a volumetric look, not all that successful ;) The colour in the nebula comes from vector rotations; there is no sun just a light source placed near to the nebula. I had to give it a strength of around 1.0+e17
Cool render. It realy shows what you can do with these things.
Cool animation! 8)Gotta play with the rotate vector some more.
Tried something with a lightsource also,but got no result with
1e+009 or so and stopped back then. ;D
I would like to get an effect reminiscent of a string theory model
kind of thing,been not successful either,as of yet that is. ;)
I have just been experimenting with the scene I posted tonight on the other thread. Working on basically the same thing in two places at once is going to be confusing for anybody reading this later on. ;) ;D
http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3093.new#new
The rotate Y vector looks like it gives the biggest variation in colour (Not properly tested). :-\ I switched to highly distorted Perlin ridges for the nebula and am getting loads of those squares showed up in some of the previous renders. This is probably related to the Acceleration Cache setting but I don't think I am going to get the effect I am after using rotate vector so will try something else
*** EDIT *** The squares are definitely down to the Acceleration Cache setting *** /EDIT ***
I will try to rerender the one with the squares with other
Acceleration Cache settings then later today.
Looking forward to what you'll come up with.
It worked for me too,thanks Mr.L..
As for the dark line i disabled the sphere and set the
planet size to zero to be sure that there are no shadows
casted by objects,then i disabled the atmosphere and
its cloud layer,but the line was still there.So finally i
unchecked shadows of atmosphere and got rid of that
line,but....see attached picture.
Still no idea what that is.
I sometimes get those dark lines in normal cirrus clouds when the sun is on or just below the horizon. They are not always visible I guess a lot depends on the other settings. There is one in the original nebula test I made.
Without the shadows the cloud is going to be fully illuminated all over, not tested but try lowering the density and see if you get your bright colours back.
I am probably not going to get the chance to do any TG for a couple of days :(
Lowering and upping the density gives you slightly better
results,the best results i got by unchecking secondary for
the 3d cloud layer or for both cloud layers,but there's always
some loss.
At the moment i assume it could be the terminator of the
cloud sphere or at least something like a terminator.
Quote from: j meyer on January 18, 2008, 10:49:40 AM
Lowering and upping the density gives you slightly better
results,the best results i got by unchecking secondary for
the 3d cloud layer or for both cloud layers,but there's always
some loss.
At the moment i assume it could be the terminator of the
cloud sphere or at least something like a terminator.
That's exactly what it is. If you use 3D clouds the terminator is usually less noticeable, although it still depends on the depth of the cloud layer and the shapes and density of the clouds. With 2D clouds it's very difficult to avoid this line at the terminator.
Matt
;D Thank you Matt!Good to know. ;D
Terminator. That's the word I was wanting last time Doh :-[
I have been working on some other things recently, looked at the sky and got inspired ::)
Here is my latest test and to be honest I think this volumetric nebula idea may be dead in the water. :( :( The cloud sphere is pushed out to e+09m and is e+07m thick I used the "Halo" built vector technique to give it colour and it works OK in places but over all is less than satisfactory. The terminator is clearly visible and there is a definite difference in the way the nebula is illuminated either side.
Unless someone knows how to Freak the settings I doubt it is possible to achieve the effect we are after. This is a perfectly reasonable limitation as TG is intended to simulate landscapes ;) The way light is scattered by clouds is exactly that; light scattered by water vapour, what these nebulas need is scattering based on gas. Years ago I experimented on something similar using POV-Ray, which has a wider variety of scattering models to choose from. Has anybody experimented with Cloud Colour and Scattering Colour?
With those settings the depth is only hundredth of the distance to the nebula. To me it seems unrealistic to have the view filled by a nebula when the nebula is contained to such a thin shell. I would try something like altitude 1e8, depth 1e8 (i.e. about the same depth as the distance). This should avoid terminator issues and also avoid the flat look that the clouds have in your image.
Matt
In the last few images i used a mix of cloud color,scattering
color and the vector coloring,so a start has been made,but
as always more tests are required. ::) ;)
Edit:I didn't mention earlier,'cause first i thought that the
normal cloud coloring would be overridden by the vector
coloring.
As for the thick cloud layer, believe it or not,that's almost
exactly what i was going to try next.As soon as possible,that is. ;D
Quite right Matt. Thin shell of cloud, not one of my better days ??? I had better go to the bottom of the class then.
Here is the test again using 1e+08 for distance and thickness, I had to lower the density quite a lot. Don't expect a nebula to render fast, I only used 256 samples for this test and that was bad enough.
The terminator and lighting problems have gone, which is what should have happened the first time.
Looks very cool.
What "depth" and what "distance" did you change?
Nice result,seems you're getting there. ;D
I had intended to work on this tonight, I got distracted: see posts elsewhere :)
Settings: e+8 and e+ 8 as Matt suggested; density something like e-5. (Sorry can't check as I have a rreder on).
Still not where i want it,but hopefully a step forward.
I am officially distracted :)
So have no idea when I will get a chance to work on this again but have it in mind.
This latest version is definitely looking like it is going somewhere good and I bet it renders quicker that the deep volumetric ones I am aiming for ::)
Some infos on the last one:there were three 3D cloud layers with
the following cloud altitude/depth settings.
#1:1e+009/100000
#2:1e+008/1e+008
#3:1e+007/1e+007
rendertime approximately 23 min.
The latest version used slightly different density settings and
rendered approx.54 min.
I'll be back and hope you'll too. ;D
Took a while,but here we go again.
The vector coloring does not work that good with these
thick clouds.See pic #1.The others are done with normal
cloud coloring only and show some more experiments.
And...
One mo'.
;D,J.
These are *really* cool looking. Nice work!
- Oshyan
;D Thanks!
Those are completely mad!!! 8)
That dense orange "Cloud" looks like a close up photo of a worn out or torn sponge (Synthetic not real), the big open pore ones you use to wash your car.
yea
;D Heehee,yes indeed it's the dreadful space sponge.
The return of the dreadful space sponge will be in theaters
all across the world real soon.Don't miss it! ;D
That thing is absolutely beautiful! Does it animate? Did you post a clip file for it, or is this strictly a private test?
(reminds me of the both the sculpture and the fire/end scene in Devil's Advocate)
Quote from: j meyer on March 20, 2008, 12:36:38 PM
One mo'.
;D,J.
I just have the "Deep" version so i can't try to animate it,but
from what i know about animations it should be possible.
No, ;D,it's not strictly private so if you want some info or a file
just tell me what you need.
Quote from: j meyer on March 22, 2008, 11:19:02 AM
;D Heehee,yes indeed it's the dreadful space sponge.
The return of the dreadful space sponge will be in theaters
all across the world real soon.Don't miss it! ;D
Yeh but only if you get the animation module otherwise it will be a pretty dull flic. :D
I had also wondered about your settings; I was going to have a stab myself before asking for a clip or tgd but as I am not the first ;D ;)
By accident I did make polystyrene/Styrofoam clouds a while back but never saved the settings.
I have the Deep version, and would love to take a shot at animating this if you don't mind sending me a file or clip file. I can see this making for some really spectacular effects!
Quote from: j meyer on March 22, 2008, 06:18:02 PM
I just have the "Deep" version so i can't try to animate it,but
from what i know about animations it should be possible.
No, ;D,it's not strictly private so if you want some info or a file
just tell me what you need.
Mr_L.:but it would be still better than blecch witch project ;)
styrofoam clouds,sounds interesting,maybe you'll find the
settings again.
I'll post a file later today.
scott8933: i would like to see these animated too and i'll post
the tgd of that one.
Oh,and be shure you also don't missThe Killer Sponge from Outer Space Part 3
The Cosmic Car Wash Incident.
The file.You should look at the camera settings also.And playing with
the sun's position is highly recommended.
I hope you'll have fun and would be glad to see some of your results.
Hi,me again,
the other day nikita suggested to use a multiply color for cloud
coloring purposes over in bigbens rainbow thread and since i said
i'd give it a try here we go.
This method seems to have similar,if not the same,problems as the
vector coloring though.Works best with rather thin layers or ones
with a low density apparently.So i picked one with a low density
that rendered rather fast for the first example.
The second is with vector coloring and three and four are with
multiply color,so you can compare.
The fifth is another example and six is multiply color again.
the next
sorry for the double post of Ex1vec,something went wrong. ::)
even more
Example #2
Cool fractal play. Have you found any opportunity to use these in anything in TG2 to better copy something compared to the real world?
You mean aside from worn out sponges and the like,i guess? ;D
Well,seriously now,i'm afraid i didn't.But then again it's dependant
of what you consider to be the "real world".It has increased my general
understanding of the cloud system though,since i did lots of tests with
many different settings.
Sorry if this came across condescending. Not meant to be. I wanted to learn what you're doing and even downloaded and am doing an over the weekend render on some clouds right now by using your work here. So...we'll see what happens. I'm pretty sure mine will be "other" real worldy. ;D
No worry man,didn' take it that way. ;D
Great for making pretty realistic fire....
Here's a very low quality test for some volumetric fire I've been making in TG2.
I made this a while ago(around the time of the last California forest fires, thus the inspiration, and the name) and forgot to post it here.
Another .tgd that'll be put in the cupboard until the renderer has been optimised on it's release(hopefully).
This took 40 bloody minutes at level 0.3 detail, 450x338px. Not good!
Smaller crops at full size/detail look lovely but I don't have the time for a full go at this one just yet, lol, there's also a layer of grey smoke that's been disabled for this test, render time is going to be terrible!
Thanks for looking at this crap, I'll fix it up to standards at some point...
Sorry, not really on topic here but, posted anyway, since someone mentioned fire...
Looks good, dandelO
I think the fire looks amazing! how have you done that? Tell us something about the concept, please.
Frank
Yeah, cool! Show it! ;D Please :)
Would be great to make a more wider shot and to add a large dark smoke cloud.
Indeed,a little insight would be nice.
OK, I'll make a little demo .tgd for volumetric fire.
The basics are, a dense cloud layer with some 'Y' stretching in the fractal for height, some wispiness etc. and some extreme fake internal scattering.
The cloud colour is the orange, the scattering colour is the yellow...
The image I posted does have a layer of smoke but I disabled it for quickness for that sneak-peek. The fire and the smoke(another cloud layer) use the same density shader set to different heights, the trees are populated using that same density shader but inverted. The burnt trees use it too but not inverted, so they only appear where there's fire. Also using the fire density fractal is a layer of blackened ground in the surface shaders, you can't really see it here.
Once I put the basics back together, I'll upload it in a new thread. I don't have access to this very project file at the moment though because my other hard drive isn't connected to this computer for now. I made this about 6 months ago, when I was too intimidated to post at what I thought of as 'The Planetside Mathematitians Forum'. Now though, I know you're all just as screwy as me! ;)
Thanks dandelO!
You'll find dandelOs tgd in the File Sharing section.
Had some fun. ;D
...and some more.
Hey, this is cool!
Sculpting sponges now; I bet bathtime just flies by. ;D ;D ;D
Did you restrict the cloud layer to an object? If so how????
If the shape is procedural then I am guessing that the render time was less than fun. But worth it. ;)
nice use of the software ! ^^
Wow, that's really nice! Could you share a clip of how you achieved those shapes?
Thanks guys,glad you like it!
Yeah,bathtime flies by,but that's how they look afterwards. ;D
And now for your questions.
"Did you restrict the cloud layer to an object? If so how?Huh"
I wish we could do that! But since it's not possible (yet?),as far as i know,
i took a depth grab of a knot model i made a while ago and applied it via
image map shader as a masking/blending shader to one of the density fractals.
So not procedural either,i'm afraid.
Do you think something like the knot would be possible with functions btw?
The other one is a greyscale map i painted earlier and which i like to use for
testing purposes.A better readable example is attached to this post.
"Could you share a clip of how you achieved those shapes?"
If you still want one after the above explanation,sure just tell me which one
and i'll post it later on,without the image map,that is.
Thanks again,J.
Quote from: j meyer on June 11, 2008, 12:56:44 PM
"Did you restrict the cloud layer to an object? If so how?Huh"
I wish we could do that! But since it's not possible (yet?),as far as i know,
i took a depth grab of a knot model i made a while ago and applied it via
image map shader as a masking/blending shader to one of the density fractals.
So not procedural either,i'm afraid.
That's a shame but using the depth information as a thickness control is an interesting idea that must have other possibilities.
Quote from: j meyer on June 11, 2008, 12:56:44 PM
Do you think something like the knot would be possible with functions btw?
The original knot can be defined as the volume which lies within a certain distance of the line formed when a rotating point is swept around a circle. So it should be possible to define that volume with a conditional function but my math is not up to the task which is why I was hoping that you had figured it out. ;D
The ability to restrict cloud or atmosphere to the volume contained within an object would be very useful.
Quote from: cyphyr on November 01, 2007, 03:13:35 PM
great work guys keep it up, some interesting effects coming along here.
23 well thats another story, been obsessed with it for oh about 23 years. I live 23 miles from junction 23 on my nearest motorway. Theres 23 roundabouts between my house and Avebury Stone Circle. And Somerset is Military Area 23 in the UK (I'm told ;)) Theres so much more about 23, gets very kabalistic and Illuminati but most of it is well covered by RAW
Richard
Finding this thread I seem to have missed I run into Discordianisms...I as well have a similar obsession R. Born 10 23 1948 has me squarely under the Law of 5's, hee hee hee ;)