HOME | DD

SergioKodemo — Dark Sorcery

Published: 2006-02-20 20:56:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 1668; Favourites: 32; Downloads: 333
Redirect to original
Description Apophysis 2.03b/Photoshop CS

It may sound "bad" by conventional thinking standards. But then, what is good or bad?. It certainly unravels the dark side we all have...but is it bad?. According to whom?. It's primitive in the best sense, pagan, exciting and inheritor of ancient almost forgotten knowledge.
Related content
Comments: 75

SergioKodemo In reply to ??? [2013-03-04 21:28:03 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much my friend . I would like to update this render to a bigger size. The parameter is somewhere...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Topas2012 In reply to SergioKodemo [2013-03-05 02:58:21 +0000 UTC]

you are welcome Sergio, that would great

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to Topas2012 [2013-03-06 19:17:25 +0000 UTC]

Found 3 similar parameters. Have to check which was the one I posted. Problem 1: I applied the final colours upon rendering it. The pars look a bit different. Problem 2: It doesn't fit on today's "band-aid" screens. Solution: I'll probably upload it as a different work, clarifying that it's based on this one.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Topas2012 In reply to SergioKodemo [2013-03-07 05:04:48 +0000 UTC]

well 7 years is 7 years... im sure you will make an amazing work like always

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to Topas2012 [2013-04-13 00:15:42 +0000 UTC]

Thanks Sergio, very appreciated. Guess I'm quite lazy now to go backwards, but if I ran out of ideas...who knows.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

KRYPT06 [2013-02-16 23:17:16 +0000 UTC]

excellent !!!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to KRYPT06 [2013-02-17 16:51:44 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much mate!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Pumpupthebase [2007-05-22 05:22:03 +0000 UTC]

very well done

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to Pumpupthebase [2013-02-17 16:51:23 +0000 UTC]

After many years away from the site, please accept these very late THANKS!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LeonieZurakowsky [2006-02-28 04:49:39 +0000 UTC]

Great combination of colour and form, movement and balance! FAVE!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to LeonieZurakowsky [2006-02-28 19:37:47 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much unhuggable and unglompable friend!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LeonieZurakowsky In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-03-01 02:24:46 +0000 UTC]

Didn't I tell you I changed my mind about emoticons! !!!

Too bad I always have a migraine!

I am rather prickly as you know! :evillaughter:

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to LeonieZurakowsky [2006-03-02 16:25:23 +0000 UTC]

...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LeonieZurakowsky In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-03-04 03:15:33 +0000 UTC]

Hey, you're not!.....not!....bi-polar are you! PSYCHO!?!?!??

I only had 2 drinks and 2 coffees last night and my DVD thingie is now working, thanks to Chris! So the above doesn't apply to me!

So I guess your little party above was your reaction to me changing my mind about emoticons or does it represent what you did last night!!?!?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to LeonieZurakowsky [2006-03-04 17:49:36 +0000 UTC]

Bi-polar?...Psycho?...hmmm...who knows...

2 drinks of undefined nature and 2 coffees (perhaps Irish?). Now it might make sense you don't know what happened!! . That "last night"...went to sleep, for sure!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

viperv6 [2006-02-26 14:13:34 +0000 UTC]

wow...thats truly a great wally...like the flow and colors u used...fits perfect

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to viperv6 [2006-02-27 15:23:56 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much mate!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Trecman [2006-02-23 22:41:57 +0000 UTC]

This is gorgeous... The colors, swirls, twirls, lighting... BRAVO!

It would also make a great Desktop screen.... Show it to Pete!!! I know he'll like it!

ssssssssssss............

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to Trecman [2006-02-24 16:21:03 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much Dan! . Not sure if Pete saw it or not, hope he likes it!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

laurengary [2006-02-22 19:35:56 +0000 UTC]

I have yet to figure these out, all I know is these are incredible ! I love that geometric look ! A really outstanding render Sergio, fantabulous !

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to laurengary [2006-02-23 13:49:52 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much Lauren! . Yeah, the day you figure this out, which will be anytime, most Apo artists would be out of the business!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

laurengary In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-24 18:12:56 +0000 UTC]

I doubt that, but thanks for the vote of confidence !

Oh ! I'm so rude, .....your so welcome !

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to laurengary [2006-02-24 20:41:03 +0000 UTC]

GOOD, as long as you keep on doubting it, we would stay in the business!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

laurengary In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-24 23:02:59 +0000 UTC]

you are so funny .....

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Star4mation [2006-02-22 19:22:31 +0000 UTC]

Ace fractal!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to Star4mation [2006-02-23 13:47:04 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

baba49 [2006-02-22 18:33:28 +0000 UTC]

this propeller blade is fantastic and so is the background. I am so jealeous I can never achieve such fine clean meshs, especially not on a light background. Super!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-02-23 14:47:09 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much!! . After looking at which triangle does what in a flame's structure, tweak some of them into a flat line or almost, and even deleting those that just produce noise. Depending on the random flame you get, the fun begins!!. Warning: this technique doesn't work as good on Apo 2.03 compared to 2.02. Most or all of my fine lines works were designed in 2.02, not yet happy with 2.03, except for carrying on with pars previously created on 2.02

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-23 19:41:37 +0000 UTC]

Oh I treasure this valuable information and will try to make use of it I had only opened 2.02 in long time. To make something I used 2.03c and for tweak challenges 2.03b if the flame wouldn't show up in c.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-02-24 21:38:13 +0000 UTC]

Hope the info can help! . Now I'm getting curious about the differences between 2.03b and 2.03c (which I didn't bother to download), considering what you said. Just hope any forthcoming 2.03 version will render as fast as 2.02h did!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-24 23:04:33 +0000 UTC]

ah but 2.03c does have nice features, more variations for instance and I like what's under the triangle tab too. 2.03c is just a bit unfinished yet but I like it to create flames.. and for tweaking too.. once I have copy pasted someone elses flame into 2.03b or older then saved it htere I can re-open it with 2.03c and work on it there... So in short: I have all versions and create with 2.03c, load flames from tweak challenges into 2.03b if it says that the parameter contains a default gradien... if what I get to see looks odd, like the color might be wrong, I open it in the old 2.02 and that, I discovered only today, shows also the personal gradients ... not sure yet if this is fool prove but it worked that way today when I tested it sometimes I open one of my own flames and see that they are torn then I just change the apo versions and most often the flame shows up ok in one of them

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-02-26 00:52:45 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much for the great feedback!! . I'm very puzzled by the different experiences people have with Apo. The other day noticed, that opening some flames done with 2.02, in 2.03, introduced in some of the "structural" triangles, variations that were not contained in the original par. Still have to figure out this and confirm it by further experimenting. Might have something to do with some of your flames being torn when opening them in 2.03. Very interesting issue!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-26 01:29:37 +0000 UTC]

I am going to check out the problem flames .. perhaps I can tell by the name of them with which apo versions they were originally made and check out their behavour in the various versions and what variations they show. I let you know if I find out a pattern in their behavour

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-02-27 20:02:38 +0000 UTC]

COOL, thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-27 20:54:39 +0000 UTC]

ahhh here is the thread I was looking for earlier
I discovered what the flames that don't open easely here have in common and I wrote it down for the apophysis mailing list. are you on that list too? if not I can forward the mail to you if you are interested just holler

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-02-28 21:30:41 +0000 UTC]

No, I'm deliberately not in that mailing list...ignorance is happiness and spontaneity!. Geee...that was sound cheap thinking, wasn't it? . Anyway, if you want to drop just a couple orientation words, I'll appreciate it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-28 22:16:53 +0000 UTC]

it's cold coffee... it's about the tricky variations rings and fisheye... all flames that didn't open in 2.03c were with two triangles with just those two variations used made in 2.03b.... those flames are only visible in that apo versions.... Made similar flames in 2.03c and those won't open in 2.03b either.. pity because I kind of like these flames... tricky variations I am repeating myself. worst of all some people aparently can't open those flames at all... ok perhaps they didn't read properly and tried the wrong version

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-03-02 17:50:56 +0000 UTC]

Now I'm puzzled, very interesting info!. THANKS! Ok, you convinced me...will get 2.03c today and try to figure out why it makes so much difference with 2.03b. It's good for all that we have old reliable 2.02 handy!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-03-02 19:15:25 +0000 UTC]

Oh yes. . I have even 2.02 and 2.02z plus 2.03b + c, just in case I am so curious about d now

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to baba49 [2006-03-02 23:25:12 +0000 UTC]

Well, for whatever intent and purpose, now I have 2.02, 2.03b and 2.03c operating...what the heck!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

baba49 In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-03-03 00:23:07 +0000 UTC]

yes, what the heck.. they don't eat any meat

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ArtByCatherineRadley [2006-02-22 11:21:14 +0000 UTC]

Its a ninja star! Carved out of pewter and stained with the blood of its foes!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to ArtByCatherineRadley [2006-02-22 12:50:07 +0000 UTC]

LOL, you know I was thinking more or less along that line??. But you know I just HAD to give it the "intellectual" touch!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ArtByCatherineRadley In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-22 14:12:53 +0000 UTC]

Hehehe lucky i'm not here to give things an intellectual touch

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to ArtByCatherineRadley [2006-02-22 19:39:08 +0000 UTC]

Yeah thanks to the Ancient Gods!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ArtByCatherineRadley In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-23 11:51:40 +0000 UTC]

Haha yes! I looked at the title on this message haha and I thought it said Dork Sorcery

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CryptFiend [2006-02-21 16:34:28 +0000 UTC]

That turned out awesome!!! Definately makes a sweet background!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to CryptFiend [2006-02-21 18:57:30 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for stopping by!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

CryptFiend In reply to SergioKodemo [2006-02-21 19:01:54 +0000 UTC]

No prob! That looks wonderful! I'm glad LZ told me to come see ya! She mentioned you after I made a piece called Sacred Connection [link] We both have a thing for wolves and wonderful artwork it seems

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SergioKodemo In reply to CryptFiend [2006-02-22 12:00:47 +0000 UTC]

Glad you gave me the link to Sacred Connection...a FAVE!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0


| Next =>