When I used *step = 0.095*, I have 64 frames, close enough to the wikipedia image's of 66.
But resultant animation is "choppy," where wikipedia's is fairly smooth. I tinkered with a spline to smooth out a different curve, but it ran fantastically slow, -- something about too many points? -- so gave up on it for this image. Thanks anyway. Will occasionally return to this -- the problem interests me. Dean --- On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Carl Witty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 1, 1:09 pm, "dean moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > When I wrote the code living at <https://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/1687/> > I > > was inspired by the > > wikipedia image (made via MuPAD) on the page at < > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypotrochoid> > > (permalink < > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:HypotrochoidOutThreeFifths.gif>). > > It looks like both images animate at about 10 frames per second in my > Firefox; your image has 240 frames, and the Wikipedia image has 66, so > the Wikipedia animation completes in about 1/4 the time. > > I don't know why setting "delay=1" doesn't seem to be honored. I > tried "delay=100" and that worked. (I'm guessing it's a deliberate > design decision in Firefox, to prevent people from making fast, > flickery animated GIFs; but it also might be a bug in Sage, or a bug > in ImageMagick or Firefox.) > > But anyway, the solution is to use fewer frames. > > Carl > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
