How do I remove artifacts from my ContourPlot3D Valentine?












8












$begingroup$


My version (below) of the "Valentine Formula" that appeared in today's New York Times, has some ugly artifacts that don't appear in the NYT (Java) version:



enter image description here



How do I remove these artifacts?




Manipulate[

    ContourPlot3D[(x^2+((1+b)*y)^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-a*y^2*z^3 ==0,

        {x,-scale,scale},{y,-scale,scale},{z,-scale,scale},

        Mesh->None,Axes->None,Boxed->False,

        ContourStyle->Directive[Red,Opacity[0.8],Specularity[White,30]],

        PerformanceGoal->"Quality"

    ],

    {{a,.1},.0001,1},

    {{b,1},.00001,5},

    {{scale,1.25},1,5},

    SynchronousUpdating->False]





graphics performance-tuning graphics3d







share|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    8












    $begingroup$


    My version (below) of the "Valentine Formula" that appeared in today's New York Times, has some ugly artifacts that don't appear in the NYT (Java) version:



    enter image description here



    How do I remove these artifacts?




    Manipulate[
    
    ContourPlot3D[(x^2+((1+b)*y)^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-a*y^2*z^3 ==0,
    
        {x,-scale,scale},{y,-scale,scale},{z,-scale,scale},
    
        Mesh->None,Axes->None,Boxed->False,
    
        ContourStyle->Directive[Red,Opacity[0.8],Specularity[White,30]],
    
        PerformanceGoal->"Quality"
    
    ],
    
    {{a,.1},.0001,1},
    
    {{b,1},.00001,5},
    
    {{scale,1.25},1,5},
    
    SynchronousUpdating->False]





    graphics performance-tuning graphics3d







    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      8












      8








      8


      3



      $begingroup$


      My version (below) of the "Valentine Formula" that appeared in today's New York Times, has some ugly artifacts that don't appear in the NYT (Java) version:



      enter image description here



      How do I remove these artifacts?




      Manipulate[
      
    ContourPlot3D[(x^2+((1+b)*y)^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-a*y^2*z^3 ==0,
      
        {x,-scale,scale},{y,-scale,scale},{z,-scale,scale},
      
        Mesh->None,Axes->None,Boxed->False,
      
        ContourStyle->Directive[Red,Opacity[0.8],Specularity[White,30]],
      
        PerformanceGoal->"Quality"
      
    ],
      
    {{a,.1},.0001,1},
      
    {{b,1},.00001,5},
      
    {{scale,1.25},1,5},
      
    SynchronousUpdating->False]





      graphics performance-tuning graphics3d







      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      My version (below) of the "Valentine Formula" that appeared in today's New York Times, has some ugly artifacts that don't appear in the NYT (Java) version:



      enter image description here



      How do I remove these artifacts?




      Manipulate[
      
    ContourPlot3D[(x^2+((1+b)*y)^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-a*y^2*z^3 ==0,
      
        {x,-scale,scale},{y,-scale,scale},{z,-scale,scale},
      
        Mesh->None,Axes->None,Boxed->False,
      
        ContourStyle->Directive[Red,Opacity[0.8],Specularity[White,30]],
      
        PerformanceGoal->"Quality"
      
    ],
      
    {{a,.1},.0001,1},
      
    {{b,1},.00001,5},
      
    {{scale,1.25},1,5},
      
    SynchronousUpdating->False]





      graphics performance-tuning graphics3d




      graphics performance-tuning graphics3d






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Feb 14 at 16:45









      xzczd

      27.3k573251




      27.3k573251










      asked Feb 14 at 16:24









      oromeorome

      6,07223883




      6,07223883






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$

          RegionPlot3D can sometimes give cleaner results out of the box. I also upped the PlotPoints manually.



          Manipulate[
          
 RegionPlot3D[(x^2 + ((1 + b)*y)^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 - x^2*z^3 - 
          
    a*y^2*z^3 <= 0, {x, -scale, scale}, {y, -scale, 
          
   scale}, {z, -scale, scale}, Mesh -> None, Axes -> None, 
          
  Boxed -> False, 
          
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Red, Opacity[0.8], Specularity[White, 30]], 
          
  PlotPoints -> ControlActive[Automatic, 40]], {{a, .1}, .0001, 
          
  1}, {{b, 1}, .00001, 5}, {{scale, 1.25}, 1, 5}, 
          
 SynchronousUpdating -> False]







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's much nicer!
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:40





















          2












          $begingroup$

          Adding the ContourPlot3D option PlotPoints -> n where n is some number greater than or equal to 100 improved things considerably for me. There is still a very faint ring around the lower portion of the heart when I do this, but it's a considerable improvement.



          The PlotPoints argument tells Mathematica how many points to use when initially sampling the plot. Many functions (including 2D functions like DensityPlot) accept this argument. For whatever reason, the default is often quite low for functions/plots with rapid changes or singularities.



          Demo:



          First, without any additional argument:
          enter image description here



          Then with PlotPoints -> 200.
          with argument






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That doesn't do anything for me.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:38










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:39










          • $begingroup$
            @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:42










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:43












          • $begingroup$
            It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:46











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "387"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f191570%2fhow-do-i-remove-artifacts-from-my-contourplot3d-valentine%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          6












          $begingroup$

          RegionPlot3D can sometimes give cleaner results out of the box. I also upped the PlotPoints manually.



          Manipulate[
          
 RegionPlot3D[(x^2 + ((1 + b)*y)^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 - x^2*z^3 - 
          
    a*y^2*z^3 <= 0, {x, -scale, scale}, {y, -scale, 
          
   scale}, {z, -scale, scale}, Mesh -> None, Axes -> None, 
          
  Boxed -> False, 
          
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Red, Opacity[0.8], Specularity[White, 30]], 
          
  PlotPoints -> ControlActive[Automatic, 40]], {{a, .1}, .0001, 
          
  1}, {{b, 1}, .00001, 5}, {{scale, 1.25}, 1, 5}, 
          
 SynchronousUpdating -> False]







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's much nicer!
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:40


















          6












          $begingroup$

          RegionPlot3D can sometimes give cleaner results out of the box. I also upped the PlotPoints manually.



          Manipulate[
          
 RegionPlot3D[(x^2 + ((1 + b)*y)^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 - x^2*z^3 - 
          
    a*y^2*z^3 <= 0, {x, -scale, scale}, {y, -scale, 
          
   scale}, {z, -scale, scale}, Mesh -> None, Axes -> None, 
          
  Boxed -> False, 
          
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Red, Opacity[0.8], Specularity[White, 30]], 
          
  PlotPoints -> ControlActive[Automatic, 40]], {{a, .1}, .0001, 
          
  1}, {{b, 1}, .00001, 5}, {{scale, 1.25}, 1, 5}, 
          
 SynchronousUpdating -> False]







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's much nicer!
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:40
















          6












          6








          6





          $begingroup$

          RegionPlot3D can sometimes give cleaner results out of the box. I also upped the PlotPoints manually.



          Manipulate[
          
 RegionPlot3D[(x^2 + ((1 + b)*y)^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 - x^2*z^3 - 
          
    a*y^2*z^3 <= 0, {x, -scale, scale}, {y, -scale, 
          
   scale}, {z, -scale, scale}, Mesh -> None, Axes -> None, 
          
  Boxed -> False, 
          
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Red, Opacity[0.8], Specularity[White, 30]], 
          
  PlotPoints -> ControlActive[Automatic, 40]], {{a, .1}, .0001, 
          
  1}, {{b, 1}, .00001, 5}, {{scale, 1.25}, 1, 5}, 
          
 SynchronousUpdating -> False]







          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          RegionPlot3D can sometimes give cleaner results out of the box. I also upped the PlotPoints manually.



          Manipulate[
          
 RegionPlot3D[(x^2 + ((1 + b)*y)^2 + z^2 - 1)^3 - x^2*z^3 - 
          
    a*y^2*z^3 <= 0, {x, -scale, scale}, {y, -scale, 
          
   scale}, {z, -scale, scale}, Mesh -> None, Axes -> None, 
          
  Boxed -> False, 
          
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Red, Opacity[0.8], Specularity[White, 30]], 
          
  PlotPoints -> ControlActive[Automatic, 40]], {{a, .1}, .0001, 
          
  1}, {{b, 1}, .00001, 5}, {{scale, 1.25}, 1, 5}, 
          
 SynchronousUpdating -> False]








          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Feb 14 at 16:38









          Chip HurstChip Hurst

          22.2k15791




          22.2k15791












          • $begingroup$
            That's much nicer!
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:40




















          • $begingroup$
            That's much nicer!
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:40


















          $begingroup$
          That's much nicer!
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:40






          $begingroup$
          That's much nicer!
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:40













          2












          $begingroup$

          Adding the ContourPlot3D option PlotPoints -> n where n is some number greater than or equal to 100 improved things considerably for me. There is still a very faint ring around the lower portion of the heart when I do this, but it's a considerable improvement.



          The PlotPoints argument tells Mathematica how many points to use when initially sampling the plot. Many functions (including 2D functions like DensityPlot) accept this argument. For whatever reason, the default is often quite low for functions/plots with rapid changes or singularities.



          Demo:



          First, without any additional argument:
          enter image description here



          Then with PlotPoints -> 200.
          with argument






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That doesn't do anything for me.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:38










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:39










          • $begingroup$
            @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:42










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:43












          • $begingroup$
            It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:46
















          2












          $begingroup$

          Adding the ContourPlot3D option PlotPoints -> n where n is some number greater than or equal to 100 improved things considerably for me. There is still a very faint ring around the lower portion of the heart when I do this, but it's a considerable improvement.



          The PlotPoints argument tells Mathematica how many points to use when initially sampling the plot. Many functions (including 2D functions like DensityPlot) accept this argument. For whatever reason, the default is often quite low for functions/plots with rapid changes or singularities.



          Demo:



          First, without any additional argument:
          enter image description here



          Then with PlotPoints -> 200.
          with argument






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That doesn't do anything for me.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:38










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:39










          • $begingroup$
            @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:42










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:43












          • $begingroup$
            It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:46














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Adding the ContourPlot3D option PlotPoints -> n where n is some number greater than or equal to 100 improved things considerably for me. There is still a very faint ring around the lower portion of the heart when I do this, but it's a considerable improvement.



          The PlotPoints argument tells Mathematica how many points to use when initially sampling the plot. Many functions (including 2D functions like DensityPlot) accept this argument. For whatever reason, the default is often quite low for functions/plots with rapid changes or singularities.



          Demo:



          First, without any additional argument:
          enter image description here



          Then with PlotPoints -> 200.
          with argument






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Adding the ContourPlot3D option PlotPoints -> n where n is some number greater than or equal to 100 improved things considerably for me. There is still a very faint ring around the lower portion of the heart when I do this, but it's a considerable improvement.



          The PlotPoints argument tells Mathematica how many points to use when initially sampling the plot. Many functions (including 2D functions like DensityPlot) accept this argument. For whatever reason, the default is often quite low for functions/plots with rapid changes or singularities.



          Demo:



          First, without any additional argument:
          enter image description here



          Then with PlotPoints -> 200.
          with argument







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Feb 14 at 16:48

























          answered Feb 14 at 16:36









          user16054user16054

          1,606417




          1,606417












          • $begingroup$
            That doesn't do anything for me.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:38










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:39










          • $begingroup$
            @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:42










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:43












          • $begingroup$
            It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:46


















          • $begingroup$
            That doesn't do anything for me.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:38










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:39










          • $begingroup$
            @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:42










          • $begingroup$
            @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
            $endgroup$
            – xzczd
            Feb 14 at 16:43












          • $begingroup$
            It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
            $endgroup$
            – orome
            Feb 14 at 16:46
















          $begingroup$
          That doesn't do anything for me.
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:38




          $begingroup$
          That doesn't do anything for me.
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:38












          $begingroup$
          @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
          $endgroup$
          – xzczd
          Feb 14 at 16:39




          $begingroup$
          @orome I bet you place the option in the Directive again.
          $endgroup$
          – xzczd
          Feb 14 at 16:39












          $begingroup$
          @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:42




          $begingroup$
          @xzczd: Yep! (God I hate Mathematica's inadequate syntax checking!)
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:42












          $begingroup$
          @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
          $endgroup$
          – xzczd
          Feb 14 at 16:43






          $begingroup$
          @orome I'm also surprised that Mathematica doesn't give any warning in this case :D
          $endgroup$
          – xzczd
          Feb 14 at 16:43














          $begingroup$
          It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:46




          $begingroup$
          It shows improvement now, but still shows (as you point out) artifacts that ruin it.
          $endgroup$
          – orome
          Feb 14 at 16:46


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f191570%2fhow-do-i-remove-artifacts-from-my-contourplot3d-valentine%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          How do I know what Microsoft account the skydrive app is syncing to?

          Image
          up vote 4 down vote favorite 1 Some time ago, I set up skydrive for my wife on her mac. But now she wants to access the files online, I cannot remember what Microsoft account I setup and linked her skydive app to and nor can I see anything in the skydrive app settings to tell me either? How can I see the name of the Microsoft account the skydive app is currently linked to? I would like to know this for skydrive app for Mac and PC onedrive share | improve this question asked Feb 25 '13 at 4:52 Gary Barrett 260 2 5 12
          Read more

          When does type information flow backwards in C++?

          Image
          up vote 62 down vote favorite 19 I just watched Stephan T. Lavavej talk at CppCon 2018 on "Class Template Argument Deduction", where at some point he incidentally says: In C++ type information almost never flows backwards ... I had to say "almost" because there's one or two cases, possibly more but very few . Despite trying to figure out which cases he might be referring to, I couldn't come up with anything. Hence the question: In which cases the C++17 standard mandates that type information propagate backwards? c++ language-lawyer c++17 share | improve this question edited 7 hours ago scohe0
          Read more

          Grease: Live!

          Image
          A tradução deste artigo está abaixo da qualidade média aceitável. É possível que tenha sido feita por um tradutor automático ou por alguém que não conhece bem o português ou a língua original do texto. Caso queira colaborar com a Wikipédia, tente encontrar a página original e melhore este verbete conforme o guia de tradução. Grease: Live! Grease: Live!  (PRT/BRA)  Estados Unidos 2016 •   cor •   130 min. min   Direção Thomas Kail Alex Rudzinski Produção Marc Platt Adam Siegel Roteiro Allan Carr Robert Cary Warren Casey Jim Jacobs Jonathan Tolins Bronte Woodard Baseado em Grease (musical) Grease (filme) Elenco Julianne Hough Aaron Tveit Vanessa Hudgens Carlos Pena Jr. Keke Palmer Carly Rae Jepsen Kether Donohue Jordan Fisher David Del Rio Andrew Call Gênero Musical Música Tom Kitt Figurino William Ivey Long Companhia(s) produtora(s) Warner Bros. Studios Distribuição Fox Lançamento 31 de Janei
          Read more