93a5dc8437
8 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Dejvino
|
93a5dc8437 |
Epic 5 Phase 2.3 — instrument Assembly for measurement
Gallery, metadata, scene-gate and scene-sweep now handle kind:'model'
with a deterministic ActorSpec. Drawing uses a forked ActorGenerator
so the actor stream never shifts the identity/palette streams:
gallery.renderScene → generateActor per context for model stages
metadata.measureLibrary now includes model stages, SCHEMA 5,
fingerprint covers actors/
scene-gate.runSceneGate → alive/animates/deterministic/distinct/
param-sweep/flash-rate all drive Engine.setLayerSpecs with
actorSpec, and consumes: searches re-derive the actor for the
swapped identity (so the consumes: gate is still testable).
scene-sweep behaves the same per-cell.
Engine.setLayerSpecs now forwards actorSpec/framing into createLayer
so the checks don't need ArcDriver.
SCHEMA bump 4→5 forces metadata refresh on next gallery build,
which is intentional: model stages now participate. Gates remain
all green (69 scenes) and vite builds clean — no runtime change to
the render path for fragment stages.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Dejvino
|
89e05459c0 |
Every shot stands on something, and the frame has two ends
A section used to be one scene, and two thirds of the library is composable —
sparse by design, elements ON something. Cast as backgrounds anyway, they left
9 of 40 sampled frames under 20% painted, the darkest at 0.3%: a minute and a
half of a few bright things on black, invisible to every gate because every
gate on the stack was a limit rather than a floor.
Every section now stands on a GROUND: a canvas that fills the frame, cast per
section kind so a shot cut changes the shot and not the world. When the shot
fills the frame itself it IS the ground — two canvases stacked is two pictures
fighting. Above that, a coverage BUDGET: director appetite times the section's
energy times where the story is, capped at two frames' worth of material.
The measured facts move into the repo. scenes/metadata.json is generated from
the gallery — coverage as a shot, coverage as a bed, variety, the structural
profile — tracked in git, stamped with a fingerprint of the scenes and the
metric definitions, and refreshed from gallery.html. `surface` is derived from
it rather than declared; nine scenes claimed `canvas` while painting under a
third of the frame, and declaring it is now a lint error. The generator weights
every layering choice by measured structural distance, because family labels
and the render disagree: two `geometric` scenes can be 0.31 apart and a `flow`
and an `organic` scene 0.04.
The gallery's 0.1 red line is gone. It was right when a section was one scene
and wrong now — nineteen scenes were failing a bar for being consistent, which
is a virtue in an ingredient.
Chasing the numbers turned up four real faults:
* A scene that reads prev() cannot be a ground. It returns the whole
composited frame including the layers above it, so a datamosh under a shot
is eating it: the render stopped reproducing from a seek and two WebGL
contexts diverged by 91/255 against a tolerance of 4.
* Screen was the wrong operator for a shot over a bed. It lightens, so a
median quarter of every frame clipped to paper and whole sections rendered
100% white. Replaced by a lumakey — the shot's brightness is its alpha.
* Feedback was an accumulator: a still image settled at 2.3x its own
brightness. Fine over black, fatal over a filled ground. Normalised at 0.6,
plus a highlight shoulder so the top rolls off instead of clipping.
* useTrack never prewarmed, so a fresh Show's first frame differed from every
later render of it — the export-breaking hazard Compositor.prime documents.
Blazing is a decision now, not a side effect: directors declare an appetite for
it, a section must be loud and late in the story to earn one, and quiet kinds
never do. The ceiling gate matches that — a hard cap per section, and no more
than a fifth of them hot at all.
Rendered across twelve videos, middle of every section:
painted 51% mean, darkest 0.3% -> 87% mean, darkest 43%
clipped white 24% median, worst 100% -> 1% mean, worst 30%
separation 0.10 -> 0.44
Seven scenes can ground a section — five geometric, two organic — so every
quiet section of every video stands on one of two beds. That is the library's
largest hole and it is scene work: there is no minimal or flow canvas that
fills half the frame without reading prev().
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Dejvino
|
eda8ac3810 |
Composable vs canvas: say which scenes are meant to sit on top of others
The top of the gallery is full of black frames with a bright element on them. That is genuinely varied and thin to watch, and the reason it ranks is that the gallery previews every scene ALONE — which is not how anyone watches one. Measured, the split is not marginal: 37 of 66 scenes paint under 30% of the frame, and the sparsest are exactly the ones topping the ranking. Storm Rift and Pendulum Trace paint 0%, Droste Feedback and Spectrum Sculpture 2%. At the other end Block Mosh covers 98% and Scan Tear 96%. So a scene now declares a `surface`. A canvas fills the frame and belongs underneath; two of them stacked is two pictures fighting rather than one picture with depth. A composable scene is mostly empty by design and reads as elements ON something. The distinction was implicit in `role: 'accent'`, which marked the depth passes and said nothing about the sixty scenes treated as interchangeable backgrounds while half of them were sparse. Verified rather than trusted, in the pattern the rest of the project uses: a gate renders every scene and measures what it actually paints, failing a composable that covers more than 55% — it would hide whatever it sits on — and a canvas that covers less than 8%, which is a canvas in name only. The gate also prints the whole coverage table, since that list is how the library gets labelled in the first place. Casting uses it: only composable scenes are drawn as overlays, and because what goes on top is now guaranteed to leave the shot underneath visible, layering happens far more often — the overlay chance went from 0.12 to 0.3 at its base. The gallery shows coverage and surface beside each score, sorts by sparsest, and says in the header why the two numbers explain each other. Nothing is labelled `composable` yet. Every scene keeps the behaviour it had through `surfaceOf`, which defaults to canvas unless the scene is an accent, so this commit changes the mechanism and not the output. The coverage table is what the labelling should be read off. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dejvino
|
c099501ead |
Raise the variety bar to 0.1
Deliberately a target rather than a description of where the library sits. Of the scenes measured since the region block went in, only Droste Feedback at 0.324 is comfortably over; Plasma Bloom is 0.082, Voronoi Shatter and Apollonian Gasket 0.062, Moiré Grid 0.047. Most of the library fails this, which is the point — a bar set where the work already is measures nothing. Third value in two days, and both previous moves were instrument corrections rather than changes of mind: the motion block was reading zero for the entire library, and adding the region block made the total a mean over six blocks instead of five. Both raised every score, so 0.04 had quietly drifted down relative to the thing it was judging. Documented as something to re-read off a fresh gallery whenever the descriptor changes, rather than a number to carry forward. The marker now sits at the middle of each meter and the grades land where they should: 0.047, 0.062 and 0.082 all red, 0.140 amber, 0.324 green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dejvino
|
8defef3ed0 |
Tell a dead shader apart from a boring scene in the gallery
A failed shader compile renders black, and black frames are identical to each other, so every block scores 0.000 and the row reads as the least varied scene in the library rather than as a broken one. That happened yesterday — the subject helpers were declared above the ink they call, GLSL has no forward declarations, the whole preamble failed to compile, and the gallery reported a variety of exactly 0.000 with no indication anything was wrong. It is a particularly bad failure mode for a tool whose entire job is ranking scenes by that number. A scene whose first frame has no luminance and no variance is now reported as broken, with both figures and a pointer to the console, and the row is coloured apart from the merely flat ones so it cannot be mistaken for a bad score. The summary counts them separately. Verified against both answers rather than only the happy one: a healthy Moiré Grid comes back 0.0365 with no error, and a deliberately broken copy of the same scene comes back with the diagnosis instead of a zero. Recorded in HOWTO-variety.md alongside the other instrument traps, since the general lesson outlives this instance — a broken render produces the most boring possible numbers rather than an error. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dejvino
|
8d9b8a593a |
Fix a permanently-zero motion block, and let the song arrange Isometric Blocks
Investigating three pieces of feedback turned up a measurement bug underneath
all of them. The gallery built four of the descriptor's five structural blocks
and never rendered a second frame, so `motion` came back 0.000 for every scene
in the library and dragged every score down by a fifth. It read as a property of
the scenes; it was a missing render. Every number in the gallery so far,
including the ones the 0.04 bar was calibrated against, was depressed by it.
Plasma Bloom 0.0532 -> 0.0624
Voronoi Shatter 0.0431 -> 0.0463
Apollonian Gasket 0.0340 -> 0.0388
The Plasma Bloom versus Voronoi Shatter oddity is real and is the metric's
limit rather than a mistake. Plasma Bloom is a centred subject whose position
moves between songs, so its layout distance is 0.096; Voronoi Shatter is
edge-to-edge cells, and a full-frame texture has the same layout however its
cells fall, so its layout distance is 0.004. The descriptor cannot see "the
cells are different" as composition, and for full-frame work the layout block
contributes almost nothing. Worth knowing before the bar is used to judge that
family.
Apollonian Gasket scoring low with good-looking frames is the gallery working:
it measures how much a scene changes between songs, not how good it looks. A
scene can be beautiful six times and identical six times.
Isometric Blocks gets the displacement it was asked for. Every block sat exactly
on its lattice slot, so the plan of the field was the same plan in every song
and only the heights moved — a layout distance of 0.005. `scatter` steps each
cell off its slot by a fixed amount of its own, bounded under half a cell so
blocks do not cross and break the isometric read, and it drives the block's
height and side wall as well as its ground position. 0.034 to 0.049, clearing
the bar, with orientation variety nearly doubling as the rigid lattice softens.
Its layout distance stayed at 0.004, for the same reason Voronoi's did: the
field fills the frame either way.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
Dejvino
|
71ddd37711 |
A minimum variety bar in the gallery, drawn as a red line
A visualizer that looks the same wherever it appears does not just fail to vary — it leaks between songs, because it is cast into many of them and the viewer who watches two videos ends up recognising the shot rather than the song. That makes the floor a property of the scene, so the gallery now states it and the scene has to clear it. 0.04 to start with, and honestly a starting bar rather than a derived one: set where the flat cluster measurably sits, to be raised as scenes are lifted to it. Drawn twice, because the two readings are different questions. Every meter carries a red marker at the bar, so a single row can be judged on its own. And in the default sort the list is cut by one red line where the scores cross it, which answers the browsing question — everything above that line repeats itself between songs. Also restored progressive drawing, which the caching rewrite had quietly lost: every draw had moved to the end of the build, leaving three minutes of spinner and nothing to look at. The first rows are the interesting ones, since the sort puts the repetitive scenes on top. Verified by seeding the cache with rows spanning the bar and reloading: four below, four above, the line between them, the marker at 20% of each meter, and the grade colours switching at the right place. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
Dejvino
|
c6d96c9d40 |
A gallery, and a debug index to reach it from
Sixty-five visualizers, six renders each, one per song — each carrying that song's whole identity: its cast, ink, lattice, palette and a fresh parameter draw. Side by side, a scene that cannot be changed by the song is obvious in a way no aggregate could show, which is the complaint this answers. It scores as well as shows. Each row carries the mean structural distance between its own six frames, on the same descriptor the variety harness uses and with colour excluded, so six palettes cannot disguise one image. Sorted least-varied first, because browsing sixty-five scenes hunting for the repetitive ones is precisely what a sort order should do for you. The result names names. Thirteen scenes barely change across six songs, and they fall into two groups that were already known separately. The ink-only migrations — Analog Wow, Halftone Misprint, Pitch Shatter, Block Mosh, Scan Tear — are the shallow tier flagged in MIGRATION.md, where the whole migration was one posterisation. And Moiré Grid, Isometric Blocks, Quasicrystal, Truchet Fold, Voronoi Shatter and Apollonian Gasket are the structural twin cliques the library sweep found weeks of measurement ago, arriving here by a completely different route: the sweep compared scenes to each other, the gallery compares a scene to itself, and they agree on the same offenders. debug.html collects the tools, since there are now enough of them that knowing which to open is its own problem. It also carries the two things a newcomer would otherwise learn the hard way: which measurements are safe to steer by (direct render comparisons) and which are not (aggregate ratios), and what to do when a page renders perfectly and does nothing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |