45 second "fur" at 300MHZ

[JoelOtron]

Whats the point of this thread?

If you want good fur in c4d buy shave, motiongimicks plugs, or use a workaround. Or just continue to use Poser if that floats your boat.

And frankly, that render doesnt even resemble fur to me.

[brammelo]

The point is that this thread is not about fur, it's about micropoly displacement. The "Fur" you see in the first post is just a result of a rendere capable of using this technique. C4D can't do this, and it would be nice to have it. Of course, it would be nice to have a ton of other features as well :)

Cheers,
BaRa.

[AdamT]

At this point I'd say that micropoly is my #1 wish for R9. But from what I hear it would require a complete rewrite of the render engine, so I'm not to optimistic that we'll see it.

[JoelOtron]

Originally posted by brammelo
The point is that this thread is not about fur, it's about micropoly displacement. The "Fur" you see in the first post is just a result of a rendere capable of using this technique. C4D can't do this, and it would be nice to have it. Of course, it would be nice to have a ton of other features as well :)

Cheers,
BaRa.

I see. I doidnt realize Poser allowed for MPD. Didnt see the connection.

Of course I've been hoping for this feature too. I'm working on a project right now where MPD would be great.

[Scott M C4D]

I DON'T BELEIVE THAT THIS RENDER TOOK 45 SECONDS, I RECON YOU SEXED UP THIS CLAIM.
WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR THIS ?

[twilight]

Eheheheh
It's funny to see people reacting this way to other program features.
That's the kind of reaction i get when i tell 3dsmax people about C4D features: "no way!!", "who needs that??", "max can do that too, with the acme plugin!"...

I believe two things:
1. That image probably took 45 seconds to render.
2. Micropoly displacement rocks!!

I don't care if it's poser, renderman, vray, whatever... i like the result and i sure could use it!
As far as i know final Render is also made by cebas and it's very close to C4D's render engine. The last release of fR features micropoly displacement. I wonder if it's really that hard to bring it to C4D.

Bring it on!!!

:bounce:

[JoelOtron]

Originally posted by AdamT
At this point I'd say that micropoly is my #1 wish for R9. But from what I hear it would require a complete rewrite of the render engine, so I'm not to optimistic that we'll see it.

Well if its doubtful that we'll see it, at least the normal mapping route could be handy--even with the extra steps. I saw your post on PF concerning NM. Have yet to digest it, but its on my list. Too bad Peranders stopped production on his plugin--not that its any of my business why he did. (MS more than made up for it.)

[JoelOtron]

Hi twilight.
My reaction had less to do with the fact that it was rendered in another program, but rather due to my misunderstanding of the post--I thought he was talking fur.

But of course MP is gonna be faster then rendering a dense mesh--which is why we want it.

[Caravaggio]

First i've heard of this micropoly displacement, what exactly is the process here? Looks like a really fine matrixed extruded fine mesh as a post effect but that wouldn't go that fast. What's up?

[AdamT]

I don't think it necessarily renders fast, but it beats having an object in your scene with 6 million polygons. :) And since (when done right) it uses selective meshing, it should be faster than simply subdividing the snot out of an object and using standard displacement.

[JoelOtron]

A displacement map, when applied to a mesh, will only affect the mesh in accordance to its density. So if you apply a fine/detailed displacement map to say, a cube made of 6 polys, you will get almost no results. If you subdivide the cube, so there are 1000 polys instead of 6, you will begin to see the displacement map really affect the surface when rendered.

You may have gotten the results you wanted in that case, but at a high rendering cost since the renderer is calculating 1000 polys rather than 6 per frame.

Microploy displacement allows you to use a low-res mesh, but still get detailed displacement results equal to using a high poly mesh.

(EDIT--Adam beat me--and with less words too!)

[rirad]

And it would be especially nice if this could be used in combination with bodypaint.
Paint small details on the mesh unstead of modeling it.
Now that would be great (I imagin it to be a bit like working with clay) :)
Look for all the ZBrush beta 2 entires in the speed modeling thread (there are some great ones in the dinosaur thread. They Rock!
For example the ones by southern:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118429&perpage=15&pagenumber=6
and
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118429&perpage=15&pagenumber=7

[anobrin]

Disney used displacement mapping to creat the knarely(sp?)
ridged heads on the "carnataurs" in "Dinosaur"

I frankly never thought much about it until started seeing
people user over at renderosity
and tried it myself.

the reason i mentioned the render time and processor speed
was to give some perspective as to how fast MPD could be
for those of you rendering on REAL computers:blush:

[stew]

Originally posted by AdamT
it should be faster than simply subdividing the snot out of an object and using standard displacement.
Since most (all?) micropoly renderers use bucket rendering, it is also using much less RAM than repeatedly subdividing a mesh before rendering.

That said, I think a decent RIB export would probably be a better solution than a rewrite of the C4D renderer.

[flingster]

woah guys this is a grumpy thread you got going on here...
time to chill out me thinks guys...

i have to go with rirad on this one having seen zbrush guys tarting up their dinosaur entries with zbrush...it would be great with bodypaint...i had a pretty nice texture (imho) but if i'd had some of that zbrush detailling a s**t looking model would have been lifted big time...would certainly be on my feature list...made me want to cry a little actually....but hey i'll live...just!
:rolleyes:

[JIII]

ya micropoly would kick ass but like always, don't doubt maxon because they always deliver always have always will.

nice looking umm grass covered baby?

[flingster]

Originally posted by JIII
ya micropoly would kick ass but like always, don't doubt maxon because they always deliver always have always will.

nice looking umm grass covered baby?

where you been...long time no posta bud...hope you are ok etc.
:beer:

[boxy]

Originally posted by Scott M C4D
I DON'T BELEIVE THAT THIS RENDER TOOK 45 SECONDS, I RECON YOU SEXED UP THIS CLAIM.
WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR THIS ?

:) I'm no government lackie but I can support his claim. Here's my dossier: Firefly is based on (another 3D app I own) Pixels3D's REYES renderer, Tempest which does indeed render such extreme displacement quickly. Micro poly displacement is my number 1 wish for C4D9. However, this is no substitute for real hair plugins, there's not much in the way of light and shadow control, nothing in the way of animation control, but such extrememly detailed MPD would help a hell of a lot where detail is just too fine to practically model in C4D.

Observe the power of displacement hehe:

Boxy
http://www.savbox.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fur.jpg

[danb]

I don't understand how these renders are accomplished. Can someone enlighten me. I understand the Microdisplacement in scenes like the one's in the speed modelling thread. I don't understand how one could get sharp pointy looking hair from this type of displacement.:shrug:

[boxy]

Originally posted by danb
I don't understand how these renders are accomplished. Can someone enlighten me. I understand the Microdisplacement in scenes like the one's in the speed modelling thread. I don't understand how one could get sharp pointy looking hair from this type of displacement.:shrug:

Hi Danb
its possible because the mesh gets diced up into millions of little triangles at render time, triangles smaller than pixels. Because there are SO many more polys in the mesh the displacement map displaces the mesh to the minutest detail. That is my basic understanding of it. In the case of the furball above imagine a simple SLA 3D noise as a displacement map with overall scale set to 0.1 or something small, then imagine it displacing a sphere which is made up of millions of sub pixel triangles and your displacement value set to 200% or such like, this is what the result would be.
Hope that makes sense
Boxy

[segart]

http://segart0.tripod.com/jpgs/pollo.jpg

Hi, maybe some of you saw this attempt at the renderosity forum. For better fur I had to subdivide the mesh a lot, it would be great if I could have used mpd, but didn't take that long to render though. This solution works pretty good for this kind of "radial" fur, but it has a limited use (but quick doing). I guess hair dept. and shave are still the best options for animal fur.

Has anybody tried the Ditools mpd? I only have C4D 8.2 and can't test it.

I don't have the money for shave but I'm still waiting for the Bodystudio version for Cinema, animal fur made with dynamic hair in Poser 5 looks great there, and you can assign a bitmap to it.

Cheers

Segart

[danb]

Ah ha. That makes more sense then. I really hope cinema 4d gets this feature.:thumbsup:

[boxy]

Originally posted by SERGIO A GARCES


Hi, maybe some of you saw this attempt at the renderosity forum. For better fur I had to subdivide the mesh a lot, it would be great if I could have used mpd, but didn't take that long to render though. This solution works pretty good for this kind of "radial" fur, but it has a limited use (but quick doing). I guess hair dept. and shave are still the best options for animal fur.

Has anybody tried the Ditools mpd? I only have C4D 8.2 and can't test it.

I don't have the money for shave but I'm still waiting for the Bodystudio version for Cinema, animal fur made with dynamic hair in Poser 5 looks great there, and you can assign a bitmap to it.

Cheers

Segart

I did see that, I like it :) man it must have really slowed down your editor views, I had to subdivide a sphere ridiculous amounts to get the same result in C4D, to the point where it wasn't really useable
Boxy

[SeanL]

Yes -- that's a good question for this thread...has anyone used the Ditools mpd in 8.5?

(didn't even know about it) :)

[segart]

Well, I'm not sure, but it seems like a feature of DiShaper+ in the 1.1 version. It's in the page 15 of the manual and there's an example in the remotion's ditool's forum.
To tell you the truth I just don't undestarnd how to do it.

[rirad]

The MAP deform function in DiTools only uses a normal map to improve the displacement. At the moment, there is not a normal map shader (or micropoly displacement method, which is a different method than normal map shading I think) included so true geometry in the mesh is still required.
The MAP method in DiShaper+ results in a much better displaced mesh due to the extra information that is stored in a normal map.
See this link for an example:
http://forum.terraforming.net/showthread.php?t=1525
The first image is a standard cinema bump map,
the second one is a normal map shader (which has been removed in beta phase due to some problems (it might be added to ditools later, I don't know)). The third one is a standard displacer displacement (much like cinema's displacement channel method, only real time in the editor window and much more powerfull). Note that in regions where polygons make sharp angles with other polygons (base of the displacement), the displacement method is poor.
The last image is the same method but now also the information stored in a normal map is included. The result does result in a much better deformation of the mesh.
So right now, DiTools can only use normal maps in combination with a highly subdevided mesh.

@SERGIO A GARCES
If you want to try the normal map DiShaper functions download the 4MB example file from www.remotion.de.vu and try the examples in the DiShaper+/NormalMapDeform1 folder (a bump map and normal map that are used in the examples are included in the tex folder)

If you want to create your own normal maps, try the NlinShader (follow the link on this page):
http://members.shaw.ca/jimht03/normal2.html

[segart]

Thanks for the info:)

[Ikari]

i'm not really sure about that MPD, because if you take a look at Renderman (which i love to test and write silly shaders for, i use 3delight) and its GI, and compete it otherwise with Mray and its GI and Displacement...

somehow it comes to my mind that you cant have fast accurate GI-rendering and a fast way to calculate Displacement at once, as i compete these two high-end-renders (everybody knows about Mrays unbearable rendertimes for displacement and that Renderman produces a usable GI but not in usable time).

so i'm not sure what to think of MPD, because as i'm more for stills, i like GI more than MPD. if i need MPD, hey there are lots of free Renderman compliant renderers out there, nice shaderman for visual shaderbuilding and C4d has a RIB-exporter too (still maybe more alpha or beta but we have it :) )

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.