PDA

View Full Version : Afterburn


Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

TwiiK
10-27-2008, 06:59 PM
Yeah, I noticed that right away when I watched the animation. Noticing stuff like that in max just from the frame rate, frame numbers and single frame test renders take experience I haven't got yet. :)

My "render farm" is arriving later this week so hopefully I will have a lot more horsepower under the hood for the final render, but even so it only took about an hour to render out those 150 frames so I shouldn't make the smoke dissipate fast just because I don't want to render 300+ frames. :)

I still have a problem I don't know how to solve though:

- I don't know how to make 3ds max lights show up on the matte/shadow material or equivalent so I can composite them in a compositing app. Anyone have any tips for me on that?

JohnnyRandom
10-27-2008, 07:11 PM
Have you ticked "Apply Atmosphere" in the matte/shadow params?

TwiiK
10-27-2008, 07:55 PM
Yes, but it does nothing for my light.

I have this nice omni light lighting the ground in the initial blast, but I'm unable to take the ground light with me into After Effects in any way. :)

JohnnyRandom
10-27-2008, 10:12 PM
Ooops sorry, wasn't reading all the words:(, thought you were talking shadows not light.

Camera map your light pass.

fiftypercent
10-27-2008, 11:47 PM
so fumefx?... for sum reason i cn never find good tutorial in fumefx to help me get better in it.... especially to achieve what im trying to get to with this bamf affect

TwiiK
10-27-2008, 11:58 PM
The fumefx plugin is only about 1,5 years old. That may have something to do with the amount of tutorials avaiable for it.

But I think the effect itself can be done with particle flow and space warps. Fumefx is only to achieve the final look of it.

Start experimenting with lots of particles and a spherical wind space warp with turbulence. You'll get some pretty cool results.

Here's another test animation of the explosion:
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/explosion_test2.mov

It's twice as long, but I think it actually rendered faster. :p Not sure what's going on. The step size is 0,1 or something and still it renders insanly fast.

But the afterburn shader flickers around and looks a little rough. The rest of it has improved a bit now.

The bouncing and gravity still looks wrong though.

TwiiK
10-28-2008, 07:23 PM
I have a question regarding the noise type settings rollout in Afterburn. The one with 'Levels', 'Phase', 'Blur' etc.

I can't seem to wrap my head around how the AFC's for those settings work.

If I set my particle life to 300 frames in Afterburn and I open a normal AFC the horisontal axis show 0-300 and the vertical axis show the first value going all the way up to the second value. Very intuitive.

But the AFC's for Phase, Levels and the rest of the noise type settings go from 0-100 and 0-1.10 no matter what values you give them. Are these AFC's bugged or did they just forget to make them intuitive?

I want the phase to only animate from frame 40-300, but when it goes from 0-100 and 0 to some arbitrary value 1.10 I have to guess where frame 40 is which is pretty weak.

amckay
10-28-2008, 11:18 PM
yes and no, the AFC's are actually a great way to work I've found. You might have to do a very simple bit of math if you wanted your fx to start at frame 40, such as frame 0 phase is 1, frame 300 its 10 then you put two keyframes of a value of 0 at frame 1 and at frame ~ 13ish ? its not precise but it means you can scale yourstuff out better for all types of particle lifes.

You can also write a quick maxscript that tells the particles age to be a specific value at any given time etc.

Personally I love the AFC curve, especially since it doesnt have to be applied to particle age, it can be distance from another object or velocity etc.

TwiiK
10-28-2008, 11:45 PM
Yeah, that is true, but what is confusing me is why the noise type AFC's are different from the rest.

its not precise but it means you can scale yourstuff out better for all types of particle lifes.

If I left it at the default 100 I could take it as 100 percent, but I want it precise so I specify 300 frames as my particle life. That's why it's bothering me that those 4 AFC's at the bottom don't listen to me. :p

Here's some images from my scene as an example:

My animation is 300 frames long, and I've set the particles to be deleted after 300 frames:
http://www.twiik.net/files/images/animationlength.png

I set the particle life in Afterburn to be 300 frames so the AFC's will be correct, well most of them. :):
http://www.twiik.net/files/images/particlelife.png

Here's a good AFC. The values are where you would expect them and the length is correct:
http://www.twiik.net/files/images/goodafc.png

But here's the bad ones at the bottom for noise type. The arbitrary value 1.10 makes absolutely no sense, and why does it go to 100 when I specified 300? If I had wanted it to go to 100 I would have left it at the default. :):
http://www.twiik.net/files/images/badafc.png

SoLiTuDe
10-28-2008, 11:53 PM
0-100 is another way of saying particle birth (0%) -> particle death (100%)... the 1.1 i never understood... 0-1.1 is also a normalized set of values for your min value and max value (low value -> high value)... i'm sure they could redo it pretty easily, but it doesn't affect workflow any, unless you really need to be specific with your numbers.. in which case a calculator would come in handy. :D

TwiiK
10-31-2008, 04:41 PM
Check it out:

http://www.twiik.net/files/images/brag.png

Over the last few days I have switched from one crappy 32-bit 2gb ram quadcore to five 64-bit 8gb ram quad cores. Setting it all up was tedious, but finally I can start rendering out stuff at blazing speeds (hopefully) :D

The "manager" is an old, stable puter stuffed full of harddrives.

*brag* *gloat* *boast* *smug* *nerd* :blush:

Glacierise
10-31-2008, 04:59 PM
Droooooooooooool! Pure awesomeness rig, now slap that bitch up dude!

amckay
10-31-2008, 06:02 PM
haha twiik I see what you mean
to be honest I havent really looked at the values inside the graph for many many many many .. many years. I usually know the values I want and just plug away without really thinking about it. So now I look at that graph, you're right it makes absolutely no sense if you were trying to get your effect precise based on that graph. I soley recommend just showing previews in viewport and watching the values change based on that ;) (for radius at least, levels or something would be interesting.. personally I've never animated the levels because you're essentially animating how much detail or octaves go into your shaders pattern.. which isnt too heavily used).

good point twiik

TwiiK
10-31-2008, 06:37 PM
“Satellite” processors allow any owner of a 3ds Max Design license to freely use up to eight slave CPUs to render an image using distributed bucket rendering (not counting the one, two, or four processors on the “master” system that runs 3ds Max Design).

This is written everywhere including the 3ds max 2009 included manual.

But you, Glacerice, told me that wasn't true anymore and I went on to buy 4 pc's instead of 2. And thank you for that. :)

I just rendered an image with 20 cores working individually. It was beautiful to watch, lol.

Edit: About the AFC's: I just found it odd. And I animate the phase quite often and this time I wanted it to start and stop at precise frames which was harder than it should have been. :)

daft-crut
11-01-2008, 01:32 AM
Ooops sorry, wasn't reading all the words:(, thought you were talking shadows not light.

Camera map your light pass.

I'm trying a similiar effect for this but to no avail, can you shed more light about camera mapping the light pass? thanks :)

jussing
11-01-2008, 09:13 AM
Over the last few days I have switched from one crappy 32-bit 2gb ram quadcore to five 64-bit 8gb ram quad cores. Setting it all up was tedious, but finally I can start rendering out stuff at blazing speeds (hopefully) Nice. :)

May I ask how the render machines are setup? I mean, are they individual tower cabinets, with screens, keyboard etc, or are they a small stack of sound-free minicabinets without screen & keyboard, or do you have a switchbox for that.... Please do tell. :)

- jonas

jimmy4d
11-08-2008, 12:44 PM
just thought I would share what I'm working on. The plane gets hit buy laser from ufo and crash lands into a fire ball. I do have all of you to thank for any of my progress. I know the geo on the Plane engines a bit low res right now. Will post some animations once I finish building my new duel X2 64 bit machine:buttrock: kinda on hold right now. Hey you guys what op should I install (while I'm here)? xp64 or vista64 I will be running a duel amd's both duel core 2.6 gig with 6 gig's of ecc ram. I have been told that vista eats a lot of ram? does the 64 version do the same? I don't want to get off subject but I'm 2 days away from install.



hope you like the pic (sorry for the bad Quality)

CapitanRed
11-08-2008, 01:15 PM
looks cool so far man.
I don't know about vista, I'm on xp64 and I am happy with it. the only disadvantage is that there are missing drivers for some software like quictime and stuff. but there is a automaticly created 32bit part of the windows, so you can run these softwares.
only thing you can not do is like rendering from max to quicktime when working in max 64bit. but rendering to quicktime isn't recommended anyway ;)

JonathanFreisler
11-08-2008, 03:14 PM
I'm currently running vista 64. And we run xp 64 at work. Stats have shown that max preforms marginally better on XP than Vista. Ram usually on idol sits pretty high, and most of the shiny new vista window displays (like the transparent and blurry windows gui ect) have to be disabled when using max anyway! Besides that theres really no difference. Although i do like to have my side bar sitting there, displaying whats going on in my cores, and ram. Granted that the side bar uses most of the idol ram lol.

EricTT
11-10-2008, 02:14 PM
I don't really know I use fr to render ab explostion the end render block last too many time but the other are fast!!!I don't use GI, I use raytrace show!!

jimmy4d
12-01-2008, 10:23 AM
Thanks guys on 64 bit stuff. I went with xp/64.......runs like a bat out of hell. AB and FFX really crank now. loving this.....:applause:

Ingsoc75
12-03-2008, 07:44 PM
Greetings Everybody!

Using Tutorial 8 of the Afterburn 4 tutorials as a base, I am trying to make some rocket exhaust but am having trouble. As you can see in the attached render the smoke trail consists of 'puffs' of smoke with gaps in between.

I've been trying to figure this out and have gone through the documentation as well as searched the web and this forum but no luck. :(

Strob
12-03-2008, 08:19 PM
Greetings Everybody!

Using Tutorial 8 of the Afterburn 4 tutorials as a base, I am trying to make some rocket exhaust but am having trouble. As you can see in the attached render the smoke trail consists of 'puffs' of smoke with gaps in between.

I've been trying to figure this out and have gone through the documentation as well as searched the web and this forum but no luck. :(

I guess you need to increase the amount of particles emited per second. Which particle system are you using? If you are using Pflow, try using half frame sampling or just increase the amount of particles spawned by distance.

Ingsoc75
12-03-2008, 08:43 PM
In that case, I think I need to start over because the scene in Tutorial 8 isn't even using Pflow at all. It's just a snow emitter.

Mafx
12-04-2008, 11:29 PM
Hey,

Has anyone got any tricks for integrating Vue and AfterBurn. I am using xStream and of course it renders in MR and AB does not like it. Has anyone achieved any sort of integration like this or is it a case of faking shadows and the like and comping it into a scene with some sort of proxy object for deflections where the Vue terrain would be?

Thanks.

S.

MartinRomero
12-08-2008, 10:24 PM
Hello Allan and everyone,


Hope you are doing good man. I am currently working at Cinematico where I just finished doing fx for Marvel Ultimate Alliance II, and now MOVING to the next project,lol.

Anyway, I have been able to create fx just fine when it comes to scenes that are pretty much standard size, but when I have really big scenes where I need to add clouds, or explosions the values in afterburn need to change enormously and the rendering time becomes a pain in the ass (With only those specific scenes of course)

I have attached for you a simple scene with a particle emitter that I am using to relatively demonstrate the size of the worlds where I needed to create clouds for. How do we go about it when with big shot like this one? Any comments about it are appreciated, thank you Allan and everyone in the forum. You guys can see it for yourselves in the scene. Please keep in mind that this issue was only for a particularly big scene that I worked on.


Thanks man and I'll talk to you soon

Martin

amckay
12-11-2008, 09:41 PM
cool mate I'm not near max right now but as soon as I am I'll take a look

dreggsy
12-11-2008, 10:06 PM
Thanks guys on 64 bit stuff. I went with xp/64.......runs like a bat out of hell. AB and FFX really crank now. loving this.....:applause:

Yeah how good is it.?!?!?!
A friend lent me Allan's fume FX Essentials.

The last tutorial with the huge explosion in the mountain terrain on the old machine was taking almost an hour.

My new machine XP64 took just under 5 mins....woot!!!

x-tazy
12-12-2008, 03:47 PM
Hi guys,

just got some general questions. Are you guys using the presets system? Does it really make sense? Because i Tryed a lot with the gradients but I everytime need to recreate it because it looks in every scene different. I just find it usefull with the explode daemon? Are there any free to use usefull prests out there?

Another question. I have one scene where I want a seperate AfterBurn Shader for different PF Events in the same System. How can I control this without duplicating the Particle System???

TwiiK
12-14-2008, 11:21 AM
Use the Pflow-ABurn operator to target specific parts of your particle flow. When you add it to an event it creates a helper in the scene. Add that helper to Afterburn instead of the whole system.

I haven't really used the preset system because, like you say, settings need to change a lot from scene to scene, but I guess it could be useful if you do many similar effects or tests. I have saved some gradients though.

x-tazy
12-17-2008, 02:11 PM
Hey thanks. Tryed it and it is exactly what i'm looking for! It also works with Fume FX! Perfect!

JohnnyRandom
12-23-2008, 04:20 AM
Check your files section....
What's new in AfterBurn 4.0b
========================

+ fixed: Object shadows are now listed when you write inside MXS listener : show $
NumSubs() now returns 2
+fixed: accessing AB Shadow Map via MXS, resulted in system exception
+fixed: AfterBurn's metaball HyperSolids render bug fix
+added: Shadow Map will now display a name of the light for which it's built
+fixed: Noise PW crash fix
+fixed: The AfterBurn Wind and VMap Daemons' rollout didn't appear in the AfterBurn UI when you select them in the Source Particles/Daemons window.
+fixed: black spots with Octane Shader

Octane fixed!

jdrouse
04-01-2009, 03:02 PM
I have a fresh install of Afterburn and Max 2009. When I add a default pflow into a scene and default AB settings I get this total blownout render.


Default AB 4 Settings blank scene, default pflow. Is this what I should be getting?
http://www.a-chasm.com/forumimages/AB-Density.jpg

jdrouse
04-03-2009, 07:30 PM
Ignore my previous post. Johnnyrandom clued me into the fact that AB 4 has no default lighting setup and requires lighting now. Hurray! I was afraid it was going to be a vista bug or something terrible.

Unik
04-07-2009, 06:13 PM
I don't know if its the correct right place to ask this...but still...What is ray marching?? and what are the major differences between raymarcher and octane shaders??

jeonado
04-16-2009, 06:46 AM
Hi, Jrdouse. If u are using AB shadow map, crank up the map size to something like 512 and change the KEYColor to something less intense then white, you should get something looks nicer.

HTH.
Jordan.


I have a fresh install of Afterburn and Max 2009. When I add a default pflow into a scene and default AB settings I get this total blownout render.


Default AB 4 Settings blank scene, default pflow. Is this what I should be getting?
http://www.a-chasm.com/forumimages/AB-Density.jpg

JohnnyRandom
04-26-2009, 02:31 AM
Afterworks has released the Max 2010 update for AfterBurn 4.0b. :)

jimmy4d
04-27-2009, 12:05 PM
Afterworks has released the Max 2010 update for AfterBurn 4.0b. :)


sweet mate...........this is good:)

fireknght2
04-27-2009, 11:02 PM
Is there a need to update if your not using 2010?
Will this update benefit 2008 and 2009 users as well?

Thanks for sharing the info.

Fire

zsero
05-17-2009, 05:25 PM
How is it possible to render multi-pass for a PFlow source (octane shader)?

No matter what I do with particles, they are always rendered. if it is not deleted, it is impossible to hide it from Afterburn. That means I can render the first pass, but I cannot render anything "after".

It is actually a Collision Spawn. For the first pass, the trick was to set delete all for the new Event 02. But for rendering _only_ Event 02, I really have no idea.

Glacierise
05-17-2009, 06:27 PM
Instead of adding the whole pflow to the AB, add just the ab operator to a pflow event, and add that operator to the AB.

JohnnyRandom
05-17-2009, 10:19 PM
How is it possible to render multi-pass for a PFlow source (octane shader)? Set your camera to render multi-pass (either DOF or mBlur). Afterburn will render multi-pass this way.


No matter what I do with particles, they are always rendered.

If you still want your particle action but you do not want to render your particle shapes set the global pflow "render" node to "none" instead of "geometry" or remove any existing shape operators.

thomwickes
07-03-2009, 03:09 PM
This is a noob question.... I'm rendering super spray particles in afterburn - how do i prevent the original particle primitive from rendering as well? i think they're triangles

BAKMS
07-03-2009, 08:11 PM
I wondering if VRay 1.5 and Afterburn work together?

Thank you

Bandu
07-04-2009, 02:30 PM
I wondering if VRay 1.5 and Afterburn work together?

Thank you

faster than scanline :thumbsup:

HeadSmell
07-08-2009, 03:15 AM
faster than scanline :thumbsup:

I've actually been experiencing inconsistencys when using Vray and AB. I'll be tweaking the shader then out the blue Vray doesn't read AB as geometry, swiching back to scanline evertything works fine again...dont know if i'm doing some rediculously simple to fix but its anyoing going back to scanline to resovle the issue.

Anyone else having similar results?

BrandonD
07-08-2009, 09:43 PM
For what it's worth, a raytracer with adaptive anti-aliasing will be faster at rendering volumetrics than a scanline renderer for the primary reason that it doesn't have to sample every pixel. A scanline renderer will sort through the screen pixels, shading each individual one whereas with a good raytracer you can under-sample, skipping x amount of sample points and thereby raymarch through volume faster. Of course, the trade off is detail, so only do this when you're rendering soft, low-detail volumetrics.

Efrudi
08-03-2009, 11:24 PM
You did choose the worst one of the bunch after all. :)

You haven't touched it at all? It does look exceptionally fake compared to the other images I've seen from the launch. :p

Here's the one used in my local papers: http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/na/archive/00655/444__Chandrayaan-1__655896p.jpg

Wow! Was that afterburn? That is the kind of afterburn results I want to create! Anyone know how to create something similar to that?

TwiiK
08-04-2009, 06:32 AM
No, that was real life (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7679818.stm). :)

But I'm sure it's not particularly hard to recreate something like that with some well positioned lights inside the AB system and some properly configured shaders. And of course adding some glow and color balancing in post and you should be nearly there.

The only problem with using Afterburn is that it's extremely hard to make it not look like balls of smoke compared to fumefx where you have the fluid motion working for you.

Making a still like the image in your quote should be pretty doable with Afterburn, but making a believable animation out of it is a lot harder.

Debneyink
08-04-2009, 08:23 AM
this ones for thom wickes:

you can set your size to 0 in the particle size part of the particle generation.


www.chrisdebney.com

jimmy4d
08-08-2009, 12:09 PM
Just thought I would post this...... playing with AB.........http://www.3dglove.com/3dglove/09/TAKE_1.mov ......7.35 mb

Debneyink
08-08-2009, 07:36 PM
k its a good start... my advice?

at present youre worrying too much about getting the camera shake right! no amount of camera shake is going to make it look better if your elements aint right

remember this is a plane in flight going very fast which means there's tonnes of drag and wind on the smoke and fire, and it would have much more movement its too static.
get some wind space warps on the particles and increase the size and opacity of the AB smoke as it happens it would be spreading out across your frame..

your could still have flames on the fuselage and pieces coming of it as it tumbles
planes are pretty flimsy once it rips its probably gonna go...

hope that helps with the vision its got potential to look cool

jimmy4d
08-09-2009, 01:49 PM
great crits mate..I thank you....yeah she does need a bit of work but I guess your right it's a start......

PexElroy
09-11-2009, 05:45 PM
Dig the theatrical qualities of this. The sound with only an abyssal view, then slowly you fade in the dreaded scene. The camera shake is okay but I think has to many small vibrations, vs. some small hits and then wide hand-camera swings; still a good way to brush out the chaos you are after.

Maybe hold up on the work for a turbulent camera shake until the end. You want to tweak your AB puffs a little, which are in the right place, but the shader is key here. you sort of want to storyboard out the blast and fuel path.

sketch of some rough idea, draw out where the fuel goes, then the heat, and then try and re-create that physical event with AB with the shader after you got the PFlow motion, which you sort of do now. When that blast goes off, you want a real hot gaseous blast, then some fuel falling and it lights on fire etc, and leads to the crash.

Cool how you have the people yelling in terror, as you know we'd never really be able to hear them...:twisted:

jimmy4d
09-12-2009, 12:35 PM
thanks robert.yeah I do need to think this out better.I'm going to work out a little storyboard of how I think this woud happen.(great Idea)

the people yelling haha .......I know but it adds to the effect, I have gotten better at pf so I should be able to do something better.hmm should I use fume I wonder, or mabe a mix. hell i mite as well put some rf too.

thanks again mate

jimmy4d
09-20-2009, 01:10 PM
oh what the heck..heres the rest of that airbus thingie....I'm doing this all over but thought I would post the rest of the animation. This is not any better but it shows the other stuff I did (not much )to this. boy looking at it cool idea......bad exacution.oh well. Thanks for the imput mates.

http://www.3dglove.com/09/airbus.html

amckay
09-21-2009, 10:52 PM
It has potential, I would make the starting size of the spheres smaller, so they don't pop on
and then adjust your explode daemons color up so it blows out more, something that intense isn't going to be a nice soft red, it will be really intense blowing out flames (look at the nasa remote plane crash tests videos on the web) I worked on a forensics video of the famous cocorde crash in france and had to try to match what happened that day, all of the flames were really blown out, with that much fuel the fire is INTENSE.
I would basically adjust the explode daemons color to blow out more, adjust the size lower (So it becomes bigger) so you get more bigger tendrils. Try to make the first part a giant streaking flame, that then cools down into smoke after a little while. You can also add more to it later, such as bits of debris coming of etc. But the first thing I would do would definitely be to make the flames much more intense.

Also are you rendering it all at once? or in layers and comping it?

great start!

jimmy4d
09-24-2009, 12:43 AM
It has potential, I would make the starting size of the spheres smaller, so they don't pop on
and then adjust your explode daemons color up so it blows out more, something that intense isn't going to be a nice soft red, it will be really intense blowing out flames (look at the nasa remote plane crash tests videos on the web) I worked on a forensics video of the famous cocorde crash in france and had to try to match what happened that day, all of the flames were really blown out, with that much fuel the fire is INTENSE.
I would basically adjust the explode daemons color to blow out more, adjust the size lower (So it becomes bigger) so you get more bigger tendrils. Try to make the first part a giant streaking flame, that then cools down into smoke after a little while. You can also add more to it later, such as bits of debris coming of etc. But the first thing I would do would definitely be to make the flames much more intense.

Also are you rendering it all at once? or in layers and comping it?

great start!


Thank you Allan........ awsome advice. I do't know where to start. How much do I owe ya..:) (Printing)

using AE to comp but need to do some better layer work with glows and stuff...I think that's what your getting at ?
funny .........everyone is all fume fume fume.......AB still has a lot to offer if it's done right. .. Doing a story board to help with this......thanks again mate


will post......

mec6288
10-02-2009, 03:23 PM
My company just purchased Afterburn 4.0b. I was not aware that it was not compatible with Mental Ray and global illumination. I am concidering returning it for that reason, because I am comfortable with that render and like the results I get. I am not sure if I can convince my company to buy Fume FX instead (because it is twice the price), but I like the results of that from what I have seen much better. I also ran across Pyrocluster, which is compatible with Mental and GI. My question is should I get Pyrocluster instead, shoot for Fume FX, keep AB, or go another route completely.

CapitanRed
10-02-2009, 03:32 PM
does anybody use GI with Afterburn??
Usually you do not render afterburn with the geo together. you will not be able to get the same stuff with afterburn as with fume..and vice versa.

for the GI. you should read about tricks how to get GI like renders with it. If you really want GI with it, Final Render an I think Vray too can do it. but it won't be fast.

mec6288
10-02-2009, 03:34 PM
We should be getting VRAY should. If VRAY works with AB, maybe I will keep it. Do you know if the particles from AB can be set to emit light themselves, and add to the GI?

CapitanRed
10-02-2009, 03:44 PM
well, particles are particles. AB is the shape you add to them.

GI has two different effects. one is emitting light. the other is blocking and bouncing light.

I'm not sure if any renderer can emit Light from AB (I never tried it). but as AB are spheres(basically) you can add spherical shapes to particles, add a self illuminated material to them, and make them not visible to camera.

Blocking or bouncing light is not nescessary actually. all you need is a domelight that will cast shadows. then you will get soft shadows from the AB shapes which will fake a global illumination.

only thing you do not get is colorbleeding...but I'm sure there's a way to fake that with compositing too ;)

Dreamie
10-02-2009, 05:34 PM
finalRender can emit GI from fumeFX renders, good chances it will work with AB as well. It also have particle light type in order to emit light from particle systems. Not sure about Vray.

JohnnyRandom
10-02-2009, 05:55 PM
Afterburn 4.0 emits GI in finalRender and Vray

amckay
10-03-2009, 12:52 AM
I've used GI in a film shot maybe once so far, it does look nice but for the render times it really needs to be justified. However depending on what you're doing it can really turn out nice sometimes
FFX is the same deal, sometimes for fire in tight environments it can really help a shot by having its light splash onto walls and the floor etc. But again render times go right up as soon as you do this so it's more a call you make on very specific shots

jimmy4d
10-05-2009, 12:13 PM
Hey Allan is your site coming up today?

amckay
10-06-2009, 12:57 AM
its up in some shape or form, it's going to be developing over the next few weeks - but loads of cool new content. I'm putting up some new stuff later today, the good thing is its now on a new server, lightning fast, lets see if you guys can try and make this site run out of traffic as well :)

mec6288
10-20-2009, 07:53 PM
What types of lights are best to use with Vray and AB together. I have just started experimenting with these two programs. So far, direct lights are working well, and VRaySun is taking forever. It would be nice to have the VraySky and Sun system illuminating the AB clouds, if possible. Anyone have any suggestions?

UbiGuy
10-23-2009, 08:43 PM
I'm not sur VRay can illuminate AB shader.... Same thing for FumeFX. Anyway VRay Shadow did not work correctly with AB. AB can cast shadows on a object, but an object cannot cast shadow on AB shader with VRAY Shadows...

JonathanFreisler
10-24-2009, 02:00 AM
Yeh, I wouldn't use the sun system at all. That doesn't make too much sense. Stick with shadow mapped. I think if you use vray shadows, it casts shadows fine but doesn't receive shadows from GEO.

reinhart82
03-19-2010, 07:36 AM
Hi, I'm having some problem getting the Afterburn shadow map to appear on my matte material. Below is what i get when i use matte material on my ground. Apply Atmosphere is on and at object depth.

http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt38/reinhart82/Test01_Matte.jpg

This is a render with standard material apply to the ground.
http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt38/reinhart82/Test01.jpg

If I use shadow map or raytrace shadows with atmosphere shadow turn on, I can capture the shadows on the matte material. Is this a bug with AB Shadow Map?

JohnnyRandom
03-19-2010, 05:13 PM
Oddly enough it works fine with fume, but I get the same artifacting (or lack thereof) with afterburn, looks like a bug, report it to Sitni Sati.

Cryptite
04-10-2010, 08:27 PM
I've searched through this thread a couple times, seems like some of you claim vray and AB work together just fine, but I've never had any luck with it. I seem to lose all sense of light direction with it, no matter which type of shadows I pick and with/without Atmospheric shadows on. Any ideas?

Scale of the scene might have something to do with it too, but I've just had no luck at all. I got it to look 'right' in one very small AB example scene that i switched the light to Shadow map, but bringing in the AB preset into another scene, no luck.

Any ideas guys?

It also seems to just work and not work from time to time, switching between the two scenes, AB shadow map will work with Scanline and vray and then not at all for the next. :(

cheerioboy
04-30-2010, 04:29 PM
I'm working with a scene that requires some afterburn love. I've gotten the shapes pretty close to what I want but now as I do my test renders for final quality, I'm finding really bad stepping/banding in the particles. see attached.

my view step size is at .001 so I can't go any lower there, are there any other settings to be aware of for fine tuning this issue?

http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=152876&stc=1

Glacierise
04-30-2010, 04:54 PM
Nothing's attached...

cheerioboy
04-30-2010, 07:05 PM
sorry, not sure why that didn't work the first time. look closely at the edges there and you'll see the stepping. thanks for any input.

Edit: I think I've been able to resolve it by bringing up the jitter, a lot.

cheerioboy
05-05-2010, 04:10 PM
How do you pull a z-depth pass of the Afterburn?

Glacierise
05-05-2010, 04:13 PM
You can do a red/green gradient based on camera distance - in the AB shading params.

cheerioboy
05-05-2010, 08:42 PM
Hey Hristo,

So for a zdepth I tried to render the scene with 2 colors, red/green with a Distance for the 'c1->c2->c3:' parameter. This gives each puff a red to green color instead of the desired color from the front to the back of the scene.

Am I missing something?

NahuelL
05-06-2010, 04:01 PM
Hey Brendan,

Go to Render > Render Setup > Render Elements and use the "FusionWorks Z Depth" render pass.

Glacierise
05-06-2010, 04:03 PM
Or for the method I mentioned - choose shading with one color only, make the gradient red/green or just white/black, then right click the 'PA' icon next to the gradient, you can select 'object distance' and the camera. But the fusionworks zdepth is better, you won't have to render AB twice, which is costly as hell.

adom86
08-16-2010, 11:56 AM
Hey Guys

Just a quick question and I do apologise if it has (most likely has) been covered. Ive got my clouds looking perect for my needs but I just want the edge of the clouds to swirl to create a more realistic look. Could I ask which parameter it is to animate as I have tried pretty much all of them within the noise/turbulence section but it appears to be making no difference!

Thanks for any help (I have had a quick look back through the forum but not found the exact answer!)

Adam

*EDIT* you have my permission to slap me! .. It has been soooooo long since I worked with AB I forgot that I needed to give the particles age! doh! .. sorry :P

Cryptite
08-16-2010, 04:43 PM
You're looking for Phase at the bottom. Make sure you turn on the curve (button to the right) and set a Hi value slightly larger than your Low.

This won't really 'swirl' your clouds, but they will fluff about (technical term).

dim1984kimo
08-19-2010, 05:57 AM
hi all,

I wanna use AfterBurn to simulate a nuke boom. At first I use FumeFX to make a fluid velocity, and I want Afterburn inherit its rotation. But it seens like doesnt work, how come?

The afterburn's rotation only affect itself, is it? it couldnt receieve fumefx's infomation?

Thanks!

Cryptite
08-19-2010, 12:36 PM
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure the velocty data outputted by Fume is only position data, not rotation. Anyone else know for sure whether this is the case?

If you're trying to get the rolling effect from fume, I'd suggest making using alot of Afterburn particles with a smaller size, then rely on animated phase to get the effect. Then again you might be better off actually doing the whole effect in fume.

sscanners
09-08-2010, 11:03 PM
I got afterburn after seeing it mentioned, but personally I have no idea where to start with the plugin...

I'm trying to make realistic clouds so I can make something very simaliar to this for my project at university so it's ideal that I learn how!:

Clouds (http://www.hikrs.com/image/josh_1/prairie_mountain_40/p1330903_20100122_2017868195.jpg)

I'm using 3ds max 2011 and afterburn 4b I believe. Does anyone have any tips or advice on how to even start making these clouds?

PsychoSilence
09-08-2010, 11:29 PM
Allan's first DVD features Afterburn and there is a whole Afterburn Masters collection at cg-academy.com the material is outdated but should give you a clue about how stuff works in AB. Afterburn still rocks!

sscanners
09-08-2010, 11:32 PM
Allan's first DVD features Afterburn and there is a whole Afterburn Masters collection at cg-academy.com the material is outdated but should give you a clue about how stuff works in AB. Afterburn still rocks!

Great! I'll take a look at it. I'm sure I did try to follow a cloud tutorial yesterday and found that they were using a different version to myself which made it difficult to follow (as you can tell I'm not the most advanced user in the world) and gave up after 4 hours.

toenexx
09-12-2010, 03:20 AM
Hi there!

So I am pretty new at using Afterburn, so far it has been great!

I have question regarding rendering out my clouds that are more compositor friendly.

I have around 6 clouds layered in Z space. I have my key light right behind them, which is opposite of the camera. This creates some nice shadowing that cover my clouds that are closer to camera. However, what I want to do is seperate each cloud into it's own rendered image with the other clouds hidden but still have their shadows casted on the cloud that is being rendered. Is this possible?

I tried using Visibility to Camera, but that seems to just turn off any shadow casting. Here is any example of what I mean:

Beauty of two clouds together:
http://www.brianalvarez.tv/afterburn/frame0_beauty.jpg
First cloud render, but no shadows from second (using Visibility to Camera):
http://www.brianalvarez.tv/afterburn/frame0_cloud_005.jpg
Second cloud render, but no shadows from first (using Visibility to Camera):
http://www.brianalvarez.tv/afterburn/frame0_cloud_009.jpg

If you were to comp the 2nd image over the 3rd, you can see the shadowing difference compared to the 1st image. Any ideas on how to solve or a workaround for this? Thanks!

Cryptite
09-12-2010, 02:08 PM
Might I ask what renderer you are using?

toenexx
09-12-2010, 02:29 PM
Might I ask what renderer you are using?

Default Scanline Renderer

dim1984kimo
09-24-2010, 03:53 AM
hello all,

I am trying to render ABF as a single pass, but I noticed there is nothing about ABF in render element.

Fumefx has its own pass such as fumefx smoke and fumefx fire, I am wondering why ABF doesnt have its own pass for output?

Fusionwork velocity and Z-depth is not what I want, however, atmosphere will render FFX and ABF together, too.

So how should I do that could render single ABF pass out, when FFX and ABF integrated.

Thanks!

PexElroy
10-01-2010, 03:59 PM
Allan's first DVD features Afterburn and there is a whole Afterburn Masters collection at cg-academy.com the material is outdated but should give you a clue about how stuff works in AB. Afterburn still rocks!
I concur. These 3 DVDs, by Allan, cover AB real well.

daft-crut
10-27-2010, 08:01 AM
@toenexx:Dunno if you've found a way for the problem , but the way i'll do it is to render both clouds together and then render each cloud with a solid white and black color to use it as matte. hope this help!

Gamble
10-30-2010, 11:21 AM
I got an issue with self shadows in afterburn.. It seems that it wont do self-shadowing with light that has "Ray Traced Shadows" on unless I tick "Atmosphere Shadows" in the light params, but then it takes ages to render. If I switch it to "AB Shadow Map" it will shadow correctly.. anyone have any clue why Ray Tracing doesn't work..?

Glacierise
10-30-2010, 12:14 PM
You should definitely use the AB Shadow map with the atmospheric shadows turned off in the light properties. The AB Shadow Map itself has another shadow type that 's used to cast shadows from geometry.

bariscan90
12-19-2010, 09:27 PM
Hey everyone,how is it going ?

I am really interested and think you guys will be very interested in to how he did this animation using AFTER BURN ??? Take a look;

http://www.vimeo.com/16933853

I mean there is no way he did it using afterburn seriously or did he ?? I can't guess how he did it , any idea from you guys ?? Thank you.



Barış Can Öztürk

http://www.vimeo.com/user849027

XRM
12-20-2010, 05:34 AM
@Baris: Simply the guys are bluffing. There is no way it is done in Afterburn. I sense compositing of Real Footage in it.

BTW< where were you all these day bro? Never saw you online...:)


Cheers!!!:D

Bandu
12-21-2010, 03:00 PM
Hey everyone,how is it going ?

I am really interested and think you guys will be very interested in to how he did this animation using AFTER BURN ??? Take a look;

http://www.vimeo.com/16933853

I mean there is no way he did it using afterburn seriously or did he ?? I can't guess how he did it , any idea from you guys ?? Thank you.



Barış Can Öztürk

http://www.vimeo.com/user849027

it's not Afterburn!
it is real fire compositing.

bariscan90
12-21-2010, 07:35 PM
@Baris: Simply the guys are bluffing. There is no way it is done in Afterburn. I sense compositing of Real Footage in it.

BTW< where were you all these day bro? Never saw you online...:)


Cheers!!!:D

Hi Ron,haven't see you in messenger either :arteest: Whats up man ? :beer:

Yea i think in the same way as you do,it cannot be afterburn he is bluffing i think :argh:

bariscan90
12-21-2010, 07:36 PM
it's not Afterburn!
it is real fire compositing.

Yes,it must be ,dang :argh:

Gamble
12-30-2010, 04:11 PM
Hey guys,

is it possible to render every afterburn event as a separate alpha channel..?

In my scene I got two main particle events - fire and smoke.. They occlude each other during the animation and I wont simply get the same look if I will render them separately.. but I still need the control to individually control things like brightness and glows on each of the event in comp.. cant seem to find an option in render layers to name and render each event separately.. anyone knows way around this???

Synoptic
02-07-2011, 07:08 PM
In my case rendering goes well on one machine, but on the more powerfull machine with the same soft installed the same scene makes 3dsMAX crash while rendering during "preparing atmospherics". If I uncheck atmospherics in the render setup, or if I disable the afterburn in the effects section then render goes without problems. How to cure?
3dsMAX2011 AfterBurn 4.0b

THANKS!

Synoptic
02-08-2011, 07:17 AM
In my case rendering goes well on one machine, but on the more powerful machine with the same soft installed the same scene makes 3dsMAX crash while rendering during "preparing atmospherics". If I uncheck atmospherics in the render setup, or if I disable the afterburn in the effects section then render goes without problems. How to cure?
3dsMAX2011 AfterBurn 4.0b

THANKS!

Ponomarev
02-11-2011, 08:42 AM
In my case rendering goes well on one machine, but on the more powerful machine with the same soft installed the same scene makes 3dsMAX crash while rendering during "preparing atmospherics". If I uncheck atmospherics in the render setup, or if I disable the afterburn in the effects section then render goes without problems. How to cure?
3dsMAX2011 AfterBurn 4.0b

THANKS!
Try to install ServicePack for 3ds max, if you don't have...and what renderer is on? Scanline?

...another problem with AB...
I have the scene with AB volumetrics. Really big area of scene is covered up by clouds. I've rendered 20 frames by machine on my render farm...all lights in my scene using AB Shadow Map in Static mode, but when I've checked final animation.........flicker....shadow flicker in period by 20 frames - this is result (((( Can I bake shadow map or I must increase stepsize settings and Shadow Map res??? At this moment shadow stepsize is 1.0 and shadow map res is 256......

Synoptic
02-11-2011, 04:26 PM
Try to install ServicePack for 3ds max, if you don't have...and what renderer is on? Scanline?

...another problem with AB...
I have the scene with AB volumetrics. Really big area of scene is covered up by clouds. I've rendered 20 frames by machine on my render farm...all lights in my scene using AB Shadow Map in Static mode, but when I've checked final animation.........flicker....shadow flicker in period by 20 frames - this is result (((( Can I bake shadow map or I must increase stepsize settings and Shadow Map res??? At this moment shadow stepsize is 1.0 and shadow map res is 256......

The same question. (^_^)/ What renderer do you use? Do you have GI in your scene?

Btw I'm running V-ray 1.5 SP5.
I have hotfix4 and SP1 installed, but it doesn't matter. I tried to turn off the hyperthreading in the BIOS setup of the problem machine, it helped, but not for a long time. (>_<) Now the rendering doesn't interrupt just after I click render button, but the error messege still emerges from time to time. Windows reboot also helps for a while.

THANKS!

deafduck
02-23-2011, 06:31 PM
I want to use the basic fireball that comes with Afterburn tutorials but at a much larger physical size. Is there a way to scale up the settings so they still look good but covering a much larger area?

I've tried scaling the Afterburn settings up using the Afterburn scale feature but that doesn't work.

I have gotten used to modeling things to real world scale/units and would prefer not to scale my scene down to the size of the Afterburn scene although that may be the way to get what I want.

Finally figured out that I need to be in a different scale.. Meters works well. 1 inch scale doesn't work.

Soledine
03-25-2011, 12:42 PM
Hey dudes!

Got a little problem with Afterburn that i cant seem to fix.

I have a Pcloud emmiter that has the particles coming towards the camera, i did that with the Particle motion option within the Pcloud.
The animation looks good in the workspace and if i render 1 frame at a time i can see the clouds growing.

But when i try to render an animation Afterburn doesnt animate the clouds, the clouds stay static.
Its probably something simple i overlooked but its kinda frustrating :P

Anyone know what i need to do to get Afterburn to render the animation?

metalsonic
04-05-2011, 12:16 AM
Hey guys I'm new here and I have kind of stupid question, I'm using afterburn 4.0 to create a meteorite crashing down to the ground. I have mostly everything done, but I want to add a glow effect to the front and I can't seem to get afterburn glow to work. Can anyone run me through the steps on how to add afterburn glow?

feldy
04-06-2011, 10:20 PM
Do the glow in post. Like in combustion or afterfx or what ever compositing app you like.

J-Bond
06-13-2011, 06:44 PM
Ups double post

J-Bond
06-14-2011, 10:25 PM
My torments with afteburn :wip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnBxCKcjvNk

Sefyu
06-15-2011, 08:50 PM
I'm having this problem with Afterburn Combustion where it refuses to make geometry cast a shadow.

This is the setup: Afterburn Combustion volumetric cloud, Direct Light pointing into the cloud. Geometry in the beam of light.

The problem is that the geometry does not generate a shadow, the lights DOES illuminate the geometry and at the same time passes right through it...

Here is a picture of it: http://www.guthmangroup.com/img/3D/noshadow.png (also in attachment)

Renderer: V-Ray 1.5 (but the same thing happens in scanline (which takes like 10x the time to render the same thing!)
I've tried every shadow type available for the lights, all result in the same...
Using other types of lighting aren't suitable as I need a directional beam, not a spot-type.

Enabling "Compute Advanced Lighting" and "Optimized atmospheric evaluation" didn't do anything.

I've inserted a sphere into the scene make the problem easy to spot.

This is the light setup: http://www.guthmangroup.com/img/3D/lightsetup.png (also in attachment).

Anyone have any clue how I can fix this?

mistermaddog
07-03-2011, 01:37 PM
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/9789/meteor03.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/196/meteor03.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

I'm trying to make a meteor effect but having problems with rendering. If you can give me some tips to make this render better, you'd save my life. I'm explicitly concerned with the weird smoothness and the lines that go around the smoke.

I have one spot light on the scene with shadow map. I'm using Afterburn 4.

kogden
07-03-2011, 02:08 PM
Your Step size in the render panel looks rather large, this would be the cause of the artifacts (the smooth lines), try lowering you step size, this will increase render time, but give a nicer result :)

kogden
07-03-2011, 02:11 PM
I'm having this problem with Afterburn Combustion where it refuses to make geometry cast a shadow.

This is the setup: Afterburn Combustion volumetric cloud, Direct Light pointing into the cloud. Geometry in the beam of light.

The problem is that the geometry does not generate a shadow, the lights DOES illuminate the geometry and at the same time passes right through it...

Here is a picture of it: http://www.guthmangroup.com/img/3D/noshadow.png (also in attachment)

Renderer: V-Ray 1.5 (but the same thing happens in scanline (which takes like 10x the time to render the same thing!)
I've tried every shadow type available for the lights, all result in the same...
Using other types of lighting aren't suitable as I need a directional beam, not a spot-type.

Enabling "Compute Advanced Lighting" and "Optimized atmospheric evaluation" didn't do anything.

I've inserted a sphere into the scene make the problem easy to spot.

This is the light setup: http://www.guthmangroup.com/img/3D/lightsetup.png (also in attachment).

Anyone have any clue how I can fix this?

Maybe make sure your lights have "effect atmospherics" checked on?

mistermaddog
07-03-2011, 07:48 PM
Your Step size in the render panel looks rather large, this would be the cause of the artifacts (the smooth lines), try lowering you step size, this will increase render time, but give a nicer result :)

That fixed it! Thank you, saved my life.

prieMAX
11-21-2011, 05:50 PM
hi,
i have a question, maybe this one somebody already asking before... sorry if repost...

how to set/get afterburn more opacity/less density, if they near/infront camera?
case:
i have thin smoke along the tunnel using pflow with afterburn.., and i have animated camera thru the tunnel, the problem when camera thru the smoke some like blank white covering camera.... if we view rendering like flicker..
so maybe will help if i can set density gradually become lesser if they near camera.

btw anybody have try 'geometry clipping' in afterburn rendering setting? how to make this work, i tried 2-sided material too, but didnt work..

thks.
prie

NahuelL
11-21-2011, 05:55 PM
hi,
i have a question, maybe this one somebody already asking before... sorry if repost...

how to set/get afterburn more opacity/less density, if they near/infront camera?
case:
i have thin smoke along the tunnel using pflow with afterburn.., and i have animated camera thru the tunnel, the problem when camera thru the smoke some like blank white covering camera.... if we view rendering like flicker..
so maybe will help if i can set density gradually become lesser if they near camera.

btw anybody have try 'geometry clipping' in afterburn rendering setting? how to make this work, i tried 2-sided material too, but didnt work..

thks.
prie

Do you have Thinking Particles? If so, I can post a scene later showing how to archieve that effect.

Cheers
Nahuel

prieMAX
11-21-2011, 07:41 PM
Do you have Thinking Particles? If so, I can post a scene later showing how to archieve that effect.

Cheers
Nahuel

so actually its particles side setting? not afterburn setting? can be done with pflow?
can say yes, i have TP.( still learning TP, sometime still thinking like pflow (events base) when using TP (rules base).. hehehehe)

thks

prie.
http://vimeo.com/prihardimansyah

NahuelL
11-21-2011, 11:50 PM
Here is the scene.
So, basically I create some particles inside the Tube. Then in a new Dynamic Set, I do the fade operation, and save that to a data channel (CH0 - Density)
In AfterBurn, you can use that channel in the Sphere Radius (just for visualization, you can adjust the Near & Far values in TP). After you like the fading, you can load it in the Density (setting Low Value to 0, and High Value to 0.5 -for example-). That's it :)

Here are some images (remember to add the geometry -in this case tube- into the Node op of the VolumePos, and also add the Camera into the FadeByCamera Dynamic Set)

http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/9887/ab00r.jpg
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4431/ab01o.jpg
http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/3252/ab02s.jpg

Cheers
Nahuel

prieMAX
11-22-2011, 07:27 AM
thank you very much..Nahuel

Raphtillie
11-25-2011, 08:57 AM
Hi !

Being in my last year in a 3D animation school I have to make a short film about a plane sculpting a woman's head into clouds.
So I intend to make the clouds with Afterburn but I need to have a precise shape with detail ... I have the head's mesh fill up with ParticleFlow on surface but the thing is : in Afterburn I would like to have different sphere size depending on the detail of the mesh. (I need smaller spheres around the eyes, nose, mouth and ears). I tried to animate the sphere size on object distance mode with another mesh -which was just the eyes, nose, mouth and ears areas- but the object distance mode seems to work just with the pivot point and not the shape of the object itself ...

Does anyone already did it ? Any idea ?
It could also be great in PFlow to have more particles in detailed areas and less in others ! I don't know how to do that...

To fill the head I need a lot of particles : around 400,000 ! Is it still a good way to work or should I use a completely different method to fill up a shape with AB ?
Or perhaps I can make this kind of cloud with something else than Afterburn ? Another plugin ?

Thanks a lot for any answer !

3ak
11-25-2011, 05:18 PM
Raphtillie, i think you have several options:
1) use Thinking particles (cebas Visual Technology Inc).
make base head mesh. apply grayscale texture and use this texture to spawn different quantities of particles on the mesh. Create Float channel for this particle group. store size of future afterburn puff per particle and then use it in afterburn via TP Float IC.

2) or you can use pflow (weird way)).
As far as i know afterburn can't use all these user channels (particleVector, matrix etc). all you have access to are pAge, pVelocity, distances and expression.
i'd use particle age to store the size of corresponding afterburn puff (through script operator. And don't forget to set finite age to particles with Delete operator for example) drawback - you will not be able to use age based test and operators (or store age in user channel).
here is example (age used as size):
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4439/abagetosize.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/836/abagetosize.jpg/)


3) some better way=)

Raphtillie
11-28-2011, 02:43 PM
Hi,

Thanks a lot for those ideas ! My school doesn't have any license for Thinking particles ... I don't think they would buy one. So i'm trying the 2nd method !
I'll post some news when i'll manage it !

Thanks again !

gyster
12-09-2011, 04:49 AM
Hi all, I'm a hobbyist, and I've been trying to learn Afterburn following some online tutorials I've found. I'm using 3ds Max with vray 2, and AB4.0. I set up a simple scene with a PF Source, and a standard spot light with shadows turned on (I've tried all shadow types). I also turn on atmospheric shadows. I delete the rotation and shapes elements in particle view, and add an ABPflow element. I add the abpflow and light to AB and leave everything at default. If I render the scene without self shadows on, it renders (but no shadows). If I turn on self shadows, almost everytime, Max crashes to desktop. Sometimes Vray posts an error "...render region xxx...", but the dialog says that although Vray generated the message, it may not be responsible for the error.

My system is dual opteron 6170s on an Asus Kgpe-D16 board, 24g ram, Quadro 2000, an intel 120g ssd for my OS, a hybrid drive where my programs live, and a couple other drives for storage. Oh, and win7 ultimate 64 bit.

I certainly will appreciate if anyone can help me solve this problem.

feldy
02-21-2012, 10:26 PM
So... we just updated all our stuff to max 2012. We have new installers and lic info for both fume and ab. The lic info is all good. Fume will sim and render. Afterburn however I can get into the plugin just fine fiddle with settings and so forth. However It will not render.. it renders to straight black. I have no idea why. Old files from max 2010 don't render even the sample scenes just render to black. Anyone have any ideas? Could it be a DCPFLICS issue? I know the new stuff uses AfterFlics. Both are on my work machine.

PsychoSilence
04-25-2012, 04:45 PM
are you using the new afterflics license server?

feldy
04-26-2012, 03:22 PM
Ya we have all that figured out now... Thanks.

PsychoSilence
04-26-2012, 04:38 PM
AfterBurn 4.1 was released a few days ago which fixes the problem and adds a Max2013 installer! I have to admit that new release totally flew under my radar until yesterday. Updated immediately. You might get an "AfterBurn Glow" loading error for duplicate IDs if you had former AfterBurn builds installed. Just remove the old Afterburn.flt file to fix this.

-Anselm

feldy
04-26-2012, 04:49 PM
Were on 2012 still at work. Hmm I will let IT know to grab it for us. Thanks!