PDA

View Full Version : Real Thick Smoke with fumeFX?


subbz2k
02-13-2007, 12:51 AM
hi guys. i'm using fumefx for just a few days in my company now and it's an amazing plugin. the way of interaction from simulation itself onto particles for example is awesome. but as an old time-to-time afterburn user, i wanna create that real nice smoke puffs, that show the self-illumination quite well. and this is there i stuck in fume, because i dont get the smoke "puffy". the manual isn't talking anything bout it (expect that you need to cast atmospheric shadows in the light also, need to turn on the checkboxes in the smoke-rollout and pushing the shadow-falloff value higher than 1) and from sitni-sati i havent received an answer yet.

thats why i ask you guys: can you tell me, what makes the smoke really looking nice self-shadowing (for example like in the image from Kresimir Tkalcec showing up then you open the help)? would be soo great, if you could help me because time is running out a bit - i cannot wait any longer to get an answer from sitni sati.

thx mates
s2k

Rickmeister
02-14-2007, 11:29 AM
Really good question! I just wanted to start a topic to ask some sort of the same question. For a new plugin there arent a lot of tutorials yet, ofcourse. Though the ones I found where all the same, about a pile of wood putting it on fire.

Anyway, I wanted to create an effect like this:
http://www.afterworks.com/FumeFX/anims/smoke.avi

Heavy smoke/dust kinda thing. All I can get are these little puffs of white air -_-

anybody an idea?

sorry for abusing your topic s2k, though opening a new one for a similar question would be useless...

subbz2k
02-14-2007, 06:50 PM
np rick you dont abuse it ;) we have the same problem - the smoke shown in almost every reel on afterworks is for me not creatable in fumefx. i made every single tutorial provided with it and i watched the provided video tutorials as well but in none of them is described, how the self-shadowing like shown above is actually created. the way described in the help doesnt work either.

so as rick i still hope that someone has unleashed the REAL smoke out of fumefx and is pleased to tell us, how he made it.

big thx in advance

joconnell
02-15-2007, 04:22 PM
Register yourself on the cgfluids.com forums and send your serial number over to the admin rif - it's got a lot of the beta testers that have used fume in film fx and so on - they're really helpful guys and you'll get a quicker response. They're trying to keep the forums for full fume users so it's not visible until you get your serial approved - it's a way of solving only the production problems and not going over the same basic stuff over and over again with demo users - keeps the quality of posts much higher :)

JohnnyRandom
02-15-2007, 05:29 PM
You guys its in the manual, nearly everything you need to know is there. :)

The animation you see on the afterworks site,(the flaming/smoky torus) by the look of it took along time to do the calculation (depending on the machine I would say at least in the region of days, not hours or minutes)

I can offer you some tips but your just going to have to play with the thing.

What type of source are you using? Little puffs sounds like a particle source, either use a different source type or increase the amount of particles.

Try adding a noise map in the sim. smoke to give it some subtle detail.

Use a gradient in the smoke color slot. Read about how it functions.

Increase the opacity of the smoke.

Lowering the spacing in the sim area increases details and increases simulation time.

Lower the advection stride to achieve more "curls"

Turn on cubic interpolation under the sim tab to get better quality smoke.

The higher the buoyancy the more the smoke will rise, the lower the opposite.

Really though read the manual front to back and it will all start to come together;)

The battle lies between quality and simulation time IMO. So have fun and be patient, BTW use a lower quality setting to get the overall feel right, then jack it up when you ready to calculate your final sim. :)

subbz2k
02-16-2007, 08:55 PM
thx for your reply johnny :) thats almost all clear though (i read the manual many times) - except the opacity of the smoke. i was so blind that i thought this is measured in percentage ^^ should i only have opened my eyes for that earlier *gg*

anyway, i've attached an image of my smoke. it's not a big beauty but it is way thicker than normal - the opacity of the smoke is set to 20 in that case. also i added some turbulence with max wind spacewarps. for the maps i havent realized how to use them in the generation coz most of the times i just get a darker smoke then i use a map in there - even if i set the noise size fairly low - it doesnt seem to take an effect for me

MSun
02-17-2007, 05:31 PM
@JohnnyRandom: thx for the pointers, the manual sometimes is not every clear about everything, but i guess the most important thing to learn fumefx is to play with it, adjust the value here, tweak something there see what happens.

btw, i've been trying to achive the result as shown on fumefx website, just can't seem to get the smoke turbulant enough.

subbz2k
02-17-2007, 06:32 PM
well the turbulance should not be the problem. just use some standard max spacewarps for that, fume supports them. i still have to tweak my flame btw. lets see what time will make with it :)

MSun
02-18-2007, 12:16 AM
i'm using a wind, but really that doesn't seem to do me any good, it dosen't spread the smoke out, need bigger turbulance.

gonna go tweak it some more.

xcomb
02-21-2007, 03:16 PM
Do you mean to make something like this?
http://rapidshare.com/files/17570547/HeavySmoke.avi.html

byvfx
02-27-2007, 08:14 AM
heres some test i did alittle while back.


Thick Smoke
(http://www.brandonyoungdesign.com/FumeSmoke.mov)
Fire A (http://www.brandonyoungdesign.com/fume_a.mov)

Fire B (http://www.brandonyoungdesign.com/Fume_B.mov)

jason-slab
02-27-2007, 08:53 AM
sorry wrong post

jason-slab
02-27-2007, 08:55 AM
nice stuff brandon

CGTalk Moderation
02-27-2007, 08:55 AM
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.