PDA

View Full Version : FumeFX


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Steve Green
06-11-2009, 10:39 AM
Hi Hristo,

I've tried both - it doesn't seem to make a massive difference other than one is a lot darker than the other overall.

Here's a zip of the first 15 frames - I was just wondering if there's a way to get it solid from frame 0 (or at least defer any movement so it's got time to build up before it starts to drift)

Thanks,

Steve

joey1
06-11-2009, 02:36 PM
I'm still a little too turbulence happy but I thought I'd post a loop of my progress.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMz9Rp56B5s

After experimenting religiously with the flame on a black background I found that inserting it into a scene is another story. I still have much to learn.

The base of the flame appears to jump or flicker out of sync every few frames. I remember reading about the phenom here and will now begin another search.

Glacierise
06-11-2009, 02:41 PM
Hey Steve - I checked it out, it definitely looks more like add source then a set source, the set one just puts the smoke there, without buildup. Anyway - you can either have some pre-roll, or use the initial state option ;)

Bandu
06-11-2009, 05:39 PM
Hi,

I'm trying to do something fairly simple (just a logo dissolve)

I'm using an object source and ramping up the turbulence/vorticity and taking down the drag.

However I'm still getting a problem where the logo is taking several frames to become dense enough to show up, and by that time it is already starting to disperse.

Any ideas how I can get it to keep the logo solid for a few frames, and then disperse?

Seems like it should be obvious, but I must be missing something...

Thanks,

Steve

and why don't you use initial state?

oh... I see Hristo already told you that
:wavey: Hristo

Steve Green
06-11-2009, 08:25 PM
Hi, thanks

I've never used the initial state before, I'll have to take a look.

Cheers

Steve

Glacierise
06-11-2009, 09:16 PM
Hey Andzhei, drink a beer for me at Gribnitsee :D Cheers!

watti
06-13-2009, 02:50 PM
Is it posible to make a realy nice Sloooow motion exposion? im working on a smal clip, lets say the matrix style. Its a panorama over a street and in the middel it will explode..

Shall i play whit a realy low timescale or?

pooderBeans
06-14-2009, 03:34 AM
Hello,

I started using FumeFX in max 2009. I have 2 Fume emitters and 2 sim areas fume , one for the initial explosion and one for a shock wave. Its all based off the allan mckay advanced fume dvd. The shockwave is being driven by pflow. My problem is that I am able to sim and watch the progress, but when I scrub the time line when it is done, it all disappears. Same thing when I try to render nothing shows up. I dont have this problem with the explosion emitter. So i think it has something to do with pflow or something. Not exactly sure.

I've never had this happen before and I have also never used pflow and fumefx together as well. If anyone can point me in the right direction that would be awesome.

SoLiTuDe
06-14-2009, 03:37 AM
is your start frame on the fume playback settings matching your sim start frame?

pooderBeans
06-14-2009, 03:44 AM
:surprised Wow, I guess I overlooked that one. My start frame was still set at 0, when my play from was at 1000 and play to was at 1100. Thank you very much Solitude for the quick and helpful reply!

grury
06-14-2009, 11:10 AM
Shall i play whit a realy low timescale or?

Thats right.

MartinRomero
06-22-2009, 11:18 PM
Hey guys, hope everyone is blowing stuff and having fun!

I got a quick question and even thought this is a question that won't probably apply to this forum in particular, I wanted to ask it here anyways since it seems that most of us, fx td and animators are located in this forum.

So, here we go, how could I based on the footage from the link below create that particular effect with either fume or afterburn or just with a simple particle emitter.

Have any of you done it in the past? if so, could you share some hints? I kind of have to get this project started so any help would be appreciate it, the characteres, env are 3d, very realistic thought so the effect will have to meet the same quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuV8FfWkpsc&feature=channel

Thanks so much.

ps: I remember seeing the work in the fx challege by David Schoneveld along the same lines.



Thanks again

Martin

Glacierise
06-23-2009, 07:10 AM
Check out this very cool AUDI commercial - it's a Super G slalom down the hills of San Francisco!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUyShZER5AM

So I'd definitely do it with particles and FFX ;)

JohnnyRandom
06-23-2009, 03:57 PM
On the topic of Snow Rallying check out the "Snow Rally" tab on Ken Blocks video page.

NO CG necessary :D

http://video.kenblockracing.com/flash/player/


EDIT: oh the question...
Think cold and somewhat heavy smoke with fume and add some chunkies with a low count fume driven krakatoa pass ;)

Glacierise
06-23-2009, 05:47 PM
That dude with the subaru is way awesome, i wanna learn drive like that.

LD50
06-23-2009, 06:06 PM
Damn i dont even have a driver license :( All the SloMo stuff with the bulbs and water look great.

MartinRomero
06-23-2009, 06:12 PM
Hi there,

Thanks a lot Glacierise and JohnnyRandom, great stuff.

Martin

JohnnyRandom
06-23-2009, 07:33 PM
That dude with the subaru is way awesome, i wanna learn drive like that.

Dudes an insane good driver, he makes a lot of great smoke reference material :D

khorask
06-25-2009, 03:26 PM
Im trying to use fumefx with mentalray and photographic exposure control but loose a majority of the flames detail. Any suggestions on howto use fumefx inside a scene that uses exsposure control ? (trying to use it with daylighting system + exposure control for some effects). Using v1.2 btw.

Thanks.

khorask
06-25-2009, 03:35 PM
Im trying to use fumefx with mentalray and photographic exposure control but loose a majority of the flames detail. Any suggestions on howto use fumefx inside a scene that uses exsposure control ? (trying to use it with daylighting system + exposure control for some effects). Using v1.2 btw.

Thanks.

To anyone curious managed to solve problemm.. seemed my photometric lights were just alot more brighter than the default fumefx flame, so after playing around with the exposure a while longer figured out it was just a matter of decreasing the lights intensity and re balancing the exposure. Perhaps something for someone to look at if anyone has similar problem in future.

SDENPIKE
06-26-2009, 05:12 PM
REEL http://vimeo.com/4325462

Films:

Previz for movie "Red Star", Universal Pictures
Previz for movie "Wanted", Universal Pictures www.wantedmovie.com
Previz for movie "Irony of Destiny-2" www.ironiasudbi.ru
Visual Effects for movie "1612" www.1612film.ru
Visual Effects for movie "Awaiting the Miracle", 21 Century Fox Russia
Visual Effects for movie "Mongol" www.mongol.ctb.ru
Visual Effects for movie "Wanted" Universal Pictures, www.wantedmovie.com
Visual Effects for movie "Inhabited Island" www.oostrov.ru

Awards:

CG Event 2008 - Awarded for Best Dynamic Effects

Software Knowledge:

• Particle fluid dynamic artist
• Non-Organic Modeling, Technical Animation, Shading, Lighting, Rendering,
• Maya, 3DS Max, Houdini, Real Flow, Zbrush
• Renderman, Mental Ray, Final Render, VRay, Mantra;
• Shake, Nuke, D-fusion, After Effects;
• Boujou, PF Track;
• Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, Corel, Freehand;
• Windows, Linux, Mac OS X.

andybyrne462
06-27-2009, 12:57 AM
Hey everybody. So I have run into this before,but not to this extent. Can anyone figure out off the top of their head where this fractal looking interaction with the geo is coming from? I got a pretty fast/hot burning fire. I love the movement of the bulk of the fire, but am just battling with this fractal looking contact.

quality 8
iterations 300
sim steps 3
advect .12
timescale 2.9
vort 1.
turb 1.19 xyz

turb noise
scale 2
detail 5
frames 6

SoLiTuDe
06-27-2009, 01:10 AM
Hey everybody. So I have run into this before,but not to this extent. Can anyone figure out off the top of their head where this fractal looking interaction with the geo is coming from? I got a pretty fast/hot burning fire. I love the movement of the bulk of the fire, but am just battling with this fractal looking contact.


Off the top of my head i'd say the shader...? Check/play with the opacity curves?

andybyrne462
06-27-2009, 01:20 AM
k, yeah ..sim wise it doesn't make sense..just added motion blur..seems to help a lot anyway. I'll keep messing with it.

pauldublin
06-27-2009, 11:42 AM
Hi it could even be something to do with your scene scale

floopyb
07-02-2009, 03:25 AM
Hey guys, I just posted about our latest project, "A Day in Pompeii".
Has heaps of fumeFX in it and i attached some fumeFX vids to check out too!

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=154&t=781293

http://www.zerooneanimation.com/pompeii/Pompeii_004_Small.jpg

JonathanFreisler
07-02-2009, 04:14 AM
Wow nice job man. Should come around one day and check it out at your work instead of going to exhibit lol.

Freaking cool

floopyb
07-02-2009, 05:31 AM
yeah, you should!!... although we had to give back the double projector setup we had, so no stereo unless you go to the exhibit :(

Darknon
07-02-2009, 10:53 AM
I just went to that link and saw all the images, it's really good. I like the 4th one best though, with all the ashes and dust.

is there an animation coming along? :)

floopyb
07-02-2009, 11:48 AM
I just went to that link and saw all the images, it's really good. I like the 4th one best though, with all the ashes and dust.

is there an animation coming along? :)

We finished a 7 minute animation, you can see a little bit of it in the breakdown video. We aren't putting the whole animation on the web at the moment as it was just released at the Melbourne Museum, so people will have to see it there!

BAKMS
07-02-2009, 12:52 PM
question about FumeFX.

When rendering using FumeFX do you use line rendering or MR built into Max?

LD50
07-02-2009, 09:14 PM
You can even render it with vray or final render guess it depends on your task! If you want to use GI you cant stick to the scanline renderer besides of that it delivers good quality renderings.

evanschaible
07-02-2009, 09:35 PM
Thought I would jump in here and plug my new tutorial. :)

A ton of people have asked me to do a tutorial on making a realistic flame, so since the course is on the simple source right now, I thought I would use that as a platform to do that tutorial. It is available in the courseware section.

www.ParticleFlow.net

- Evan

VictorSantos
07-02-2009, 09:40 PM
Hello there!

I just did a shot with FumeFX and Particle flow and I just wanna know you opinion about it, I really aprecciate your critics and suggestions.

thanks!

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=781645 (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=781645)

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/767/thumbxrb.jpg

Darknon
07-03-2009, 09:51 AM
Yo there.

As some might know I'm working on this WW2 movie, called Sitting Ducks.

Anyways. This is what the explosions will look like. Tell me what you think :)

Youtube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3WsBDWXf9k

http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/84/l_46af2e951de1497f8b892ce718cdca38.jpg

VictorSantos
07-03-2009, 10:24 AM
Pretty cool simulation Darknon, I like it :thumbsup:

Cryptite
07-06-2009, 01:46 PM
Looks good, Darknon, but if it indeed is supposed to be a "Beach" explosion, then I would get rid of the huge plumage of smoke after the explosion.

Sand doesn't really give way to much smoke as would a dirt clod. When in doubt, watch Saving Private Ryan :)

Darknon
07-06-2009, 02:04 PM
VictorSantos: Thanks :)

Cryptite: I see what you mean. And I have thought the same thing since the beginning almost. My goal is to make over-the-top hollywood action. I have seen Saving private ryan, more than I want to admit, and it's not really hollywood action, it's realisme. Even though the explosions are real, I do think they're a bit wake. I agree that my explosions are not really sand explosions, but I don't really want them to be. I just want them to be cool, and powerfull :)

andybyrne462
07-07-2009, 07:16 PM
Hey guys I was wondering if someone can explain your fumefx, holdout workflow.

Currently applying a scanline matte/shadow material to geo and rendering with fume on...you get bogus results. With the new mental ray capability you drop a holdout material on your geo and it works great.

I tried rendering out my fume seperate with scanline and then switch to mental ray and render my matte..but doesn't seem to workout.

Am I missing something simple? Hard to believe I've never had to do complex holdouts with fume thinking about it...but this just seems way too hard for what it is.

-also sorry if this has been explained in the past. I did a quick search,but just found parts of an explination

andybyrne462
07-07-2009, 07:27 PM
_ you know totally overthinking it. I just need some holdout mattes...so I can just turn everything black...derhhhhuhh.

Still curious though of anyone else's workflows. I've been messing with Mental Ray last couple weeks. It's working out great

Dreamie
07-08-2009, 04:53 PM
Hey guys I was wondering if someone can explain your fumefx, holdout workflow.

Currently applying a scanline matte/shadow material to geo and rendering with fume on...you get bogus results. With the new mental ray capability you drop a holdout material on your geo and it works great.

I tried rendering out my fume seperate with scanline and then switch to mental ray and render my matte..but doesn't seem to workout.

Am I missing something simple? Hard to believe I've never had to do complex holdouts with fume thinking about it...but this just seems way too hard for what it is.

-also sorry if this has been explained in the past. I did a quick search,but just found parts of an explination

Hi,

My method is the following:

If your fume needs to be holdout on a surface (ie, a ground plane) then you simply apply a matte/shadow material on the surface. You need to make sure to check the "apply atmosphere" checkbox on the material settings, uncheck "opaque alpha" and choose "at Objectdepth" radio button.

When I tried mentalRay I got incredibly slow results so this method works great with the default scanline renderer and it holdsout the alpha perfectly as well.

If you need the fume effect itself to holdback other element in your scene then what I do is set the fume rendering type to channel data and render those holdbacks out seperately (the fire and smoke). Sadly the alpha channel isn't updated and it shows the full alpha from the original sim. Tho with few comp tricks I can live with it.

Hope that helps.

Isaac.

RFX
07-08-2009, 05:23 PM
Here's something (http://rickfx.com/missile_hit_003.mov) I started working on two nights ago at home, did the breaking with rayfire first, and now I'm in the process of creating the explosion, critiques and ideas are always welcome :-D

tool2heal
07-09-2009, 05:13 AM
The impact looks nice, remember if it being ground ie. Earth so I would say maybe go with larger pieces, or at least get some of those pieces that are still stationary to end up angled and such. another thing is that I can see it looks like your using a particle source. I usually have better outcomes with fewer particles (lets say 50-60) with higher radius per particle.
also it seems either your spaceing is somewhat low, or your not using motion blur because i can see some banding in the smoke.
Just some ideas, good job so far.

ishar
07-12-2009, 10:23 PM
Hi all. I'm new to this board but have read lots in the fumefx forum and have seen some really nice fumefx results from those here. I've been researching fumefx for 4 weeks now, not long I know, but at least 100 hours. I'm trying to achieve volcanic, pyroclastic type smoke. If I can do a good enough job with this plugin then the company will buy some licenses, at the moment it's just research.

I've split the scene into 3 separate fume events, an initial blast with fire and smoke channels, initated by a couple of simple sources and some particles.

The main column eruption, just smoke enable, around 9 sources in a barrel type object to build up pressure.

A kind of stratospheric pancake cloud, (at the top of the column) using a particle flow emit from center as a source.


I'll make images available if anyones interested. I think I should be getting a much more pyroclastic feel than I'm achieving at the moment though. Does anyone have any tips on good settings for that thick rolling cloud?

floopyb
07-12-2009, 11:56 PM
Hi all. I'm new to this board but have read lots in the fumefx forum and have seen some really nice fumefx results from those here. I've been researching fumefx for 4 weeks now, not long I know, but at least 100 hours. I'm trying to achieve volcanic, pyroclastic type smoke. If I can do a good enough job with this plugin then the company will buy some licenses, at the moment it's just research.

I've split the scene into 3 separate fume events, an initial blast with fire and smoke channels, initated by a couple of simple sources and some particles.

The main column eruption, just smoke enable, around 9 sources in a barrel type object to build up pressure.

A kind of stratospheric pancake cloud, (at the top of the column) using a particle flow emit from center as a source.


I'll make images available if anyones interested. I think I should be getting a much more pyroclastic feel than I'm achieving at the moment though. Does anyone have any tips on good settings for that thick rolling cloud?

The thing i found with the volcano smoke was getting the advection stride and vorticity settings spot on. They will determine the scale of the detail in the smoke.

ishar
07-13-2009, 12:43 AM
The thing i found with the volcano smoke was getting the advection stride and vorticity settings spot on. They will determine the scale of the detail in the smoke.


Thanks for that, I've seen images from your Pompeii work, excellent. Well I'm still up working at it, this also is a vesuvius eruption. I think fume can do the job but getting it right with my lack of fume experience is hard, but interesting work. However time is now become a factor and I need to start delivering the goods.

For the main eruption at the moment I'm using advection stride 0.6, vorticity of 1 with damping at 0.08. Here are the other settings I've used. I'd really appreciate your or anyones comments, something here may jump out as a big no no.

simming at 0.55 fume box height 310 m length 166m width 199m

quality 6

iterations 300

steps 1

advection stride 0.6

cubic interpolation on

time scale 0.5

gravity 1

buoyancy 1

vorticity 1

velocity damping 0.08

turbulence at 0.8

turb scale 2.0 frames 4 detail 5

ignition temp 100

burn rate 8 variation 0.7

heat production 1400

expansion starts at 6 animated to 2

fuel creates smoke density 20



smoke: diss' min dens 0.01 dis strength 0.3 diff 0.05

temp: diss min temp 0.01 dis strength 0.5 diff 0.01


thanks again for any advice and I'll start looking at the advection stride and vorticity settings.

floopyb
07-13-2009, 01:15 AM
You will need your time scale to be a lot higher to get the right detail in it... but then you may need to slow the rendered frames down in post. Try a time scale of about 3, turn you vorticity down to .5 or .7. You will lose detail with a vorticity of 1.
Personally i have not found any use for turbulence or vorticity dampening in these types of sims, so turn them off. Rely on vorticity and advection stride for getting detail.
For speed you may want to turn off cubic interpolation, put your quality down to 4 or 5 and your steps down to 100 or lower (you shouldnt notice any loss in quality).

If you have turned your time scale up you will need to adjust you r temps/burnrates or buoyancy levels to stop it rising so fast now.

Good luck!

ishar
07-13-2009, 01:39 AM
You will need your time scale to be a lot higher to get the right detail in it... but then you may need to slow the rendered frames down in post. Try a time scale of about 3, turn you vorticity down to .5 or .7. You will lose detail with a vorticity of 1.
Personally i have not found any use for turbulence or vorticity dampening in these types of sims, so turn them off. Rely on vorticity and advection stride for getting detail.
For speed you may want to turn off cubic interpolation, put your quality down to 4 or 5 and your steps down to 100 or lower (you shouldnt notice any loss in quality).

If you have turned your time scale up you will need to adjust you r temps/burnrates or buoyancy levels to stop it rising so fast now.

Good luck!


Thanks vey much, I'll make some renders available soon. When I first saw a couple of renders of yours, the 10 day sim, on youtube, I thought mmm, I need to talk to this guy. thanks again.

ishar
07-13-2009, 02:19 AM
floopyb, did you use set or add for smoke type, or a combination, and did you use things like animated geometry to stir things up or just rely on the sources, sorry to fire all these questions at you. Just another thought, in the you tube 10 day sim it looked like you were using particles,... just wonderin.

ishar
07-13-2009, 06:11 AM
those tips have helped a lot, thanks. I've slowed the rise down by adjusting temps and velocities, I've also added wind with animated decay and the column seems to keep its mushroom shape.

I'll get around to writing an introduction for ya'll soon. I've been working on a virtual building site the last 4 years building all the designs for kings cross station from cad, for export in quest 3d. It's a bit like working on a real building site but you don't get the muscles.

floopyb
07-13-2009, 06:34 AM
floopyb, did you use set or add for smoke type, or a combination, and did you use things like animated geometry to stir things up or just rely on the sources, sorry to fire all these questions at you. Just another thought, in the you tube 10 day sim it looked like you were using particles,... just wonderin.

For the base plume i had an inverted conical hollow in the volcano mesh with a simple source pumping out heat, then a bit later i had some particle emitting smoke. The particles only just made it past the top of the volcano. Then for extra effect i had some clumps of particles shooting from the mouth (they are probably the particles you can see).

ishar
07-14-2009, 10:24 AM
For the base plume i had an inverted conical hollow in the volcano mesh with a simple source pumping out heat, then a bit later i had some particle emitting smoke. The particles only just made it past the top of the volcano. Then for extra effect i had some clumps of particles shooting from the mouth (they are probably the particles you can see).


Hi. Thanks. Well I'd be happy if I could get a similar look to the smoke. I think I'll rebuild my files for the next wave of sims. I tried turning off everything but smoke on all but one emitter which just pumps heat controlled by a waveform controller and I can see what looks more like volcanic activity, so more testing, maybe I'm making it more complicated than it needs to be.

What I like about your Pompeii work is the sense of scale, I've only seen stills but it looks like a big event. As it should.

thanks again for your help.

Dreamie
07-30-2009, 06:53 PM
Hi all,

Please have a look at a desert explosion test I did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LENY7TITxYE

TwiiK
07-30-2009, 07:26 PM
I'm not really too thrilled about the explosion itself, but the whole composition looks stunning. You made that image look like a shot of film.

My gripes with the explosion is that there's no connection between the fast moving blastwave and the slow moving plume of smoke. Also the dust dissapears to fast and the explosion itself is a bit too orange. Some more color variation and an initial flash of light would look good.

The moving birds, haze and clouds look awesome.

fiveoften
07-30-2009, 08:46 PM
hey dreamie

looks very nice.

I have ever problems with the look of the plume.

If you can make a screenshot from your pflow setup? Youtube has a shit qualitiy


thx five

JonathanFreisler
07-30-2009, 11:36 PM
Yeah the comp is nice, but I have a few problems with the explosion.

The initial blast looks really weird, and its hard to tell whats wrong due to speed inconsistency's. And the dust plume disappeared too fast, an explosion like that, all the dust would slowly drift down or linger in the air.

Dreamie
07-31-2009, 07:52 AM
Thanks for all the comments it's pretty helpful. :)

I got other comment in another forum that the plum smoke looks too thick and that after the initial explosion it should blend in the background better by making it softer.

I don't think I agree with this cause according to references I saw an explosion from a bomb like that should cause a thick cloud to rise. It's a pretty thick cloud filled with sand so it shouldn't be so puffy as opposed to smoke from smaller bombs.

JonathanFreisler, After looking at your reel I saw your desert explosions are also quite thick so I'm pretty confident in that look. What will you change in the initial blast? I think the firery blast needs to go.

TwiiK
07-31-2009, 11:52 AM
You ask JonathanFreisler what he thinks should be changed about the initial blast, but if you look at some references I'm sure you can spot some of the problem areas yourself.

People often say they're not going for realistic looking, but instead cool looking explosions and therefore they don't need to look at reference footage of realistic explosions when creating their effects. The problem is that even if you're not going for realistic you still need to take certain elements from realistic explosions to make your end product look like an explosion.

You need to capture the intensity most of all. Remember that 1 second is a long time when dealing with explosions.

Here's some references I have of explosions similar to yours:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwNS7sGW77k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q01e_HQOQFE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFuQpK0ZT7s

As you can see in all those explosions they are very bright and energetic in the beginning and almost look like a bright expanding ball of light in the very first hundred milliseconds.

So I would not remove your fiery blast, but instead make it brighter and more fiery.

And the smoke and dust resides longer as you can see.

Also, if you look at explosions on youtube you'll notice most of them are from sonicbomb.com. That site is my definite reference site for explosions. It has anything you need. It seems to be down right now, I hope that's not permanent. :)

Dreamie
07-31-2009, 12:44 PM
Many thanks!
I did look at references as well, you could say too many references. :P
I understand your point, but in some cases when a bomb hits a desert surface (not a nuclear bomb) then since the sand is so thin and sensitive then you immediately see just long big puffs trails of smoke and then the plume rises. That fire you mention is covered with sand even in that initial millisecond.

I don't mind adding a brighter blazing quick explosion, but I also just had a look at Jonathan's reel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO0mTxMVxSk) and the desert explosions he did there pretty much fits my explosion type. In those explosions you also don't see the fire at all. You think he needs to add it there as well?


You ask JonathanFreisler what he thinks should be changed about the initial blast, but if you look at some references I'm sure you can spot some of the problem areas yourself.

People often say they're not going for realistic looking, but instead cool looking explosions and therefore they don't need to look at reference footage of realistic explosions when creating their effects. The problem is that even if you're not going for realistic you still need to take certain elements from realistic explosions to make your end product look like an explosion.

You need to capture the intensity most of all. Remember that 1 second is a long time when dealing with explosions.

Here's some references I have of explosions similar to yours:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwNS7sGW77k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q01e_HQOQFE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFuQpK0ZT7s

As you can see in all those explosions they are very bright and energetic in the beginning and almost look like a bright expanding ball of light in the very first hundred milliseconds.

So I would not remove your fiery blast, but instead make it brighter and more fiery.

And the smoke and dust resides longer as you can see.

Also, if you look at explosions on youtube you'll notice most of them are from sonicbomb.com. That site is my definite reference site for explosions. It has anything you need. It seems to be down right now, I hope that's not permanent. :)

TwiiK
07-31-2009, 01:44 PM
You do what you like. :)

How much fire you see depends on how deep into the ground the bomb travels before exploding. That's up to you to decide.

No one would ever just drop a bomb on the desert surface like that though so you won't find references for that exact scenario, but you can look at bunker busters and underground explosions like buried IED's etc.

Also, you keep comparing your explosion to the one Jonathan did. I would never use other artists work as reference because they may not even have used real life references in order to create what they did, or maybe they took a lot of shortcuts.

Dreamie
07-31-2009, 02:18 PM
I see your point, I guess I'll still keep the fire and try to enhance it as you suggest. I was just trying to go for the best look for this scenario and I did see some other explosions that were covered only with puffs of sand.
I'm doing some modifications now and will post a preview soon. :)

Thanks again.

JonathanFreisler
07-31-2009, 03:20 PM
Other artists work is never a good point of reference, but i think he was trying to use a point by saying that other artists (me) has a similar look. But he wasn't saying he was using mine as a reference.

My explosion has no fire, because the footages i was referencing, had no fire... simple as that.

The main reference i used was posted by Depleted form the blur challenge, I also used a stack more from youtube, but tried to find similar ones so i wouldn't stray too much. It was a deep charge, so the charge was under the ground and forced upwards through the loose soil on top where the charge was laid, this is why the plume is slow (its a bit too slow, but i think its nice to see it develop. You never see explosions well enough when there super fast eh). And this is also why you don't see any fire. I think if i had to change one thing on the first explosion would be to speed it up... and well, i don't like the second ha ha.

I'm confused, and drifted off topic...

And twiik you know i use reference material :P

Dreamie
07-31-2009, 03:33 PM
Yes I also came to realize my explosion is more an EOD type then one that is coming out of dropped bomb. To be honest it did start without a dropping bomb, then I thought it looks a bit odd so I decided to drop a bomb.. Yes totally wrong approach, you may stab me if you want. :)

*edit* attached pflow setup snapshot as requested.

jimmy4d
08-01-2009, 11:31 AM
Hi all,

Please have a look at a desert explosion test I did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LENY7TITxYE


looks nice,very nice, love the comp....still trying to do that:banghead: I to agree on all said, the fire my just need a bit of shader work.

great work mate

Dreamie
08-01-2009, 12:43 PM
looks nice,very nice, love the comp....still trying to do that:banghead: I to agree on all said, the fire my just need a bit of shader work.

great work mate

Thanks! I'm still tweaking the sim so it's gonna be completely different.. I'll post a preview soon.

*edit*
Here's a fume preview of the fixes I have so far: http://www.sendspace.com/file/ow40zp

khorask
08-02-2009, 02:15 PM
Just a few fume questions..
Im using V1.2

Q1) does it work with DBR (Bucket rendering) ? When I try PC1 renders buckets with the flames and PC2 renders buckets without flames... I get this message in the mental ray window.

LINK 3.n error 191007: cannot load ..\shaders_autoload\shaders/FumeFXmr.dll, The specified module could not be found.
LINK 3.n error 191029: failed to link library on host klap

(klap is the name of PC2)

Q2) are there known bugs getting it to work with backburner ? I rendered a single frame on PC 1 with backburner with no issues but as soon as I split the render between the two PCS (via Common->Net Render->Split Scan Lines), PC1 crashes with a error saying cannot load afterFLICS.ini ?? and PC2 continues to render the job without error. Both PCs have valid licences and render by themselves without error.

All I want to do is a netrender with fume in my scene :( spent the last 10 hours trying :(

Thanks.

khorask
08-02-2009, 03:19 PM
Just a few fume questions..
Im using V1.2

Q2) are there known bugs getting it to work with backburner ? I rendered a single frame on PC 1 with backburner with no issues but as soon as I split the render between the two PCS (via Common->Net Render->Split Scan Lines), PC1 crashes with a error saying cannot load afterFLICS.ini ?? and PC2 continues to render the job without error. Both PCs have valid licences and render by themselves without error.

All I want to do is a netrender with fume in my scene :( spent the last 10 hours trying :(

Thanks.

After searching around for a while found out afterFLICS is the license server used with other Sitni products (not fumefx). I have Sitni Enlight so installed that which installs afterFLICS license manager and gave it my Enlight licence.

Now when trying to render, its not complaining about no ini, but still about no fumefx license.

Problem is, fumefx uses DCPFLICS license manager not afterFLICS and my licence is managed with that app (and works all the time except when I try to do a net render). ??

Maybe that can help someone, help me track down an answer..

thanks...

andybyrne462
08-02-2009, 10:20 PM
Q2) are there known bugs getting it to work with backburner ? I rendered a single frame on PC 1 with backburner with no issues but as soon as I split the render between the two PCS (via Common->Net Render->Split Scan Lines), PC1 crashes with a error saying cannot load afterFLICS.ini ?? and PC2 continues to render the job without error. Both PCs have valid licences and render by themselves without error.

All I want to do is a netrender with fume in my scene :( spent the last 10 hours trying :(

Thanks.

_________
You should make sure you have mental ray render license. 1.2 is compatible with mental ray, but only locally out of the box. You have to purchase mental ray net licenses separately to be able to render on a farm.

Dreamie
08-06-2009, 08:20 PM
Here is the fix I've done for the explosion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOaTVtHq5-Q

I'm still not that happy with it, but I run out of free time for fun..

MiguelPerez
08-06-2009, 08:31 PM
Hey people,

Here's a little test after months of not using fume! It lacks shadows and a more accurate illumination, but it was a quick experiment and I had a laugh with my friend (the actor)!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0OKjT6nZmM

Darknon
08-06-2009, 08:41 PM
Dreamie: God damn. That's a damn sweet explosion that. Well done. Can you give a quick rundown of some of your settings? Damn!

Dreamie
08-07-2009, 10:05 AM
Dreamie: God damn. That's a damn sweet explosion that. Well done. Can you give a quick rundown of some of your settings? Damn!

Hey Ronnie, Glad you liked it. I personally see it as a failure cause I was looking for something more realistic. The fume part is 3 containers, one for the initial shockwave, other for the plume of smoke and the last is for the dust emitting form the impact. I used a variation of particle emitters mainly as well as some simple fume source emitters.

For the actual fume setup itself, I animated the fuel, expansion, buoyancy, time scale, burn rate, dissipation, etc.. As well as different wind element animated.

I attached my pflow setup, fusion and a fume snapshot.

Check my other youtube videos, I put there my previous desert test and it has a small breakdown as well.

fireknght2
08-07-2009, 05:50 PM
Dreamie if that's a failure I can't wait to see what isn't?
I really liked it, and it looked pretty realistic to me. I did enough of blowing stuff up in the Army while in Iraq and not every explosion with sand is the same. You can tweak this and that all day long but if you can get something that shows an explosion and dirt flying everywhere, you pretty much won the battle.
I've come to the conclusion that I can do just about anything I want to create an explosion, but there all different and there is no way I can make one any better than the other. I'm sure that all the FX artist here will support this as we all have had to step back and leave it alone.
If you read the definition of an explosion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosion) you will see that it doesn't say anything about everything being exact all the time. Heck even a Nuclear explosion isn't the same every time.
Basically what I am saying is this...that was not a failure it actually was another type of explosion that has it's use in some SFX presentation. One of the best Allan McKay can tell you that there are many ways to show an explosion, you need to give yourself more credit.
Keep up the great work everyone your keeping the bar high for those of us trying to keep up.

Rich

Dreamie
08-07-2009, 06:32 PM
Thanks! I guess it was pretty harsh calling it "failure". Yes I know an explosion doesn't have it's exact rules and can't be identical every time. It has so many natural and physical variations so each one can look pretty unique. I was trying to explain this couple of pages here in my previous test. I already did my share of reading and looking at references..

But coming back to my last test, the movement of the plume resemble an ink movement more then dissipated smoke. The intense motion blur hides it a bit. The rocks that generate the dust from the impact.. Well.. The dust there is so weak and behaves just bad. I was running out of free time for this so I did it pretty quick. The only reason the shot "sells" is because the camera moves up faster now. That's a flexibility I can have for a private work but not if I'd be working in a serious place. I'm working as an all arounder for 14 years, yet only less then 2 years out of them are in bigger houses when I was able to work in Canada (and those weren't the highest end of the studios out there). In such places I don't think my test has a finish which could be good enough for movie production quality other then looking like a "Cool fumefx test". That was my purpose and in that I think I did fail. Of course from a youtube quality you can't really tell the difference but my higher res isn't that better.

Anyhow, didn't mean to bitch here about it , I'll keep on trying in the near future both in fume and Maya's fluids.


Dreamie if that's a failure I can't wait to see what isn't?
I really liked it, and it looked pretty realistic to me. I did enough of blowing stuff up in the Army while in Iraq and not every explosion with sand is the same. You can tweak this and that all day long but if you can get something that shows an explosion and dirt flying everywhere, you pretty much won the battle.
I've come to the conclusion that I can do just about anything I want to create an explosion, but there all different and there is no way I can make one any better than the other. I'm sure that all the FX artist here will support this as we all have had to step back and leave it alone.
If you read the definition of an explosion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosion) you will see that it doesn't say anything about everything being exact all the time. Heck even a Nuclear explosion isn't the same every time.
Basically what I am saying is this...that was not a failure it actually was another type of explosion that has it's use in some SFX presentation. One of the best Allan McKay can tell you that there are many ways to show an explosion, you need to give yourself more credit.
Keep up the great work everyone your keeping the bar high for those of us trying to keep up.

Rich

JonathanFreisler
08-11-2009, 02:08 AM
Too... many... white papers.... to even comprehend...

The ones on fluid sims had me confused from the get go. I mainly just looked at the pictures ha.

http://kesen.huang.googlepages.com/sig2009.html

beatblack
08-18-2009, 04:03 PM
Hi
I am doing some tests with the velocity channel and particle flow. I am trying to network render after the simulation has been done.
What is the right method for doing this. Where does the velocity channel get saved. I think maybe the render nodes are not seeing that velocity channel information?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks
B

JohnnyRandom
08-18-2009, 04:15 PM
the velocity is stored within each simulation frame just as all of the other attributes are.

Renderfarm sorry don't know, only have two machines, the only thing I ever do is send the whole sim or render off to the machine that isn't busy.

Have you cached your plfow? either within the scene or disk cache? that may help.

beatblack
08-18-2009, 04:47 PM
Thanks, i dont have a render farm either :/ I am doing this on thee machines.
When i render localy it works fine, as soon as i send it to the other machines via backburner it just renders black.... no pflow. Disk cache is partcle flow tools? I dont own that yet.

JohnnyRandom
08-18-2009, 04:54 PM
Yes disk cache is particle flow tools box#3, you can use a standard cache operator too, it will substantially increase your file size depending on flow complexity but it keeps your flow from updating at render time which is what you want.

do you have fume installed on all of your machines? it doesn't need to be registered just installed. Also if you are using mental ray you can only render locally unless you purchase additional render licenses (I think they are like $60 a piece for less than five)

JonathanFreisler
08-18-2009, 11:18 PM
Is the fume sim visable to the other computers on the network? If they cant refrence the .fxd (lets say locally on your main comp its on c:fume) the render comps will be looking in there c:fume

beatblack
08-21-2009, 11:21 AM
HI
Thanks cached particles works like a bomb. You can do some weird stuff with this feature. Just playing around, rendered with vray, + environment fog.http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/2164/testfumey.jpg

Dreamie
08-21-2009, 11:36 AM
Yes disk cache is particle flow tools box#3, you can use a standard cache operator too, it will substantially increase your file size depending on flow complexity but it keeps your flow from updating at render time which is what you want.

do you have fume installed on all of your machines? it doesn't need to be registered just installed. Also if you are using mental ray you can only render locally unless you purchase additional render licenses (I think they are like $60 a piece for less than five)

I assume this method will render out fume sims with less ram being used?
I currently have only 4GB of RAM and was having several issues when my container was at nearly 400-500 res size. Tried rendering with "conserve memory" checked, still the 4gb of ram was used pretty quick and during the end of the render it moved to the HD instead which resulted in a dramatic slowdown..

Darknon
08-21-2009, 12:09 PM
Dreamie (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=32778): Thanks, it just seams that everytime I try to use fume with pflow, the fume gets some wierd shapes. and the difficulty with using a simple source is to get away from that sphere look the explosion gets. I've tried adding a noise map in the fuel channel, but it's still really hard to get a good shape.

Dreamie
08-21-2009, 12:29 PM
Dreamie (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=32778): Thanks, it just seams that everytime I try to use fume with pflow, the fume gets some wierd shapes. and the difficulty with using a simple source is to get away from that sphere look the explosion gets. I've tried adding a noise map in the fuel channel, but it's still really hard to get a good shape.

Yes I hear'ya. What you need to tweak the most in order to avoid getting fume out of particles to look too weird is the radius and it's variation. If it's a puff of dust bigger values and if it's a trail of smoke then test it with smaller values. In some cases the amount of particles can make quite a difference, as well as the resolution of the container.

My main plume of fire is a combination of a simple source and a particle emitter. The particle exist only a few frames cause it's main goal is to establish the initial shape and to pour a lot of fuel to the explosion. Once the fuel burns and expands you don't see any resemble to the particle themselves.

Darknon
08-21-2009, 01:27 PM
dreamie: I'm trying to understand this right.. You use the particles to emit fuel only? And when you turn on the simple source the fuel from the particles will burn? Is that correct? It does sound complecated to actually pull of.. Can you tell something about fuel amount, ignition and temperture, on the source and particles?

Hope I don't ask too much, but I really do love explosions :)

Dreamie
08-21-2009, 02:54 PM
Darkon: No problems, let's see if I can put it out clearer. Take a look at the pflowSetup.gif I attached. The PF_Plume emitter consist two events:
* plumeExplosion - born for 5 frames only with a short lifespan, they rise up quickly.
* plumeShockwave - another short lifespan of particles for the smaller shockwave of the plume. The PF_Plume is a circle emitter and this event speed shoots out fast by the random horizontal in order to achieve the shockwave shape.

The PlumeExplosion event goes to a single particle source which has a radius of 7, it's fuel starts with 100 and goes down to 0 on frame 18. The temperature is also animated, starts with 1400 and goes down to 1200 on framre 10. This works together with animated expansion (starts at 4 and goes down to 3) combined with animated burn rate (starts with 30 and goes up to 40). Ignition is set to 100 and heat production is set to 130.

I figure there're good chances you lost me by now, took me some time to translate the values to real life scenarios as well. But in general, since the particle source starts with a very high temperature then it burns pretty quick. The high expansion combined with the low burn rate makes it all burn fast. I have "fuel create smoke" checked so by the short time it all burns smoke is created out of the dying fire and not by the particles shape themselves. For additional movement, I have buoyancy, time scale and turbulence animated down from slight high values to lower values.

I also have 4 other sources and a wind force hooked to the same plume container. 3 particle sources and 1 simple source. They're not really a must for the explosion effect itself but it's just a matter of experimenting with the result:

1. Particle source for the plumeShockwave pflow event I mentioned earlier. This one has no fuel and emits only smoke.
2. Particle source for the PF_SecFire emitter - Has fuel on, temp' of 1200 and radius of 6. It's job is to add some secondary fire after the plume rises up. You can notice in my pflow setup it's birth is from frame 15 till 18.
3. Particle source for a smoke trail of the debris and rocks flying out after the impact. Radius of 3, no fuel. This source just need to make a smoke trail.
4. A simple cylinder source that has the same animated temperature and fuel animation of the plumeExplosion particle source. Combining this one helped adding more pressure and volume to the overall effect.

So to answer your question directly instead of writing this all up (heh) it's not particle source for fuel only and a simple source to burn them up, but the combination of them all together. You can't make a simple source's fuel to activate another source object within the same container. Each source acts for it's own parameters even if they're in the same container. What helps is that combining them together in the same container builds up pressure and effect the overall temperature which always gives interesting results.

Hope that's clearer now. :-)

Isaac.

Darknon
08-21-2009, 03:43 PM
Yeah thanks. That did help. That's a lot of parameters you have animated. I usually want to keep it as simple as possible and only animates the time scale and fuel, and maybe turbulense. But I guess you have a animates alot more parameteres to get advanced results. I'm just afraid I'll lose the overview :)

I'll definatly come back to your "guide" when I come back to my explosion :)

JohnnyRandom
08-21-2009, 04:12 PM
@ beatblack, cool, thinking out of the box ;)

fireknght2
08-21-2009, 04:41 PM
I've been wondering if a Good size twister(tornado) can be created in Fume?
Some of the Tornado tutorials out there are very small maybe an F-1 or F-2 at best.
I want to create a Gang Buster F-5+ and it seems that Fume may only be capable of creating the amount of turbulence and dust etc associated with a Tornado of that magnitude. Something of this nature maybe even wider:
http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter14/graphics/keller.gif

Any ideas or suggestions? Oh animated too not just a still image.
Thanks for helping me and thanks for sharing all your talents here.

Rich

Dreamie
08-21-2009, 04:58 PM
Darkon, no problems. I don't think it's too complex but I also think you can achieve great results in even much simpler setups. You basically sim it all in lowres and preview the results so it's going pretty fast. Then you just add the elements you think that could aid and keep it previewed in low settings. Sooner or later you end up with a complex looking setup without even meaning it to be that complex.. :)

ddustin
08-22-2009, 07:11 PM
We need to simulate a wind tunnel effect (similar to the one in the FumeFX demo with the lamborgini).

1. We need the smoke to emit from a very small tube .5" (12.7mm).
2. When we try to use a simple source, we cannot get it to emit at any diameter smaller than 6" (152mm), we are using a cylinder.
3. There is wind in the scene.
4. We need the wind to interact with certain objects in the scene, similar to how it would in a wind tunnel.
5. We are using Max 2009 64 bit.

There is proably more information required to get help, so feel free and I can provide anything you need (except details of the product being tested).

Thanks in advance for your help.
David

SoLiTuDe
08-23-2009, 03:20 AM
DDustin: what's your grid spacing size set to? It has to be really clost to .5" (12.7mm) for the voxels to pick up the cylinder -- basically you just need more detail in your simulation.

ddustin
08-24-2009, 01:11 AM
I decreased the spacing and then ran out of memory....

David

SoLiTuDe
08-24-2009, 01:32 AM
Well then you've got two options: make your tube bigger, or get more ram. :)

ddustin
08-24-2009, 11:28 AM
Actually I had set the grid to .1 so I should try to increase it.

David

jimmy4d
08-25-2009, 12:01 PM
I've been wondering if a Good size twister(tornado) can be created in Fume?
Some of the Tornado tutorials out there are very small maybe an F-1 or F-2 at best.
I want to create a Gang Buster F-5+ and it seems that Fume may only be capable of creating the amount of turbulence and dust etc associated with a Tornado of that magnitude. Something of this nature maybe even wider:
http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter14/graphics/keller.gif

Any ideas or suggestions? Oh animated too not just a still image.
Thanks for helping me and thanks for sharing all your talents here.

Rich


hey Richard, take a look at peters old twister tut. (If you havent already)I still refer back to the pflow workflow on this one. I two was going to play around with fume and this tut together, could work well together, at least it would be fun anyhow.
Good luck mate:buttrock:


http://www.computerarts.co.uk/tutorials/premium_content/3d__and__animation/assisted_twister

Dreamie
08-25-2009, 12:50 PM
We need to simulate a wind tunnel effect (similar to the one in the FumeFX demo with the lamborgini).

1. We need the smoke to emit from a very small tube .5" (12.7mm).
2. When we try to use a simple source, we cannot get it to emit at any diameter smaller than 6" (152mm), we are using a cylinder.
3. There is wind in the scene.
4. We need the wind to interact with certain objects in the scene, similar to how it would in a wind tunnel.
5. We are using Max 2009 64 bit.

There is proably more information required to get help, so feel free and I can provide anything you need (except details of the product being tested).

Thanks in advance for your help.
David


I think first of all it's important to know if you need to use it in order to affect scientific results or need it just for visualization.

Another thing, for lower RAM consumption turn off cubic interpolation, keep your quality to about 4 and iterations to 40-50 and fluid mapping turned off. I also believe since it's a wind tunnel you can keep the width of the container very low compared to the length and height.

How much RAM your machine currently have?

fireknght2
08-25-2009, 04:38 PM
hey Richard, take a look at peters old twister tut. (If you havent already)I still refer back to the pflow workflow on this one. I two was going to play around with fume and this tut together, could work well together, at least it would be fun anyhow.
Good luck mate:buttrock:


http://www.computerarts.co.uk/tutorials/premium_content/3d__and__animation/assisted_twister

How stupid could I be? Of course that is the answer, and I have all his books too...hope Petes not hearing this that I forgot to reference his books. It would be amazing to combine some of the techniques Pete uses with fume, I'm envisioning a Fire Tornado!
Thanks for the wakeup call jimmy4d.

Richard

ddustin
08-27-2009, 04:51 PM
How much RAM your machine currently have?

I currently have 8gb but just ordered 32gb, it should be here next week.

As a workaround I increased my virtual memory and also am using a separate drive for the Virtual memory.

David

SoLiTuDe
08-27-2009, 05:09 PM
Ddustin: what is the actual number of voxels, ie: where it says, 300x300x100 ? Spacing of .1 doesn't mean much if the grid isn't very big... also, are you paying attention to the estimated ram usage in fume?

Jake0
08-28-2009, 10:22 PM
hey guys

Is there anyway to get the grid settings from the .fdc or .fxd files? I've just done a lengthy sim and accidently over wrote the .max file with an old one and the gride settings are slightly different can wont play the fume file sequence. Anyway around this?

cheers!

RFX
08-28-2009, 10:23 PM
hey guys

Is there anyway to get the grid settings from the .fdc or .fxd files? I've just done a lengthy sim and accidently over wrote the .max file with an old one and the gride settings are slightly different can wont play the fume file sequence. Anyway around this?

cheers!

You should be able to open a new scene and create a fume box and load the sim by the "saving" File in.

*Points down* er yeah that.

Jake0
08-28-2009, 10:27 PM
ugh ignore that, I was trying the "load inital state" but missed the "match grid in file". My bad!

Sreekant
09-01-2009, 11:47 AM
can anyone suggest me a way to achieve a fire breather effect.I have already posted a test file in a new thread.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=801708
About to burst.Please help.

entrancea
09-02-2009, 06:47 AM
Hey Sreekant.....My advice to you would be that if you plan to do an FX shot then do a bit of preproduction first......Get a can of Body spray and hold a lighter in front of the nozzle and spray the Can....you can get an idea of what the effect is when fire is propelled by fuel....Would have recommend you doing it with putting fuel in your mouth and spraying it but that would be dangerous....so dont try it unless you are sure of what your doing....But you know a can of spray would do fine also......Also if you wanna get more creative then shoot the spray against a green screen and you can use it to layer it over your CG Fire to add in a bit more realistic deatail....

Hope this helps....
Regards,
entrancea

entrancea
09-02-2009, 12:53 PM
Hey Guys.....Sooo...Its been a long time since we all have been playing around with Fume....Now I had a little something in mind and would like to share with you all....I was thinking what if we could just create a simple source fire and try to create a toony shader to it?I don't know if any one has tried it our before but I didn't see much of it happening...So I was thinking that Realisitc motion fire with a toony shade would be really cool...as like it could be a really stylized effect.....So I would ask you guys to make some examples and share it here.....I am also trying it out...lets see who has a better output and maybe we can set that as our benchmark and Rnd more with it.....I'll be pitching something up as soon as I have something.......:D

Cheers Mates,
entrancea

Dreamie
09-02-2009, 07:00 PM
Hey Guys.....Sooo...Its been a long time since we all have been playing around with Fume....Now I had a little something in mind and would like to share with you all....I was thinking what if we could just create a simple source fire and try to create a toony shader to it?I don't know if any one has tried it our before but I didn't see much of it happening...So I was thinking that Realisitc motion fire with a toony shade would be really cool...as like it could be a really stylized effect.....So I would ask you guys to make some examples and share it here.....I am also trying it out...lets see who has a better output and maybe we can set that as our benchmark and Rnd more with it.....I'll be pitching something up as soon as I have something.......:D

Cheers Mates,
entrancea

Heh. I think I have some 5 years old tests with maya particles of toonish smoke using sprites. Having that in fluids could be interesting yet the challenging part is getting the diffuse/highlight/shadow look right instead of just looking flat.

jimmy4d
09-03-2009, 12:02 PM
Hey Guys.....Sooo...Its been a long time since we all have been playing around with Fume....Now I had a little something in mind and would like to share with you all....I was thinking what if we could just create a simple source fire and try to create a toony shader to it?I don't know if any one has tried it our before but I didn't see much of it happening...So I was thinking that Realisitc motion fire with a toony shade would be really cool...as like it could be a really stylized effect.....So I would ask you guys to make some examples and share it here.....I am also trying it out...lets see who has a better output and maybe we can set that as our benchmark and Rnd more with it.....I'll be pitching something up as soon as I have something.......:D

Cheers Mates,
entrancea


HMMMM..............Vray toon shader? I wonder what you could do with that?

Sounds cool as hell mate.

Dreamie
09-03-2009, 03:17 PM
I've a question re the scripts here:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=206&t=603113&page=1&pp=15

Hopefully Allan could reply or anyone else who has been using this..

PFFX_pflow_script_GenOBJ.ms - This is used to place a dummy obj on impact areas (for airstrike effects type)

PFFX_ScriptGUI_v01.2.ms - Then this one is placing a fumefx container on each of the dummys objects created by the previous script.

Question is, if I'm not wrong it's basically placing the same selected container across the dummy objects. What if I want to make a bank of few containers and have the script place them randomly? I'm pretty sure it requires modifying the script..

If Allan is reading this then huge thanks for these tools. :-)

ChrisBore
09-04-2009, 07:43 AM
You'd have to add a random number generator variable (in the i loop), the limits would be the number of different files, then in the part where the filename is called you'd need to append the random number to the file string, so every time you cycle through the for i loop, you should get a different random number, and a different container.

Chris

Dreamie
09-04-2009, 08:01 AM
ChrisBore, many thanks!

If it's not too difficult for you could you post it here?
I'm not that fluent in maxscript so I'm sure I'd get issues with the syntax.

The looping part is this:

(
fn GenFFX_1 Container_Path LightList = -- brings in container file and assigns lights
(
slidertime = animationrange.end
ExploGRP = #() -- create empty array
ExploGRP = $dummyPos* as array

for i = 1 to ExploGRP.count do
(
-- collect data
Exp_frame_Num = (substring ExploGRP[i].name 10 2) -- frame number (10f)

-- bring in container
mergemaxfile Container_Path -- merges the file
foo = $fumefx01
foo.name = ("FumeFX_" + ((exp_frame_Num) as string))
foo.offset = (exp_frame_num as integer)
foo.position = ExploGRP[i].position
)

FumeLightGrp = #()
FumeLightGrp[1] = LightList

FumeGRP = #()
FumeGRP = $FumeFX_* as array
for i = 1 to FumeGRP.count do
(
FumeGrp[i].lights = FumeLightGrp
)
)
-- -- -- --
GenFFX_1 "C:/ffx/explo01.max" ChooseLights.object -- function to execute
-- -- -- --
)

Dreamie
09-04-2009, 09:18 AM
Entrancea, here is a quick 2d test. Yes you were talking about fire and not smoke but I preferred taking something I already have that looks good in its shape and just change its render shading so that I could do it in a few mins. I'll try a 2d fire too soon. :-)

I had to modify it a bit in photoshop too. Comp work is always a better solution. :)

ChrisBore
09-04-2009, 09:51 AM
Hey Dreamie.

I have had a butchers at this, it works in the tiny amount of testing I have done on it.

I have added the lines in the code below
(
fn GenFFX_1 Container_Path LightList = -- brings in container file and assigns lights
(
slidertime = animationrange.end
ExploGRP = #() -- create empty array
ExploGRP = $dummyPos* as array

for i = 1 to ExploGRP.count do
(
-- collect data
Exp_frame_Num = (substring ExploGRP[i].name 10 2) -- frame number (10f)

-- Random Number Generator - Added by CB

Number_of_files = 5 -- Change this to account for the maximum number of files
MySeed = 12443 -- Change this value to change the random seed
RandSeed = seed (MySeed * i)
myRand = random 1 Number_of_files

-- Modify container_Path variable Added by CB

Container_Path = "C:/ffx/explo" +((myRand) as string )+".max"

-- bring in container
mergemaxfile Container_Path -- merges the file
foo = $fumefx01
foo.name = ("FumeFX_" + ((exp_frame_Num) as string))
foo.offset = (exp_frame_num as integer)
foo.position = ExploGRP[i].position
)

FumeLightGrp = #()
FumeLightGrp[1] = LightList

FumeGRP = #()
FumeGRP = $FumeFX_* as array
for i = 1 to FumeGRP.count do
(
FumeGrp[i].lights = FumeLightGrp
)
)
-- -- -- --
--- Modified by CB
GenFFX_1 Container_Path ChooseLights.object -- function to execute
-- -- -- --
)

like I said its worked in a few small tests, let me know how i works for you.

Chris

Dreamie
09-04-2009, 10:44 AM
ChrisBore, Thanks a lot! I'll give it a try. :)

pauldublin
09-04-2009, 02:18 PM
Hi Dreamie,

I saw your Fume Explosion test, very nicely done. I was wondering could you help me out with something? Sorry If I'm posting this in the wrong section guys, but I asked in another place but didn't get much help.

I'm having trouble with camera mapping in Max. I've read a good bit about this but can't seem to get it working.
It's a really basic scene with just a large flat ground plane and bg plane for the sky and a camera, but it just will not work!

Here's the steps I'm doing:

apply camera map per pixel to diffuse slot of material

In the shader parameters, specify the camera and texture to be used

apply this material to my 2 pieces of geometry

clone the camera and use this camera to render

But when I render, the image appears on the geometry no problem, it just doesn't 'follow' the camera movement...the camera is tracked too if that's any help letting you know.

Hopefully you or someone can help me here

thanks,

Paul

PS. I'll post up my shot when done, it's an explosion, I think the Fume stuff is ok, just this is holding me back!

Dreamie
09-04-2009, 03:31 PM
pauldublin, Thanks! I"m not sure I understand what's causing the issue in your scene, would be easier if you could post a test scene. Also check this tutorial (http://www.cgarchitect.com/resources/tutorials/misc/tutorial2.asp)and see if you're still having issues with it. Good luck!

pauldublin
09-04-2009, 04:01 PM
Cheers man, I've had a look at that before Yigit pointed me to it, but still weird things happening

I'll try post a file later on when I get home...cheers

entrancea
09-05-2009, 10:29 AM
Hey Dreamie....Nice one.....I am trying one to get it look even more 2D..yeah ur right....comp work is always a big preference and alot can be achieved in comp too.....so it all about getting the right passes and the right shaders......

Lemme see what I can come up with...

Cheers,
entrancea

Dreamie
09-05-2009, 10:40 AM
Hey Dreamie....Nice one.....I am trying one to get it look even more 2D..yeah ur right....comp work is always a big preference and alot can be achieved in comp too.....so it all about getting the right passes and the right shaders......

Lemme see what I can come up with...

Cheers,
entrancea

Thanks, actually I think my approach wasn't the best one for this look. I was trying to get the rendering shading of fume to look 2d and then cranked it a bit in comp. Only problem with this approach is that if the source image is nearly 2d then it doesn't leave much control and freedom in comp. I think it'll be much better if the shading in fume isn't 2d at all, yet you need to make sure the outer area and the inner areas of the flames or the smoke plume are completely different, say red/blue. Then all the fun part will be in comp and it will be much more flexible and easier to get interesting results. Looking forward to try it soon myself. :)

wreath
09-06-2009, 12:10 AM
Cheers man, I've had a look at that before Yigit pointed me to it, but still weird things happening

I'll try post a file later on when I get home...cheers


Well i have made a sample scene for projection, it's definitely not the right place but it's not something like a tutorial to post on an individual topic, might be useful for others who trying that kind of thing on their fx stuff :twisted:
http://yeatvfx.com/stuff/stuff.html
cheers :beer:

entrancea
09-06-2009, 09:43 AM
Hey Dreamie....Well I finally cooked up something....not very satisfied with what I have but its a start atleast....here you go....

Cheers,
entrancea

entrancea
09-06-2009, 09:44 AM
Wreath.....Dude thanks a lot.....really interesting to see this process.....Very Nice...

Dreamie
09-06-2009, 10:23 AM
Wreath, That's a great scene and a very good background image for camera mapping. Thanks for sharing. How come your camera moves in a noisy way while there isn't any noise controller in its transform? It only has two simple keyframes so it's not in the animation too. That same tut we both gave to pauldublin also has a scene file so I thought this entire process is pretty self explanatory.

entrancea, Looks interesting. I can see why you're not very satisfied with it. It's flat alright but not exactly in a toonish way. The fire has a smooth gradient from yellow to red and we want to avoid such gradients. The smoke would look more toonish if all of it will have a single color and its outer shape will have the outline\shadow darker color. Right now some of the smoke is white and some of it grades to black.

entrancea
09-06-2009, 01:30 PM
Dreamie:You are absolutely right my man......I have to get it to look more toony.....

Well Wreath.....Hope you dont mind cause I used your plate to do a lil FX Explosion....This is my first test against a live action plate......:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIqs6rQTU_Y

Cheers Guys,
entrancea

dementol
09-06-2009, 03:17 PM
Well i have made a sample scene for projection, it's definitely not the right place but it's not something like a tutorial to post on an individual topic, might be useful for others who trying that kind of thing on their fx stuff :twisted:
http://yeatvfx.com/stuff/stuff.html
cheers :beer:

Hey yigit, i have a question for you. What tecnique do u use to animate cameras??? can u explain it??

wreath
09-06-2009, 10:04 PM
Wreath, That's a great scene and a very good background image for camera mapping. Thanks for sharing. How come your camera moves in a noisy way while there isn't any noise controller in its transform? It only has two simple keyframes so it's not in the animation too. That same tut we both gave to pauldublin also has a scene file so I thought this entire process is pretty self explanatory.


Hey yigit, i have a question for you. What tecnique do u use to animate cameras??? can u explain it??

Pretty simple, animated cam. linked to the point helper that has a smooth rotation noise controller.



Well Wreath.....Hope you dont mind cause I used your plate to do a lil FX Explosion....This is my first test against a live action plate......:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIqs6rQTU_Y

Cheers Guys,
entrancea


Thats the point man, no problem. :thumbsup:

3DMadness
09-06-2009, 11:39 PM
Dreamie:You are absolutely right my man......I have to get it to look more toony.....

Well Wreath.....Hope you dont mind cause I used your plate to do a lil FX Explosion....This is my first test against a live action plate......:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIqs6rQTU_Y

Cheers Guys,
entrancea
Looks really nice, how is your spacing? I'm begining at fume and sometimes is hard to get thoes small details, do you have some tips?

entrancea
09-07-2009, 05:04 AM
@Wreath: He he.....Sure man....Thanks:beer:

@3DMadness:Hey man....thanks....well the grid settings are around 300X300X600 approx......to get finer details you have to play with the turbulance a bit......Regarding the fact that how much of turbulance effects the sim in what amount time..In a way Turbulance strength is inversly proportional to turbulance time:thumbsup:......Thats a way to get smaller details...but as ofcourse the higher the Sim Res the more details it has....

Hope this helps....
Cheers,
entrancea

pauldublin
09-07-2009, 09:09 AM
Hi Yigit,

Thanks a mill for doing that camera projection scene very kind of you for your time and effort.

I figured out what I was doing wrong, I had the texture in the environment map (for what reason I don't know!) and was copying this into the camera map per pixel texture slot, which of course was copying in as an environment map instead of a texture map. Silly silly mistake by me.
But again thank you for the scene it has really cleared this method up for me.

Cheers!!!

jimmy4d
09-07-2009, 11:50 AM
Yigit.........................dude thanks for the test scene and backplate mate. you rock man. Yeah i still am having problems with this and now I too see what I was doing wrong......(Big dummy).


well I gotta get blowing crap up.....thanks again man:buttrock:

LD50
09-07-2009, 12:01 PM
Yeah Yigit, a big thanks for the scene! But i still wait for a whole explosion example scene ;)
Just joking keep up your great work.

greetz

wreath
09-08-2009, 01:42 AM
Cheers guys !
:beer:

Dreamie
09-08-2009, 08:25 AM
wreath: Can't believe I missed that helper. heh. I was inspecting the camera instead of just pressing H. I usually prefer to do the trick of using a list controller on the cam itself and keep one position XYZ for motion and one noise for the shake. That and a multiplier curve on the noise just in order to activate the noise gradually where needed. But as in many things in 3d it's not a must and one thing can be done in so many ways.

BTW is your bg image royaltee free? Where did you find it? I did quite a lot of searching when I was doing desert explosions and it wasn't that easy finding something suitable.

3DMadness
09-08-2009, 05:55 PM
@3DMadness:Hey man....thanks....well the grid settings are around 300X300X600 approx......to get finer details you have to play with the turbulance a bit......Regarding the fact that how much of turbulance effects the sim in what amount time..In a way Turbulance strength is inversly proportional to turbulance time:thumbsup:......Thats a way to get smaller details...but as ofcourse the higher the Sim Res the more details it has....

Hope this helps....
Cheers,
entrancea
Hey entrancea, thanks for your tips. I was expecting this, do you make tests with the grid on this size? Sometimes it seems too slow to make adjustments when the gride size is big.

For the people who asked for a scene, this tutorial was a good starting point for me, the scene is included with the file: http://www.community.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46:fumefxexplosion&catid=34:fume-fx&Itemid=50

wreath
09-08-2009, 11:32 PM
wreath: Can't believe I missed that helper. heh. I was inspecting the camera instead of just pressing H. I usually prefer to do the trick of using a list controller on the cam itself and keep one position XYZ for motion and one noise for the shake. That and a multiplier curve on the noise just in order to activate the noise gradually where needed. But as in many things in 3d it's not a must and one thing can be done in so many ways.

BTW is your bg image royaltee free? Where did you find it? I did quite a lot of searching when I was doing desert explosions and it wasn't that easy finding something suitable.

Yeah sure, i did some matte paint stuff on that one so feel free to use.

entrancea
09-09-2009, 12:17 PM
Hey entrancea, thanks for your tips. I was expecting this, do you make tests with the grid on this size? Sometimes it seems too slow to make adjustments when the gride size is big.

For the people who asked for a scene, this tutorial was a good starting point for me, the scene is included with the file: http://www.community.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46:fumefxexplosion&catid=34:fume-fx&Itemid=50

:D...Hey man.....well it depends...I generally do my testings on an approx. size of 100 grid size....and when I get my basics right I set it of to a high res sim.....I try to get everything done before the high sim otherwise it will be a waste of precious simming time.....And as for FumeFX Basics to start with check this site out.....sabandija and myself maintain this site.....

http://fumefx.org/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=12

And if you find these helpful do become members of this site....:buttrock:

Cheers guys,
entrancea

ThallDesign
09-09-2009, 01:15 PM
I generally do my testings on an approx. size of 100 grid size....and when I get my basics right I set it of to a high res sim

So do you simply lower your spacing when testing, and raise it when you do your hero sim? Or do you create an entirely new fume container and import your settings from the test version?

I just didn't understand the part where you said you set it to a high res sim.

entrancea
09-09-2009, 01:36 PM
So do you simply lower your spacing when testing, and raise it when you do your hero sim? Or do you create an entirely new fume container and import your settings from the test version?

I just didn't understand the part where you said you set it to a high res sim.

Well what I meant to say was that I do my tests on low Resolution and then increase my resolution for the Final sim......

ThallDesign
09-09-2009, 01:39 PM
Well what I meant to say was that I do my tests on low Resolution and then increase my resolution for the Final sim......

So you'd render a 360x240 sequence, see how it looks, and if you like it, do the 1920x1080 version? This way I could leave my spacing relatively small the entire time?

My biggest issue is how different the sims look when I change the spacing in between my tests and final render.

entrancea
09-09-2009, 04:08 PM
So you'd render a 360x240 sequence, see how it looks, and if you like it, do the 1920x1080 version? This way I could leave my spacing relatively small the entire time?

My biggest issue is how different the sims look when I change the spacing in between my tests and final render.

Ummm not quiet what I had in mind....my bad....I should have been a lil more clearer man....

Well what I am saying is no matter what video resolution I render it in....In FumeFX I do my testings at a lower resolution and when I am satisfied with my Fume I crank up the resolution of the FFX Grid upto a higher resolution say my tests are done at an FFX Resolution of 150X150X150 and then when I see that the results are coming towards what I have in mind I increase the resolution of my FFX to something around 300X300X300 upto as much as my machine can handle so that I get a lot more detail in my simulation.


At the end its the amount of detail that you put into your FX which you get by cranking up the FFX Resolution and then its upto you whether you want to render it in 320X240 or 1920X1080......The resolution I am telking about is of FFX's Rexolution and not the Video Resolution.....

But at the end of the day if you are rendering something less than .7K resolution(eg.720X405) then you really dont need to put in a lot of detail into your sims as it would mean usage of more time than what is required for that particular shot.....but if you are aiming to do a 1K resolution render(eg.1920X1080) then obviously you have to increase your FFX Resolution to get more amount of detail.....

Also if you have a low video resolution render then you could always reduce your FFX Resolution to do a low to mid level sim to save you time and use fluid mapping and procedural maps to get details into that particular simulation.....So there are lots of ways to work around to achieve your FX output....its just matters what you want lower sim times for smaller video resolutions with fluid mapping or do a high resolution Simulation for a higher video resolution which will take a lot more time and may or maynot use Fluid mapping with the choice completely depending on you.....


Cause a FumeFX Grid Resolution is just like a Video Resolution.....what a 1920X1080 video resolution render will give you will be far more sharper and crisp compared to a 320X240 render which will seem like its pixelating.....In case of Video Resolution we call them pixels which are represented in 2D where as in FumeFX we refer to them as Voxels which are nothing but 3D pixels....


I would say a good start on Fume is to go to Allan Mckays site and getting the introduction to Fume basics videos.....lots and lots of vital informations are there.....Very helpful to anyone who wants to start off with some kickass Fume Stuff.......

Well I hope I made myself clear....Any doubts please let me know.....haven't written this long a post is quiet a while:p

Cheers man,
entrancea

JohnnyRandom
09-09-2009, 04:19 PM
So you'd render a 360x240 sequence, see how it looks, and if you like it, do the 1920x1080 version? This way I could leave my spacing relatively small the entire time?

My biggest issue is how different the sims look when I change the spacing in between my tests and final render.

Spacing has nothing to do with render size (not directly anyway). Spacing is completely dependent upon the FumeFX Grid object. Simply stated if your grid is 100 units wide, 100 units deep, and 100 units high, with a spacing of 1.0, your grid object is divided into 1,000,000 separate cubes and these are called voxels. The voxel size can be visualized either by the small cube in the lower corner of the grid OR by turning on the "Show Slice + Grid" in the FumeFX Grid object's modify panel.

The more voxels in your grid the greater the detail (as well as the more memory/horsepower you are going to need to simulate)

You should retain the closest possible spacing as you can to your final render. The only time you should ever build up a simulation with lower spacing than your render is to get the very most basics of movement. Your simulation can change drastically with every change of any of the grid proportions.

Dreamie
09-09-2009, 04:33 PM
One thing worth adding is that of course higher res values will never behave the same as lower values. So it's a matter of starting with approx 100 grid size values then at mid stage of adjusting anything between 150-200, then lastly for good quality and higher render res output it should be between 350 to 500. (depends if you have enough RAM).

Still even those mid values will be different then the higher ones so it's always a matter of guessing and seeing if you like the results. And yes, sometimes you do need to resim for fixes in high res values even quite a few times just to make sure everything is spot on.

ThallDesign
09-10-2009, 08:24 AM
In case of Video Resolution we call them pixels which are represented in 2D where as in FumeFX we refer to them as Voxels which are nothing but 3D pixels....

Well I hope I made myself clear....Any doubts please let me know.....haven't written this long a post is quiet a while:p


entrancea, sorry for not being clearer about it earlier, you're dealing with a major beginner haha. I've got a core i7 with 12GB of Ram, so I'm not hurting for resources, but it's nice to know a bit more about what's happening under the hood. Right now I can only learn as fast as I can sim, then compare it to my previous iteration, so every second I can save helps. Thanks for taking the time to type all that up, I really appreciate it.



The voxel size can be visualized either by the small cube in the lower corner of the grid OR by turning on the "Show Slice + Grid" in the FumeFX Grid object's modify panel.


HUUUUGE tip, I can't believe I didn't make that connection before. I wish I had FumeFX at work but I've got to wait until I get home to play.

th3ta
09-11-2009, 06:04 PM
How does Network simulation work?

Are you supposed to just press the Backburner button, and then press "Start Simulation" and it will let you choose which machine you want to simulate to?
Because When I press the simulate button with the backburner button depressed, it just simulates locally like normal.

Documentation on this is non-existent with the included help file.

Rafa-el
09-13-2009, 03:42 AM
Is it possible to set the amount of time a fume voxel will live? ive set an animation with a spline releasing particles and set them to die after 3 frames but the smoke on fume stays till the end of the simulation. and can i do that without using pflow?

Glacierise
09-13-2009, 08:43 AM
@theta waves: What you do is: enable the backburner mode, then set the render range to a single frame, disable saving of the rendered frame, then submit a network render. Then you can choose a machine from the backburner submission dialog.

@rafa-el - the best way is to have a source that sets 0 fuel, 0 smoke and 0 temperature for the voxel, so the adaptive grid can cut it out. I haven't done that with particles. If you need to do that with particles, you'll need to increase their size a lot at the end, since the smoke will dissipate. I'd try with a simple source, if possible.

Rafa-el
09-13-2009, 06:20 PM
@theta waves: What you do is: enable the backburner mode, then set the render range to a single frame, disable saving of the rendered frame, then submit a network render. Then you can choose a machine from the backburner submission dialog.

@rafa-el - the best way is to have a source that sets 0 fuel, 0 smoke and 0 temperature for the voxel, so the adaptive grid can cut it out. I haven't done that with particles. If you need to do that with particles, you'll need to increase their size a lot at the end, since the smoke will dissipate. I'd try with a simple source, if possible.

Cant test this right now but i dont think that will work if i intende to keep a constant stream of smoke emiting from an object and then have the smoke dieing 10 frames after it is born for lets say 200 frames, will it?

thanks in advance. :beer:

Glacierise
09-13-2009, 07:10 PM
The thing is, after you emit the smoke, it moves through the grid, so it doesn't know which particle emitted it or when... So It won't work precisely as you describe it, but you could manage to pull something that effectively looks the same.

JohnnyRandom
09-13-2009, 07:23 PM
You can kill your smoke by raising the smoke dissipation parameter, if I understand you correctly.

Rafa-el
09-13-2009, 09:04 PM
You can kill your smoke by raising the smoke dissipation parameter, if I understand you correctly.

I believe thats just what i want! i need the smoke to dissipate after just a few frames, so yeah! i'll try it later

StevieMac
09-14-2009, 10:06 AM
Hey guys. A problem I always seem to run into......

You create a FumeFX plume/explosion & use PFlow for the debris.
When you come to render the passes whats the best way to get it all to work back in comp?

If you render both the FumeFX & PFlow Debris separate you can't get the Debris to be behind & in front of the Fume cloud.
If you render it all together you won't be able to change stuff in the comp as easily.
The FumeFX takes a while to render & you want image motion blur on it but with the Debris you want Object motion blur.
So on a single machine any tips on whats the best way to render all this?



Thanks

floopyb
09-14-2009, 10:17 AM
The way to do this is to render a particle pass with no fume and fume pass with the particles in there but as matte objects. Do this by applying a matte/shadow material if using scanline (dont forget to apply atmophere at object depth) or by setting the vray object properties if using vray.

ThallDesign
09-14-2009, 10:29 AM
The way to do this is to render a particle pass with no fume and fume pass with the particles in there but as matte objects. Do this by applying a matte/shadow material if using scanline (dont forget to apply atmophere at object depth) or by setting the vray object properties if using vray.

If you're using VRay remember that to get your matte objects working correctly always set them a matte objects from the Render dialog (Under Settings::System tab). you check the Matte Object box, and set it's alpha value to -1. You can also selectively disable motion blur here too. Simply uncheck "Use default moblur" box, and change the value to 1. There's a VRayMtlWrapper that supposedly does matte objects but I've never been able to get it to work, I just use the Object Settings dialog box.

http://www.spot3d.com/vray/help/150R1/global_settings.htm

There's a writeup on it.

Glacierise
09-14-2009, 11:11 AM
Yeah I almost always put the FFX pass on top, with all else matte objects, and I use camera motion blur, no problem with FFX since it renders fast. Its tricky with Krakatoa, of course, but you can push your way through :) Also, the vraymtlwrapper does work, I remember I have used that too, but most often I use the obj property.

StevieMac
09-14-2009, 08:09 PM
Ok thanks guys I didn't use Matte material for the debris since the PFlow was really slow rendering maybe if I had box tools 3. images/icons/icon10.gif

I'll go the matte material route in future then.


Thanks again.

Bandu
09-14-2009, 11:18 PM
Ok thanks guys I didn't use Matte material for the debris since the PFlow was really slow rendering maybe if I had box tools 3. images/icons/icon10.gif

I'll go the matte material route in future then.


Thanks again.

BOX3 does not make your rendering quicker!

StevieMac
09-15-2009, 10:55 AM
No but I thought it could greatly increase the cache load time in PFlow, making your render quicker.

JohnnyRandom
09-15-2009, 03:49 PM
No but I thought it could greatly increase the cache load time in PFlow, making your render quicker.

One acronym PRT ;) Strictly for point-based/voxel of course :)

tool2heal
09-15-2009, 10:05 PM
im testing out rendering with mental ray and the physical sun and sky, how would i go about getting fume to cast shadows since i cant chose atmospheric shadows in the sun shadow settings, I've tried putting an extra direct light in there just for shadows but thats not working either. everything looks fine im just not getting any atmospheric shadows...

If anyone can point me the right direction that would be great.
thanks.

Glacierise
09-15-2009, 10:26 PM
Choose 'segmented shadows' as the shadow type? Its in the renderer settings.

StevieMac
09-15-2009, 10:27 PM
Try turning off the skylight & leave the sun light on.
You are rendering using Scanline renderer right?

tool2heal
09-16-2009, 12:13 AM
nope, rendering using mental ray.
segmented shadows didnt work either?
im also haveing some goofy problem with the horizon/ground line.
I watched a video on youtube useing mental ray but i have yet to get reasonable results with it, maybe i should just stick with finalrender and its environment maps?

heres the really simple test scene if anyone wants a go with it.
i read somewhere that scene scale in the exposure control needs to be set to 80000 so i did so and atleast now the fire shows up correctly.

http://rapidshare.com/files/280650252/mentalray_testing01.max.html (http://rapidshare.com/files/280645683/mentalray_testing01.max.html)

thanks for any help, we really need to figure this whole mental ray thing out..

and heres the youtube video previously mentioned if anyone wants a look.

EDIT: alright i got the shadows working with the segmented type, but im still haveing issues where when fume reaches the horizon line it completely changes opacity, where is all the detailed self shadowing you get so easily with every other render?
why is it so diffucult to get any fume/mental ray renders to look good?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSU3wg2zHrM

JohnnyRandom
09-16-2009, 01:08 AM
maybe i should just stick with finalrender and its environment maps?


Why even mess with mental ray if you have fR? I see the mental ray ability just because it is included with max, I haven't personally seen any production quality renders with it (yet), you need extra licenses to render over network, fR has has a barrage of production testing with Fume...:shrug:

jlelievre
09-16-2009, 07:48 PM
Does anyone know of a way to feed a specific event from Pflow into FumeFX?

ChrisBore
09-16-2009, 07:57 PM
You need afterburn (I think), then you just stick a PF-AB node in the event you want to send to fume, then when you have your particle source you select the PF-AB node instead of the Pf Source.

Chris

jlelievre
09-16-2009, 08:03 PM
Awesome! I haven't used AB for a while now so I'll install it for Max2009 and give it a go; thanks Chris!

ChrisBore
09-16-2009, 08:09 PM
No worries buddy!! I can't quite understand why it isn't included in fume! would come in very handy for those who don't have both plugs.

Chris

amckay
09-16-2009, 11:40 PM
Yeah its really odd, it wasn't documented at all it's just one of those things you try out of desperation and realize wow it works.

Rafa-el
09-17-2009, 03:56 PM
How would you do a sun using fumefx? is it possible? because everytime i try the fire just goes up and i cant figure how to make it go to every direction like the sun, ive tried particle systems but unless i need to tweak the hell out of it its just not working for me, can someone help me?


Oops, forget about that i just found out that i needed to play more with the buoyancy values

Glacierise
09-17-2009, 05:54 PM
Even with the buoyancy, you don't have a spherical gravity. You could use zero gravity and expansion, but I would go for lots of overlapping ffx grids.

Rafa-el
09-18-2009, 01:16 AM
Yeah i guess ill have to work with overlapping grids too, unless im aiming for a egg like sun :p

amckay
09-18-2009, 05:34 AM
if you emit from a spherical emitter and tell it to not be directional only radial, then have 9 buoyancy that should work. However personally I would use particles probably for it rather than fume. I've thought about putting together an exercise on how to build a realistic sun as I've worked on a few in the past. But the main idea would be a sun sphere, and then lots of particles probably via krakatoa and maybe some additional volumetric layers on top of it, but the key elements would be nice turbulent particles

Rafa-el
09-19-2009, 01:11 AM
Changing the subject since im doing loooots of tests with fume to get the hang of it or at least try, i made a ring of fire using pflow and fume expand real fast using a force explosion (i dont actualy recall the right name right now ) and its working except for the smoke generated by the fire, what setting can i use to make the smoke react to forces?

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/9918/examplez.th.jpg (http://img183.imageshack.us/i/examplez.jpg/)

amckay
09-19-2009, 01:43 AM
The smoke will react to forces just add them into fume fx as you would an emitter or anything else, however they are a bit more stubborn than particles, so you will probably need to ramp the settings right up to see some effect. But just raise the values higher and you should begin to see its influence

fiveoften
09-20-2009, 12:37 PM
I make this shot with Fumefx only

Its not final Composed.

http://www.bs-media.org/mpcw/49_6_Totale_Brennendes_Haus_8Rauchtest.avi

Glacierise
09-20-2009, 03:25 PM
Nice shot man! There's just a couple of things - The base of the fire doesn't seem to come from something that is burning - that's a hard effect to do btw - and the lighting on the smoke is a bit too bright and contrasty for the shot. But overall - I like it, and the smoke on the foreground is cool too.

fiveoften
09-20-2009, 04:16 PM
Thank You Hristo for the good imput


The source from the fire in the front is a rainwater gutter *:-)*

For the fire in the background i make a Mattepainting of glowing roof beams.

http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/thumbs/omf-51.jpg (http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/omf-51-jpg.html)

http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/thumbs/omf-52.jpg (http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/omf-52-jpg.html)

PexElroy
09-20-2009, 05:07 PM
Nice work five. overall it moves good and the smoke too. You could have bits of the home start to fall off and their on fire or the roof caves in. :)

Glacierise
09-20-2009, 05:40 PM
That second one is much better! The light in the smoke is still off though, and the smoke color is too bright. Also, it makes much more sense then the rainpipe burning :D

amckay
09-21-2009, 12:36 AM
fiveoften - keep in mind its low exposure so it should probably glow a little bit, and probably scatter into the smoke a bit more too. But definitely looking good so far

everlite
09-21-2009, 05:16 PM
Hey guys,

I have a small fume project coming up that involves setting an object on fire, however the film plate been used is shot in the daytime with quite high exposure at times. Before i get started any tips on creating a realistic effect that will show up when comped over the plate? im guessing the fire will be very washed out when comped.

thanks
Dave

amckay
09-21-2009, 10:41 PM
Fire usually doesn't wash out over plates, one thing to keep in mind is whether your shots are high or low exposure and match them. You're going to technically run into the same issues with real fire as you would cg fire if you're simulating with fluids. It is best to match the exact look of the shot. If your plate is high exposure (daylight etc) then you're best not using any glow etc. just add your fire to the shot and match the aperture correctly so the fire sits in the shot.

If you're in more night time conditions then you're more likely to use glow. I have worked on plenty of shots day and night and it does not take much work to make them look photo real. Just make sure you simulate at a high enough voxel level, also don't make your fire transparent etc. Also feel free to blow out the flames a bit in daylight shots, get the mid and high color ranges and bump them up, if it makes the shot match better. A lot of people like to try and keep all the nice details in the flames, when in reality in a lot of situations the fire is just going to blow out the color range in that shot.
It's like someone creating an awesome creature model and then not wanting him to hide in the dark because you don't see all the nice subtle details you put in the character ;)

renaissance01
09-23-2009, 11:44 AM
Hey guys,

I haven't been very active in this thread for a while so I figured I'd drop in and share my latest personal project I've just finished... 'Transformers: Battle at the Docks'. It has a few Fume/Pflow elements involved. As with all art, it's never finished, only abandoned and due to other commitments, I have to let it go for now. Hope you enjoy. Comments and crits welcome

Cheers :)

Shameless plug link:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=154&t=809625

amckay
09-23-2009, 12:24 PM
nice work looking good

Dreamie
09-23-2009, 12:31 PM
That's odd my last reply didn't go through. Anyhow, Renaissance01, that's looking very nice!

My only crits is that it's a bit weird we see a smoke trail before for the first explosion and then no trail for the 2nd. Also a bigger camera shake once the explosions occurs could be better.

*edit* oops didn't notice my reply already went in your own thread and not here. I need to take longer breaks.. :P

renaissance01
09-23-2009, 12:36 PM
Thanks Allan. Means alot!

Dreamie: Totally agree now that you mention it...Should be a quick and easy fix :) cheers

dr0815
09-23-2009, 10:50 PM
hi all,

im new in the world of ffx, i using ffx for an animation of a rocket launch and i may need some help.
can someone give me some hints of how to create this effect.
should i use particles or a simple src or even an object.
and how big must the simulation area be.

i try to make this effect with a simple src (rotate it down) but it looks as if the flame burns upwards.

it would be glad if someone could help me

thx

amckay
09-24-2009, 10:32 PM
Ah thats going back to the very basics, I haven't really looked around so I'm not sure what training material there is out there for Fume, but below at least there are a couple of Fume (FFX) tutorials as well as various others.

http://www.vfxsolution.com/uc/ - the website is temporary, I'm launching my new website (allanmckay.com) in a week, so I created this placeholder for the time being. But check it out, there is a lot of tutorials available, they're a bit old, but this server is very fast so you shouldn't have problems downloading anything.

Personally I would probably recommend afterburn if you're just doing rocket smoke and you're relatively new to FX, particles are much easier to control and you can see your instant feedback in the viewport, which makes it much easier to quickly grasp how it all works.

Hope that helps as a start, let me know if you have any specific questions

-A

StevieMac
09-24-2009, 11:00 PM
Hey guys I'm having a few probs with FumeFX after using Box tools #2. I've now removed all PFlow's that were using Box #2 & had to re do the parts of the scene to make FumeFX work with the geo in Max x64 (i was using Max x32 with Box #2)

When I hit sim in FumeFX it runs fine but when I change an SDeflector's radius settings from bezier curve to linear animation the sim sticks on frame 30 everytime max hangs & my whole system freezes for about 3 mins thenI just have to kill Max using Ctrl Alt Del. Anyone else had a problem like this?

Using Vista 64 8Gb Ram Max 2009 x64

Cheers

HeadSmell
09-24-2009, 11:08 PM
http://www.vfxsolution.com/uc/ - the website is temporary,

Whats up Allan,
Cool photo of Perth, you gota come back here and visit again Gregs got another show on
:beer:

everlite
09-25-2009, 06:00 AM
Fire usually doesn't wash out over plates, one thing to keep in mind is whether your shots are high or low exposure and match them. You're going to technically run into the same issues with real fire as you would cg fire if you're simulating with fluids. It is best to match the exact look of the shot. If your plate is high exposure (daylight etc) then you're best not using any glow etc. just add your fire to the shot and match the aperture correctly so the fire sits in the shot.

If you're in more night time conditions then you're more likely to use glow. I have worked on plenty of shots day and night and it does not take much work to make them look photo real. Just make sure you simulate at a high enough voxel level, also don't make your fire transparent etc. Also feel free to blow out the flames a bit in daylight shots, get the mid and high color ranges and bump them up, if it makes the shot match better. A lot of people like to try and keep all the nice details in the flames, when in reality in a lot of situations the fire is just going to blow out the color range in that shot.
It's like someone creating an awesome creature model and then not wanting him to hide in the dark because you don't see all the nice subtle details you put in the character ;)





Thanks for the tips, i'll be working on this over the weekend so see how it goes :)

Dave.

dr0815
09-25-2009, 04:56 PM
Ah thats going back to the very basics, I haven't really looked around so I'm not sure what training material there is out there for Fume, but below at least there are a couple of Fume (FFX) tutorials as well as various others.

http://www.vfxsolution.com/uc/ - the website is temporary, I'm launching my new website (allanmckay.com) in a week, so I created this placeholder for the time being. But check it out, there is a lot of tutorials available, they're a bit old, but this server is very fast so you shouldn't have problems downloading anything.

Personally I would probably recommend afterburn if you're just doing rocket smoke and you're relatively new to FX, particles are much easier to control and you can see your instant feedback in the viewport, which makes it much easier to quickly grasp how it all works.

Hope that helps as a start, let me know if you have any specific questions

-A

hi Allan,

first thanks for you comment and tips, I watched your vids and they gave me a better understanding about ffx.
I think I will probablly go on solving it with fume. Till now I've play around with some parameters and I thinking I'm on
the right way. During this weekend I will have some time to work on it
and I will certainly ask you if I have some specific questions.thx

ThallDesign
09-25-2009, 09:16 PM
Sorry this isn't exactly about CG. I don't know whether I should post this here, or in the Rayfire thread, but everybody should probably watch this.

http://www.break.com/index/ultra-slow-motion-explosion.html

I thought it was worth a bookmark.

EDIT: Okay, I actually DO have a FFX question.

If I've got 12GB of RAM, and I only have Max open, can I safely push my Sim: Up to 10GB or so, to get a super tiny voxel size? Is the size in the General tab the ram usage per frame, or RAM usage in total?

I'm running 64 bit Max, on Windows 7 with a Core i7 and 12GB ram

PsychoSilence
09-25-2009, 10:36 PM
Sorry this isn't exactly about CG. I don't know whether I should post this here, or in the Rayfire thread, but everybody should probably watch this.

http://www.break.com/index/ultra-slow-motion-explosion.html

I thought it was worth a bookmark.

thanks! grabbed to the fx library :)

Bandu
09-26-2009, 10:47 AM
.....

EDIT: Okay, I actually DO have a FFX question.

If I've got 12GB of RAM, and I only have Max open, can I safely push my Sim: Up to 10GB or so, to get a super tiny voxel size? Is the size in the General tab the ram usage per frame, or RAM usage in total?

I'm running 64 bit Max, on Windows 7 with a Core i7 and 12GB ram

sure you can use all your free memory for the simulation, What max is telling you with the memory usage is the maximum of RAM to use for calculation in worst case, but it almost always newer use so much.
But why do you need 10 GIG for 1 grid ?? this is way too much, try to optimize this !!!
more voxel doesn't mean for sure a better result !

cheers,
Bandu

ThallDesign
09-26-2009, 08:04 PM
Thanks for your tip, my sim doesn,t look very good at a super tiny voxel size, you're correct. Is the general rule of thumb to keep doing test sims until you get rid of the flame's 'boxiness', where it looks like a grid of squares around the edges? Or is there a secondary way to get rid of that while keeping my voxel size higher?

Bandu
09-26-2009, 11:28 PM
Thanks for your tip, my sim doesn,t look very good at a super tiny voxel size, you're correct. Is the general rule of thumb to keep doing test sims until you get rid of the flame's 'boxiness', where it looks like a grid of squares around the edges? Or is there a secondary way to get rid of that while keeping my voxel size higher?

yes, there is, the "Step Size in Fire%" in Fume "Render Parameters" rollout

this one is at step size 50
http://www.b3d-animations.com/tmp/stepsizeinfire_50.jpg

this at 20
http://www.b3d-animations.com/tmp/stepsizeinfire_25.jpg


and the best result at 10
http://www.b3d-animations.com/tmp/stepsizeinfire_10.jpg

the grid is 28x28x28 voxel uses 2mb to sim in 00:01s


the same for the smoke !

cheers,
Bandu

tasiek
09-28-2009, 10:56 AM
Hi mates,

I need to make a kind of solid, textured smoke sim. I have found an excelent reference, but I'm far away from this great effect. I'm not sure, if he achieved this effect with textured opacity, or it's rather simulation only. What do U think ?


Take a look at this video.

http://vimeo.com/5367780

edit:

I guess it's a matter of sim settings, rather than shading.

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2518/testil.jpg

SureBeatsWorkin
09-28-2009, 01:54 PM
Yep, your voxel grid settings are way too loose, look at getting them nearer
500 in each axis.

Make sure you have fluid mapping on for sim. For materials we are getting great
results mixing noise, smoke and the Blur Studios Electric shader as both smoke
and fire maps.

check your gradients in the smoke color slots.

CAB

Impact
09-28-2009, 08:51 PM
Hi people
When i create a FumeFx object in viewport and open FumeFx Ui windows everything is okey but when i try to move the windows or close and reopen it,it cut in half and i can't use most of right hand options.Whats wrong with that?Is it a bug in UI? I test it on both max2009 and 2010 and problem is remain.
I'm using vista,max 2010 32bit,and i love Fume:cry:

jimmy4d
09-29-2009, 12:11 PM
Yep, your voxel grid settings are way too loose, look at getting them nearer
500 in each axis.

Make sure you have fluid mapping on for sim. For materials we are getting great
results mixing noise, smoke and the Blur Studios Electric shader as both smoke
and fire maps.

check your gradients in the smoke color slots.

CAB

Hey SureBeatsWorkin.

what is ....."the Blur Studios Electric shader " and how do you mix with a noise map?

amckay
09-29-2009, 12:42 PM
dr0815 cheers mate!

Alex - yeah mate I'm off to ILM next week, just waiting for visa to come through.. but when I'm back in town I'll definitely swing by, had some fun that weekend hah

Dreamie
09-29-2009, 12:47 PM
jimmy4d, You can get the blur plugins here: http://www.splutterfish.com/sf/WebContent/BlurPack

impact, Your bug sounds odd but in order for fume to work properly you should switch to a 64bit max and OS. (XP 64bit is the best imo).

SureBeatsWorkin
09-29-2009, 01:07 PM
JimmyD

as noted before go to spluttefish and download the blur pack for your
max version.

Un pack it and add the blurlib to the plugins folder, restart max and
ensure that this is loaded.

close max and then add the electric.dlt into the plugins folder.

Restart max and you will find the shader available.

IMPORTANT

as with all (i think) Blur plugins the blurlib needs to be accessed befor the electric
shader otherwise you will get an error. If you know how to edit your plugin.ini files
then just add both to a blur folder in plugins directory and edit that way. Been using
max since k'netic days but somehow got an error in Max 2010 when installing the
electric shader last week.


Now render with fuid mapping on in ffx, get material and create a new map, noise, for fire I created a

size 5
high .749
low .451
fractual
Levels 5
and in the white slot added the electric shader.

you can get ok results using just the electric shader but we tend to blend them and then render additional passes.

This can help dramatically with television effects where, well the budgets arent there any more by adding in additional detail that wasnt there in the first place.

TIP:

try adding just a noise shader first to the smoke map slot in FFX, we are using electric only inthe fire maps slot.

CAB

Impact
09-29-2009, 03:02 PM
Thanx Dreamie (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=32778) ,i have a 64bit vista and a 32bit max,maybe that's the problem.I install 32bit max because of Rayfire's PhysX and now i must choose between this two:banghead:

SoLiTuDe
09-29-2009, 04:47 PM
^Just install both

tasiek
09-29-2009, 05:56 PM
here is what I've got so far. First two has fluid mapping with noise map applied, that's why it's flickering...

http://tas3d.com/pub/shuttle_ffx.mov.mov

dr0815
09-29-2009, 11:01 PM
yeah Allan it it doesn't seem to be as easy as I thougt it would be
, but I try my best to create something like this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB5_j1RYMYg&feature=related.
I got problems with the forces. I think i'll post a test render tomorrow.

tasiek - your launch looks nice so far

jimmy4d
09-30-2009, 12:48 AM
jimmy4d, You can get the blur plugins here: http://www.splutterfish.com/sf/WebContent/BlurPack

impact, Your bug sounds odd but in order for fume to work properly you should switch to a 64bit max and OS. (XP 64bit is the best imo).


sweet man thanks. going to download now..irun vista 64/ max 2009 32/64 (0nly cuz of rayfire phyx)



SureBeatsWorkin...dude thanks man...great instructions..i think I got my blur blurlib loaded. this gonna be sweet......thanks guys.

Glacierise
09-30-2009, 08:23 AM
Hey Tasiek, that's very cool!

PexElroy
09-30-2009, 11:43 AM
@ Tasiek - lookin' good man. Looks a lot like the Space Shuttle smoke, a tad thicker, but cool ;)

Impact
09-30-2009, 07:55 PM
Today i find out that my problem is with vista font size:banghead: So i have to change from large 120DPI to very small 96DPI to fix the UI.
O god 96DPI is very small in my 1680*1050 lcd.
Is there anyway to manually change font size for max? :(

everlite
09-30-2009, 08:30 PM
Fume/comp question ...

A small project im working on involves setting a guy on fire from a plate ... the issue im having is, when i comp the fire into the plate i can see the backside of the fire, which would otherwise be blocked by the actors body in reality. Can anyone recommend a solution to get around this? I guess one idea might be to roto the guy out, and stick one in front and one behind. Another been to do a digi double and some how matte this out ...

Thanks
Dave.

Dreamie
09-30-2009, 09:11 PM
Fume/comp question ...

A small project im working on involves setting a guy on fire from a plate ... the issue im having is, when i comp the fire into the plate i can see the backside of the fire, which would otherwise be blocked by the actors body in reality. Can anyone recommend a solution to get around this? I guess one idea might be to roto the guy out, and stick one in front and one behind. Another been to do a digi double and some how matte this out ...

Thanks
Dave.

A better approach would be just to roto it manually where needed. I had a project were I did a cg double as holdback and believe me it was a huge waste of time.

dudekill
09-30-2009, 10:12 PM
Is there any way to change the intensity of the light cast using Mental Ray? The default seems too intense.

thanks

3DMadness
10-01-2009, 04:47 PM
Is there any way to change the intensity of the light cast using Mental Ray? The default seems too intense.

thanksI don't have fume here but I remember it has a GI multiplier on the material settings.

dudekill
10-01-2009, 05:35 PM
Thanks, a guy on CG Fluids helped me out.

RFX
10-05-2009, 08:52 PM
Revisiting some of my older stuff and tried to make it more efficient and make it look better.

http://rickfx.com/dreadnought_flamer_comp_v1.mov

pauldublin
10-07-2009, 08:54 PM
Hi guys, here's a shot I have just finished (it took an age to do!), my main aim was to learn Fumefx and do a convincing explosion, and comp it agianst a bg plate. Hope you like it, feel free to critique.

Cheers,

Paul

http://www.vimeo.com/6951769

JohnnyRandom
10-07-2009, 09:30 PM
@Fuentealba nice flamer, burn rate a little low or buoyancy little high in the collision particles, really nice stream and impact fire :)


pauldublin great up until you see the fire at the end... toy flames, out of scale, otherwise tight, great smoke shader IMO ;)

Glacierise
10-07-2009, 10:13 PM
Hey Paul awesome bang and smoke man! Only problems were the wrong fire and the shockwave moving too slowly. If you fix these - it's perfect.

Rafa-el
10-08-2009, 03:08 AM
So, in one of allan mckay's videos he shows how to make fume start simulation after a particle colision using afterburn, my question is, can i do the same without afterburn? like make fume non-renderable until a colision or precise frame? sorry if my english is hard to understand.

amckay
10-08-2009, 04:17 AM
you mean without using the pflow-aburn operator? technically you need to use this node to make fume emit at a specific particle event. Otherwise it becomes more difficult, you can use a mesher and make the mesher read a particle event, and then emit from it via a obj/src emitter. Or use TP is another solution, but ideally using the pflow-aburn operator you put it into that event, and tell fume to emit from that operator.

Is that what you mean? Hope that helps,

-A

pauldublin
10-08-2009, 09:33 AM
JohnnyRandom and Glacierise, thanks very much for the comments man. Yeah, that fire was the last element I added to it, I admit a little rushed. I'll have to fix it because that will eat away at me now!!! But I rendered over black but was still getting a horrible edge back in After Effects. Any ideas how to fix this? The fire scale is pretty far off too I know, which I'll address when I get the time. And the speed of the shockwave, I'll fix it also. Thanks lads.

Sorry I forgot to say thanks to Allan McKay, I bought his DVD's and learnt so much from them thoroughly recommend them to anyone wanting to learn Fume. Also Yigit Acik, aka Wreath for his help too.

So thanks lads!

ASCsab
10-08-2009, 01:31 PM
Hello everyone!

I have some problems with FFX setup, I would be much pleased if anyone can help me!
I'm making an animation where a rocket explodes a building. I use two different containers for the explosion and the rocket (because i need two different settings), in each preview i see the desired effect, but when i render it only one of the containers (the rocket one) appears. Somehow where the two grids overlap the rocket one kills the explosion one. I've checked for solutions everywhere on the net, but haven't found any. Any ideas?
Thank you forward!

holycause
10-08-2009, 04:09 PM
I'm working on an explosion

http://aespid.com/3dscool/WIP/Explo01s.jpg (http://aespid.com/3dscool/WIP/Explo01.jpg)

I made a quick setup for it.

http://aespid.com/3dscool/WIP/Explo01WFs.jpg (http://aespid.com/3dscool/WIP/Explo01WF.jpg)

Now the details and the shaders

Glacierise
10-08-2009, 07:18 PM
I'd say - avoid the super obvious trail thingies. They are a cliche and don't even look that good. If you really wanna do them, toss some debris up and spawn from their surface, not from simple points. Also, in your fume setup, try to break up the bulbs, it looks small this way. Keep rockin :)

ASCsab
10-08-2009, 07:53 PM
I see! The way is getting know the PF much better than the current state :)

Rafa-el
10-08-2009, 08:40 PM
you mean without using the pflow-aburn operator? technically you need to use this node to make fume emit at a specific particle event. Otherwise it becomes more difficult, you can use a mesher and make the mesher read a particle event, and then emit from it via a obj/src emitter. Or use TP is another solution, but ideally using the pflow-aburn operator you put it into that event, and tell fume to emit from that operator.

Is that what you mean? Hope that helps,

-A

yeah thats what i meant! guess i have an argument now to make my employe invest in afterburn too, thanks allan!

fiveoften
10-09-2009, 08:49 AM
the explosion looks very nice i need a max file ^^

Lestat
10-09-2009, 10:33 AM
JohnnyRandom and Glacierise, thanks very much for the comments man. Yeah, that fire was the last element I added to it, I admit a little rushed. I'll have to fix it because that will eat away at me now!!! But I rendered over black but was still getting a horrible edge back in After Effects. Any ideas how to fix this?
Have you tried rendering out as TGA image sequence and disabling "Premultiply Alpha", then have AE treat it as an unmultiplied alpha? I think the problem in your case is that you are getting your alpha, i.e. the edge pixels' alpha values multiplied up with the BG color, which you do not want.

L.

pauldublin
10-09-2009, 11:59 AM
Have you tried rendering out as TGA image sequence and disabling "Premultiply Alpha", then have AE treat it as an unmultiplied alpha? I think the problem in your case is that you are getting your alpha, i.e. the edge pixels' alpha values multiplied up with the BG color, which you do not want.

L.


Hi Kristian, I haven't tried that but will definately give it a go, hopefully it works.

I'll let you know anyway,

Cheers for that

everlite
10-09-2009, 03:52 PM
A little off topic but thought you might like to see this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfDoQwIAaXg&feature=autofb

1 million fps slow motion video of bullet impacts, later in the video it also shows various smoke effects, interesting for reference ...

Dave

DanFX
10-10-2009, 09:03 AM
So I've had a bunch of free time again lately, and in an effort to keep what's left of my sanity, I decided to work on another personal project...this is what I came up with:

Youtube (watch in HQ)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkcxMURj4Uc

My website (720p version, about 75mb, so may take some time to load)
http://danchamberlin3d.com/movies/Burning_House_01_sm_test.mov

Comments and critiques are more than welcome.

Enjoy...

-Dan

sharefree0703
10-10-2009, 12:00 PM
hello every body , I needed some help on a project which i'm currently working on , can I put different color on my two different simple source object emitters which is simulated in same fume FX Grid so that they can interact with each other.
http://sharefree0703.angelfire.com/images/3fluid.jpg

sharefree0703
10-10-2009, 12:02 PM
hello every body , I needed some help on a project which i'm currently working on , can I put different color on my two different simple source object emitters which is simulated in same fume FX Grid so that they can interact with each other.


http://sharefree0703.angelfire.com/images/3fluid.jpg

Glacierise
10-10-2009, 12:22 PM
Nice shot dude, I love the fire/wood interactions.

PexElroy
10-10-2009, 02:42 PM
Awesome shot Dan. Moves and feels good, and hot. Great detail. I like the falling wood, or if the entire roof fell in. Is this several (sim) passes you comped together?

@ everlite - raw video footage :twisted:

DanFX
10-10-2009, 07:25 PM
yea, all in all I did about 15 separate fire simulations (so I could get the detail I wanted on a lonely quad core with 8 gigs or ram) So I ended up doing fire sims for each different sections of the house, rather than just putting the grid over the whole house. I rendered them as a single pass however.

The smoke was different, I could get away with a larger voxel size without it being noticeable, so I had one big sim for the smoke billowing from the inside/top of the house, and then only one other sim for the porch roof planks that fall down. These two passes were rendered seperately, and the multiple scattering was faked in After Effects.

PexElroy
10-12-2009, 05:52 PM
:cool: "the multiple scattering" , you mean FFX's multi-scattering was (opted) off?

Dreamie
10-12-2009, 06:09 PM
holycause: What is that FFX Multi Run script you use?

holycause
10-12-2009, 07:54 PM
it's one of my own scripts.
It allows me to run as many simulations as I want.

If i've 5 grids in my scene, when 1st simulation finish, it will run the 2nd one. etc..

Dreamie
10-12-2009, 08:35 PM
Sounds useful. You plan on making it public?

DanFX
10-12-2009, 09:13 PM
Yea Pex,

As far as I know, there's no way to get fume to take a sim that's just fire and use it to light another sim that is just smoke, although I wish there was.

JohnnyRandom
10-12-2009, 11:28 PM
That's a mighty fine burning building! :)

SoLiTuDe
10-13-2009, 12:20 AM
Sounds useful. You plan on making it public?

http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/fumefx-priority-simulation-v1-4 I think this does the same thing...

jimmy4d
10-14-2009, 11:58 AM
nice fire dan......looks sweet as hell mate......thanks for sharing.

ddustin
10-14-2009, 01:44 PM
1. Any problems with FumeFX and max 2010?
2. Any problems Net-rendering (we bought the extra licenses) with max 2010?

Thanks,
David

Dreamie
10-14-2009, 01:53 PM
Here is a test I did which involved fumefx a little:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=6153181#post6153181

solitude: thanks!

gaialau
10-15-2009, 06:26 PM
Can anyone point me some tips on how to make the Ink effect using fumefx ?
Any links are really aprecciated .
sample here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzP9KoI4vVo&feature=related