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

DeKo-LT
10-10-2008, 12:26 AM
...
But when cracked software is used on commercial projects....that is bullshit.

Bullshit is global money purpose. A couple of years ago my yearly income was $2k. What software do you think we use? :)
Thanks God, that "the world" had printed too much dollars and now currency rate is more balanced... :scream:

TwiiK
10-10-2008, 12:33 AM
I think letting people use commercial products for free as long as they're not used commercially is a great thing that would benefit everyone.

The software developers wouldn't lose money because those intent on not using money on their software just gets a pirated version anyway, but the real benefit would come in terms of experienced users.

I think we would see alot more talented individuals if anyone could download any 3d app and just use them as they wished.

Houdini, even though extremely expensive, lets anyone in on the fun. And if you pay a very small sum you practically have the entire application to use as you wish.

That's a great way to do it and I'm sure it would benefit other software developers as well to do it in a similar way.

I, myself, am positive that open source is the future. :)

dementol
10-10-2008, 12:34 PM
Well I think cracks are everywhere everyoen does it, its just depends how they are used, if your not makeing any money and it is strictly for educational purposes I dont see anything morally wrong with that, cause there is a high chance the person that does that is going to buy the software or worksome where and encourage to purchase licenses....

But when cracked software is used on commercial projects....that is bullshit.

i agree with u

there are many many countries when the dollar is more than the country money, then, buy a software for educational Purpouses is too expensive. Yes, u can use the trial, but many trials come with too much limitations. When u feel that u learned the software and whant to make some money with, u buy it, because, with 3 or 4 jobs, u pay the full license.

cheers!

JonathanFreisler
10-10-2008, 02:07 PM
lets get back on track.

johnny, i have both of these codecs and it still crashes every time i preview. My computer is due for a reformat, so i guess ill do it after this currently task. Bloody vista!

JohnnyRandom
10-10-2008, 07:32 PM
I only have Vista on a test bed, and not much time to use it, the pain-in-the-butt of user permissions, drivers, and software incompatibilities has driven me to avoid it like the plague. (it has gotten a little better) but think I will wait until the next incarnation of windows.

Nothing drives me more nuts than spending days loading the OS, drivers, patches, software to find out something doesn't work, XP64 all the way at least I know what does and does not work with it. OS upgrades are supposed to be easy with a few glitches to figure out, not starting again from scratch.

If you really need Vista, I would suggest a dual-boot w/ XP (install XP first, it is a little more work but makes it easier to get rid of vista, if need be), then you know you can at least get some work done.

Most of the issues I have read across people have been running vista. Other folks trying to replicate the same issues on XP OS's have been unable to reproduce.

Daniel-B
10-14-2008, 08:17 PM
In Terminator 3 and the new Indiana Jones, ILM ran fluid sims for their nukes. I know they use custom software and code for doing their stuff. Basically they simed 2D slices at a fairly high grid sizes. Then they rotated those 2D slices around and interpolated between them to create a 3D fluid field.

Is there any way to do this with Fume? I think it would be a neat thing to do, but I have no idea where to begin. Here is a Siggraph paper on what I am talking about...

http://physbam.stanford.edu/~fedkiw/papers/stanford2003-02.pdf

JonathanFreisler
10-15-2008, 03:42 AM
heh thats really cool, just read the paper then. I think currently over at the afterburn thread there talking about doing nuke explosions (well they were last time i checked)

Diependaal
10-15-2008, 10:09 PM
im also currently fidling around with some stuff, try making a good nuclean explosion.
Fume i thought would be a good idear, but since im on a inspiron 9300 laptop, wich is the last single core version, i wont get much with fume.


I think you need a really , really high voxel count to get a propper explosion, i just dont get the detail till now.

Aldo im not so formiliar with fime yet, as of how to make fine detail in the smoke, trying with someturbelents now, wish it would have little more straight forward settings like afterburn.

Making smaller detail in the smoke can only be done by , adding maps to the smoke, and decreasing the step size?



Downside with fume is, till now , its pretty slow, you dont see what you get ,as fast as afterburn. but its a sim, so if fume is good enough, and all is right it should be able to simulate a nuke explosion spot on.

With afterburn all has to be particle driven, and animated by hand mostly, the fases of the bomb. but it has better 1-1 display of what you get / faster render, and better preview capabilities.

Would be nice if someone had some good detaild explosion fume fx files, where i could look at, im curious to the settings, and how to achive, the illusion of grand scales, maybe without also to much render power needed.

Aldo im afraid, that to do that with fume, you will need a really fast duo, or just a quad core.

darthmaya
10-16-2008, 05:36 AM
Hey guys, been lurking in this thread for a while and wanted to share a link.
There's a new show on Discovery Channel called Time Warp and its pretty much 30 minutes of high speed footage. The hosts are a little on the corny side in my opinion but it was still cool.
Anyways, on the site they have some videos that you can scrub through on the site. My favorite is the blender/lighter clip. http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/time-warp/video/interactive/interactive.html

Btw, great work everybody!

JohnnyRandom
10-19-2008, 04:57 AM
Ok Ladies and Gents, what I know you have all been waiting for...

FumeFX, PFlow, & Krakatoa Tutorial

A basic rundown of what you need to do to render out a FumeFX sim with Krakatoa.

My very first ever video tut. so please bear with me (it could be my last :) )

All the basic info you need to know to use FumeFX to run particles through pflow, save out to particle partitions, color and render... all in ten minutes.

http://4rand.com/TEST/Krakatoa/PflowFume/kr_colortest_fire_pass_01.png

Render QT 6.5mb (http://4rand.com/TEST/Krakatoa/PflowFume/KRK_PF_FFX_MOV.html)


Tutorial Windows Media 12 MB (http://4rand.com/TEST/Krakatoa/PflowFume/FumePFKrak_Basics.wmv) http://4rand.com/TEST/Krakatoa/PflowFume/TUT_FPK_Basics_Thumb.png

http://4rand.com/2008/10/fumefx-pflow-krakatoa-tut/

darthmaya
10-19-2008, 05:56 AM
Great tutorial, thanks John! Very easy to follow, and I learned a lot! :applause:

JonathanFreisler
10-19-2008, 10:27 AM
heh ncie john, very cool. And all in 10 mins :applause:

nitrocom
10-19-2008, 10:36 AM
Hey Johnny,

I got sound but no video in my hand, compression problem or what ?

Edit : Ahh sorry, my bad... Just opened it, good tutorial thanx for this one !

TwiiK
10-19-2008, 11:54 AM
Nice tutorial and result.

A quick, slightly off topic, question.

Is it impossible to render particles as dots without krakatoa? Is that what krakatoa is all about?

I'm working on an effect where I want some sand flying around, and I've only been able to get anything looking partly like sand with small cubes or planes facing the camera.

JohnnyRandom
10-19-2008, 06:21 PM
Thanks you guys, glad it was helpful.

Twiik, yes it is a Point Cloud renderer, for rendering particles as points only. Bobo wrote a script a while back, trying to find it/think of the name...acutally it is in the mxs ref., it is basically a very very junior version of Kraktoa, it is just a real-time vertex renderer, not really meant for rendering sequences but it will do single frames. Really a pretty cool script.

You can find it in the Maxscript Reference under "How To > Develop a Vertex Renderer"

I seem to remember seeing something about this ages ago in the PF thread, I think Loran had something working...I'll have to hit the search button

--scratch that I found it:)

"Poor Man's Krakatoa" :D
rollout forege "PARTICLES PIXEL RENDERER"
(
--VIEWER ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
label label0d "This render the time line range"
label label2d "to the output path and size "
label label3d "defined in the Render window"
label label4d "______________ "
label label5d " Select the particle Source"
label label6d "in the view you want to render"
label label7d "and clic button below"

label label11d "======================="
button pouet " Render Sequence "
on pouet pressed do
(
local framenum
local VertexRendererEnabled = false
local screen_width, screen_height, back_vfb, front_vfb
local front_vfb
screen_width=RenderWidth
screen_height=RenderHeight
front_vfb = bitmap screen_width screen_height filename:rendOutputFilename numframes: (animationrange.end - animationrange.start)
back_vfb = bitmap screen_width screen_height
for t = animationrange.start to animationrange.end do
(
at time t
(
for o in selection where classof o != TargetObject do
(
theMesh = $
dot_color = #(o.wirecolor)
$.updateparticles $ t
partpos = $.getparticleposition
for v = 1 to $.numparticles() do
(
thePos = (partpos v)* viewport.getTM()
screen_origin = mapScreenToView [0,0] (thePos.z) [screen_width,screen_height]
end_screen = mapScreenToView [screen_width,screen_height] (thePos.z) [screen_width,screen_height]
world_size = screen_origin-end_screen
x_aspect = screen_width/(abs world_size.x)
y_aspect = screen_height/(abs world_size.y)
screen_coords = point2 (x_aspect*(thePos.x-screen_origin.x)) (-(y_aspect*(thePos.y-screen_origin.y)))
setPixels front_vfb screen_coords dot_color
)--end v loop
)--end o loop
-- sleep 0.2
-- display front_vfb
-- sleep 0.2
save front_vfb frame: t
copy back_vfb front_vfb
)
)
)--end script

label label44d "======================="
label label8d "press ESC to stop rendering"


)
createDialog forege width:230 height:230

MartinRomero
10-20-2008, 12:02 AM
Hey John,

Well done man, thanks for that tut. Are you using Max 2008 or 2009?

Martin

JohnnyRandom
10-20-2008, 02:11 AM
Hi Martin, thanks:)
The scene file is max2008

jimmy4d
10-20-2008, 11:10 AM
wow super man ...........thanks so much.........very good tut.:buttrock:

darthmaya
10-22-2008, 04:49 AM
Hey guys, I have been learning so much from this thread I figured I would post one of my tests real quick. Its really short, so I will probably let it simulate a little longer next time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVPLgeM_iN0 (Beware complete particle noob!) :D

http://vimeo.com/2034411

Oh yeah, I picked up Iron Man and Indy 4 on blu-ray. I didn't see either at the theaters. There are some drool worthy shots in Indy. (Pretty cool extra features too.) Can't wait to watch Iron Man tomorrow!

Nick

JohnnyRandom
10-22-2008, 04:17 PM
^nice little afterburner (as in engine) looking sim :)


Just drooling over some hardware and thought I would share a dream sim/render machine...

Dell Poweredge 4 socket six-core (yep that's 24 cores total) and up to 256 GB ram :drool:

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&oc=MLB1041&s=biz&fb=1

Anyone got an extra 60 grand lying around:D

Glacierise
10-22-2008, 04:48 PM
These are quad-cores dude :) so 4*4=16. Anyways, 6 and 8 cores will be here in a few months, so coolness coming... And 60K, that's quite steep :D

PsychoSilence
10-22-2008, 04:48 PM
i want that under my chrismas tree alongside the quadcore notebook from dell with 16gb of ram!

TwiiK
10-22-2008, 05:50 PM
That seemed a tad expensive.

Take a look at this one: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/21/1217252

I on the other side managed to get 4 Dell Vostro's each with 1 quad core and 4gb ram for the grand total of $1600 today. :) That's $100 for 1core/1gb ram.

Not too shabby if I may say so.

JohnnyRandom
10-22-2008, 06:50 PM
These are quad-cores dude :) so 4*4=16. Anyways, 6 and 8 cores will be here in a few months, so coolness coming... And 60K, that's quite steep :D

PowerEdge R900, 2x X7460 Xeon, Six Cores, 2.67GHz, 16M Cache, 1066Mhz FSB [Included in Price] :)

It's the ram that kills it 256 GB, 8GB subtract $30,000.


i want that under my chrismas tree alongside the quadcore notebook from dell with 16gb of ram!

Mmmmnn dreamy :D


Damn a desktop Cray... Getout!

darthmaya
10-22-2008, 07:13 PM
^nice little afterburner (as in engine) looking sim :)


Thanks, I was actually going for that. Originally I was going to render it with a engine there (well a engine shaped cylinder :p ) But I decided to just have the simulation. I probably should look up some reference next time.


I need a new pc I think. My current one is a three year old hp from bestbuy and I didn't spend a whole lot on it. The graphics card in it is pretty bad, it struggles with team fortress 2 (in window mode)


P.s I just realized my username is darthmaya, I made it that back before I switched over to primarily max. lol Oh well guess you gotta kick me out. :cry: :thumbsup:

olipoli1
10-27-2008, 12:25 PM
Hi guys

Im in a bit of a problem here... I just got hired for a specific task that should be easy with fumeFX but it has problems. I only have time for a quick post so If someone is familiar with the problem without further explonation please help me out.

So the thing is pretty simple I have to create flames for a burning sword which is easy... untill the sword moves too fast, like turnes more than 60 degrees in one frame. The origin of the flames show up on the frames but the flames dont seem to follow the movement. So it looks like the sim starts over on the frames where the sword is moving fast. We had the same problem with Mayas fluids but it was much worst so thats why with went on with fume.

If someone dealt with fast moveing objects in fume please drop a note if you encountered such things...

Glacierise
10-27-2008, 12:47 PM
Check out the simulation steps parameter. It does render subsampling, which is just what you need with fast moving stuff. I've used it in the past, works great. Slows down your sim, of course, that's life :)

Debneyink
10-27-2008, 12:51 PM
yep simulation steps is the one

olipoli1
10-27-2008, 01:09 PM
Thanks guys

I tried simulation steps before I just wasn't sure how many steps should one use because the spinner can go up to a hundred...:) anyway it seems to be working for the test now with 6 steps but I never had to use that much before Im not sure if its not an overkill and Im getting something wrong. The animation comes from maya in .fbx Im not sure if fume or max can calculate substeps from such source or it doesnt mater.

JohnnyRandom
10-27-2008, 07:20 PM
^The simple explanation, Sim steps are calculated per frame so if you set it to 100 it would sample the grid 1 time for every 1.6 ticks, when doing that you are basically calculating 100 times per frame, which will make you simulation calculation time 100 times longer.

olipoli1
10-28-2008, 10:28 AM
Hi again

OK so sim steps seem to work fine but they raise another problem, it seems to me like if I calculate more steps per frame the whole sim slows down. Did anyone experience the same thing? Im not sure if the speed decrease is proportional to the amount of plus steps but more steps surely change the behaviour of the sim. Should I raise the time scale as well? The manual suggests that if you raise the time scale considerably you should rais the amount of steps as well, but says nothing about the invers of this...

TwiiK
10-28-2008, 10:36 AM
*edited to remove faulty information*

The slowdown could just be a bi-effect of the increased substeps because you calculate more often and velocities are more correct.

CapitanRed
10-28-2008, 10:45 AM
yes, the second thing you say seems more logical.
The speed is still the same, no matter how many substeps you have. it's always a vector with a length.
but when having substeps, it's more accurate, which means there's more stuff like velocity damping, vorticity, diffusion and objects that slow down the motion, or change directions of the vectors.

olipoli1
10-28-2008, 11:17 AM
Yes I managed to finish some low quality previews and it looks like its running with the same speed only it looks different. To be precise when I was looking at the prev window it lookd like thata with more steps the flames dont rise as high as with 1 step per frame but when I could check it in real time the motion was the same speed only it didnt rise as high because of some parameters being taken into account more often per frame. Thanks for the help guys this realy stuck me,now I just have to somehow recreate the original look of the sim...

JohnnyRandom
10-28-2008, 06:52 PM
Try decreasing your grid spacing a little.

olipoli1
10-28-2008, 08:48 PM
After all I think more steps generally smoothen out every type of movement and increases the effect certain attributes like velocity damping for instance. But mainly it's hard to predict what will happen. Also I didnt get the results that I wanted because my grid wasn't proportional to the original size of the object. I never tought that the actual size of the grid is so important, it didnt occure to me that only in a larger grid can there be suficcient amount of voxels to achive detail.
By the way, does the grid size actauly influence the sim in any way because of its size? I mean with the same parameters in two grids with diferent sizes would the sim be different?

fiftypercent
10-29-2008, 03:10 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrdR5CemlY

can anybody help me with this.... im really striving for this effect....and afterburn wasnt the right thing to do

SoLiTuDe
10-29-2008, 03:23 AM
Fume isn't the right thing to do either... go for krakatoa + lots of particles

JohnnyRandom
10-29-2008, 03:28 PM
By the way, does the grid size actauly influence the sim in any way because of its size? I mean with the same parameters in two grids with diferent sizes would the sim be different?

Voxel size is constant (if you didn't know, the voxel size is represented by the small cube in the lower corner of the grid), you should get similar results with a different size grid, not sure if it would be exactly the same.


fiftypercent, you could use fume, depending on how fluid you want it to look, it would be less steps to use just Krakatoa, spacewarps (blurs randomwalk spacewarp would look real similar), & lots of particles. Example of RandomWalk & Krakatoa (http://4rand.com/TEST/Krakatoa/RandomWalk/KRK_RndmWlkMOV.html)

PexElroy
10-29-2008, 03:44 PM
Yeah you will want to use many millions of tiny particles; aka krakatoa. and looks like they used some wind and noise to stir and affect the motion (FumeFX may help with more CFD motion though).

TwiiK
10-29-2008, 03:57 PM
But then again why recreate the effect down to the smallest detail? Especially when it requires you to get plugins you may not have or don't know.

I think fumefx with some wind space warp turbulence will look awesome. You will surely get some awesome results with Afterburn as well, or just plain old particle flow will. The most important thing in my opinion, no matter what plugin you choose, is the wind space warp turbulence if you are to achieve that kind of motion.

JohnnyRandom
10-29-2008, 04:10 PM
Poor Man's Krakatoa

PsychoSilence
10-29-2008, 04:26 PM
OT!!!

just checked ur website, john! haven´t been there in a while and i ahve to say u rock :)

just wanted to give a sign of life....

EDIT: ill add ur link to the website :)

JohnnyRandom
10-29-2008, 06:08 PM
Thanks Anselm:) It's all Ian's fault, saw his and got jealous:D

PsychoSilence
10-29-2008, 07:06 PM
just added you BOTH to my website :)

fiftypercent
10-29-2008, 11:18 PM
ok well can somebody tell me where to get the wind space warp thing... i dont see it anywhere

TwiiK
10-29-2008, 11:25 PM
Have you checked with the other space warps?

Create -> Space Warps -> Forces -> Wind

If you had searched for "wind" in the help that information would have been your first hit. It seems you should find some introduction to 3ds max tutorials before you try to recreate quite complex movie effects.

fiftypercent
10-29-2008, 11:29 PM
naw naw naw... i knw all of that... i never knew that it was in the "space warps" category... i thought yall were saying look for a specific force called space warp.... but i've been doing that.... afterburn doesnt seem like its really working with that... and i dont really knw how to do smoke with fumefx

SoLiTuDe
10-29-2008, 11:29 PM
Thanks Anselm:) It's all Ian's fault, saw his and got jealous:D

Heh... yeah, mine is pretty awesome... :D now if I could only make time to update it with scripts and RnD stuff.

SoLiTuDe
10-29-2008, 11:52 PM
naw naw naw... i knw all of that... i never knew that it was in the "space warps" category... i thought yall were saying look for a specific force called space warp.... but i've been doing that.... afterburn doesnt seem like its really working with that... and i dont really knw how to do smoke with fumefx

I'm confused :) ...what all have you done / tried? Do you have a particle system with particles moving in a similar fashion to the nightcrawler effect yet? You need a particle system first, and then use the other things to add to the effect / render the effect out. I'd maybe use particles as fume emission, then use particles + fume follow as a render pass,use krakatoa for most of the rendering, and probably add a soft fume or afterburn smoke pass.

fiftypercent
10-30-2008, 01:34 AM
this is what i got in afterburn.... and like i said im striving for this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrdR5CemlY

.... and i dont know what settings i need or anything like that for afterburn or fumefx to look like it

SoLiTuDe
10-30-2008, 03:44 AM
It doesn't look like you've really got the particle system down on that...It looks like just one afterburn puff... the afterburn shader looks pretty nice though. Do yourself a favor and just get the particle system down first.

...If you haven't seen it already, I'd suggest getting allan mckay's turbosquid dvd http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/index.cfm/ID/236836 as a good starting place for particle flow.

olipoli1
10-30-2008, 03:02 PM
hi guys its me again

Did any one of you notice before that even if the sim doesent change that much (like I have the same sword burning all the way and it doesnt move) so it doesnt takes up more space in the grid, even than the sim time raises with every frame... Why? when I start the sim the first frame takes about 20 secs the next one 36 and the 10th 2minutes 40 secs for instance I have to use a lot of sim steps could it be in relation with that? thanx anyway

Debneyink
10-30-2008, 03:36 PM
I presume its because the sim grows in complexity each frame, therefore there's more for it to calculate, at the start of a sim you've got precious little for it to spend time thinking about, but with each frame the complextity grows? I'm no expert but that would seem to make sense to me.

olipoli1
10-30-2008, 03:42 PM
Yes that seems logical but my sim is pretty constant all the way, the same sword burns with the same intensity... if it would over time use up more space in the grid I would understand but its the same size all the way.

Debneyink
10-30-2008, 04:00 PM
cool i see what your saying but maybe its still has to take into account the history of whats come before it even though not much is happening? like i said I'm no expert!

fiftypercent
10-31-2008, 05:53 AM
It doesn't look like you've really got the particle system down on that...It looks like just one afterburn puff... the afterburn shader looks pretty nice though. Do yourself a favor and just get the particle system down first.

...If you haven't seen it already, I'd suggest getting allan mckay's turbosquid dvd http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/index.cfm/ID/236836 as a good starting place for particle flow.

yea i think i went there before but i need to knw some settings because afterburn just hooks on to a particle.... but the effect is like u drop some liquid in water... it isnt the same.... unless afterburn has a way with some settings i dont know about

TwiiK
10-31-2008, 07:41 AM
yea i think i went there before but i need to knw some settings because afterburn just hooks on to a particle.... but the effect is like u drop some liquid in water... it isnt the same.... unless afterburn has a way with some settings i dont know about

That is exactly the reason why Particle Flow is what creates this effect. Afterburn just creates a volumetric puff per particle in your system. There's no "ink in water"-effect in Afterburn, but that effect can easily be created with Particle Flow.

Here's an example of what Krakatoa can do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LAY-_VHWoY

If you compare the Krakatoa example to the Nightcrawler effect you don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize Krakatoa can be used to recreate that effect down to the smallest detail. The Nightcrawler effect even looks like it was made with Krakatoa.

But the point is that you can create a similar or cooler effect with Either FumeFX or Afterburn, but for both the most important thing is Particle Flow, or FumeFX can create some cool motion by itself, but like you said Afterburn just hooks on to Particles. You have to setup a particle flow system with wind forces etc. You need thousands of particles creating the motion, not just 1. :)

fiftypercent
10-31-2008, 08:01 AM
thanks.... i'll work on that... u know where to get some good fumefx tutorials....for smoke?

SoLiTuDe
10-31-2008, 02:42 PM
Fifty Percent:
Unfortunately there aren't very many good tutorials on Fume. Allan Mckay has a dvd out through turbosquid, which I've heard some good things about... When you get the fume basics down, you should try to emit smoke from particles (that give the basic motion you want for the effect) and then have a set of particles follow the fume motion for more of a fluid movement (you can also have the particles emit smoke while being affected by it which is really cool), although it's not really necessary since you can get a lot of it just through space warps on the particle system.

Good example of not using fume:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/11960.html

JonathanFreisler
10-31-2008, 04:27 PM
ah how i have missed the fume forums.

Yeah pflow with fume would be the way to go. AB wouldn't work too well at all, but Krakatoa would be a suggestion. Glacierise did a cool test with fume that looked like ink being dropped in water and worked nicely.

I remember watching some making of for X2 talking about how they made the effect in Houdini as i recall - may be worth while trying to find.

In regards to fume tuts. Allan's are great, there are plenty of free ones on his site if you aren't looking to buy his DVD, and i think there are a few introductory ones lingering around on the net. Just a general internist, but what fume tuts would people like to see (if any) that aren't available from other artists or through a dvd source? I remember when i was first learning i wanted some really crappy intro lessons, that explained the ins and outs of fume - as dumb as they could come lol. In retrospect they wouldn't be too necessary, but at the time to grasp the idea of 'hey these things aren't really particles at all' would have been helpful.

fiftypercent
11-01-2008, 04:24 AM
yea i have X2 on dvd and i did an animation using afterburn.....result was real nice...... im uploading the test animation on youtube nw

fiftypercent
11-01-2008, 04:35 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMfXxFg7ybc

here it is...watch in high quality

depleteD
11-03-2008, 12:18 AM
fifty, thats pretty cool, I would make the bamf come from more of your body than from a sphere and inherit the motion more. Cool effect but just too spherical

olipoli1
11-03-2008, 08:39 AM
Hi all

I'm stuck with a stupid problem... I have run a sim on a computer which was considered good and after I got a another PC which is a bit better and I had to move the whole stuff to the new rig. I copied the cache files as well and it played back correctly when I set up locations in fume. The problem started when I wanted to re simulate... it produced a totally different (crap) result! Im emitting from an object based on a black/white map which controls fuel by intensity. The original sim from the older PC looked like it correctly "grabbed" the map and was able to reproduce a detailed emisson pattern based on the map. On the new machine it looks like that the grid is not the same size or something and the result is like I was simulating with much lower grid res. Ill attache a .zip with a pair of screenshots from the preview window. The results come from exactly the same settings only the good one was simmed on another machineand the other came from the new machine with the sam settings.

Bobo
11-03-2008, 12:59 PM
If you compare the Krakatoa example to the Nightcrawler effect you don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize Krakatoa can be used to recreate that effect down to the smallest detail. The Nightcrawler effect even looks like it was made with Krakatoa.


A bit OT:
As a proof that the world of VFX is rather small, Mike Fink, the visual effect supervisor of X2, became our boss 3 months ago (btw Frantic Films did the previs of those Nightcrawler shots, but not the final effects, of course).

olipoli1
11-03-2008, 04:03 PM
hi again

so I might have not been to understandable in my previous post or it could have been a silly problem but it was still true. Anyway it seams like AB was the reason for the problem. The machine I have been transporting the stuff from didnt have AB and the one I migrated to had AB installed which screwed things up a bit. just for everyone to know if you come across this problem. By the way I didnt find any solutions other than uninstalling AB.

pauldublin
11-04-2008, 12:02 PM
Hi there,

I'm having trouble submitting a job to backburner. I have the sim license installed on the slave, and have the backburner botton enabled in the fume tab. Anyone any idea why it isn't working?

hope you can help,

Thanks,

Paul

TwiiK
11-04-2008, 02:05 PM
Some more information would probably help out:

- Are you trying to simulate or render?
- What's the problem?
- Where does it go wrong?
- Do you get any errors?
- Are the render servers giving you errors?
- Can you access your servers?
- Can you network render normally without fumeFX?
- Have you shared the needed resources?

Over the last few weeks I've been setting up a few servers of my own. I don't have fumeFX, but I have Afterburn and that works perfectly over backburner. I had plenty of problems, but they were all explained in detail in the error logs.

Bandu
11-04-2008, 03:00 PM
Hi guys,

I did some test for a company I'm working for and as this job is finished I can show it to you.
Very easy setup, nothing special. FFX + PFlow + Krakatoa

LoRes (http://www.b3d.de/mov/ink_3_lo.mov)
HiRes (http://www.b3d.de/mov/ink_3.mov)

cheers,
Bandu

TwiiK
11-04-2008, 05:09 PM
That looks pretty slick. :)

Glacierise
11-04-2008, 05:58 PM
Awesome as always dude ;)

JohnnyRandom
11-04-2008, 11:10 PM
Script - Carpet Bomber v1.0, I know, I know, how could I have ever lived without this?...

Well enough poking fun at myself. Read on, and have fun carpet bombing...:D

The basic idea is you can create a bunch of sources through out you scene and Carpet Bomber will populate those sources with Fume Containers, and in those Fume containers you can add lights, spacewarps, geometry, ects. You can then update your grids either with the basic settings or the Preset Loader...and a whole lot more:p

Get it HERE (http://4rand.com/stuff/script-carpet-bomber-v10/)

http://4rand.com/scripts/CarpetBomber/CB_GridParams.png http://4rand.com/scripts/CarpetBomber/CB_Lists.png http://4rand.com/scripts/CarpetBomber/CB_LoadPreset.png

SoLiTuDe
11-04-2008, 11:17 PM
^Well look at you... making crazy scripts! Very nice man. I'll have to f* with that soon. Great job (even if it breaks! hehe)

JohnnyRandom
11-04-2008, 11:21 PM
LOL, it could happen, break that is :D

BTW it works real good with the Fume Source Manager!

grury
11-05-2008, 07:09 AM
Script - Carpet Bomber v1.0, I know, I know, how could I have ever lived without this?...


LöL, the things u guys come up with :twisted:

Great stuff Johnny, thanks a lot.

olipoli1
11-05-2008, 11:23 AM
Hi all

Another question: Im still working on the burning sword thing.

The sword is emitting fuel on both sides based on a map (it has small white dots along the middle of the blade) to mimic a real prop sword created by the SFX team which has gas pumped inside it by the handle and the it comes out on similar lithe holes...

OK so the FumeFX setup works fine for the animation and rendering part but it looks like the fire "burns trough" the blade itself. So if the blade is held flat side paralel to the ground the flames generated on the bottom part just come trough the emitter mesh they dont swirl around it.

The FFX manual says that untill you turn on "free flow" for an emitter it behaves like a normal object which was linked to the grid to be able to collide with the fluid. Free flow means that the emitting mesh is not taken into consideration as a collision object, if Im getting it right. I have tried to put a thinner blade inside the original blade and use that as a collision mesh for the flames but for some reason the closeness of this extra geometry "put out the flames" so they didn even start to be generated.


Im thinking of making a rig from the sword and a number of simple sources instead of mapping the emission on the sword geometry itself, do you think it would work better? I generally experienced that simple sources are much more reliable

Thanx in advance

pauldublin
11-05-2008, 02:06 PM
Thanks but I think it's a problem with the farm/backburner, it's being worked on anyway.




Some more information would probably help out:

- Are you trying to simulate or render?
- What's the problem?
- Where does it go wrong?
- Do you get any errors?
- Are the render servers giving you errors?
- Can you access your servers?
- Can you network render normally without fumeFX?
- Have you shared the needed resources?

Over the last few weeks I've been setting up a few servers of my own. I don't have fumeFX, but I have Afterburn and that works perfectly over backburner. I had plenty of problems, but they were all explained in detail in the error logs.

JohnnyRandom
11-05-2008, 07:18 PM
Hi all

Another question: Im still working on the burning sword thing.

The sword is emitting fuel on both sides based on a map (it has small white dots along the middle of the blade) to mimic a real prop sword created by the SFX team which has gas pumped inside it by the handle and the it comes out on similar lithe holes...


Have you turned on enable display to verify it is traveling through the object?

Also is your geometry thick enough, in comparison with your voxel size?

olipoli1
11-06-2008, 08:30 AM
Yes I have rendered and also checked in the viewport that the fire goes trough the object. But the voxel size question is a good point. I have a pretty dense grid, Im not sure how many voxels thick the blade is Im going to check that out, but it is a blade so its not very thick naturaly.

In the mean time I started to experiment with simple src-s assembled to the sword and It seemd like they give a much better result in terms of object collision.

Thanx for the advice anyways

jimmy4d
11-08-2008, 12:28 PM
SWEETscript ...........Jonny.............. you rock dude.

n0mad
11-09-2008, 01:57 PM
hi there,

I want to return for some time back, for the epoch JohnnyRandom creates one of his irreplaceable scripts called "sim and render". It saved a lot of time than.

It works so:
At the start calculating the simulation of all of the frames. Than starts the render of the final image.

How about the alternative version of the script where the frame will render immediately after the sim calculating ???

I mean , lets say so , the 1000 frames of the animation. The script will take the fist frame, simulate the dynamic of the fluids and render the image file. Then it take the second frame, simulate it and render. Than third, 4,5,6 - until the 1000th frame.

The anvantage of such script is obvious - You can stop the calculating in any time you like and see the final result. Instead of previous version of "sim and render", where you have to wait till the last frame simulates.

May be i am going crazy, I believe it would be very powerfull tool, dont you?

JonathanFreisler
11-10-2008, 01:24 PM
n0mad i can kind of see where your coming from. (i think it was Allan who wrote sim and render, well the one i have was by him, theres probably more than one)

Sim and Render does come in handy some times - heck i'm about to use it now. But yeh, i have needed to stop a render once or twice. With Allan's quicksim the render process window doesn't come up, which means you have to forcefully close max if you choose to stop it during render time.... (ie theres no cancel button) - thats probably an easy fix, I've never got around to looking.

What your saying makes sense to sim a frame, then render a frame, sim, then render. This would proved you with a quick frame throw back (not having to wait for the entire sim) But would take the same amount of time i guess.

Sounds like a cool idea.

JohnnyRandom
11-10-2008, 03:54 PM
Thanks Jimmy4d :)

n0mad, when I wrote my first version (Allan did write one too:)) of it I tried to get it to sim a frame render a frame, I got it to work but it wasn't working as I expected so i opted for a straight sim then render.

you can try this code, you have to use the FumeFX maxscript access at the bottom of the General Tab then add it to the PostStep() function. The problem with it is it holds the bitmap in memory until the sim is complete, which after a bunch of frames could start uselessly wasting memory but it does work.

I'll work on it when I get back from NYC, and see if I can get it working right.


-- FumeFX Simulation Script Template --
-- File is located in AfterWorks/FumeFX/ --

-- SIMULATION CONTROL
---------------------
-- Uncomment this if you want to skip certain FumeFX simulation phases completely.
-- Not recommended unless you know what you are doing!
--skipForces = true
--skipAdvection = true
--skipPressure = true
--skipBurn = true


-- GLOBAL VARIBLES
------------------
-- declare here...

global vfb_saveFrame = bitmap RenderWidth RenderHeight filename:rendOutputFilename
global vfb_OverFrame = bitmap RenderWidth RenderHeight

-- FUNCTIONS
------------

fn PostStep =
(
render RenderWidth RenderHeight to:vfb_OverFrame
currentFrame = sliderTime.frame as integer
Save vfb_saveFrame frame: currentFrame
Copy vfb_OverFrame vfb_saveFrame
slidertime += 1
)

PostStep()

karr1008
11-10-2008, 05:06 PM
Hi Guys,
I've been reading through all these amazing posts about Fume Fx and I did my tutorials and have learned quite a lot since then but, I still get the same problem as some had here in the past. The moire pattern or a lego pattern which I basically can say is probably just one. I know the light has to do with as well but I only have a direct light with shadow map. Can someone help me about this? If need be, I can add some of the details on Fume settings used for the qt sample.
Many thanks.

I have included a demo qt to show what I am writting about.

Click here to watch Fume_FX_test (http://media.putfile.com/Fume_FX_test)

Here is a still:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=134920&stc=1

MartinRomero
11-10-2008, 05:31 PM
Hello everyone,


I know this is a FumeFx forum however I am trying to create heat distortion for a jet animation that I am working on.

I finished the Thruster flame effect but I would like to add an extra level of detail by adding the heat distortion to it. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

amckay
11-10-2008, 06:51 PM
JohnnyRandom - thats cool man nice work! I wrote my crappy one to sim everything first and then render everything. I cant remember why but I think I wanted it to do all the hardcore time consuming part and then if lets say I got back in in the morning and it was still simming, I knew I could net render the shots whereas at the time we didnt have any net simming capabilities. I think it was a bit of copying and pasting to swap it around so it sims, then renders but I hadnt thought of adding it into ffx as a post process script, thats a great idea!

What are you doign in NYC? I'm there end of the month to do a fluids talk at 3december if you're around go grab a beer!


MartinRomero - areyou asking how to make a heat distortion? Sure, if you like make a separate pass of thin whispy smoke (or even just straigh up soft smokey particles) render it out and then build a simple comp of your fire, and the background you're rendering it on, and then use a displace filter on both which sources your heat distortion pass you're using.

Basically a heat distortion (in cg terms) is a black and white image that will distort/displace the pixels to create the distortion. Its not too easy to do in 3D (you can use refraction but its not really the best method) usually its a 2D effect you apply to distort everything

n0mad
11-10-2008, 08:59 PM
hi everyone !

JonathanFreisler:::

Yeahh, i know that Allan wrote the same tool, i use JohnnyRandom's one, it works fine, so thank you JonnyRandom :applause:

You said - it would take the same amount of time. Yes, the time is equal. But in this case you can stop the render, see it, do another, compare, choose the best one and do the final setup ! (souds so simply :D )
What you see in the sim window not the same as the render frames... you can see the whole scene and with light / render setuping achieve the better result. So may it takes time but it is justify.



JohnnyRandom:::

Thanks for sharing the script !

Very cool !!! :cool:
i tested it for the simply scenes it is just what i am talking about. Can not understand why the afterworks did not add this option to the dialog.

Anyway it is very useful script,

thnx.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 02:36 PM
:sad: Can someone help me with Fume Fx?
I would really appreciate any tips on how to get rid of these patterns on the smoke.
Thank You.

JonathanFreisler
11-11-2008, 02:44 PM
Basically that pattern is to do with your grid size - well it looks that way. Changing your spacing down will make the simulation take longer, will be more accurate, but it will remove that nasty cubism you have there. Also adding some fluid mapping might help to blend cross voxel.

grury
11-11-2008, 02:45 PM
:sad: Can someone help me with Fume Fx?
I would really appreciate any tips on how to get rid of these patterns on the smoke.
Thank You.
hard to tell without a screen shot of your settings
Have u tried:
Using raytraced shadows, AB shadows
Incressing simulation steps, quality, max iterations, spacing

karr1008
11-11-2008, 02:55 PM
Ok, let me give you my settings.
Will take a few minutes to post.
Thanks guys.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 03:22 PM
Here are my settings:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=134941&stc=1
Thanks again.

depleteD
11-11-2008, 03:28 PM
Quality should be at 4 minimum
fume behaves much nicer on a grid that is smaller than that huge,
try scaleing your scene down.

-ANdrew

karr1008
11-11-2008, 03:33 PM
Quality should be at 4 minimum
fume behaves much nicer on a grid that is smaller than that huge,
try scaleing your scene down.

-ANdrew

The only reason is that big is because I read that fume works more accurate based on scene scale which in this case it should resemble a shuttle launch steam. Basically the steam on real life should go about 400 ft high and expand as cumulus cloud but, if you think that scaling down will work then by all means I will do that. As long as it behaves like if it iwas large scale.
Thank you.

depleteD
11-11-2008, 03:40 PM
i read that too, and in some cases it definately works, but I find that you can tweak values to get what you want.

but if u want to keep your scale the same , set quality to 4 and iterations to 120 that will help things out

karr1008
11-11-2008, 03:48 PM
i read that too, and in some cases it definately works, but I find that you can tweak values to get what you want.

but if u want to keep your scale the same , set quality to 4 and iterations to 120 that will help things out
I will def. give it a try.
Thanks so much.

Glacierise
11-11-2008, 03:49 PM
I was kinda angry for not having made cool explosion smoke in the past, so i sat down and cracked it. It's only a single source so no complete explosion yet, but I think I made this element much better then previously, check it out:

http://cg.glacierise.com/animation/expl_smoke.mov

edit: link fixed, sorry.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 03:52 PM
Would these settings get rid of the banding issue?
Quality=4
Max Iterations=4

I also have the temp. at 300. I wonder if this is another flux causing the banding since the higher the temperature the faster it rises...?

karr1008
11-11-2008, 03:54 PM
Glacierise, your first link there is no movie found. Check your link please.
Thanks.

Glacierise
11-11-2008, 04:06 PM
Thanks, I fixed the link. And dude, default iterations is 200! No way 4 will suffice. The iterations is the number of times the solver will be run, so the more iterations - the more accurate the result. But stay in the hundreds :) Also, quality of 4/10 is small, I'd only use that for previews.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 04:43 PM
Thanks, I fixed the link. And dude, default iterations is 200! No way 4 will suffice. The iterations is the number of times the solver will be run, so the more iterations - the more accurate the result. But stay in the hundreds :) Also, quality of 4/10 is small, I'd only use that for previews.
So, then quality=10 and iterations=200
I will give that too a try. Right now with the previous settings of Qty=4 and iterations in the 120 is not working. Perhaps this will. Darn banding. Thanks.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 04:46 PM
what about the advection stride? I have it at .75 now.

PexElroy
11-11-2008, 05:13 PM
Banding of smoke can be tricky to get rid of. Try to add some wind or slight chaos for motion, so the smoke doesn’t become to immobile or "at a stand still". Banding is a result mostly of to much symmetry in the smoke generation.

Try not to boost the smoke rendering opacity level to high, as banding seems to occur the more opaque the smoke shader becomes, plus the type of emitter will have an affect on banding and the output speed.

One trick I use is to put a (small hidden object) obstacle in front of the emitter, so the smoke is immediately disturbed and won't sit idle.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 05:22 PM
Thanks Robert. I was just thinking about that a few minutes ago.
The cloud seemed to be a bit to stationary thus showing the voxels more isolated so I think I have cured this by increasing vorticity but you still see a tad of banding at the beginning.

Here is a render:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=134945&stc=1

JohnnyRandom
11-11-2008, 05:34 PM
JohnnyRandom - thats cool man nice work! I wrote my crappy one to sim everything first and then render everything. I cant remember why but I think I wanted it to do all the hardcore time consuming part and then if lets say I got back in in the morning and it was still simming, I knew I could net render the shots whereas at the time we didnt have any net simming capabilities. I think it was a bit of copying and pasting to swap it around so it sims, then renders but I hadnt thought of adding it into ffx as a post process script, thats a great idea!

What are you doign in NYC? I'm there end of the month to do a fluids talk at 3december if you're around go grab a beer!


Thanks Allan, for the PostSim() still gotta figure out how to write individual files, instead of a sequential bitmap, to free the memory usage. That script you wrote isn't crappy dude, I wrote one too before you released your Fume Script pack, cause just like you said, letting it bake over night is a beautiful thing ;)

NYC was a social visit, just got back last night, bummer tho would have really liked to have seen your talk and drank beer:)

@n0mad

No problem, it would be a nice fume feature, I'll post an update to it when I get some free time to mess with it.

@karr1008

if it looks right use it:D

@Hristo
What are you rendering with? + settings...Vray+irrandiance map?

karr1008
11-11-2008, 05:41 PM
Hey thanks Johnny. It's getting close.
Thanks for all your help guys.

grury
11-11-2008, 06:46 PM
I was kinda angry for not having made cool explosion smoke in the past, so i sat down and cracked it. It's only a single source so no complete explosion yet, but I think I made this element much better then previously, check it out:

http://cg.glacierise.com/animation/expl_smoke.mov

edit: link fixed, sorry.

Damn thats very nice! How did u managed that sudden slowin of the smoke outwards, after the blast.

karr1008
11-11-2008, 07:24 PM
Wow Glacierise! How did you managed to not have banding at the begining of the simulation. That looks great.

Glacierise
11-11-2008, 08:35 PM
Heh thanks guys.
@Johny - yeah it's VRay but no GI at all dude, just a sun and a sky spotlights, and only the sun one is casting shadows. I've made my ambient smoke color bluish, and I've played with it in Fusion afterwards.
@grury - it's mainly achieved with timescale and velocity damping animation.
@karr1088 - it's the resolution (i think something like 200*200*300) and the fact that the smoke has a low opacity! I think your high smoke opacity could be causing your problems. Try higher smoke density, and lower opacity.

MartinRomero
11-11-2008, 10:25 PM
Thanks a lot amckay (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=1435),

That's exactly what I needed.

Martin

SoLiTuDe
11-12-2008, 03:11 AM
So, then quality=10 and iterations=200
I will give that too a try. Right now with the previous settings of Qty=4 and iterations in the 120 is not working. Perhaps this will. Darn banding. Thanks.

A quality of 10 probably won't give you many noticeable differences in the sim. I'd go with the quality of 4, and iterations of 120. You'll need more steps if the stuff is moving fast. It's not suggested that you ever go over a quality of 6 anway.
It's not likely that you're not getting banding because of sim quality.... You're likely getting banding because of density settings (I think somebody mentioned that). You need to play with your source density settings and your smoke render settings. Shadows can play a role in it too...
A co-worker actually noticed that smoke on large scale is usually better, whereas doing fire on small scale is better... we're doing some insanely huge smoke grids, and the smoke looks / renders great... no special secrets, I swear it!

karr1008
11-12-2008, 03:17 AM
Thanks SoLiTuDe. You are right about Fume Fx works based on real dimensions so in this case I do have a fast moving steam that should boil up like the one on a shuttle launch.
That is like about 300-400 ft high in a matter of seconds but the density is cumulus-like.
That is another reason not to do small scale simulations and cheat with the settings...I tried that before unsuccessfully and my art director noticed a sense of small scale...not working at all and odd behaving. This is when I decided to do it right and here is where I am at now.

JonathanFreisler
11-12-2008, 04:49 AM
It's not likely that you're not getting banding because of sim quality.... You're likely getting banding because of density settings

Yeah i mentioned that 2 pages ago, did you try that?

grury
11-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Heh thanks guys.

@grury - it's mainly achieved with timescale and velocity damping animation.


Thought so. Altho was a bit surprised how it slowed down so fast outwards, but still managed to get a rather high speed going upwards.

Glacierise
11-12-2008, 09:04 AM
That's due to the source's high directional speed.

pauldublin
11-12-2008, 11:30 AM
Hi there,

I was wondering could anybody tell me is there any major advantage running fume in 64bit max over 32bit? Like would sim time quicken, would it be more stable etc.?

Hope you can help,

Paul

Glacierise
11-12-2008, 11:35 AM
You can sim heavier stuff, and with more stability, when you have more ram available in 64bit.

pauldublin
11-12-2008, 11:49 AM
Thanks Glacierise,

I have 4 gig of ram so that should help. I'll have to give it a test so

cheers

karr1008
11-12-2008, 02:14 PM
Yeah i mentioned that 2 pages ago, did you try that?
Yeah, you are right. I did higher smoke density, and lower opacity. It reduced the banding to a great extent. You still see it at the beginning of the sim but 30 frames later is almost none existent. I will try with 2 steps this time to see if that takes care of the beg. of sim part. Other than that, It has been a good progress. Thanks guys.

n0mad
11-12-2008, 02:16 PM
You can sim heavier stuff, and with more stability, when you have more ram available in 64bit.

hope so, but look to the test http://www.3dspeedmachine.com/News/compare/compare3.htm

the 64bit max require more "time to complete task" ...
especially for the dynamycs.

anyway, pauldublin, tell us the resuls of the test

JonathanFreisler
11-12-2008, 02:21 PM
@ n0mad

firstly, i'm not sure if you missed how incorrect aspects of that test are (tbh you cant miss the posts if you go to the general max thread). Second, they are comparing Vista 64 bit, and Xp 64 bit.

He was asking whats the difference between 32 bit, and 64 bit. And what the advantages of using 64 bit max/fume over 32 bit max/fume.

Glacierise
11-12-2008, 02:48 PM
@Nomad - dude can't you just limit the app wars to the specified threads?! And how can it take more time to do it in 64 bit, when you can't do it in 32bit at all?! Thanks.

@Karr1008: you have more banding in the start because you have excessive smoke density there. Animate it so it doesn't get clumped so much. Either make smoke blow lighter at the start, or make the opacity a minnimum at the start.

pauldublin
11-13-2008, 09:47 AM
http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp323/pauldublin/closeup_fire_094.jpghttp://s424.photobucket.com/albums/pp323/pauldublin/?action=view&current=closeup_fire_094.jpg

Hi Guys,

Just a question in relation to a fire test I'm doing, I ran a sim last night and thought my settings were pretty high. There seems to be some weird stuff going on I've atttached a frame from the animation to show. Maybe someone could point me in the right direction or tell me what I'm doing wrong?

Thank You,

Paul

pauldublin
11-13-2008, 09:57 AM
PS

sorry for the huge image I'm only new here! Not sure how to post the small images that link to the actual proper image

TwiiK
11-13-2008, 10:44 AM
The image is fine. It's nearing the end of this page so noone will notice it on the next page.

About the weird stuff going on I'm not quite sure what you mean, but looking at that image I would say you didn't sim it high enough for it to be seen that close. With motion blur in an animation I don't think that would be noticeable however in a still frame like this one I would increase the density or whatever it's called in fumefx. :)

Edit: Well, what do you now? It was the end of the page. :p

pauldublin
11-13-2008, 12:57 PM
Cheers yeah looks like i'll really have to crank up the settings, I'll set one off tonight

jimmy4d
11-14-2008, 12:13 PM
Hi there,

I was wondering could anybody tell me is there any major advantage running fume in 64bit max over 32bit? Like would sim time quicken, would it be more stable etc.?

Hope you can help,

Paul


I just build my first 64 bit system......... duel ,duelcore AMD optrons, with 8gigs of ram xp/64...........dude fume just plane rocks conpaired to 32 bit.........:buttrock: ........image looks nice......I agree a little MB and it should look fine.

Glacierise
11-14-2008, 02:48 PM
Sweet rig! Now show off :D

I don't know whether you guys noticed, but there was a FumeFX explosion in the last episode of House :D House was being bugged by a mosquito, and he did set up some elaborate propane mosquito trap, but the pesty bugger outsmarted him and the thing blew up hehe. Turned out to be a dream of course. The explosion was not bad, I didn't like the lighting a lot and it was too short, but cool nonetheless.

pauldublin
11-18-2008, 10:16 AM
Hi guys,

Is it possible that someone here can tell me how to set up motion blur for fumefx rendering?

Hope you can help,

cheers,

Paul

grury
11-18-2008, 01:36 PM
On Envirnment FusionWorks Render tick Create channels, image motion blur. On Effects tab add Motion Blur.
Make sure u turn G-Buffer, Object ID (on FumeFx object properties) to 1

pauldublin
11-18-2008, 04:38 PM
Hi,

I've tried that but no luck!

SoLiTuDe
11-18-2008, 05:00 PM
It also needs velocity exported.

kabyll
11-20-2008, 01:22 PM
Hi everyone,

For some job, I have to integrate an explosion on a footage.

I have modelised all the objects, and my simulation is ok so far.

Actualy, my problem is the compositing.


I would like to get the lightning of the fire on the differents elements of the scene, cause the fire casts GI but I don't understand how to do that.

(you can see some pics here)
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=697974


Every objects have a diffuse texture camera mapped on them.


Should I put them as VrayMate objects? If I do that, I have just a black image as Vray_RawTotalLightning...

Turning only their alpha to -1?

I'm lost... and tired, it doesn't help ^^'

kabyll
11-20-2008, 02:30 PM
also,

when I render my fire and smoke only (isolate selection), the FumeFx_fire pass is correct (fire and smoke are white, and background black)

but... when rendering the whole scene... I have a black image... what the hell?

JonathanFreisler
11-21-2008, 02:00 PM
ahaha glacierise i just youtubed the house mosquito trap now.

Turbulence size was too small lol >< - that is all.

n0mad
11-22-2008, 09:06 AM
Hello everyone !
i have really problem and need for your advice.

The scene consist of opening book cover by wispy smoke (See the MOV file (http://live-00.land.ru/book_only_1.mov)).

The problem is that the smoke does not covered the pages of the book as softly as i expect ... it is just appears some kind of flickering and jumping.

At first i thought it depends of page's thickness. I add some volume to mesh plane (shell modif) but nothing changed :surprised.

Form the help: ("Objects, Sources and Warps")

"...If the object moves too fast, the simulation may become inaccurate. It may
even “eat” any smoke and fire that are on its path. These problems will be more pronounced if you have set the number of solver steps too low. To ease these problems, you can increase the number of Simulation Steps in Simulation tab. Or, if the object is just consuming smoke, you can increase the object’s Speed Multiplier, which will increase the force of its push on the fluid."

So, i tried to increase the step size up to 9 - 12, but the smoke is still flickering. The higher value of Speed Multiplier does not help as well :cry:.

To tell the truth the page does not actually move very fast (you can see it in the MOV file (http://live-00.land.ru/book_only_1.mov)).... so i defenetly can not understand where the bugs come from.

i did not remember if i have such problem elier but now it does
How can i fix it ???

thanx :)

JonathanFreisler
11-22-2008, 12:05 PM
have you tried turning "soften edges near objects" on? Also it could be the spacing lines which you see and looks like flickering - is your spacing low enough?

n0mad
11-22-2008, 03:44 PM
Thank you JonathanFreisler for your reply:wavey:.

"soften edges near objects" does not actually change anything. All remains the same.
Honestly speaking, i believe that something wrong is from the simulation... not from the render. May be i am mistaken.

The final look of the smoke becomes more accurate with low value of spacing. But it has not any affect on flickering. However i will try to reduse the spacing vastly, hope it helps:bowdown:.

jakemmm
11-24-2008, 01:54 AM
hey everyone :P,
i got a VERY annoying problem. i installed 3ds max 2009 a couple days ago. i was using 2008 before. whenever i try to open up the ui a SECOND time it wont open at all. it opens up the very first time then i just cant reopen it. i've done all the research i could to find a fix but nothing.

thanks for your time :)

visualchaosfx
11-25-2008, 03:33 AM
hey everyone :P,
i got a VERY annoying problem. i installed 3ds max 2009 a couple days ago. i was using 2008 before. whenever i try to open up the ui a SECOND time it wont open at all. it opens up the very first time then i just cant reopen it. i've done all the research i could to find a fix but nothing.

thanks for your time :)

Hi,

Did you try reinstalling the plugin?

floopyb
11-25-2008, 04:25 AM
I have had this problem and you just need to start the DCPFLICS service on your local machine. Even if you are getting licenses from a remote server.
Should be here:Program Files (x86)\DCPFLICS\DCPFLICS_tools.exe

jakemmm
11-25-2008, 08:07 PM
I have had this problem and you just need to start the DCPFLICS service on your local machine. Even if you are getting licenses from a remote server.
Should be here:Program Files (x86)\DCPFLICS\DCPFLICS_tools.exe

well it worked some what. i can open it up everytime. when i select something else then go back to open up the UI it doesn't work o.O

jimmy4d
11-26-2008, 06:19 PM
Quite question guys, FFX and matt/Shadow on a plane. My problem is the fume gets blocked out by my plane???? I have a pic in the environment slot and want to cast shadows on the plane. Is this the wrong way to do this? I have a simple animation were the BBQ grill takes a dudes head off. The pic is a backyard scene.

wreath
11-26-2008, 06:38 PM
Quite question guys, FFX and matt/Shadow on a plane. My problem is the fume gets blocked out by my plane???? I have a pic in the environment slot and want to cast shadows on the plane. Is this the wrong way to do this? I have a simple animation were the BBQ grill takes a dudes head off. The pic is a backyard scene.

Jimmy be sure that you checked the " At object depth" button under atmosphere parameters on matte/shadow material.

olipoli1
11-27-2008, 01:45 PM
hi all

I have a pretty serious problem with fume, It seems like its not able to produce values above 1 in float files. I made a test where I have an omni light cranked up casting light on a plane and there is also a fume fire in the scene. If I render this with v-ray where color mapping is left on linear and I check pixel values of the render in the vfb, I get 3.5643216 real value in the hotspot of the light but no mater how white the fire is it never goes above 0.985461 or something, so it never goes above one.... I tried to crank up the color value in the rendering tab in fume but all it does is that the whole fire burns out to white but pixel values still stay under 1.

Is there a setting I missed or maybe It has to be rendered in scanline (which I tried and gave me the same bad results but maybe there is a setting for this in max) or can it be that fume just clamps data higher than 1. Please if anyone had the same problem let me know because this is a very important issue I have to solve because we need to save out float data and its not working together with fume.


Thanks in advance

SoLiTuDe
11-27-2008, 05:17 PM
Try going to the environment panel > fusionworks > create channels > nonclamped colors

olipoli1
11-27-2008, 05:22 PM
huh thanx a lot I was going crazy with this problem and while I was writing my post I had an idea about checking the fusion works renderer, which I always forget that there are also some settings there...

nitrocom
11-27-2008, 08:32 PM
Look who is back,
wreath whats up ? :)

wreath
11-27-2008, 10:12 PM
Hey Cenk! came back Turkey for a damn second surgery, connecting from sickbed :surprised but i'm great though!! :buttrock:also sent you a p.m.

Btw i just started reading recent pages, Johnny R. "Carpet Bomber" looks very cool!! sweet tools dude :thumbsup:

JohnnyRandom
11-28-2008, 04:15 PM
Glad all is well Yigit :)

Thanks man, Carpet Bomber was fun to write, not an everyday script by any means, but fun for multi bullet hits, explosions, ect. Kinda like RayFire used to have in it.

wreath
11-29-2008, 01:13 PM
Glad all is well Yigit :)

Thanks man, Carpet Bomber was fun to write, not an everyday script by any means, but fun for multi bullet hits, explosions, ect. Kinda like RayFire used to have in it.

So what's in your mind for next one? :cool: actually kinda tool like; multiple ffx containers management stuff would be so handy :scream: really want that kind of thing but i still suck so bad in scripting :D

wreath
11-30-2008, 11:00 AM
After a long boring break finally had some time to blow shit up! so came with this (http://yeatvfx.com/works/files/javelin-strike-web.mov) (5mb/quicktime)
love javelins! :drool:

Wicked
11-30-2008, 11:53 AM
After a long boring break finally had some time to blow shit up! so came with this (http://yeatvfx.com/works/files/javelin-strike-web.mov) (5mb/quicktime)
love javelins! :drool:
Cok güzel olmus! ;) (in english "Very nice!")

Maybe you could add some more smoke and let that rise less quickly, since the tank is burning now.
Nice reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUHH1ydnJM&fmt=18

TwiiK
11-30-2008, 01:52 PM
That explosion looks great, wreath.

I do have some opinions though: :)

The javelin is normally a top-attack device, it can be used straight on for bunkers and such, but the idea is to hit armored vehicles on the top where the armor is thinner.

Also, there's too little force in the effect. It looks like a hollywood petrol explosion and not like a high explosive. The initial blast should be way faster, as well as the debris. The smoke plume should be more of a secondary explosion. You probably would only see the initial blast as a flash in real time.

But on the other hand hollywood and games has made people think that real explosions look like that so maybe you're well aware of what I'm saying and instead makes the explosion most people want to see. :p

The lighting, fire and smoke looks terrific.

JohnnyRandom
11-30-2008, 04:04 PM
Nice bit of destruction there Wreath:)

So what's in your mind for next one? :cool: actually kinda tool like; multiple ffx containers management stuff would be so handy :scream: really want that kind of thing but i still suck so bad in scripting :D

You can manage multiple grid settings with carpet bomber if you use reference grids and the import preset function. You can add (you can't remove items yet) lights, objects, spacewarps ect. to multiple grids too.

Also Goran Pavles wrote a killer script that share data across multiple grids - shareFFXdata 1.1 (http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/shareffxdata-1-1)

wreath
11-30-2008, 06:04 PM
Cok güzel olmus! ;) (in english "Very nice!")

Maybe you could add some more smoke and let that rise less quickly, since the tank is burning now.
Nice reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUHH1ydnJM&fmt=18
:beer:

That explosion looks great, wreath.

I do have some opinions though: :)

The javelin is normally a top-attack device, it can be used straight on for bunkers and such, but the idea is to hit armored vehicles on the top where the armor is thinner.

Also, there's too little force in the effect. It looks like a hollywood petrol explosion and not like a high explosive. The initial blast should be way faster, as well as the debris. The smoke plume should be more of a secondary explosion. You probably would only see the initial blast as a flash in real time.

But on the other hand hollywood and games has made people think that real explosions look like that so maybe you're well aware of what I'm saying and instead makes the explosion most people want to see. :p

The lighting, fire and smoke looks terrific.

Looks like we have a pro in here :) great info man! thanks for that, as you noticed just tried to get some cool looking,fun to watch explosion:bounce: you know, everybody loves mushroomy stuff :cool: and actually making faster flashy explosions are way easy to get with fume but as we used to see on Hollywood stuff people love to see some relatively slow moving (generally on slow motion) easy to observe,fiery stuff. ;)


Nice bit of destruction there Wreath:)



You can manage multiple grid settings with carpet bomber if you use reference grids and the import preset function. You can add (you can't remove items yet) lights, objects, spacewarps ect. to multiple grids too.

Also Goran Pavles wrote a killer script that share data across multiple grids - shareFFXdata 1.1 (http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/shareffxdata-1-1)

Thanks John, will check out that script,sounds like the exact thing that i want.

jimmy4d
12-01-2008, 10:17 AM
Jimmy be sure that you checked the " At object depth" button under atmosphere parameters on matte/shadow material.



damm I forgot that:shrug: ..........it's fine now..........will post render later today....thanks and wecome back wreath.

thomaskc
12-01-2008, 11:30 AM
@wreath

I just looked at your website, lovely stuff !

I know its not just something that you just do without having any knowlegde about how to control the particles and how to make fumeFx do what you actually had in mind :P

But I was wondering if you know of any guides/tutorials that could get me startet with the basic idea of how it works with particles and fumefx?

I know how thinking particle works and I understand the basics of fume (just cant control it yet) :)

ofcause, if any of you other guys can point me in some direction, feel free :D
thanks

Jerico
12-01-2008, 05:13 PM
uh, long time no see. i got very frustrated because of many unexpected memory leaks in the last time. :rolleyes:

so for now a very small test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URjuFBMJjuk

btw @wreath: nice job! :applause:

thomaskc
12-02-2008, 08:29 AM
Well to give you guys an idea of what kind of explosion id like to have help creating here is my scene that I plan to insert fumefx to:

www.thomaskc.dk/wip/3dsmax/3x_camp_blast.avi

grury
12-02-2008, 09:16 AM
uh, long time no see. i got very frustrated because of many unexpected memory leaks in the last time. :rolleyes:

so for now a very small test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URjuFBMJjuk

btw @wreath: nice job! :applause:

Dude, thats totally awesome. Love the way it interacts with the surface of the liquid.
How did u achieve that?

Cheers

wreath
12-02-2008, 10:36 AM
uh, long time no see. i got very frustrated because of many unexpected memory leaks in the last time. :rolleyes:

so for now a very small test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URjuFBMJjuk

btw @wreath: nice job! :applause:

Sweet test Jerico!


@wreath

I just looked at your website, lovely stuff !

I know its not just something that you just do without having any knowlegde about how to control the particles and how to make fumeFx do what you actually had in mind :P

But I was wondering if you know of any guides/tutorials that could get me startet with the basic idea of how it works with particles and fumefx?

I know how thinking particle works and I understand the basics of fume (just cant control it yet) :)

ofcause, if any of you other guys can point me in some direction, feel free :D
thanks


Hi Thomas, nice to hear that.

Knowing how to use TP is a great advantage for fume stuff.There is nothing special/hard with using fume/particles together and they really help to tame simulations for example:
if you need a basic shockwave dust you just need to set a particle system like that:

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/3078/shockwave1sp1.jpghttp://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7153/shockwavehh1.jpg

and then use the "FFX Particle SRC" to bring the particles to ffx simulation, simulate!

http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/18/ffxac8.jpg


thats all, this is the simpliest example ever but idea is always the same.


And the scene that you post, looks like a big deal, dunno whats in your mind but do not even think about finishing scene with 1 ffx container :) you may plan your fume stuff like that;
-Main explosion
-Main dust cluster
-Shockwave dust
-Dust after buildings collapse
-Dust after debris fall ground/other objects
-flaming/smoking flying debris
-buildings/things that on fire or just smoking
finish step by step and be sure that everything working in harmony especially timings! of different containers.

cheers


Edit!: forgot to post this one TP&FFX (http://www.cebasusa.com/m_o_v_e_e/TPFume01/TPFume01.html)

thomaskc
12-02-2008, 11:02 AM
@wreath

Thanks alot for the answer and the small guide, looks like its learnable even for me ;-)

So I will look into it for sure, it seems thats the way to go when working with fumefx.

Mafx
12-02-2008, 11:13 AM
Hey all,

I have something weird going on. I have an object moving left to right across the screen (a plane) I have an object on the wing using that as an emitter. When the plane moves the smoke belts out in along the horizontal in the direction the plane is heading (as opposed to trailing behind it.).

I have tried the gravity helper, no gravity, no bouancy , different fuel rates, heat production but every single time the smoke charges in the same direction the plane is heading.

What is the painfully simple thing I am missing here to actually get the smoke to trail and not lead!!!

Thanks

S.

wreath
12-02-2008, 11:27 AM
Hey all,

I have something weird going on. I have an object moving left to right across the screen (a plane) I have an object on the wing using that as an emitter. When the plane moves the smoke belts out in along the horizontal in the direction the plane is heading (as opposed to trailing behind it.).

I have tried the gravity helper, no gravity, no bouancy , different fuel rates, heat production but every single time the smoke charges in the same direction the plane is heading.

What is the painfully simple thing I am missing here to actually get the smoke to trail and not lead!!!

Thanks

S.

Sounds weird, maybe you can check the objects src's velocity values higher values cause similar problems.

Mafx
12-02-2008, 11:29 AM
nah I tried that.. had it set high and low but it still just charges off away from it.

JohnnyRandom
12-02-2008, 03:28 PM
Hey all,

I have something weird going on. I have an object moving left to right across the screen (a plane) I have an object on the wing using that as an emitter. When the plane moves the smoke belts out in along the horizontal in the direction the plane is heading (as opposed to trailing behind it.).

I have tried the gravity helper, no gravity, no bouancy , different fuel rates, heat production but every single time the smoke charges in the same direction the plane is heading.

What is the painfully simple thing I am missing here to actually get the smoke to trail and not lead!!!

Thanks

S.

Have you tried using a simple source instead of an object source? (IMO you get way more directional control) Not only can you control the direction with the icons arrow you also get the velocity multipliers in the source params. You can still add the plane geometry as an object source just disable the fuel and smoke so you don't emit but use the temperature and velocities for interaction.

Mafx
12-02-2008, 07:00 PM
Sounds like a plan, I will try it tonight - the normal 9 to 5 calls at the moment (well 8:30 to 6:30)

Thanks for the idea.

S.

Mafx
12-02-2008, 07:01 PM
oh one other thing, I didn't try this yet but can you animate the fume grid to move with an object? basically what is the best way to get the grid to cover the effect if the effect is moving and I do not want to have an enormous grid?

Thanks

S.

Cryptite
12-02-2008, 09:12 PM
It only sometimes works for me, but I generally sim'd the grid and whatever object(s) it was affecting while it was still. After the sim is done, you can link the grid with the moving object and it should work fine; unless you want some sort of interaction with the grid and object while they're moving, at which point, you'll just need a huge grid.

VVaari
12-03-2008, 10:05 AM
wreath: How many particles you used on that shockwave?
I did quick smoke test with fume and pflow, but i could not get it to look like smoke, just black small balls flying around :) Is the any specific settings i need to tweak when using fume and particles together? I'm gonna test more later and post it here.

wreath
12-03-2008, 11:42 AM
wreath: How many particles you used on that shockwave?
I did quick smoke test with fume and pflow, but i could not get it to look like smoke, just black small balls flying around :) Is the any specific settings i need to tweak when using fume and particles together? I'm gonna test more later and post it here.

Here is the scene (http://www.yeatvfx.com/web/pf-ffx-max-2008.rar) VVaari (max 2008)

jimmy4d
12-03-2008, 11:50 AM
wreath: How many particles you used on that shockwave?
I did quick smoke test with fume and pflow, but i could not get it to look like smoke, just black small balls flying around :) Is the any specific settings i need to tweak when using fume and particles together? I'm gonna test more later and post it here.


Hey Iam taking a look at that file too. I did a test render and even though it mite look kinda neat......... its way off from what I want...test (http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/TR001.htm) ........I did a new sim and render last night that looks better, but I think wreath's file will shed some light.......thanks dude.

Strob
12-03-2008, 01:07 PM
Hi,

I have question for Wreath. I saw your website and I like your FX! I would like to have a hint about your settings for the fire ball. what was the scale and noise settings?

Thanx

wreath
12-03-2008, 04:47 PM
Hi Strob, can't remember the exact setup but has to be something like that; high vorticity(1),low buoyancy(0.2 or0.15),didn't used any turbulence and higher burn rate.
Btw nice subsurface scattering on your ear! :thumbsup:

Strob
12-03-2008, 04:59 PM
Hi Strob, can't remember the exact setup but has to be something like that; high vorticity(1),low buoyancy(0.2 or0.15),didn't used any turbulence and higher burn rate.
Btw nice subsurface scattering on your ear! :thumbsup:

Ok thanks for the info. About my ears sss, you have to praise my mother and the sun of Japan (I was in Japan when this photo was taken)!

And again about your fireball, dou you remember using a noise texture for the emission?

wreath
12-03-2008, 05:09 PM
Cool! and i did not use any emission map.

VVaari
12-03-2008, 05:40 PM
wreath: Thanks, I'll check out that scene tomorrow. My goal is to get similar explosions and destruction what you did to that poor chevy :)

Anyways here is one explosion test what i did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj6KAb7vC7o

I know, it's ugly render and crash itself sucks, but it is mostly FumeFX test :)
I'm happy that I was able to get average looking explosion just by playing around with settings. I think biggest problem is that I can't get good looking smoke.

kabyll
12-03-2008, 05:53 PM
Hi,

I would like to get some informations about the "Start Simulation with Loaded Initial State".

I already have a big simulation, 24go on the disk for 45frames, and up to 7.5go in the ram.
But, I need more details at the end, cause the smoke comes near to the camera (frames 30>45), and it lacks of details.


Is it possible, to recalculate with more details, only the last part of the simulation, using the existing one?

If it s possible, how? I don t understand what kind of infos or files needs the "Start Simulation with Loaded Initial State"


thank you,



edit: I'm not sure, the only thing to do is just to activate the snapshot, at frame 30. And then, modifying the parameters, and start from the snapshot of frame 30? As easy as it seems?

Mafx
12-04-2008, 02:48 AM
Thanks for the tip about using the simple source.. I used the shapes I need and plonked them on the plane where I needed them. Once I added the plance in to the obj tab the smoke interacted with it as it rotated also.

Cheers.

S.

Mafx
12-04-2008, 02:55 AM
Hey vvaari,

I think the initial emitter looks a little too big. The explosions is actually bigger than they plane. It starts suddenly at that size and doesn't actually balloon out to that size and up, dunno I just think for the size of the plane and the size of the initial explosion it looks a little too large.

S.

jimmy4d
12-04-2008, 12:07 PM
wreath: I took a look at your file and worked on my own from there. It really did shed a bit of light on things. After I get out from my 9to5 I gotta show you what I did. Thanks a mill Mate.:thumbsup:

jimmy4d
12-05-2008, 12:00 PM
O I know this is not much but its a better start for me.........roadkill (http://dglove.fatcow.com/08/testrenders/roadkill.htm)

wreath
12-05-2008, 01:47 PM
wreath: Thanks, I'll check out that scene tomorrow. My goal is to get similar explosions and destruction what you did to that poor chevy :)

Anyways here is one explosion test what i did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj6KAb7vC7o

I know, it's ugly render and crash itself sucks, but it is mostly FumeFX test :)
I'm happy that I was able to get average looking explosion just by playing around with settings. I think biggest problem is that I can't get good looking smoke.

Looking good "VVaari" have some suggestions if you mind,temperature values looking too linear,try to animate temparature value like;
frames 0-3 (explosion frames) - Temp Values: 100-100
frames 3-8 (after explosion) - Temp Values: 100-0

with that way the explosion smoke cloud may rise more naturally not keep rising with a high velocity,simulation have to lose temparature after very first frames of explosion
Actually that idea is same for all parameters because ffx have a physical based engine, you have to think the way that already exist on nature.


wreath: I took a look at your file and worked on my own from there. It really did shed a bit of light on things. After I get out from my 9to5 I gotta show you what I did. Thanks a mill Mate.:thumbsup:

You're welcome mate, i like your fire gradient ;)

Nicolasii
12-06-2008, 10:18 AM
hey guys, i was just wondering if you could tell me how to "inverse" the flame. Im doing a scene where there is a kind of rocket, and i need the flame to be the rocket engine (so the fire has to be inverted). i have tried to rotate the whole thing, but it doesn't seem to work. lol

TwiiK
12-06-2008, 02:16 PM
What do you mean by an inverted flame? :)

Do you have a reference image I could look at?

pauldublin
12-06-2008, 03:12 PM
Hi,

Here's an explosion i'm working on, any tips/crits greatly welcome

Thanks,

Paul

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

TwiiK
12-06-2008, 03:25 PM
Do you have any references for that explosion or are you just freehanding(probably not a word :p) it?

I can tell you straight up that nothing in the real world explodes like that. :)

What I would change right away about that explosion is to first have it expand out, then have it rise up. That way it would look more like a fuel explosion or similar.

Also, it should be fast then slow. Not the same speed all the way through. I would also throw some more red in there.

It looks good though, definately on the right track.

pauldublin
12-06-2008, 03:36 PM
Thanks man, yeah i'm aiming for something like this by lassjus:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaG24xMQDYQ&feature=related

and this by wreath, really brilliant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIHm1K2FEYI

TwiiK
12-06-2008, 03:45 PM
They do look good, but in my opinion the suffer, to some extent, from the same problems as yours.

In my opinion you should never use other artists work as references instead of the real deal because then you're basing your work on their interpretation of that same effect. This is probably just me though, because I'm a bit eccentric and a realism nut. :)

Nicolasii
12-06-2008, 03:48 PM
twiik:

This is what i'm trying to achieve

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SPAC_Sounding_Rocket_Black_Brant_XII_lg.jpg (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=232647)

i've created a scene where there's spaceship taking off... so i'm trying to simulate the fire coming from the engine... i don't know if there's a way to make the flame pointing to the ground instead of how it would normally be...

(if there's any other doubt, don't heasitate)

pauldublin
12-06-2008, 03:55 PM
of course, but they're brilliantly executed. For fume to be capable of something like these is amazing, I just want to give it a shot too, then I'll try something more of my own

TwiiK
12-07-2008, 09:44 PM
Ahh, by inverted I thought you wanted it to be black in the middle and bright around the edges or something. :)

I guess there's a number of ways to achieve such an effect. You could link a simple source to the end of the rocket and rotate it so the arrow points out of the nozzle. Then increase the directional velocity until you get the flame you want. You'll find the velocities near the bottom of the sources tab in the UI, I think.

You could probably also link a particle flow source to the end of the rocket and spawn particles from it and use fumefx on the particles.

Not sure which method works best. There's probably also lots of other ways to achieve the effect, and maybe someone who actually has fumefx could help you further. :)

jimmy4d
12-08-2008, 12:12 PM
Just having fun with fume.....thought I would share..simplycg callange, could of done a lot better as always....... ran a bit short ontime. ...oh well it was fun.........http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/final_2.htm

JonathanFreisler
12-09-2008, 09:44 PM
AH, im back. I had a week off, but ive finally caught up on the forums. Wreath good stuff as usual man :bowdown:

heres my few explosions/breakdown i did for the blur challenge - may fix it up a bit, i can do the debris MB really easy, but im nto sure if i can handle re siming lol.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=RUlhX9G2tNY&fmt=6

enjoy!

wreath
12-09-2008, 11:37 PM
I have seen on blur thread mate awesome work! lots of patience :cool:

Nicolasii
12-11-2008, 10:46 AM
Thanks twiik for the reply,

i've tried your second suggestion (the one regarding the particle flow, becouse i didn't understood how to do it) and i've set up the particles so when they collide with the deflector, they expand. but i can't get the settings right... i will post what i have came up with later on...

thanks again, and if you could explain me how to link the source and inverse it, it would be great

gaialau
12-11-2008, 09:38 PM
AH, im back. I had a week off, but ive finally caught up on the forums. Wreath good stuff as usual man :bowdown:

heres my few explosions/breakdown i did for the blur challenge - may fix it up a bit, i can do the debris MB really easy, but im nto sure if i can handle re siming lol.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=RUlhX9G2tNY&fmt=6

enjoy!

Wow men really nice work . I loved the break down too, it really help guys like me "beginners" to understand what it takes to make a Hollywood like shot .

amckay
12-11-2008, 09:40 PM
yeah great work dude you did a really nice job

pauldublin
12-11-2008, 09:49 PM
Excellent work I love it. Really convincing

Here's another two tests I've done, just getting used to fume now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W3Ijx6HI5w

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

Only short tests now but I'm aiming to have a more complete effects shot soon

nitrocom
12-11-2008, 10:00 PM
Cool Job Jonathan...

gibson1980
12-12-2008, 03:54 AM
Hi evryone!
Can you halp me?
How adjust parameters (Fire Gradient, Fire AFC, Map) on Rendering panel for really realistic fire...
For example:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=135994&stc=1

this is my test:
http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=hELnW0G8dZM

Thanks

jimmy4d
12-12-2008, 12:06 PM
AH, im back. I had a week off, but ive finally caught up on the forums. Wreath good stuff as usual man :bowdown:

heres my few explosions/breakdown i did for the blur challenge - may fix it up a bit, i can do the debris MB really easy, but im nto sure if i can handle re siming lol.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=RUlhX9G2tNY&fmt=6

enjoy!


Now that is it man.. thats just plane rocks....well done mate.......... and Jonathan thanks for the breakdown, I'm working to get something even close to that.....us amateurs
would be lost without guy like you and wreath.......:beer:

pauldublin
12-12-2008, 12:50 PM
I have a question about scale. I have a grid 500 x 500x 500. When I do my sim it is really clumpy looking, quite strange looking. But, when i reduce the grid back to say 150x150x150, it works fine and 'looks' correct.

So I was wondering is there some way to change the scale globally in fume???

I really don't want to be physically scaling the grid because of animation/tracking etc.

Hope you guys can help on this one thanks

JonathanFreisler
12-12-2008, 02:57 PM
jimmy4d, Allan (the major source of C&C), Paul, wreath, gaialau thanks guys! Its all the people in this forums that inspire me to go go on and power through.

@ gibson1980 - Brandon riza does some amazing stuff and i'm not sure if he lurks around these forums, so i cant speak for him. But, fire isn't always achieved realistically by its shader (Rendering panel). The image you posted had a pflow system through it for embers ect, but its also about the movement, timing, shape and form. That being said the Rendering panel plays a large roll (not to sound contradicting) but try playing around with the opacity AFC, also fluid mapping helps a lot with fire.

@ pauldublin - try putting your spacing up when you have a large grid, do you have the same problem?

gaialau
12-13-2008, 01:24 PM
jimmy4d, Allan (the major source of C&C), Paul, wreath, gaialau thanks guys! Its all the people in this forums that inspire me to go go on and power through.

@ gibson1980 - Brandon riza does some amazing stuff and i'm not sure if he lurks around these forums, so i cant speak for him. But, fire isn't always achieved realistically by its shader (Rendering panel). The image you posted had a pflow system through it for embers ect, but its also about the movement, timing, shape and form. That being said the Rendering panel plays a large roll (not to sound contradicting) but try playing around with the opacity AFC, also fluid mapping helps a lot with fire.

@ pauldublin - try putting your spacing up when you have a large grid, do you have the same problem?

hey JonathanFreisler,have you ever thought about recording an tutorial ? i wish u had recorded this one ,I would be first in line to purchase .

JonathanFreisler
12-13-2008, 01:53 PM
ha ha. Yeah i do plan to do some video tuts in the near future. Basically its just a matter of what people require teaching in and what the current demand is. Atm there is a good coverage of fume/pflow tutorials out there which cover basics to expert levels of training. That being said a lot of questions on the forum could be easily answered in a few intro/beginners tutorials that i think are lacking out there. I know when i first started fume i wanted some dumbed down video tutorials out there (that didn't seem to exist) about what the frick is going on.

@ - I would be first in line to purchase.
If i ever get around to making tutorials (which i do honestly plan too, i just need a minute to chill) ill never charge money for them (unless i made a CD which is unlikely). I'm a strong believer in using online communities to grow and develop as artists and the fact communities work in a cyclic fashion. When I first begun 3D around 6 years ago (yeh i am only 20, but I have been using max for about 6 years now and I do believe I know my fair share of stuff) I watched videos from artists like Allan McKay and read tuts from bobo, Paul Neal (for example, there are more..) and other industry leaders. So me making video tuts would be continuing the cycle or artists giving back to the community just the same way they received in the first place. Hopefully this cycle continues to turn like it has been for years.

@ pauldublin i made a major error, i said "try putting the spacing up". WRONG, try putting it down lol, the lower the spacing the more accurate your sim will be. I have to stop answering questions with beer in my system lol. :beer:

Nicolasii
12-15-2008, 11:45 PM
hi again!!

after doing some research, i manage to make the fire to point to the floor...

thsi is the test i've done, i know it doesn't look very realistic, that's why i want someone to criticise it and give me some hints...

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=zcr6J-sT2kw

jimmy4d
12-16-2008, 12:34 PM
ha ha. Yeah i do plan to do some video tuts in the near future. Basically its just a matter of what people require teaching in and what the current demand is. Atm there is a good coverage of fume/pflow tutorials out there which cover basics to expert levels of training. That being said a lot of questions on the forum could be easily answered in a few intro/beginners tutorials that i think are lacking out there. I know when i first started fume i wanted some dumbed down video tutorials out there (that didn't seem to exist) about what the frick is going on.

@ - I would be first in line to purchase.
If i ever get around to making tutorials (which i do honestly plan too, i just need a minute to chill) ill never charge money for them (unless i made a CD which is unlikely). I'm a strong believer in using online communities to grow and develop as artists and the fact communities work in a cyclic fashion. When I first begun 3D around 6 years ago (yeh i am only 20, but I have been using max for about 6 years now and I do believe I know my fair share of stuff) I watched videos from artists like Allan McKay and read tuts from bobo, Paul Neal (for example, there are more..) and other industry leaders. So me making video tuts would be continuing the cycle or artists giving back to the community just the same way they received in the first place. Hopefully this cycle continues to turn like it has been for years.

@ pauldublin i made a major error, i said "try putting the spacing up". WRONG, try putting it down lol, the lower the spacing the more accurate your sim will be. I have to stop answering questions with beer in my system lol. :beer:


Well said mate......well I took your breakdown and applied to my scene.



I have a ton of questions but I will keep them to a limit........

What form of camera tracking did you use? I like the way yours came out. No detail just the method.

Right now I have 5 containers doing my explosion looking pretty good so far....I will post after a while. Trying to get the rocks to hold on to fume and leave smoke trails in 1 container. I just added the rock I used as an instance object in the pflow to the container. Is there a better way to do this? Do I need to run fume through plow for this....it's working but I think it could be better?



:banghead:

JonathanFreisler
12-16-2008, 12:48 PM
I didn't really do camera tracking. Basically i just animated the target of the camera, i think i may have had a list control with a noise on it, but very subtle. I think when i had the original footage as the background at the start i was animating to match the footage, but just used that as a basis and improved it my self.

AS for the rocks, i used particle sources and just picked my pflow. I think for most of them i used the pflow-AB op to control the amount and size of fume all in the same sim. SO when there in the air, they leave small trails, but when they contact the ground (in the same fume) they make contact splashes of dust (if that makes sense).

jimmy4d
12-16-2008, 02:53 PM
I didn't really do camera tracking. Basically i just animated the target of the camera, i think i may have had a list control with a noise on it, but very subtle. I think when i had the original footage as the background at the start i was animating to match the footage, but just used that as a basis and improved it my self.

AS for the rocks, i used particle sources and just picked my pflow. I think for most of them i used the pflow-AB op to control the amount and size of fume all in the same sim. SO when there in the air, they leave small trails, but when they contact the ground (in the same fume) they make contact splashes of dust (if that makes sense).


Thanks mate, that really helped. The pflow-AB op, I new there was something else I could do, I will tryout tonight.
I don't mean to sound dumb but if you put footage in your background (the envirment tab) I did not know a noise would show up on a camera. I gotta play with this tonight. Thats what your talking about right. :bowdown:

Thanks again for the info and insperation too.

cboath
12-16-2008, 04:38 PM
We finally talked our company into getting fume - and we got the tutorials by Alan McKay as well (amazing stuff) - we've barely had this a couple days and we're getting pressure to do a 200-400' vertical flame, pdq. Think, knocking off the cap on a high pressure gas line and having it ignite about that high.

We were hoping someone could give us some pointers on how to get the flame that high - so far from what we've done, we can't get it remotely that high - even when giving it a simulation box of that size - it barely gets 40'.

Any suggestions on what values to tweak to get that kinda height?

Thanks!

Glacierise
12-16-2008, 04:56 PM
Use the directional velocity of a simple source, or particle source so you can control it as you wish ;)

cboath
12-16-2008, 05:28 PM
Use the directional velocity of a simple source, or particle source so you can control it as you wish ;)

Hey thanks!

That did the trick. Hadn't seen that in the tuts yet. I'm loving this thing...you get lost for days playing with this! :)

TwiiK
12-16-2008, 09:45 PM
Guess who else finally got fume?

I was becoming tired of watching everyone go from the Afterburn thread to the FumeFX thread.

Here's some of the tests I've done the last few days (click the images to view the movies or right-click and download to download the movies):

They are all fairly small (500kb-3mb) except the high quality fire one which is 20mb.
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/flame.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/flame.mov)
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/meteorrain.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/multimeteor.mov)http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/multimeteor.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/meteorrain.mov)http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/rockets.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/rockets.mov)http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/weird_explosion.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/weird_explosion.mov)http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/weirder_explosion.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/weirder_explosion.mov)http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/weirdest_explosion.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/weirdest_explosion.mov)
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/flamethrower.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/flamethrower.mov)
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/flame_hq.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/flame_hq.mov)

The first flame was the first basic test I guess everyone does with fumeFX.

The 3 really weird "explosions" were just the result of some ufortunate tests done in a scene with messed up settings. I just sent them on to the render servers and didn't actually look at them until they were done.

The 3 meteor-like tests were just some simple tests with particle flow as the source.

Flamethrower scene was a global illumination and particle flow test.

The last fireball was just a test of how high I could go settings wise and a pretty funky fire gradient. The scene is basically the first flame scene, but with all the settings cranked up high. Grid size of 400x400x800 for that one. Took about 9 hours to simulate for 300 frames.

One of the weird meteor tests was actually worse in terms of the simulation (I think it was the one with the meteors coming up from the ground). The high quality flame spiked at 5gb ram used while that meteor test used all 8gb ram on the server it was rendering on as well as 50gb of sim data for just 100 frames. I guess it was because of the smoke and fluid mapping.

Nicolasii, now that I actually have FumeFX I did a testscene for the rocket engine as well:
http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/fumefx/rocket_engine.jpg (http://server2.nymedia.no/twiik/sites/server2.nymedia.no.twiik/files/rocket_engine.zip)
Click or right-click and save as to download the scene for this one

I will get some proper effects and not just tests done soon when I have some more time.

Btw, I originally had some smilies in there, but apparently they counted as images so the mood of the post became a bit more serious. *grin*

grury
12-17-2008, 06:46 AM
LOL! Thats some crazy stuff u have there Twiik, well done.
Nice GI test, although would be nice to have the sticky fire to stay in for a bit longer.
That crazy 400x400x800 sim, would look pretty cool as a Krakatoa render.

JonathanFreisler
12-17-2008, 07:05 AM
Nice to see you have converted to the fume side twiik :P Really cool stuff man. It all looks a really quick and light, try putting the time scale down or activation stride. even to 0.8 or something so it all just doesn't whisp by. but good stuff.

Have a good Christmas all, I'm going on holidays (again) 2mora, and ill be back in the new year after my birthday and all!

So much stuff to do.

TwiiK
12-17-2008, 09:10 AM
Yep, the speed issue is something that's visible in all the tests. Some of the really weird ones seemed to accelerate towards the end as well. :)

They were all done so quick that I barely looked at the results before I let them sim and render out, but I will look into that the next time. Maybe I'll have something done this weekend - I have some ideas.

CapitanRed
12-18-2008, 12:18 AM
Grid size of 400x400x800 for that one. Took about 9 hours to simulate for 300 frames :eek:

this way you can get real fire in da house man! ;)
What a hell of a machine did it that quick?
some of your tests look pretty nice!

JohnnyRandom
12-18-2008, 02:24 AM
Twiik is tweaking :D

would look pretty cool as a Krakatoa render. To be honest when i first saw it I thought it was (the fire anyway), the voxel size was so small.

Glacierise
12-18-2008, 07:38 AM
Twiik, that's brutal settings dude :) Keep up Fuming ;)

I have a question guys, have anybody successfully made a FumeFX matte? In my current scene I can get away with the channel data shader rendering black, because I will screen-merge that pass in comp, but I need some way to make Fume render a matte, i.e. it's alpha to be black. Thanks!

Mafx
12-18-2008, 08:33 AM
ok I am not really sure what I am missing but I have a scene sim'd out and I have just changed the renderer to VRAY but I cannot get any of the flames to render now. I am lighting the scene with a direct light for shadowing of the flames but using VRAY HDRI with a standard camera, pretty standard sort of arrangement - no flames though. VRAY has GI turned on - can someone point out the no doubt obvious mistake I am making here?

Thanks heaps

S.

TwiiK
12-18-2008, 10:34 AM
It was simulated on 1 of my servers, a core 2 quad 6600 slightly overlocked to 3ghz, with 8gb ram. I had hoped I could simulate on all the servers at once, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, the way you submit simulations through backburner feels a little hacked to me. It would be nice if you had a completion timer or anything in the backburner monitor. Instead I have look at the simulation through vnc on the remote server to see how long it will take and how far it has come.

Still, only minor issues for me at the moment. :) The most important fact is that it does work.

My next FumeFX attempt will be a slow motion effect to see how that works. Hopefully I'll get some time to work on that this weekend.

jimmy4d
12-18-2008, 10:42 AM
Twiik, dude those shots look sweet mate.......wecome to the fume side........(cool someone else to learn from hehe)

wreath
12-18-2008, 01:29 PM
Twiik, that's brutal settings dude :) Keep up Fuming ;)

I have a question guys, have anybody successfully made a FumeFX matte? In my current scene I can get away with the channel data shader rendering black, because I will screen-merge that pass in comp, but I need some way to make Fume render a matte, i.e. it's alpha to be black. Thanks!

Dude we are suffering from same sh%t !!! :banghead:

Glacierise
12-18-2008, 05:46 PM
@Wreath: sucks then. I hope FFX2 will fix that thorn up my... neck soon.

Meanwhile: http://cg.glacierise.com/animation/bar-be-gone.mov

My new shot! Take a look folks!

wreath
12-18-2008, 11:56 PM
Soo cool dude!! great render too :buttrock:

Glacierise
12-19-2008, 07:02 AM
Thanks man :) I can now take a shot at that challenge of ours. Btw, do you happen to have access to any soldier models?

wreath
12-19-2008, 01:05 PM
Thanks man :) I can now take a shot at that challenge of ours. Btw, do you happen to have access to any soldier models?

Hmm not really, whatcha planning?

Glacierise
12-19-2008, 01:26 PM
Hm, I changed my idea. So the original challenge about the mech stays. I can't find any decent free model, so I will have to do that again (argh). And what I imagine is a scene with a simplish mech, getting enraged over a giant granite moss-ridden teapot! :D It would be a nod towards CG geekyness - with the teapot and the ground being checkered concrete :) So the mech would fire some cannons and missiles at the teapot, to no effect, then get pissed off and pull out a freeze ray, freeze it over and smash it in some stylish fashion :) This way I won't model for weeks, and I will be able to put more FX work in, but it will still look nice and will be fun. It will have bullets, cannons, missile and a freeze ray effect, with it then freezing over and breaking. Kinda CG short, really. What do you think?

wreath
12-19-2008, 01:51 PM
Hahaha loved that teapot buster thingy, same on me dude still don't wanna mess with rigging stuff but couldn't find any rigged mecha within my budget so mine will kinda experimental i guess, i'm starting on Monday!!

JohnnyRandom
12-19-2008, 03:43 PM
Nice Hristo :D I like the bending pipe and lamp post that was cool;)

Glacierise
12-19-2008, 09:07 PM
Thanks man, it's the details that really sell it, right? I have put quite a lot - the small cup rolling in the wind and the waving cloth in the start, the bending street sign and lamp pole the drainpipe, the cool way the chalkboard flies off :) Cool stuff, I think!

PexElroy
12-20-2008, 08:49 PM
Lookin' good Glacierise; what were some specs on the FFX settings, RAM and cache sizes?

Glacierise
12-21-2008, 12:27 AM
Thanks man! Well the only thing special is the animation. When I design a Fume sim I always end up animating a lot of parameters - the turb, byoyancy, directional velocity, time scale, etc. The grids themselves are - one for the main smoke blast, one for the dust from the entire wall, one for the dust from the fragments flying off, and one for the burning pieces. Resolutions are not too big - the biggest dimension is like 200 - I am a poor guy with just one Q6600, 4 Gb ram. I think you need at least 4 to work decently in Fume, it was quite sucky before when I was with 2 and 32bit - often ran out of memory and was unstable. I've already deleted the sim files now, but they were, I think, 3-4 gigs altogether.

jimmy4d
12-21-2008, 12:37 PM
sweet Glacierise; I do like the paper effect, always adds a nice touch. Nice job on the detail, hard to keep track and know when to stop aye........great stuff mate:buttrock:

jimmy4d
12-21-2008, 02:28 PM
Forgot to post my work........thanks to all for your help........crits welcome..

http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/farmland.mov ......10.2 mb.

Glacierise
12-21-2008, 02:58 PM
Hey Jimmy! I saw your vid - I like the start, but the finish - not that much :) The straight vertical column kills it for me. You need some other setup for the late smoke - high amounts of smoke in the source, a little hi-freq turb.

jimmy4d
12-21-2008, 03:53 PM
thanks Glacierise....yeah that upward rushing,skinny thing does nothing for me either. Will redo.

Glacierise
12-21-2008, 06:28 PM
Hey guys,

I am in a tough spot, rendering my geometry with mr, and my fumefx with scanline. Problem is motion blur, for a long time now. I have a mr geometry pass, and on top - a scanline fumefx pass with the objects as mattes. The problem is that I can't use neither scanline's nor mr's motion blurs, since they behave differently and mattes don't match with the objects beneath. I also can't use vector based mblur, because Fume doesn't render the velocity element. And the only option left is image based MB, and having people saying to me that my motion blur sucks :) How do you bigtime production people do it?

Daniel-B
12-21-2008, 06:39 PM
Hey guys,

I am in a tough spot, rendering my geometry with mr, and my fumefx with scanline. Problem is motion blur, for a long time now. I have a mr geometry pass, and on top - a scanline fumefx pass with the objects as mattes. The problem is that I can't use neither scanline's nor mr's motion blurs, since they behave differently and mattes don't match with the objects beneath. I also can't use vector based mblur, because Fume doesn't render the velocity element. And the only option left is image based MB, and having people saying to me that my motion blur sucks :) How do you bigtime production people do it?

Try using multiple pass Camera motion blur. It acts more like true 3D motion blur, and might match up with Mental Ray enough. However, you will have to get the biases to match as well. In my experience, a bias in Mental Ray of 0.25 instead of -0.25 matches up better.

Hope this helps.

wreath
12-22-2008, 01:28 AM
Forgot to post my work........thanks to all for your help........crits welcome..

http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/farmland.mov ......10.2 mb.

Hey man you're really getting better'n better here my suggestions;

If you will use a still photo for backplate try to find a scene that doesn't have anything always in motion on it,in this case no matter how your explosion kicks ass that freezed bushes near the road would kill the scene. Next time get yourself a giant fan and ventilate them to death :twisted: or you can do some basic matte paint stuff and replace them with CG bushes reacting the explosion.
Agreed with Hristo on column looking smoke,to prevent that tweak your buoyancy values or animate temparature to a low value after very first frames of explosion, higher temperature values cause fastly rising smoke/fire and personally i recommend avoiding of harsh camera motions, if you really want to use, adding some motion blur to camera gets you a smoother/natural results.

cheers

jimmy4d
12-22-2008, 11:12 AM
Hey man you're really getting better'n better here my suggestions;

If you will use a still photo for backplate try to find a scene that doesn't have anything always in motion on it,in this case no matter how your explosion kicks ass that freezed bushes near the road would kill the scene. Next time get yourself a giant fan and ventilate them to death :twisted: or you can do some basic matte paint stuff and replace them with CG bushes reacting the explosion.
Agreed with Hristo on column looking smoke,to prevent that tweak your buoyancy values or animate temparature to a low value after very first frames of explosion, higher temperature values cause fastly rising smoke/fire and personally i recommend avoiding of harsh camera motions, if you really want to use, adding some motion blur to camera gets you a smoother/natural results.

cheers

Thank you mate..........all well said:) ,,,,,, Ya that photo does nothing for my fume boom does it. I mean the photo is cool but yeah nothings moving,good point. I kinda rushed to finish cuz I had to reformat pc. I think I can do better. Thank for the advise, taken with great stride.

JohnnyRandom
12-23-2008, 03:35 AM
Check your files section...

What's new in FumeFX 1.2
======================

+ new: mental ray shader - included local rendering only. Network rendering will require additional licenses.
+new: availability of stand alone rendering libraries for Windows and Linux.
+new: max script access to shader's AFC and Gradient controls
+fixed: if using same cache in multiple grids, some might fail to open cache.
+fixed: Fume FX Follow operator crash fixed
+fixed: FumeFX_TP.dlo crash under max 2009
+fixed: Fume FX Follow operator for Particle Flow bug fixes
+removed: simulation on hard disk
+fixed: max2009 64bit - FumeFX max script dialog failed to reopen

mmmnnn Mental Ray woohoo!

Glacierise
12-23-2008, 08:06 AM
Yahooooooooooooou mental!!! Oh happy day :D Now if only there are no unpleasant surprises, like it not working with half the othe mr stuff, that would be awesome. And the other fixes are great too!

grury
12-23-2008, 03:15 PM
Damn good news! :scream:

Mafx
12-25-2008, 09:55 AM
Just tinkering with a RF mesh and chucked a Fume effect over it.

Just practising.


http://www.meshandfx.com.au/3dwork/rf_fire.mp4 (1.3 meg)

S.

wreath
12-27-2008, 11:32 AM
Hi guys made a new shot used fume a lot on this one. (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=5582526#post5582526) :buttrock:

fiftypercent
12-27-2008, 07:49 PM
wreath... hw much memory cn u get 2 with fumefx... because mine shuts down at like 800 mb of ram