View Full Version : Effect with FumeFX or Afterburn?

01 January 2007, 07:54 AM
In Star Trek Insurrection, there is a scene where the Enterprise is trailing smoke. It's a wide angle shot, and you can see the curved smoke trail way back in the scene. A couple of photons are exchanged in the scene as well. The smoke has a liquid like movement (very slight), and appears to be milky in texture. Do you know what scene I'm talking about?

Anyway, which plug-in would be needed to acheive that type of smoke effect? Is it even possible with Afterburn, or is FumeFX the only way to do that? Does FumeFX work with particles, or does it only work within its own grid space? All of the Afterburn examples that I've seen have a billowing/plume type smoke which is not what I want. Can Afterburn be adjusted to have a smooth/liquid smoke look? I've heard that Afterburn can use metaparticles, where they blob together.

Anyone have any ideas?


01 January 2007, 09:04 AM
any chance of posting a screenshot of the effect?

01 January 2007, 12:12 AM
Let me know what you think. Which plug-in could/would be used to re-create this scene, and if anyone could share a few pointers. I'm guessing I would need either Afterburn or FumeFX.

Thanks in advance,


01 January 2007, 01:03 AM
I don't have this on DVD, only Nemesis, but if I recall, you can do this with Afterburn or FumeFX. To use FFX would take a little more work, but is possible after you learn all the fine controls of FFX. Afterburn would work too, but it won't move as natural as a fluid system, as in the film, it was likely a custom Maya fluid or practical smoke effect done on a green screen. So it's a question of what effect you want and your skills at each tool, and how much time you want to invest. FFX also works in a grid box, so the larger this grid, the more RAM and time it takes. If I see it on TV and watch this scene again, I could likely say it is a fluid system vs. Afterburn.

01 January 2007, 01:25 AM
Thanks for the reply. I agree with what you said. Here's my thinking, and correct me if I'm wrong:

FumeFX uses a grid (just like you said), but if I have a ship flying from the distance to the foreground trailing smoke the whole time, the FumeFX grid would have to be HUGE to cover all of that 3D space. Would that even be practical in FumeFX?

Can you use FumeFX with particle flow like with Afterburn, or does it HAVE to be within its own grid?

With Afterburn, I could link the particle flow emitter to my ship which is on a path constraint. The only problem I see with this would be the motion and texture of the smoke. If you watch the scene in Star Trek, the smoke does have a fluid like motion to it (at least that's what I see). Could that motion be re-created with a little bit of wind and drag?

Also, can you texture Afterburn smoke to look like that? I'm guessing with a little work.

Thanks again,


01 January 2007, 03:07 AM
Getting the look like that with afterburn wouldn't be too hard. Getting a fluid like motion will be the harder part. You can have pflow follow fume motion, but you still need the grid to do the simulation in. I think your best bet would be afterburn and pflow.

02 February 2007, 03:07 AM
agreed things moving that fast the consumer wont even notice if its moving fluidly or not. unless ur the artist doing it no one will know. only time people notice things like that is when the effect was done badly. how do you think they did that shot. its an older shot and fluid simualtion was proabaly not used.

02 February 2007, 04:50 AM
Yeah i think chosing Afterburn & Pf flow will be good option for this kind of effect. You can achieve it quite affectively.

CGTalk Moderation
02 February 2007, 04:50 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.