Xpresso and thinkng particles

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  11 November 2012
Question Xpresso and thinkng particles

Hello All,

I have basic knowledge of C4D R11.5. I am learnign it myself by online tutorials. I came to know that Xpresso and thinking particles are very powerful in C4D but I don't know anything about it. I tried some online tutorial but I didn't get it. I want to learn about them.

1. What is Xpresso and Thinking particles?

2. Difference between simple particles and thinking particles

3. What can I do with them? I mean what are uses of them?

4. How can I learn about them ? Beacause I am learning online, no one is here to help me

5. Is there any website from where I can learn from begaing?

Thank you,

Vipati
 
  11 November 2012
1. xpresso is a node based programing language. thinking particles is a rule based particle system. tp is implemented as a feature of xpresso. xpresso is very similar to the ICE in XSI or the operator (Ops) system of houdini.

2. the standard particles are a very basic event based particle system and therefor less powerful than tp.

4&5. there are specific video training products for tp & xpresso out there i think, but the most obvious answer is : http://www.cineversity.com/.


ps : i know, some people won't like this, but if you are specific into particles, cinema isn't a very good choice right now. you will be way better of with XSI or houdini. for reasons use the search function, it has beeen discussed quite often here, why c4d is a bad particle environment.
 
  11 November 2012
Originally Posted by Little_Devil: ps : i know, some people won't like this, but if you are specific into particles, cinema isn't a very good choice right now. you will be way better of with XSI or houdini. for reasons use the search function, it has beeen discussed quite often here, why c4d is a bad particle environment.

No surprise, i don't like it
Sorry, but while i agree that Houdini offers a lot more regarding particles than TP in Cinema 4D and that XSI does have a very good particle systems it's not as if TP were a slouch. I wouldn't do Blockbuster movie effects with it, but for by far the most uses a single person or a small studio needs particles for it will work just fine.
Also i don't see Houdini or even ICE as a valid alternative for someone who hasn't even mastered any bit of Xpresso.
So while your comment isn't incorrect, it does not realy apply to this situation.

Cheers
Björn
__________________
- www.bonkers.de -
The views expressed on this post are my personal opinions and do not represent the views of my employer.
 
  11 November 2012
Hi,
I just started using Thinking Particles with C4D too and found this tutorial - though he does not explain anything verbally - very helpful:

http://vimeo.com/18310667

I hope this helps you too

Greetings,

JayCox
 
  11 November 2012
As someone who loves xpresso, I have a complicated relationship with Thinking Particles. It is quite powerful once you get a little bit under the hood, however it isn't very intuitive and I often hit a wall. A lot of this has to do with particle limit, both in absolute numbers, but also the playback in cinema. I'd need a LOT more hands and feet to count the number of times I've frozen cinema because I hit the play button with a particular TP setup that I can't escape from.

I don't have a different piece of software to compare to, but I'd be very happy with an updated TP system. It does feel its age to me.


Anyway, I made a series of tutorials on TP a couple of years ago for beginners, please excuse the quality, it was the start of making tutorials

http://vimeo.com/12773194
__________________
Tutorials
 
  11 November 2012
Originally Posted by Srek: No surprise, i don't like it
Sorry, but while i agree that Houdini offers a lot more regarding particles than TP in Cinema 4D and that XSI does have a very good particle systems it's not as if TP were a slouch. I wouldn't do Blockbuster movie effects with it, but for by far the most uses a single person or a small studio needs particles for it will work just fine.
Also i don't see Houdini or even ICE as a valid alternative for someone who hasn't even mastered any bit of Xpresso.
So while your comment isn't incorrect, it does not realy apply to this situation.


i do not mean to hijack this thread with starting this old discussion again, but let me reply quickly to that, so that the op knows what i meant.

1. the lack of subframe sampling isn't a matter of project scale. it hurts even on smallest scale, as combined with missing baking support for tp your are either forced to render at very high framerates or use tedious workarrounds in your setups.

2. the preset libs of other packages are just better. rebuilding a siwrl noise or a flow arround surface compound in xpresso and python will be quite time consuming and difficult, especially as a small scale user. and even smaller compunds aren't there like a TurbulenceArroundValue or a CatchParticlesByVolume.
the reason for that is mainly that maxon doen't seem to trust their on tech, as it only provides compounds on scene level (aka the user data null object presets) and not on node level (except for some dataconversion coffee/pyhton compunds).

you could add the quite limited particle count and the outdated pyrocluster to the list, but this won't apply to every users demands i guess. however, i didn't want to say that TP is weak, its robust concept set by cebas remains powerful even after years and in combination with mograph tp offers some unique features.

but the fact remains, that c4ds thinkingParticles workflow could be called at best edgy these days ( imho ). and again this doesn't mean you can't do anything with it.

(ps : tp != xpresso, xpresso is 100% fine)
 
  11 November 2012
Originally Posted by Little_Devil: i do not mean to hijack this thread with starting this old discussion again, but let me reply quickly to that, so that the op knows what i meant.

1. the lack of subframe sampling isn't a matter of project scale. it hurts even on smallest scale, as combined with missing baking support for tp your are either forced to render at very high framerates or use tedious workarrounds in your setups.

2. the preset libs of other packages are just better. rebuilding a siwrl noise or a flow arround surface compound in xpresso and python will be quite time consuming and difficult, especially as a small scale user. and even smaller compunds aren't there like a TurbulenceArroundValue or a CatchParticlesByVolume.
the reason for that is mainly that maxon doen't seem to trust their on tech, as it only provides compounds on scene level (aka the user data null object presets) and not on node level (except for some dataconversion coffee/pyhton compunds).

you could add the quite limited particle count and the outdated pyrocluster to the list, but this won't apply to every users demands i guess. however, i didn't want to say that TP is weak, its robust concept set by cebas remains powerful even after years and in combination with mograph tp offers some unique features.

but the fact remains, that c4ds thinkingParticles workflow could be called at best edgy these days ( imho ). and again this doesn't mean you can't do anything with it.

(ps : tp != xpresso, xpresso is 100% fine)


1. has been discussed several times here and there is a working solution. The main problem is that most users simply don't adjust their setup to allow for this. With R14 Alembic can be used to bake several particle solutions for later combination in a single scene.

2. I asked for wishes on presets in the past and got practicaly no reply. Something like what you ask for hasn't been requested via the Maxon Web Suggestions form either. Your attempt to provide a reason is not correct. The reason why not as many compound nodes are provided is simply that they weren't requested. There was more feedback regarding Object presets and those were realy only a few.

The particle count limitations can be overcome in many situations by using Alembic as well. I agree that PC is in need for an overhaul, but i found i.e. Hair a very good method to render particles fast in a versatile way.

Cheers
Björn
__________________
- www.bonkers.de -
The views expressed on this post are my personal opinions and do not represent the views of my employer.
 
  11 November 2012
Originally Posted by Srek: 1. has been discussed several times here and there is a working solution. The main problem is that most users simply don't adjust their setup to allow for this. With R14 Alembic can be used to bake several particle solutions for later combination in a single scene.

2. I asked for wishes on presets in the past and got practicaly no reply. Something like what you ask for hasn't been requested via the Maxon Web Suggestions form either. Your attempt to provide a reason is not correct. The reason why not as many compound nodes are provided is simply that they weren't requested. There was more feedback regarding Object presets and those were realy only a few.

The particle count limitations can be overcome in many situations by using Alembic as well. I agree that PC is in need for an overhaul, but i found i.e. Hair a very good method to render particles fast in a versatile way.

Cheers
Björn


i will leave it at that, i have just expressed my oppinion. its understandable that you defend your product. i think it is now up to the OP to decide what he needs and what he doesn't.

cheers,
LD
 
  12 December 2012
SubFrame Woes

I've hit a snag and I fear it may be a sub frame issue...

I'm running an emitter along a spline which generates particles at right angles to the spline. I'm using a Tracer object to trace the paths of the particles. Basically like a tree trunk with branches.

The trouble I'm having is that the particles don't always emanate from the main spline, there appears a little gap on most of the branches.

If I set the emission rate to match the frame rate (25fps) its perfect.

I can also get it to work if I set the frame rate to 100fps, but to be honest I don't want to have render 100fps!

I been banging my head for a couple of days trying to figure a work around but with no joy. Been trying all the various solutions & work arounds mentioned as well.

Has anybody got any other suggestions?! Project attached.

Best

Pete

http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachm...id=170230&stc=1

Attached Files
File Type: zip SubFrameEmission02.c4d.zip (54.8 KB, 23 views)
 
  12 December 2012
Just use Shot instead of Count as Birth Mode and you should be fine.
 
  12 December 2012
connect Position velocity and Emitter Velocity
Attached Files
File Type: zip emission_particle_distance.zip (9.3 KB, 12 views)
 
  12 December 2012
hmmmmm

I've tried the 'positionVelocity-emitter velocity' method and the problem is still there.

I've also tried the 'DT Factor' method, which seems to help a bit but doesn't eliminate the issue.

My fudgeroo is to clone a load of spheres onto the junctions to hide the gaps at the moment.

projects attached

http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachm...chmentid=&stc=1
Attached Files
File Type: zip SubFrameEmission03.c4d.zip (93.9 KB, 9 views)
 
  12 December 2012
hm,

everything is working as expected. i think you are talking about the particle density
being higher at the begining and end of the spline ? that is because of the the non
linear velocity of the null itself, the null is moving slower at start and end of the spline
and therefor more particles are being emitted there. this is not a subframe emission
problem.

1. you could make the animation of the null linear by going into the timeline and set
the align to spline key interpolation to linear.

2. you could try to normalize the the length of your nulls velocity vector with a
topspeed value and use this factor to drive the particle per frame emission of your
emitter. but this method might cause other problems. the method to get the length
of of a vector is simply myVector.GetLength(). so some python/coffee would be
required here.
 
  12 December 2012
Thread automatically closed

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.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.