XP4 owners - vs TFD?

Become a member of the CGSociety

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

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  12 December 2017
XP4 owners - vs TFD?

I know it is early days, but one thing that that had held me back from purchasing TFD, was knowing that XP4 had a fluid solution too.

I'd like to know how it stacks up? I have read the other thread and native renderers seem to create issues. I don't really want to invest in another renderer ( time and money ) just to get XP4 up to scratch.

Anyone in a position to comment?

Ta.
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
  12 December 2017
I've barely touched  TFD, but I found it a lot more challenging to setup & control creatively. 

Plus, it hasn't had a real update in a number of years. 
 
  12 December 2017
I've played with XP4 a bit and for me TFD still looks more real at its behaviour and faster at viewport with Interactive simulation. I think more opinions and thoughts will be available next year when all XP4&TFD users will play with it more. For now I think it's better to wait and check what people doing with XP. Physical and Standard renderers like to calculate XP fluids some time before begins to render even when cached. Don't know though is it bug or a feature.
Btw TFD got small updates from time to time with small improvements and bug fixes and also I think TFD 2.0 is still at development. I hope so at least.

Last edited by E2GO : 12 December 2017 at 06:15 AM.
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by LukeLetellier: I've barely touched  TFD, but I found it a lot more challenging to setup & control creatively. 

Plus, it hasn't had a real update in a number of years.
Quite the opposite, its the easiest tool to get high quality fluids within C4D. 
plus it has real GPU solving since a number of years which alone makes it vastly superior
__________________
.::www.uglykids.org::.
 
  12 December 2017
Just as an FYI as I just learned this.  

X-Particles does not support GI with the C4D standard or physical renderers.  Don't expect to use the fire as a light source unless you're using a 3rd party renderer that supports it.  

I'm really disappointed by this.
__________________
MikeFix.com | C4DList.com
 
  12 December 2017
My take after a couple of days experimentation – these are all early observations and not to be taken as gospel! There are pros and cons to both plugins…

Explosia is slower to simulate and render. It's weird that there's such a long preparation time before rendering – with complex scenes you're talking very long render times. Yes you can use OVDB files in another renderer, but this overcomplicates things for most people. If this issue can be fixed or optimised, it would help a great deal as the end results are lovely.

Because of its GPU acceleration, its far quicker to do a sim, preview, tweak and iterate in TFD. You can also get sharper, finer-detailed results in less time. To do the same with Explosia you need to wind down the voxel size and then everything gets much slower.

Explosia is far more art-directable. You can add loads of XP modifiers to shape the smoke trails and do all sorts of weird and wonderful effects. You can also move the source in real-time (albeit at low res) to see a rough preview. TFD is all cache based and largely bound by realism.

TFD's screen preview is far superior to XP's; really no argument there. Also, Explosia doesn't seem to preview the fuel/fire properly.

In terms of final render, both create really attractive images and are pretty evenly matched. Tweaking the colour palette is similar in both, although TFD is easier to experiment with due to its preview and rapid iteration.

TFD cost £369, while  X-Particles 4 is £540, but you get an awful lot of value in its suite of tools; Explosia is really just one small part of it. However if you need good looking, realistic smoke/fire/explosions etc and need them today, not tomorrow – as it stands you'd get TFD. If Insydium can speed up Explosia (which is basically a v1.0), then it has a lot of positives such as the art directability and ability to create more abstract imagery. Just my opinion after a few days mucking about!
 
  12 December 2017
Thanks guys. Really helpful comments here. I still 100% believe XP4 is an incredible product and superb value for money. It's definitely on the list. But TFD is probably more suited to my fluid sim needs at the moment. Im hoping they drop the price in response to XP4, but either way, TFD is back on the table for a purchase soon.

Ta.
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by uglykids: Quite the opposite, its the easiest tool to get high quality fluids within C4D. 
plus it has real GPU solving since a number of years which alone makes it vastly superior

I guess I phrased myself poorly. It presents very realistic results, and the GPU speed-up is definitely well received by those who have the hardware (I never had enough Vram to make use of it). Plus, the fact that it can make use of Standard and physical renderer without issue is a big boost.

I was thinking more about its ability to control the flames in specific and art-directable fashions, as Darth mole mentioned - and the Xparticle tools (especially those in V4, like velocity fields) are fantastic at doing just that.
 
  12 December 2017
At one point the dev of TurbulenceFD conveyed he was working on an update that would utilize multiple GPU. The idea is once VRAM was exhausted on one card it would proceed to the next available card. This was a few years ago. I guess he abandoned the idea.

Currently once VRAM is used up...the rendering auto-shifts to CPU mode...so that's pretty slick.
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by LukeLetellier: I guess I phrased myself poorly. It presents very realistic results, and the GPU speed-up is definitely well received by those who have the hardware (I never had enough Vram to make use of it). Plus, the fact that it can make use of Standard and physical renderer without issue is a big boost.

I was thinking more about its ability to control the flames in specific and art-directable fashions, as Darth mole mentioned - and the Xparticle tools (especially those in V4, like velocity fields) are fantastic at doing just that.
Whilst this is mostly true, the use of TP is an option in TFD. So whilst not on par with XP4, some artistic sculpting is available if you know how to wrangle TP. 
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
  12 December 2017
One thing that's being overlooked here is the speed at which Insydium updates their products, particularly right after a big upgrade. Also some big updates coming very soon to Cycles4D, including Explosia support. So... what's true today...
 
reply 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 06:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.