CGTalk > More Forums > Click Here for: > Apple Shake
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-19-2009, 05:35 AM   #1
Graphscale
Veteran
portfolio
AJ
na
The South, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 55
What are you Shake guys using for...

What are you Shake guys using for rain, fog, steam, smoke etc? I find myself going to After effects for that (and for setting up simple 2.5D scenes like small crane moves etc, bugger! ) but I'm getting sick of that. I hate the layer based workflow. So what are you guys using? Thanks.
 
Old 12-19-2009, 11:02 PM   #2
beaker
Meep!
 
beaker's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Deke Kincaid
VR Pipeline Supervisor
DD
Los Angeles, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,540
Send a message via ICQ to beaker Send a message via AIM to beaker Send a message via MSN to beaker Send a message via Yahoo to beaker
Same thing I use in every other compositing app: Stock Footage.
__________________
-deke
 
Old 12-20-2009, 01:46 AM   #3
Graphscale
Veteran
portfolio
AJ
na
The South, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 55
You mean you use stock footage as in "rain" shot against a black back ground?
You use that for fog, smoke, steam too? I can't see how as it's not very controllable. I think some sort of simulator or particles emitter is better because you can fully control it. I was looking at Particles Illusion but as it is a stand alone program I'm not sure if there's any integration with Shake. Some sort of Shake plug-in would probably be easier. But with Shake discontinued a lot of it's plug-ins have gone too.
 
Old 12-20-2009, 02:04 AM   #4
scrimski
antieverything
portfolio
J. Schreyer
head->wall
ARRI Berlin
Berlin, Germany
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,983
Quote:
If your working on the mac then you can do particle effects in Motion and then just bring a live motion project into a file-in node and it will playback without prerendering.
Nice. Never thought about that, looked at motion and never touched it again.

edit: meh. Post order messed up again.
 
Old 12-20-2009, 02:06 AM   #5
beaker
Meep!
 
beaker's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Deke Kincaid
VR Pipeline Supervisor
DD
Los Angeles, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,540
Send a message via ICQ to beaker Send a message via AIM to beaker Send a message via MSN to beaker Send a message via Yahoo to beaker
People have been using stock for years in vfx, commercial and television production. Just warp, distort, mix and match different versions to make it work for your particular shot. It is far faster then having to make it up from scratch with a cg program. I can point to thousands of films and commercials where this has been done. Hundreds that I have worked on personally.

If you are using something like particle illusion you can just render it out and then bring it into Shake to comp (done that many times too). If your working on the mac then you can do particle effects in Motion and then just bring a live motion project into a file-in node and it will playback without prerendering.
__________________
-deke
 
Old 12-20-2009, 02:31 AM   #6
Graphscale
Veteran
portfolio
AJ
na
The South, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 55
I had no idea Motion was usable for anything. Have never touched it. So how does Motion particles compare to something more professional like Particles Illusion? Probably look cheap and fake . But maybe not. I have to check.
What is a good source for stock footage with steam and fog? I have only seen rain, smoke and some very fake looking snow.
Thanks.
 
Old 12-20-2009, 02:50 AM   #7
beaker
Meep!
 
beaker's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Deke Kincaid
VR Pipeline Supervisor
DD
Los Angeles, USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,540
Send a message via ICQ to beaker Send a message via AIM to beaker Send a message via MSN to beaker Send a message via Yahoo to beaker
Particle Illusion and Motion particles are both sprites so I don't see why Motion's would look any cheaper then PI particles. Motion actually supports 16/32 bpc float where PI only supports 8 bpc. Also Motion has full 3d cameras and more volumetric looking 3d particles where PI is much more 2.5d. Some of it depends the quality of your source sprites behind the particles, not the program behind them.

As for stock footage there are tons of different places on the web that sell them (artbeats for example). On many shoots people just go out and shoot their own. These days with a 5d or 7d you could easily shoot high quality versions in your backyard.
__________________
-deke

Last edited by beaker : 12-20-2009 at 02:53 AM.
 
Old 01-09-2010, 02:15 AM   #8
stuckfootage
New Member
portfolio
Les Stuck
stuckfootage
Oakland, USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6
/Applications/Shake/Cookbook Extras/macros/Rain/Rain.h
 
Old 02-05-2010, 05:49 AM   #9
Shankar
Veteran
Sankar
Sr.VFx TD
Singapore
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 73
To do fake rain, you can use Rand node .Then make it to look like dots and desaturate it and bur in Y axis. You will get fake Rain
Cheers
Sankar
 
Old 02-12-2010, 05:58 AM   #10
kevmo
Frequenter
 
kevmo's Avatar
Kevin Morin
kmdesign
Raynham, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaker
Particle Illusion and Motion particles are both sprites so I don't see why Motion's would look any cheaper then PI particles. Motion actually supports 16/32 bpc float where PI only supports 8 bpc. Also Motion has full 3d cameras and more volumetric looking 3d particles where PI is much more 2.5d. Some of it depends the quality of your source sprites behind the particles, not the program behind them.


same thing only different... :-)

http://wondertouch.com/emittersMtn.asp
__________________
k!
http://www.kmdesign.com
 
Old 02-22-2010, 09:22 PM   #11
Rtist
Veteran
 
Rtist's Avatar
portfolio
Christopher Bernal
CG Generalist
Rtist | Insight
San Francisco, USA
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 44
I'm happy to see some posts regarding shake,
I haven't done much compositing lately, but still prefer shake when I do.

I agree with beaker, even for some complex effects I'd rather work some stock footage in vs simulating.

Thanks for the info on Motion, didn't even remember I had a copy till I read this post.
 
Old 02-22-2010, 09:22 PM   #12
CGTalk Moderation
Lord of the posts
CGTalk Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,066,480
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


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 06:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.