Problem of the day: Storm

#61

Sorry, don’t understand problem. BTW: I2M (or any other plug) can create geometry anywhere but cannot modify the linkage point. Ok, the attachment is a simple solution (as we see it)

#62

I’ll try to come up with a couple of examples today… and show you the problem.

#63

This thread is so very very interesting, thanks Brian for starting this kind of discussions, please keep ideas like these coming. On the other hand I have to say, Psunami has never looked as much interesting to me as it is now, if/when I need to animate a large volume of water for commercial purposes it will be a no brainer. Thanks Blair for making these awesome power tools.

J

#64

There is a thread here on Postforum that is worth a look too.

http://www.postforum.com/forums/read.php?f=9&i=40711&t=40711

#65

duplicated below…

#66

By the way, I wanted to say, after reading Blair’s comments (and the following comments about a boss unwilling to buy plugins for ‘the boys in the trenches’)…

I run a very small production house, and have two partners, and we have equal decision power, and that means that each buy has to be approved by all three of us. But I’m the 3D guy. The other two have no idea about 3D or the tools, they go as far as know that Maya exists and that I don’t have it/use it, and that I use a less known (practically unkown for them) 3D package, and that it has given us very good results.

It’s always me that has to sell the powertools to the other two, and sometimes I get a feel like some times they see my requests for these tools as almost innecesary expenses. I’m all for the new toys, and will take a good opportunity (a need in a project) to get them, but it won’t be possible to always be succesful in my sales pitch, and the projects still have to be done. And that’s why I’m glad you started this kind of discussion, Brian…

cheers

Joel

#67

yep, the thread I started myself, if I knew about this thread on CGTalk I wouldn’t have posted there hehehe…

Joel

#68

Here is a technique using deformers that may bo of interest to the group (some of this is recap if you saw the postforum thread) It is easy to link an object to a (runwave) deformed surface and tracking it to the displacement and angle of the (deformed) surface, bit animating (moving) the linked object can be problematic (to say the least)

The technique I illustrating I actually came up with several years ago (but it is unlikely I am the only one who has thought of it)
First the preview: (2.9MB H.264)

http://idisk.mac.com/holderness/Public/Concept/WaveDeform2obj.mov

Same movie in low bandwidth version (711KB H.264)

http://idisk.mac.com/holderness/Public/Concept/WaveDeformLowB.mov

Now the how, Since objects linked to a deformed surface can’t be moved (without problems) the simple thing is to move the surface and the parent surface will drag the child along for the ride while at the same time you displace the deformer the same amount in the reverse direction. I used this but then up came with a shot request for a jet-ski to approach and jump a floating buoy. This (like the preview above) was impossible with the moving the surface object technique because all objects would be pulled along with the surface in the same way. And an object not linked to the surface would not track the bobbing and rolling motion of the deformer.
What I came up with at the time (though I never had to do it because the shot got scrapped) was to use two identical surfaces (duplicate the surface one set up). The first surface would be pulled along (and the deformer backed up) to make the child plow through the water and the second surface would just remain stationary (though it could be moved if necessary) The first surface is invisible (non rendering) so this actually solves a problem in the original, single surface trick, in that not only does the deformer have to moved to counter the movement of the movement of the surface but also any shaders also have to be moved as well. In the 2 surface setup the shaders are simpley attached to the non moving (just deformed) surface.

There are a couple tweaks that make the children look more like boats and less like objects tracking the surface of a deformed object;:wink: First set the deformer displacement a little larger (10%) than you actually want it to be (get the right look then add 10%) then after you attach the child set the vertical scale (y) of the surface (parent) to .9. The child will track the original surface displacement and over/undershoot the waves accordingly (real boats do this because they have translational inertia) also move your children (the floating objects) slightly toward the advancing waves, this makes them react to the waves just after they encounter them dipping into the face of the wave and then tipping upward and lifting as the trough passes (again boats do this because of their translational and rotational inertia)

So that’s it while it might sound complex (or perhaps I just explain it to verbosely) it really only took a couple minutes to set up the test (I had never tried to do the two surface setup) It is also a very clean (unfettered) setup as the surfaces only have two keyframes (one at the beginning and one at the end) and the 2 floating objects are unconstrained, so if you wanted to adjust them to float higher or even animate one of the objects doing something complex (like leaping into the air and jumping over the second object) it would be easy to set a few keyframes (on the object) to alter it’s path (EI just layers the change on top of the deform displacement)
Here is a screenshot of the setup:

http://idisk.mac.com/holderness/Public/Concept/Screen.png

You can see I don’t even have animation enabled on the cube (boat) and capsule (buoy)
Also note that the surface is about half way through it’s 100 unit movement (about 50 units) and that in the plane deformation dialog the region control shows the deformer position is -50 so it is perfectly offsetting the advance of the surface. (that is how easy the setup is; you advance the surface to move the child where you want it. Then make a note of the displacement (at the keyframe) and set a corresponding inverse value in the deformation position.

I can provide the project file if anyone wants it (though there is truly very little to it)

-Wm Holderness

#69

Thanks WmH. This really is the smoothest technique so far.
The setup is incredibly simple.
http://www.rdn.qc.ca/free/Runwave.mov

#70

WmH, that is very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Tim

#71

Been ushered in here to show you this…

Basically it’s a ball bobbing in water, at the moment in a very basic stage, but here’s a quick animation showing it working…
http://www.x1.ltd.uk/brooks_website/ball_on_waves.mov

I’m still improving it, that’s actually using an older script than I have now… That’s a real cheat… heh.

One problem I have at the moment is stealing rotation from constrained objects… XP just won’t do it. So any rotation will look less natural than the movement, so I’ve not had that rotate :slight_smile:

I’ll do a quick render of the new script at work…

#72

I would like the setup file WmH if it isn’t too much problem for you.

thanks!

Joel

#73

It is a 6.5 file and uses (only) the UberShape (6) plugin for geometry

http://idisk.mac.com/holderness/Public/Concept/WaveTest2obj.prj

#74

thank you very much!

#75

Hey Brian
In an earlier post you said it would be nice to see what someone may have done with psunami for this challenge. I did this a few years ago and never finished it but it will give you the idea. The wake foam was an animated map out of AE. Particles were pppro but were never tweaked. Any way, take a look :slight_smile:

http://www.morleyarts.com/storm.html

#76

Nicely done. I completely agree that Psunami is the best way to complete this exercise. Considerably more control and options than a manual solution. However, if in a pinch, it shows it can be done without it.

#77

Absolutely. I could have definitely done this without psunami. To tell you the truth, just as much time can be wasted using a plugin that was specifically made for the task. Psunami works great in some situations and not so well in others. Scale and speed are huge issues with psunami.:banghead: On MANY occasions I have fallen back on animated gray scale maps and I2M instead of psunami. So even if you have the plug, it’s a good idea to learn other ways to create these FX. So this is a great idea Brian! :applause:

#78

In case anyone was interested, here’s the updated animation… Looks a bit jumpy cossuv the low frame rate, it actually goes quite niceley. But yeah, heh.

http://www.x1.ltd.uk/brooks_website/waves2.mov

If anyone wants to see the project, gimme a yell… It’s probably more cluttered than it needs to be.

I’ve said on teh EIAS forums, i’m waiting for total rotation values to be included in Xpressionist, then I’ll be able to make some much more impressive rolling go oon in the animation… For now, this it is :slight_smile:

Lots of editable channels, such as air resistance, gravity and buoyancy… Well, mostly them!
For a boat I’d use two or more of these and take an average rotation between them and animate the boat like that.

Hope this helps summink…

#79

Impressive … Most Impressive! :applause:

#80

BJ that is really very cool!