Questions about the DMM in maya2012.?


#1

Hi.!
will now try me on the DMM. genmesh progress is not finished going over and over again, should for example have a stone to fall down in a glass bowl, but it is so that it is the stone that crushes and not glass bowl. How to get this to be the reverse.? Have tried with most DMM Material, what might be wrong here. Is there anything wrong in this plugin that comes with Maya 2012.?
Thanks for the help.!:thumbsup:


#2

in my opinion DMM is not a production ready tool but having said that it does some amazing and unique things for the destruction pipeline. Id guess that your " stone" needs higher density and toughness and lower that on your glass. This is a balancing act and you should always consider the material presets as starting points only.rarely do they behave as wanted with default values.

good luck


#3

If i remember it right. Select your stone. and go to your channel box. i think there are some attributes there that you can adjust so that it does not break apart. Cant say for sure, since i only played with the 30 day demo.


#4

Thanks for the help, but this will not work with me, have tried to adjust the Density and toughness without the glass breaking apart. I have also tried to get the stone to be harder but the stone can not smash the glass. (Polygon cylinder or sphere and create DMM from Polymesh with auto cage.)


#5

notice the numbers on your youngstiffness and density they change A LOT when you use the slider…my experience has been to change them until your close then tweak the numbers numerically.

Also using passive regions until you smash something works well. Create a passive region over your glass then animate it out of the way when you smash it.

Other than this advice the only thing i can say is to start simple, Scene scale really matters, make sure everything has zeroed transforms, generally try to keep it all as clean as possible.

Also ive noticed sometimes pieces will get messed up dont be afraid to start it all over again!


#6

It works if the object is in motion, when the DMM Passive is off.
When passive is just go right through the stone without breaking the broken glass.


#7

Time to start posting and trolling the pixelux forums…maybe people have addressed this issue there or someone with more experience with DMM can help you through your issues.


#8

First, I have to differ with the opinion about DMM not being production ready. It is absolutely a production-ready tool. The standard version that runs on Maya has been used to produce a number amazing effects for both TV and Film. The credit list is quite long, but I’ll list a few:

  • Pillars of the Earth (UPP.cz)
  • Avatar (Weta Digital)
  • Terminex Commercials (Vando)
  • Sucker Punch, X-Men First Class, Source Code, Sherlock Holmes 2, etc.

The plugin has 7 years of R&D behind it and is used for close hero shots that are impossible to do any other way. You can read more about it in the fxguide article on destruction (cgsociety doesn’t allow posts to other sites for some reason…) The plugin was developed in conjunction with LucasFilm for their games and has also been augmented with feedback from VFX professionals. It is, by every stretch of the imagination, built for production.

I believe the issue is that material adjustment is an entirely new domain for a lot of people and it is tricky to understand. You have to adjust physical properties of materials and judge their interaction visually. While this enables artists with tremendous control over objects, it also requires a different way of thinking - you now have to consider mass, plasticity, floppiness (young’s) and other physical properties to get your results. You also can adjust the number of finite elements in the object overall as well as within a certain range.

If you want to play with these qualities, I recommend getting our iPhone/iPad app, “DMM Touch” and playing around with the settings to see how they affect materials. Its a good way to rapidly understand what these values mean.

If you look around the forums, I have posted scenes for people who had issues with DMM, check out how those scenes are made and look over the comments. There is a lot of useful information about material adjustment from our forum and I would be happy to help if you have any issues beyond that.

-Vik


#9

I dont know with DMM but using Pulldownit Plugin in Maya making this is very easy, here a fast tutorial showing what you ask for, I gess

http://vimeo.com/34109596

cheers


#10

First off my apologies Vik I should have been clearer. DMM is amazing, what i meant by not a production ready tool was that you need extensive mel experience and pipeline integration before this tool can be used as your “hero” solution for destruction.

The workflow is different and takes some getting used to but I am so confidant in it that I purchased the unlimited version for my maya at home as well as recommend it to the studios that I am working for.

In the Pixelux Forums some have raised artist requests and shortcomings of the current build of DMM. I think with these additions DMM will become the standard for destruction effects.

Cheers
Michael


#11

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the feedback. I know that there are a couple of things I would like to see in the next revision. We have been looking at the suggestions in the forum, and will try and get those into the next major update. If you have consolidated those into a list, please send it to info@pixelux.com and I will be happy to add it to our list of suggestions.

The version of DMM that MPC uses is built directly from the DMM API. The Maya version has limited exposure of internal DMM APIs due to the feature set of things that we access via Python and MEL.

Glad to hear that the plugin is useful to you. I see more amazing things done with it every day!

Cheers,
Vik


#12

Works now so far, but now it is causing errors when I Click on create DMM Object from Polymesh in DMM Asset or icon.
“Warning: DMM:1pCylinder Selected mesh (es) not suit comfortable for DMM use” see Script Editor for details-
Do not put on the web.
What can this problem be and what is wrong with this DMM?

/ / Error: MESH: Face 2 INCONSISTENT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.66603e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 7 INCONSISTENT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.72479e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 12 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.66603e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 17 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.66603e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 22 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 2.45946e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 25 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 5.76583e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 27 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 3.83939e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 32 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 3.47821e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 34 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 9.54364e-018 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 37 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 2.35612e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 38 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.30374e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 39 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 9.41088e-018 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 42 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.66603e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 47 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.72479e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 52 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.66603e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 62 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 2.45946e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 65 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 5.76583e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 67 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 3.83939e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 72 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 3.47821e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 77 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 2.35612e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 78 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.30374e-016 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 79 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 4.52209e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 80 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 1 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.43372e-014 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 84 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 0 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.43484e-014 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 87 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 5.86062e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 89 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 2.475e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 90 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.43422e-014 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 92 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 3.2232e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 93 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 2 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.16499e-007 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 94 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 0 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.05065e-007 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 102 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 5.86062e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 107 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 5.76583e-017 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 108 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 3 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.16499e-007 / /
/ / Error: MESH: Face 109 INCONSISTE NT UV: vertex 1 uvSet “map1” relative distance = 1.05065e-007 / /
/ / Error: MESH: INCONSISTENT UV: found 34 vertices with inconsistent Uvs (maximum relative distance = 1.16499e-007) / /
/ / Warning: DMM: ‘pCube2’ Selected mesh (es) NOT suit comfortable for DMM use, see Script Editor for details / /

Thanks for the help.!:slight_smile:


#13

Try useing a pillar primitive instead of a cylinder. My experience has been that DMM does not like closely packed verts, like the top and bottom of a cylinder primitive. Try to keep your mesh as simple as possible and rely more on displacement and normal mapping to resolve fine details.


#14

Thanks for your reply.!

I did it, but it does not work.
Polygon Primitives and Cube. (to create a chair for example)
that can be crushed.

Refers to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75UVclTtqsE&feature=related

has made ​​it quite the same as here
but does not work, why it works in this video then.?


#15

after using Bullet in the 2012 SAP, there’s no way I’d recommend DMM. It’s way too slow. I like the ease of use but it’s brutally slow compared to Bullet. If you want a good dynamics/explosion package, get Fracture FX, which is in beta but has Bullet integration for great speed.


#16

It all depends on what you want to achieve. Rigid body systems are great if you want to have completely rigid debris, but unfortunately, they do not provide a high fidelity when simulating things actually breaking. Most objects in the real world don’t “fall apart” they flex slightly before breaking and this is difficult (if not impossible) to achieve with a pure rigid body approach. Rigid body objects can also look like styrofoam, because RB systems do not provide any control over the physical properties other than coefficient of restitution and mass. DMM is slower because it is doing an accurate simulation of the physical material of the object.

You can compare the results for yourself. The cinematic VFX that have been created with DMM have been covered by Cinefex and FXguide, and are now contributing to the possibility of a VFX Oscar for 5 films made using the technology over the past year.

Given this, I can say with absolute certainty that DMM technology is the best solution for state-of-the art destruction and this has been proven many times over.

As for speed, that is also dependent on the job at hand. If you are rushed for time and the quality doesn’t matter as much, a RB system may work for you. Obviously there are VFX that can be done entirely with rigid bodies as well, but that is a question best answered by the artist doing the work. I would not categorically eliminate either Rigid Body or DMM from a discussion of high quality destruction shots. A combination can also get great results as well.

-Vik


#17

Hi Charlie31,

It may be the case that some of the extrusions are resulting in inside-out faces. Did you create the chair exactly in the way described in that video?

I have seen a similar issue when creating extruded geometry for Maya letters.

-Vik


#18

Thank you for your reply! , It works now after I found out that I had on DMM Asset and Verify Polymesh in option box. and with “Detect faces with inconsistent Uvs” and then worked there.:slight_smile: It might work somewhat slowly during playback, a little exaggerated slow motion, but once you have render it out it’s not so bad result. I think. but it will probably be the case.


#19

Glad to hear it! I look forward to seeing your results. Please post them if you can.

Cheers,
Vik


#20

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.