ICE, not so NICE?

#1

so i was playing with xsi7 and it’s new ICE.

i’m sure it’s great and all but i wish it was a bit easier to understand. now i know while it’s easier than coding it’s still maybe geared towards specialized td’s.

i just start with an idea like “explosion” and have no idea how to set up the ice-tree.

then i opened up an example scene called explosion and looked into it’s ice-tree. so many nodes! damn. how are you supposed to know how to set up such a tree? which node goes into which place and so on?!

i just feel like i’ll not be able to keep up or get it :frowning:

#2

Well, I can’t speak for others and I haven’t gotten a chance to play with it yet. I’m too new at XSI and busy learning everything else before I can think of messing with ICE. From everything I gathered though about ICE, it basically is a form of programming, just in nodal form. If you don’t know much about how programs are structured or how programming works, I can see where it would be difficult for you. You have to understand what it is you’re trying to do on a scene level. Trying to make generic explosion is too broad to setup an ICE tree. You have to work through all the events that are going into that explosion and tackle them one at a time in a procedural fashion. What triggers the event? What is driving the motion? What forces are acting upon the motion? Each of those thing will have some sort of nodal interface with it’s own properties. What properties you are trying to effect have an input or an output. I would watch some of the great videos that are out on ICE where they explain what they are doing as they setup the ICE trees to see what they’re doing and why they’re doing it.
The other thing though that I understand about ICE is that people will be submitting ICE trees that they have constructed to a location where they will be of use to people like yourself that might not want to go through the process of setting them up yourselves.

#3

Well ICE is 1st, at least as I see it, a new particle system that XSI really needed.
But great thing is that is so much more to conect and reshape as you fit. So no more typing scripts just kinda drawing. Now ofc it looks confusing at first. Remeber your first opening of some 3d animation program, 1st time ever. all those buttons and everything where to start :slight_smile:
Same thing here. In any case, I recomend geting some video tutorials, and there are few of them out allready like digitaltutors (don’t wanna market anyone, I just remembered this one first, DT video tutors are great for starters) and start by a node… then another one then anoder one… and in no time you will have trees :slight_smile:
Have fun with ICE and good luck :slight_smile:

#4

It’s definitely for the smart people, and I’m not one of those(at least when it comes to things like ICE). Let the smart people make the nodes, then hopefully they will post them for the rest of us.

#5

Look I took one pascal class about 10 years ago and didn’t do so well on the written tests, but did OK when it actually came to doing the basic “coding” part. Logic and I are not always compatible hence I was better when it came down to “fiddling around”!

That being said, ICE IS very ready to be used by artists pending you’re willing to spend a little time with it. Yes, it takes some serious TD-ness to crank out the really good mind blowing stuff, but don’t forget you can use it to do expression like things etc. that before might have been REALLY hard- but now mortals such as us can do it.

I implore you guys to check out stuff like test triggering with states. Once you get your head half way around states a lot of possibilities open up.

Think of it this way- if you want to use it at a low level it’s going to take about as much effort as it took to go from layer based shading to a render tree. If you want to go further it’s going to take a bit more mental work and learning!

Start with small examples too and then try to build those into more complex things.

It is frustrating though to have this powerful tool dangling just out of reach like forbidden fruit- if you want it you gotta grow longer mental arms.

Softimage has said there will be more documentation on ICE soon. Right now everything is grouped well etc. but it will be nice to have a more general document to read through on what different nodes and ports can do on a basic level for all of us that don’t think directly in vectors for a living.

#6

I’ve been on the Ice Beta for well over year. Since the days it was called moondust. I’m not a programmer by any means and I’m sure I’m not the first to say ICE has a steep learning curve. But Once you get over that initial “What do I plug into What” stage, you’ll find yourself a whole lot more comfortable building effects.

I just purchased a copy of the “Intro to Ice” by digital tutors for personal review (I don’t like offering suggestions unless I have first hand experience with it).

I’ve watch half of all the video’s and think its a great kick-start into ICE. DT does a great job of explaining how each node type works and when to use them. For novice users just getting into XSI and ICE I think it’s a great buy.

More advanced users May find it too basic. But Hey I learned a few things from the video’s and for $50 it’s worth it.

If you not interested in tutorials… Just try some really basic effects. Make clouds, poofs of dust, try collisions and spawning. Once you get the concepts for creating these effects mastered then move on to an explosion. Realistic explosions are extremely complex relying on lots of smaller effects and can be difficult to build in any system, I know I’ve been building explosions in Ice for the last few weeks.

Hope that helps you out.

Votch

#7

I think the biggest benefit for ICE for me and other non-TD types will be how easy it will be to download compounds. There’s always been scripts and plugins etc, but getting them to work is always questionable. Now we’ve got that Self referencing in ICE nodes so it’s not scene dependent, plus all those nicely labeled inputs and annotations. It’s a huge step forward from trying to get some script/plugin/scene file working and hoping you’ve got the right version and setup.

#8

Don’t forget, ICE is new for everyone, not just the users but for Softimage, document writers, and education. Not only are all of us just figuring out how to use it in production context, but we’re also trying to figure out the best ways to teach it, explain concepts to various levels of users.

It might help those of us doing our best to put out training materials if people were more specific about what is giving them a hard time. What specifically are people trying to do that they can’t figure out how to do it?

#9

I wish there was something that started at the fundamentals (vectors, arrays, etc.) in their explanation in terms of for use in 3D, with VERY simple examples of these being used as simple ICE trees with scenes and then went from there.

Right now I open a complicated compound and understand 50% on average of what is going on- that’s with the solution right in front of me.

If you look up “array” on the internet you’ll get a really solid explanation…but if we could have examples of when using an array is useful etc. in ICE that would be more beneficial.

Kind of like the VAST training except for ICE. Less of a huge project and more of a bits and pieces index with thorough explanations and examples.

Right now I’m trying to string together basic programing theory and an a slap dash understanding of how ICE works and its taking six rolls of mental duct tape to keep my brain from exploding! I get the feeling that part of the problem is the people most able to use ICE are in someways the least able to explain it to a programing peon like me as there are just too many assumptions of experience and knowledge base.

Don’t get me wrong- I’m happy with where I’m headed using ICE even at my current level of understanding, but I know I’m missing out on the “big” party.

#10

I second mocaw. Seeing some examples on where you use that stuff would be super helpful.

#11

Picking up an easily and digestible book like “mathematics for computer graphics” by John Vince would cover those bases.
You could explain what a 2Dvector and 3Dvector constants are, but it’s not really an XSI thing, and literature about linear algebra has been written and distilled to perfection for ages now.
Now that visualizing the output of what you learn, with something like ICE, is trivial in the least, you do yourself some damage not approaching at least the most visual branches of 3D theory.
If only people tried they’d surprise themselves. It really is NOT that hard, and 90% of the obstacles I see people having problems getting over is usually a lack of fundamentals rather than an issue with ICE itself or what nodes it presents and how.

At some point hopefully some literature and videos will bridge this gap between theory in maths and practice in ICE. I agree one is needed. But until then picking up some easy reads and wiring stuff around yourself might get you a lot further than you ever expected.

#12

Ok so how about some explanation of the 3D theory for us folks who don’ have a solid grasp of the Programing approach.

Me thinks that DT or Gnomon or whoever might want to publish a DVD material explaining just what the fundamentals of 3d theory are and how Ice in XSI implements them with basic examples.

finally do a complex effect as a project using the fundamentals just learnt.

#13

I wish there was something that started at the fundamentals (vectors, arrays, etc.) in their explanation in terms of for use in 3D, with VERY simple examples of these being used as simple ICE trees with scenes and then went from there.

I agree totally that the theory behind is what is lacking.
I was trying to grasp ICE looking in web about vectors,scalar etc. and looking at help file and reading the precise words of what softimage help says.
Why i use the scalar to make this? why i use the vector to get that data? I can make that just by repeating but i have learn nothing behind it.

“mathematics for computer graphics” by John Vince would cover those bases.

thanks.

#14

I consider myself fairly technical minded and personally I had no problem picking up ICE and XSI (coming from max). It took just hours to replicate certain things that I’ve spent days on with maxsript.

BUT, I wholeheartedly agree that for someone who is not that much into all the detailed processes, it may seem quite daunting at first. Documentation is fairly brief on a lot of things, and it’s also bit difficult to search for specifics, specially if you don’t really know what they are called. The example scenes and compounds should be far more comprehensively commented too.

#15

I agree that ICE can be intimidating, but ask something who first tries to model a human head or body, or someone trying to animate a humanoid character, or rig a humanoid. Many things in 3D are difficult at first, but people do it all the time.

Many people said the same things about scripting with Maya and MEL, but before that all you could do is code in C+ with an SDK. Now ICE stands to kick things up a notch. It doesn’t do everything for you, but then what would be the point? If you just want some nice looking particle clouds, then just use the ones that others make. There is no shame in that.

For those that are new to XSI, don’t foret that there is much more to the software than ICE. You have one of the most powerful character animation systems in the world. Created by one of the companies that founded the highend 3D market. There are plenty of other parts of XSI to focus on if ICE isn’t you thing.

Ohmanoggin

#16

Look, we (those non-technical artists) were asked what we’d like to see to help us along and some of us stated it. If you’re on the other side of the fence please understand that as fellow creative sorts we too like to make our own things, and in some cases do for our selves instead of waiting on someone else to do it esp. if it does not require a PHD in computer sciences.

If you want to make art analogies I’d say that some of you are saying- “Look we already told you a pencil makes marks, and an eraser erases- so what’s the problem? Now grab some paper! That’s all you need to know to draw like Leonardo.”

All we’re asking for is some creative insight on top of a description of how the tools work. I don’t think any of us expect to make complex wave, gas and feather simulations any time soon, we just want a little help getting around first base on this. Trust me, many of you guys don’t even know what first base IS anymore you’re so advanced to us!

Granted, as someone trained as an “artist” I know it’s a life long pursuit just like anything else worth while, but you can’t tell me a teacher, a DVD, a book etc. has never given you some creative insight as to the thought process that would have taken you on your own days, months, or years to come to on your own by just dabbling. (thank you for the book reference Le_Jaco BTW)

I also understand that ICE is VERY new to many people, but I look forward to the day there is material/training that fills this creative and theoretical gap for many of us.

#17

I too wish there were two sides of ICE. One that allows it to be really technical like it is kinda now and the other side would be an easy way to create things and particles. Kind of like a particle plugin a la hypervoxels or some other (avilable for lightwave, maya, etc.) where you can easily manipulate settings without a necessary science-degree.

And i’m speaking on behalf of us non-programmer types. i hope the more technical people have a little mercy on us.

But i agree that it is new so maybe it will evolve in future and get some kind of panels where you can build effects more easily like i mentioned above.

Thank you

#18

Well you can already almost do that with compounds etc. so I don’t think it would be to hard to do something like that even on your own correct? With compounds you can specify what elements are “user controlled” etc.

#19

Quick side question. Are you rendering the effects out in XSI or are you exporting the Particle data out and rendering in another package?
thanks
mash

#20

If you want this option. I’d Go for Max…you got pflow and TP.

–As for the original question/comment… Personally ICE isn’t that difficult to understand, but I’ve been using houdini and TP more often as of recent. It really is just a different way of thinking, but to me ICE has done the best job at making the “transition” possible. ICE gives you all the option to be as “technical” as you want and as “artistic” as you want. I just think you haven’t really given it a chance. There’s dvds like votch said and a huge forum full of new users just like you to go through the growing pains with.

To me ICE is a stable TP and an answer to houdini for smaller studios. Now if they get a fluid solver…then we’d really be talking!