Go AWAY!!
From:
owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Marc-Andre
Carbonneau
Sent: 14 June 2006 14:32
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: RE: Re: Re: [OT] dynamite v1.1
Some more voxel stuff. This time for Houdini.
http://www.myrtlesoftware.com/index.php/fivebyfive
From:
owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Vince
Fortin
Sent: June 13, 2006 5:43 PM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [OT] dynamite v1.1
I see... I think it's a
combination of the two.
It happens where density and temperature (simulation) peak then the shader draws
the colors according to these.
Maya fluids have a nice set of texturing/gradients tools for that. You can
really play with the thresholds for each voxel attributes and make the clouds
crunchier, brighter, etc.
Back to XSI, with a simple volume shader, I recall being able to give some kind
of SSS look to the render using the density returned by the particles (see the
4th orange render on the page) but I guess it couldn't go any further due to
the lack of extra channels in the voxels.
Everything else is beyond my knowledge. So I guess you're right Kim, XSI needs
a fluid solver ;-)
cheers
On 6/13/06, kim aldis <kim(at)aldis.org.uk> wrote:
Smoke like that, I think is as
much a motion issue as a shader issue. I couldn't find a video of that
smoke but you get this kind of boiling motion where the smoke kind of pushes
through and folds back on itself. It's very distinctive. I thought I could find
a better example, but check out this link. I don't think you could get that with
XSI particles.
http://www.bbcmotiongallery.com/Customer/SearchDetails.aspx?searchText=refinery+fire&type=Simple&itemId=2aa3ac71-8c02-4205-a278-fa1617d9616f&page=1
Correct me if I'm wrong Kim but this is more a
shader issue rather than a simulation thing.
If XSI had a good volume shader, we could achieve this result with both
grid-based and particles simulations.
I've once been told though that it's more difficult to implement the
"hypervoxel" or "afterburn" texturing features in MR
(because they are isosurface or someeeethinnng like that).
On 6/13/06, kim aldis <kim(at)aldis.org.uk> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
[mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
On
> Behalf Of Ronald Beirouti
> Sent: 13 June 2006 18:56
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: RE: Re: Re: [OT] dynamite v1.1
>
>
> The last four smoke renders (after the head renders) are particles
> rendered with a volumic shader. Particles are simulated using a
> standard particle system, so it's much faster. Other advantages are
> more control over the simulation making achieve a wider range of
> effects including non physically realistic effects. Also, the
> simulation is not bound to a volume. However, although a rendered still
> image looks very nice, the fluid movement is not as fine as with grid-
> based simulations but still looks quite nice when tweaked right. This
> is the solution you find in Lightwave and plug-ins such as Binary
> Alchemy.
>
[kim aldis]
It's worth pointing out here, though, that motion for some of those particle
based simulations you won't get right XSI's particle system. In particular,
check out that one with the black smoke and fiery middle. If there's a
motion of it available you should see a really nice boiling kind of motion
which is very typical of big, explosive type effects. There's another nice
example on Glasswork's site which I think is one of their custom particle
effects, correct me if I'm wrong Alastair. Pete, wasn't it?
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM
with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
|
