Huge difference between cloud types

Started by N-drju, May 25, 2020, 11:25:33 am

Previous topic - Next topic

N-drju

Another unpleasant surprise have presented itself. This time, the thing is about the clouds.

I had a decent masking solution for the V2 clouds which allowed me to create dense cloud masses quickly. I have tried the same thing with a V3 cloud and the result has been a terrible, watered-down version of something that used to be impressive.

Here is an example. V2 cloud creates a dense, well defined cloud mass, while V3 creates an inexplicably sparse coverage. Both clouds are using exact same settings apart, of course, from some V3-specific stuff.

V2.jpg
V2

V3.jpg
V3
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

Kadri

Matt can say what is the difference the best of course. But the way they are rendered (structure and lighting wise) is different to me.
Because of that i prefer to use V2 clouds actually. Subjective preference too of course.
But because of the different look V3 clouds does have it place too of course.

WAS

May 25, 2020, 01:25:34 pm #2 Last Edit: May 25, 2020, 01:40:29 pm by WAS
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,27837.msg277007.html#msg277007

The different look is down to texture space for the noise.

The rest is just lighting settings / limitations.

Edit: Here is a change to that file with more similar lighting. The big difference is v2 scattering colour is gray, where v3 is sampling lighting and creating this dark scattering area with enviro light tinting it looks like.

Edges do look softer on v2, and I wonder if that can be helped with v3 because it is a challenge softening edges.

N-drju

Quote from: Kadri on May 25, 2020, 12:55:13 pmBecause of that i prefer to use V2 clouds actually.

Just like me. ??? V2 clouds have always been more "sculptable" in my view. V3 lighting can be beautiful but they are best if you just need general coverages fast. I just can't mask them the way I wanted to...

Quote from: WAS on May 25, 2020, 01:25:34 pmThe different look is down to texture space for the noise.

The rest is just lighting settings / limitations.

Edit: Here is a change to that file with more similar lighting. The big difference is v2 scattering colour is gray, where v3 is sampling lighting and creating this dark scattering area with enviro light tinting it looks like.

I don't think it's texture space, because if it was, the "Move textures with clouds" box would save the day. It doesn't. :-\ This might have a lot to do with scattering and lighting that you mention, but certainly not the "mask" for the cloud.

Really, I am at a loss trying to understand why the same exact fractal would generate a different cloud shape... It's really weird.
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

WAS

May 26, 2020, 02:32:26 pm #4 Last Edit: May 26, 2020, 07:41:23 pm by WAS
Well, clearly if the shape is so radically different, it must be texture space.... Far less likely to be some sort of bug.

I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Masked, or Final Position Final Density, or not, the clouds are the same, with "Move textures with clouds"...

The only difference is the cloud lighting model and edge softness. Perhaps you need to poke around your setup some more. Is your masking in final position or something that would not be effected by cloud layer settings?

Matt

Just because milk is white doesn't mean that clouds are made of milk.

N-drju

Quote from: WAS on May 26, 2020, 02:32:26 pmIs your masking in final position or something that would not be effected by cloud layer settings?

I'll take a look into this, but no - I don't think there is anything peculiar there. ???

Quote from: Matt on May 26, 2020, 05:24:42 pm@N-drju do you have a TGD so we can test this?

Thanks for chiming in @Matt. I'll send a test file over to the Planetside mail.
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

N-drju

May 27, 2020, 04:56:27 am #7 Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 09:07:33 am by N-drju
Ummm... My appologies to everyone, but it seems there had to be a problem on my part... I have decided to give both cloud types another try and came up with this:

clouds.jpg

Which proves that both clouds work just the same in both instances. Apart from obvious differences in lighting of course. I didn't notice what was responsible for the problem (perhaps another time).

I have noticed that mysteriously sounding "softness" and "param C" can influence a cloud in some very positive ways. Is it perhaps explained on the wiki?
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"