Planetside Software Forums

Hi Guys,

So who has bought The Plant Factory by now?

I know Ade (TerrAde) and I did. You too, Michael (Badger)?

If you like I'd like to use this thread from now to share thoughts, experiences and insights about the soft here.
Despite that we can't exchange project files directly I think it's very cool to see and share each others workflow.
In the end this may all culminate in a topic with tons if interesting info similar to the rest of these forums which are also a giant heap of documentation all together :)

I will install my copy tonight and report back here about my findings.

So Ade and others, what are your thoughts so far?
And show us your WIPs! ;D

Cheers,
Martin

I do find it bizarre that users cant share their files, how on earth would a studio work. Would a tree modeller still have to upload it to Cornucopia and then the guy on the desk next to him have to download it?
I'm sure in practice this wont happen, the model will be converted to a OBJ and shared about the studio regardless of the EULA. As long as it doesn't leave the studio no real harm has been done.
I do still wish I could afford it but alas no chance at the moment.

Neither will I, too many strange restrictions  >:(. I'll stick to XFrog, but am interested to see what you come up with. 

First thoughts. It has all the tricks of other packages in one but not much that is new?, it has a definite vue slant.  Now that they have lifted the restrictions it is very powerful when it is stabilized it will undoubtedly be the best.  Big learning curve without a manual but after an hour or two I'm beginning to get the basics. It is not as fast as Speedtree to learn or produce trees but can do more.  At the pre release price, it's a bargain but at the final price, no way would I buy it!  Frankly you can do almost as much in Xfrog.

Pfff.

Quote from: mhaze on June 11, 2013, 06:41:38 AM
First thoughts. It has all the tricks of other packages in one but not much that is new?, it has a definite vue slant.  Now that they have lifted the restrictions it is very powerful when it is stabilized it will undoubtedly be the best.

The best I don't know, but I have a nice modeler now for a nice price. If it will be better than SpeedTree? Time will tell, but I think they will be pretty similar.

Quote
Big learning curve without a manual but after an hour or two I'm beginning to get the basics. It is not as fast as Speedtree to learn or produce trees but can do more. 

Well everybody has been learning TG without a manual ;)

This topic is meant to do the same.
Share your results and workflows so we can all learn from each other.
Of course I can move on to E-on's forums and will do so occassionally, but I'm keen on this community.

Quote
At the pre release price, it's a bargain but at the final price, no way would I buy it!  Frankly you can do almost as much in Xfrog.

Yeah $395 is a great deal...$595, current pre-release price, is absolutely the max I would like to pay for it.

There are quite a few things you can't do in XFrog design/creative wise.
Also branch-welding is superior to XFrog.
I think it's fairest to compare TPF with SpeedTree.

QuoteAlso branch-welding is superior to XFrog.

I presume you mean XFrog 3.5 stand alone version. The C4d and Maya versions are up to v5 and are considerably more advanced that the 3.5 version. If only Greenworks had updated the stand alone version ...

Here's my first exported tree rendered in TG.  I had problems (Still do) with developing the branches the don't seem to inherit from their parents though I think that's probably me.  I also had problems with uv mapping from trunk to branch and had to adjust the image size.  The texture sytem is very Vue and really does not work well for trees. Export displacement is normal maps and for the time being will have to convert to height maps in MindTex.

Don't use the pre made components for best results click in the node tree choose segment and add as a child to the previous node. this will give you more controll

Did you try the "blending with parent" ? It allow much better smoothing between the branches and the trunk.

Thanks guys.
Setting "blending as parent" for better blending sounds quite logical.
I'm eager to have a look tonight, new toy!

Here's a neat trick

[attach=1]
To achieve this create a very short trunk in this case 1 unit in length and call it root.

Then create  a child segment and set placement to "Tip of the segment"
[attach=2]

Set Whorl to the number of branches you need
[attach=3]

Repeat to taste

[attach=4]

Yes I bought it, Martin. Feel a little dirty about it for the moment though. Ill tell you with no doubt, it was right at the price, but I would not have payed one cent more.

Have you guys got your prerelease part 2 yet? I have received no link and cant open the soft without windows yet. So I doubt I will do much more in this thread than read and take notes. But Im glad you guys are talking about it, and I am looking forward to using it too.

In the end I decided whats important is that I can make the objects that I need, much more than I need to be able to sell a model for someone else's project. And as others have said, if I need too, ill just make an obj if i want to collaborate (on a not for profit).

In the end, if this soft helps me to make the art I always wanted too, then Ill be happy. I guess thats all that really maters.

Badger goto the plant factory site

http://www.theplantfactory-tech.com/

and you'll find a link to pre release II

Thank you.

I tried to add fractal noise to a trunk following the video demonstration on the TPF blog. The problem is that I don't see (in the displacement material window) the little arrow allowing to click on "connect parameter". Perhaps I am doing something wrong, or is there an another way to make it work, I don't know, could someone give it a try ?

I just saw there are some video tutorials at geekatplay.com

Hi guys,

I just want to say that I think in terms of TPF output, we should only (or mostly), discuss it in terms of using the models in TG2, on these forums.
You know what I mean?

Yes I think that would be most appropriate Michael.

Hi

Wat no tips 'n tricks!

What do you mean Mick?

Tips and tricks should be expected any moment.
Everybody's having this toy for just a week :)

Yes tips and tricks!  :)
Just nothing about other terrain software. So output in terms of tg2 only.  ;)

plant factory is easy once you know how to draw a tree, add the branches etc, the trickiest part is.....when it comes to the leaves, they are bilboards......

but what happens when they are exported to tg2...they look like deformed candles on a xmas tree

sorry i have missed out on some comments on this thread, martin forgot to send me the link......tut ;)

@Terrade

The leaves don't have to be billboards. They can be real geometry.

This is a simple tree I've been playing with to get a feel for the controls/options. The leaf geometry is controlled via the "Blades" options for the Segment you are editing. It allows you to custom control the leaf profile, warping, etc.

[attachimg=2]
[attachimg=1]

I'm still getting a feel for things, but so far it's pretty cool stuff.

~Micheal

~Micheal

Are you guys finding that its easy to make the leaves the correct size, relative to the rest of the tree? Is it completely manual based on appearance, or some automation?

Hi Badger,

Each "Segment" added to the tree allows you to control it's length and radius. Radius can controlled via specific values or can be inherited as a percentage of it's parent in the graph. You can edit segment profiles for adding custom shapes (e.g. knots, tapering, etc.) to the segment or you can drive displacement with a fractal.

When you activate "blades" on a segment for making leaves with actual geometry, their size is fully controllable in the same fashion and is relative to the segment they are a part of. There is a "Start" offset that allow you to start a blade either right at the beginning of the segment or some point inset into it (essentially allowing for a stem). Similarly, there is an "End" offset which allows you to end the blade prior to the end of the segment.

You can control segment/leaf population via a maximum number and an editable curve which provides for some variation in that number. Alternatively, you can attach random number generators to those inputs and give a maximum number (this is also possible for many other parameters, e.g. length and rotation, etc.).

Hope that helps.

~Micheal

Quote from: mhall on June 12, 2013, 06:24:04 PM
@Terrade

The leaves don't have to be billboards. They can be real geometry.

This is a simple tree I've been playing with to get a feel for the controls/options. The leaf geometry is controlled via the "Blades" options for the Segment you are editing. It allows you to custom control the leaf profile, warping, etc.

[attachimg=2]
[attachimg=1]

I'm still getting a feel for things, but so far it's pretty cool stuff.

~Micheal

~Micheal

yeah i know, i worked that out last week...click the bilboards and then add object.....search in pc for the mesh, reconnect readd the texture....I did a little tutorial for TU yesterday concerning that....
as for drawing trees. shift click the crayon icon and draw away a tree.

ill post a few pics later on what im trying to say

i always learn ass backwards.....rather than learning how to draw a tree and then finish on the leaves.
what I did I loaded a preset tree and then zoomed in on the billboard nodes and changed them for meshes as shown in the following images.
I already had leaf meshes as objects so i substituted them for the billboards

after all of this I exported the preset tree to tg2 and all was fine.....so as for setting up your own tree from scratch should be a dawdle

Could you post a bigger rendered image ? it's difficult to see the mesh leaves details.

Here's another tree. using whorl technique for branching plus added painted on trees.  Used the billboard technique but didn't get such good leaf shapes as you, will have to study yours :) The whorl technique, as you can see, gives bad joins when it come to texturing the mesh.  The modelling process in TPF is great but at the moment texturing sucks.  But importing into TG works ok with a bit of manual texturing.  Leaves are a PF tree image map exported by TPF from a TPF procedural texture.  I'm finding lots of bugs and the texture system which has obviously been ported from Vue causes most of them.

i tried another one but instaed of using planes which were hard to rotate into place and looked like a complete mess I used a cube object to hold the leaf material, exported to tg2...looks ok to me

I hear that on texturing, early days yet

Thanks for sharing this guys.

I started yesterday with my very first tree.
The first model I'm making now is a poplar. I can see one out of my window so that's easy for reference :)

I'm doing it slow and systematically, going through all the parameters and see what they do.
So it will take some time for me until I am ready to put some leafs on it.
I'll see if I can use simple planes and deform them with a fractal.
I have seen in the segment shader that you can apply an extra subdivision level of geometry to your segment so by upping that I think I should be able to get gently bent leafs.

Ade, yes you're doing it backwards :) lol
That doesn't matter that much of course, as long as you get it eventually.

here a new exportation test. I used warpboard for the leaves and in Terragen, after a few shader settings, it looks good for me.
However, I don't know how to make seemless the bark texture between the trunk and the branches.

QuoteI don't know how to make seemless the bark texture between the trunk and the branches.

You and me both!  I suspect no one really has a solution to this.

Hmmm curious...let's have a look at the example models to see how the textures are applied?

I guess you need to do something similar to the textures as with the geometry, like "blend with parent" to have child segment blend with parent segments. Works great. Maybe something like that...

I don´t think that you can have really seamless texture blend between trunk and branches when working with bitmaps only.

SpeedTree can, sort of. I think TPF can do too, just by looking at the example renders so far.

Ideally you would do some remapping/retexturing of course.

Only guessing here as I have neither Speed Tree or TPF but surly a procedural texture could be made to be seamless and then baked to a UV mapped bitmap ... maybe.
The difficulty would be to create purely procedural fractal textures that look like differing kinds of bark.

Speedtree has a trick but I'm not sure you can export it as .obj file I think its only fbx.

On a another note if you are trying to image map a blade with alpha info make sure uv extension in the materials tab is turned on

Thanks for the tip Mick :)

if you are going with bitmaps only, then this means that trunk texture can´t be tiled anymore - if it´s done the regular way . I know some cheats, but usually you have to cheat different in each application ;-)

So it would be interesting to see, if they have a "global" solution. The only global solution I have seen so far is, to ensure that trunk and each branch is really unwrapped "on it´s own", then you can paint seamless - but not tileable. That on the other hand means, you need really high resolution for the bitmap, otherwise it looks blurry.

As I said, I know several methods to do so, but until know it has been manual work and often had to be adjusted for each application.

Thanks Walli,

If so, I think the best is to wait for the final version release.

Quote from: Antoine on June 13, 2013, 06:55:18 AM
here a new exportation test. I used warpboard for the leaves and in Terragen, after a few shader settings, it looks good for me.
However, I don't know how to make seemless the bark texture between the trunk and the branches.

nothing wrong with that tree

i export mine to another program and map the trunk there, but perhaps play with the uv tile sliders and whatever else is there, twist, too in the material tab

So you guys are saying that your having to map the tree is something that will be fixed by final release? That mapping will be automatic by final? Or no?

Unfortunately, I haven't had time to try out the Pre-Release Phase II this week (too much work to do at university :( But I finally handed in my bachelor thesis last week, yay!!  ;D), but I will chime in later as soon as I've tried it.

About that texturing issue: If you look closely at the supplied tries you will notice that these aren't seamless, either. My guess is that there's simply no way to make textures blend entirely without manually editing the UVs in third party software like e.g. Bodypaint 3D. But that's just an estimation. Either way, you can always play around with the different mapping modes in the material editor. For non Vue-users here's a short explanation:

World mapping modes: Think of your object (the tree) as a "window" to the material that is stretched and repeated infinitely across the entire world space. If you move the tree, you will see another part of the material.

Object mapping modes: The material's position is attached to the object. Moving the tree won't change the pattern on the object.

Parametric and standard: When you resize an object with parametric mapping, the material will resize accordingly, too. For example, if you make your tree three times bigger in scaling, the material will also be scaled up three times in its size in order to keep the correct relation of sizes with the object. If the object has standard mapping applied to it, though, resizing the object will reveal "more" of the material and the material itself will stay the same size.

Also, if you double-click on the material preview (the sphere), the content browser will pop up. You can find procedural bark materials that are fully adjustable under Plants=>Barks.
Maybe this information is helpful :)

Great tutorial about how to model a group of 3D leaves. It is in German, but you should be able to follow the steps nonetheless.

Basically, he talks about how he manipulates the filter curves to get the desired leave shapes. He uses a hydra object to distribute the leaves and manipulates the distribution radius with another filter curve. He goes back and forth between the leaves ( = "Blätter") and the hydra object and continues to adjust the curves until he is satisfied with the result. At the end, he distributes the newly made leafes along a basic primitve trunk shape to see what it looks like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GZyOwLzqGlU

More to come this Monday - http://www.theplantfactory-tech.com/index.php?post%2F2013%2F06%2F14%2FThe-Power-of-Procedural-Modeling

Hey Guys.

I am curious about roots!
Now suppose that you want to have visible root flares on your trees. Rather than modeling the tree and roots and guessing at what how much of the root will be visible on the terrain. Can you import a terrain into TPLF and model the trees to an exact relationship with the terrain? And, like in IvyGen, can you save out the trees so that when importing into TG2-3 the trees will have a coordinates that match TG2-3?

Hope to get an answer on this in the affirmative.

Thanks, and take a look at the images here so theres no mistaking my intent:
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/dark-trees-visible-roots-forest-fog-21078451.jpg

Also, from Dylan Cole: If you co to his website and look at his work from "Avatar", you can find several more of this nature:
[attach=1]

And this last one is just for pleasure! Maybe some inspiration
http://cdn4.pacifichorticulture.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Maier.04.jpg

Any news? Any new tree images to post?! 8)

Walli's 'Bristlecone Pine' achieves the buttress type trunk base as does his 'The Noble One' tree. Certain 'Ficus' varieties and Olive trees achieve these types bases; but, on ones that are many years old. These 'Hero' trees make for some spectacular scenes.

Oh, I will still be buying from Walli even if I manage to master TPF! He has already saved me tons of time and money. But for very specific things I need to do it my self. Or else get rich and pay Walli to do it for me.

Hope Ill be able to do what Im after!

Just a quicky - a Gunnera plant.  Modelled in plant factory, using photos of leaves from a nearby stream, mapped onto blades. RT off as I wanted bumpiness!.  Lots of Issues but I hope to sort them soon!

http://www.theplantfactory-tech.com
OSX version out next week.

I'd like to give an update, too. It seems I am starting to get the hang of how to achieve the plants I want. I am currently working on a chamomile.

[attachimg=1]

It is by no means finished yet, but I think I am getting somewhere. I also did a simple but colorful testrender and I like the outcome so far.

Looks real nice Blue.

Ideas, thoughts, opinions to share? Or not just yet?

Quote from: TheBadger on June 16, 2013, 02:00:25 PM
Hey Guys.

I am curious about roots!
Now suppose that you want to have visible root flares on your trees. Rather than modeling the tree and roots and guessing at what how much of the root will be visible on the terrain. Can you import a terrain into TPLF and model the trees to an exact relationship with the terrain? And, like in IvyGen, can you save out the trees so that when importing into TG2-3 the trees will have a coordinates that match TG2-3?

Hope to get an answer on this in the affirmative.

Thanks, and take a look at the images here so theres no mistaking my intent:
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/dark-trees-visible-roots-forest-fog-21078451.jpg

Also, from Dylan Cole: If you co to his website and look at his work from "Avatar", you can find several more of this nature:
[attach=1]

And this last one is just for pleasure! Maybe some inspiration
http://cdn4.pacifichorticulture.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Maier.04.jpg

Michael, this is one of the reasons I'm not so into standalone tree generators. The best option is to have features in a standard 3D app that can create trees. At present for large trees I'm not sure what is available in that direction but all small plants can easily be modelled in most apps that have features such as arrays or particles. Leaves can be arrays or particles. I'm not saying this is easy but I don't Tree Factory will be dead easy either. When it gets into thousands of leaves and masses of connected branches then it gets more problematic. I'm assuming you can take the trees from Tree Factory into a standard app and further edit but then what about the textures etc? For gnarled roots and trunks nothing beats voxel sculpting in 3D Coat and you have no problem matching roots with ground which obviously you can just import as reference. Maybe there are ways of matching this continued into Terragen with a heightfield ground. Could you match those things?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PicXftYaqEw

The short answer is yes it can be done in both Speedtree and Plant Factory.   You would have to import only the parts you want to use for the roots to keep import mesh sizes down.

Here's a very simple badly executed rushed example

Thanks a lot! Mhaze
So I am really looking forward to knowing for my self how this can work for me!  ;D

@efflux
I agree with you, at least in principal on a ton of stuff. But on this issue it comes down to me wanting to spend more time in a gallery than a studio. So to speak.  ;) I love looking at art more than I love making it. But if I want to look at art I made, well, then I have to make it, obviously :o.
Speed and efficiency is my single most important concern with plant soft. And thats why I gave in and bought.
There is no way Im going to spend the time to sculpt a whole forest. And believe it or not, I do have a goal of making an entire eco system, (sort of).

My plan is to measure out a square (of some to be determined size.) near my home, and reproduce ALL of the plants with-in that square.
trees, bushes, weeds, everything. And also variations of each plant.

We had to do this in an ecology class I took at school. We would go to a forest. and everyone would measure-out in meters, a square shape. And we would have to identify (in the classes case) all the trees that fell in our zone. It was rather tedious because then we would also have to explain what type of tree it was, not just what it was named. Identify the leaves, describe important facts. So on and so forth.
Anyway, thats what I want to try and do here.
...

from the old thread.

QuoteBtw, I can't check your UV issue at the moment. Every tree that I export right now is exported without materials, even though I managed to do it once for the leaves render that I've shown before.  It appears to be a bug in the pre-release.

Im getting nervous again

QuoteNo need to become nervous yet Michael...it's a beta version, still.

And still is a beta too. But now Im worried because you guys have had a good while to come to some conclusions, or at least strong feelings about what you bought. But theres been not much talk at all!

Are you guys being quiet because your busy people with busy lives, or because this soft just pisses you off so much you can't speak?!!

HOWS THE WEATHER UP THERE?!

Hi Michael,

At the moment mostly too busy with other things.
Especially because in the past 5 months weather has been utterly crap and now it's finally good weather, so little PC time now.

On top of that there are still some export issues and other issues with TPF and thus I'm not rushing to get really serious with it.
I have stated before in other places that if it turns out not to be working together with TG or any other obj-accepting 3rd party software I will happily pass it on to a Vue owner.

So at the moment I'm also waiting for important stuff to be ironed out besides enjoying the long waited for good weather.

Cheers,
Martin

I'm finding it really unstable and buggy.  It has great potential but so far not for me.  I just hope the final version isn't as buggy and we don't get charged for a stable version.

I suppose you mean that we won't be charged for a stable version. I hope so not.

Anyway, I'm not feeling nervous at all about this.
I spent $395 on this beta and if it doesn't work for me I can sell it for at least the same price, since everybody now has to pay either $795 now or $995 later.
It hasn't been a bad investment if you consider money, that I'm sure of.
I hope I won't need to do that though and that obj geometry and texture export issues will be fixed in the final release.

What bothers me a lot is that you do not fully own the creations made with the software.
That single point is enough for me to not buy.

Cheers
Frank

Frank, who told you that?  It's not true.

Quote from: FrankB on July 09, 2013, 08:05:11 AM
What bothers me a lot is that you do not fully own the creations made with the software.
That single point is enough for me to not buy.

Cheers
Frank

Here's an example of tree roots hugging terrain from Speedtree Architect.

Quote from: rcallicotte on July 09, 2013, 08:23:22 AM
Frank, who told you that?  It's not true.

Quote from: FrankB on July 09, 2013, 08:05:11 AM
What bothers me a lot is that you do not fully own the creations made with the software.
That single point is enough for me to not buy.

Cheers
Frank

It depends on how you look at it.

If you own something fully then that means that you can sell it through your own means and keep the revenues to yourself.
Both are not the case with TPF.

Quote from: Tangled-Universe on July 09, 2013, 10:01:16 AM

Quote from: rcallicotte on July 09, 2013, 08:23:22 AM
Frank, who told you that?  It's not true.

Quote from: FrankB on July 09, 2013, 08:05:11 AM
What bothers me a lot is that you do not fully own the creations made with the software.
That single point is enough for me to not buy.

Cheers
Frank

It depends on how you look at it.

If you own something fully then that means that you can sell it through your own means and keep the revenues to yourself.
Both are not the case with TPF.

that is what I meant, thanks!

@ Badger

Well, I have my exams at university coming up and - just as Martin said - the weather is too good right now to sit at home in front of a screen ;) But I will find more time in the coming weeks to get in-depth with some things.

For the mean time, I almost finished the chamomile. The great thing is that you can "extract" certain parameters from your node network and build a custom interface at the top-most level that can help to control several aspects of a plant easily. I think I mentioned this concept in the other plant thread in a discussion with Martin. If you use the plant in Vue, this custom interface will be "included" with the species and can be accessed by double-clicking on it which is very cool. And even if you want to create plants for other applications, it is really easy to achieve new variations with these self-made controls.

For the chamomile, I built a custom interface with the following options:

- adjust plant health with a slider (from healthy blossoms to withered blossoms)
- adjust the blossom's closeness (from fully open to fully closed)
- adjust the distribution of open, closed and withered blossoms in general
- add seeds to the pistil for close ups (as a standard I set the parameter to 0 so that you can add seeds to individual "hero" plants without overloading a population of flowers with millions of invisible seeds)
- adjust the seed type (whole seeds, "hollow" seeds, seeds already eaten by insects)
- adjust the resolution for each seed type individually

Thus, the plant is both suitable for populations and for close ups, all while being fully user adjustable. :) I did a macro shot with the new pistil detail, see the attachement. It was rendered in Vue xStream with DoF. Some color correction, the vignette and some slight chromatic aberration in PS.

AND: I did not experience a single crash while working on this plant (about 20 hours so far).

I really love TPF so far, but I discovered that your exported Vue plant species also have DRM on them (no idea about exporting as an object, though). Somebody else cannot open a species created in TPF unless he/she bought/acquired the species through C3D which is a real shame. I wanted to give away the chamomile for free, sigh.

I posted in the official e-on TPF forum about this and I hope to receive an answer:

Quote

I finished a plant yesterday that I wanted to give away for free. My understanding of the EULA was that

1. you weren't allowed to SELL species outside of C3D and

2. that you weren't able to exchange the editable scene files with other people, except for the producer version.

However, it appears that also the exported TPF-species have DRM on them and are locked to the creator's licence, at least nobody else was able to load my created species into his or her copy of Vue. This really bothers me, because it means that giving away freebies is no longer possible, unless you want to become a "broker" at C3D just for giving something away for free.

I don't like the selling restriction to C3D in particular, but at least I understand the economic reasons behind it, even though I don't appreciate it. But freebies do not hurt anyone, neither e-on nor the creator. They are the best advertising campaign for TPF that you can imagine - people see what is possible and get excited for the software. Also, it is highly debatable that the files that YOU created yourself in the software that YOU bought from YOUR money have DRM added to them without YOU having any influence on this.

I highly advise e-on to rethink the position regarding DRM on TPF species. It is enough to state in the EULA that selling species outside of C3D was illegal. Nobody would take the risk of openly making money in a way that was clearly prohibited (read: in another store than C3D). You don't need to impose a "locked-to-licence-DRM" on top of that or you could give the creator at least a choice when exporting the species.

Freebies are a word-of-mouth-multiplicator for a software and it really hinders the spreading of the programme in the long run.

I'd love to get an official reply to this. Thanks :)

Ok, Now Im completely muddled! What are the final export options supposed to be?????!!!!!
I was under the impression at the beginning of this that we would have full .obj, and even FBX? If the e-on native file format is this much trouble, Im really worried about formats that actually matter.
Without these two things the software is useless. And with them E-on restrictions are pointless! Pointless because all anyone who wants to share plants made with TPF would have to do, is import the plant into a modeler and alter it. Then share that.
e-on would spend all its time in litigation and never win.

Blue, Please tell us the response you get to your question. If they give you one.

Nice render though.

@Mhaze
Nice one!

http://www.theplantfactory-tech.com/index.php?post/2013/07/08/TPF-MacOS-Pre-Release-Now-Available
OSX pre-release now available!

Ok now maybe I can get some answers for my self. ;)

Hi Daniel (Bluestorm),

What a most interesting read about your Chamomile!

I would love to see it in action in TPF.

"Publishing" parameters, that's what you're refering to isn't it?

For the ones who wonder what it's about, it allows you to create a kind of macro where you can control a significant amount of your plants properties through a simplified interface with a couple of to be adjusted parameters. Right, Daniel?

The DRM is really annoying.
I wonder if you could sell it for $0.01? ;)
What's the bottom price allowed?

I did that some years ago, with the "sunflower" generator in Xfrog4 (you can build your own interface in Cinema4D to control certain properties) and poeple liked that. It´s always nice if you can "extract" the most important parameters to simplify creation of variations and the like. So TPF basically took the approach that e-on used on meta-nodes? Good move.

Nice flower by the way!

I guess that at some point you will be able to share those plants, as long as you do it via Cornucopia. AFAIK it is already possible to give away other  freebies, so this probably also applies to TPF.

QuoteWe have fixed a lot of issues with the way plants are exported from Plant Factory. At this point, we would like to hear your perspective on these exports.
Please understand that some issues are related to format limitations or importer flaws in other applications (e.g. the Modo FBX importer is wacky and currently being rewritten by Luxology). Of course, we would like to make sure that there is a path that works for all applications.
Please post in this topic your findings about Plant Factory exports (please note that Quad support is not expected in the short term, so no need to report on this). For maximum efficiency, please provide a precise description of your issue with, if possible, very simple examples. Thank you.

So it seems E-on is aware of issues and is dealing with them.
Also, there is some indiction that the restrictions we have been talking about may change slightly. But like before, its just a feeling I have based on what Im reading.
It does appear though, that e-on has not made final decisions on some issues yet.

OSX Beta version is really sluggish and hard to be patient with. Looking forward to the next update.

Dose anyone have any new plants to post? I do love to look at em'

@ Badger

No news from me, I am afraid. The weather is simply too good to be inside :) Thanks for the compliment.

@ Jan

I am happy that you like it. Coming from you, the XFrog expert, I value this comment quite a bit :) By the way, your XFrog tutorials are also somewhat applicable to the Plant Factory, the concept is pretty similar. Your tutorials helped me a lot in the past and still do now :)

Quote from: Tangled-Universe on July 10, 2013, 09:12:58 AM
Hi Daniel (Bluestorm),

What a most interesting read about your Chamomile!

I would love to see it in action in TPF.

"Publishing" parameters, that's what you're refering to isn't it?

For the ones who wonder what it's about, it allows you to create a kind of macro where you can control a significant amount of your plants properties through a simplified interface with a couple of to be adjusted parameters. Right, Daniel?

The DRM is really annoying.
I wonder if you could sell it for $0.01? ;)
What's the bottom price allowed?

Hi Martin,

sorry for not replying earlier. I had my final exams at university until last Monday and did not have time for anything. I am done now and looking forward to a great summer vacation :)

Regarding the freebie, offering something for free on C3D is not a problem. There are in fact a lot of freebies to be found. However, you need to become a "broker" so that you can add your stuff to the store. If you simply want to offer something that you are satisfied with, this is a lot of bureaucracy to deal with.

Anyways, you are correct about your macro comparison. I attached a screenshot from the plant that shows the node network and my custom made interface :) I plan on doing a tutorial on how to create this kind of control as soon as the weather happens to be bad ;)

Final release is out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8cIjMQJHeQ

A tut
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzjAy1EbQvU

I bought it at pre-release time and I must admit it's one the worst applications I've ever used. The OBJ export quality is so bad (probably planned to be that way) that the exported plants are unusable if you want to further refine or style those in ZBrush or else. Also, at least on OSX the interface is so slow that can be hardly used, and it crashes very often.
After leaving Vue, now with TPF I'm totally done with eon.

Sorry to hear about the instability on Mac. I can only report good things about the Windows version. It became a lot more stable with each new prerelease and I barely have had any crash since PR6. Export works ok for me, but I also don't plan on editing a plant further after exporting it. So I can't comment on that.

What's not working properly is the association with Vue, but that's a Vue issue. There appears to be a memory leak somewhere when importing complex TPF plants. I hope this gets fixed quickly.

Still need to try to export a plant to Terragen. I will report the results.

Edit: Turning off shadows speeds up the preview considerably. Maybe you should try that, Alessandro.

Martin, Michael, what are your experiences?

I have installed but not had time to use the final release.  Going on holiday soon too.  TPF has great potential but.... Like alot of other eon stuff just misses being great. I think the whole texturing and uv mapping which has been ported over from vue is poor and therein lies its weakness.  The modelling side is excellent even if it is ripped off! but uv mapping is awful and I find texturing a major pain.

Haven't installed the final. Im on OSX

I can tell you that I did open and attempt to navigate the UI of each update. As I wrote earlier The initial beta on OSX was utterly useless. However, Each update did show a functional improvement. Until the last update before final release when navigating the UI became very "normal".

I will download the final release today and do one of the tuts. If I am able to make a tree of nice detail and quality, and open it in both Maya and Terragen, well, then that will be that. I'll report back.

I'm sitting on the fence at present regarding which tree creation software to buy. I was hoping y'all would be my guides (guinea pigs?), but it seems to be a pretty mixed bag at the moment regarding The Plant Factory.  Speedtree 7 previewed (future release) at Siggraph last month with the announcement of subdivision surfaces. I queried via the Speedtree Forum whether that option would be included in Speedtree Studio  ($895), the answer was that the product announcements are pending at a later date.  Hmmm... So the entry level of TPF is $495, with an upgrade to TPF Studio another $500 ($995). The entry level of Speedtree (Architect) is also $495, with an upgrade to Speedtree Studio of $400 ($895). The functionality and pricing levels between the two products are similar. The problem is which Company do you want to hook up with, and which product is going to prove the better for use and value.  Speedtree is a small Company (only 5 folks per the online info) that has already achieved spectacular success both in the Game Industry and the Motion Picture Industry, their Forum (while not as active as Planetside's) seems responsive and helpful. E-on is...well, it's E-on. I agree with mhaze about the modeling in TPF seeming a bit 'derivative'. Here's a couple of photo's from twitter of Speedtree 7's subdivision surfaces, which to me are drool worthy. If ST7 Studio can deliver quads like that then I'm onboard, if it's only their high-end realtime app ($4995) then not so much (although in honesty the high-end package does come with a stunning and growing set of trees).

One thing I can tell you for certain is that there is no quad export in TPF. E-on said that they're working on it since it was requested by many users, but it will take quite some time because it wasn't originally planned at all. I'd expect this to be a feature of TPF 2. As I said, I am not bothered by it because I don't edit the plants any further outside of TPF, but I can clearly see that this is might be an issue for other people. Steve Bell said somewhere in the e-on forum that the way the exporter is meant to work is to create as few polygons as possible to keep resources down for complex trees. So that's why there is no quad support yet and why the exported models have irregularly sized polygons.

That Speedtree screenshot sure does look fantastic and it would be great if we got something similar in TPF in the future.

What sets it apart IMO is the option to create random variations of a plant with the click of a button and the ability to build custom interfaces for aging, seasonality etc. That's the selling point for me.

I can't give you any recommendation whether Speedtree is better or worse. I've never tried it. However, I also own XFrog (both standalone and the plugin for C4D) and I could never really get into it. It was too mathematical for me with all the curves and splines. Even though the concept of TPF is very similar, I personally find it to be much more user friendly than XFrog. To be fair, having a large background in Vue helped me a lot because there were a lot of things that I didn't need to learn totally from scratch. I say you should wait for the trial version which is supposed to be released within the next two weeks and then see for yourself which software you'll like best.

Something new...

A pansy, comaptible with Age and Health.

Wow! Very sweet. That appears to be a very complex layout. The FREE Plant Factory PLE has just been released and I'm looking forward to giving it a try.

http://www.plantfactory-tech.com/download/

Actually, the plant geometry itself is quite simple (the green lines in the graph). The blue lines and all the other nodes connect various plant parameters to the age and health sliders so that the flower reacts to both. If I hadn't implemented these two features, the whole plant would probably consist of about 10-12 nodes.

I think for the money this is much more fun. It's free and amazing.

http://vimeo.com/68195050#

~Glenn

Its only free if you have an iPad. Otherwise its really pricey ;)
But yeah, that looks like a good soft!

There was some talk about it in a thread called "trees" here in open. I downloaded the app even though I dont have an iPad, just in case I decide to get one.

Soft like that almost makes buying the device worth it. I have been thinking about getting out of my smart phone contract and just getting a simple mobile phone and using the savings to pay for the pad.

If you have used treeSketch you should post some of your trees!

Still haven't had the time to play with TPF like I want to.

Hi Guys !

I was in the business of virtual vegetation for last ten years - first I made a lot of models based on L-Systems code, then for 6 years I made The Plant Factory models.

Recently I was setting a personal website about 3D plants : http://GreenGene.republika.pl (http://greengene.republika.pl)

Maybe you'll find some interesting ideas there ?

If you have some suggestions, or something I should add/modify there - please let me know - here, or send me an e-mail.

Take care !

czarnyrobert
http://troc.cgsociety.org/gallery/

this is a very nice overview and compilation!

by the way, seems that we "suffered similar fate".

Thanks Robert.  I like your compilation.  Plant Factory hasn't been out very long.  How could you have been making plants for years or did I misunderstand you?  Seems like a great program.

czarnyrobert, some cool stuff. I really like the other-wordly plants.

I have few tutorials here : http://www.geekatplay.com/tpf.php

Hi geek.
Used your sites tuts for other things before. Good little place you got there.
There are a few voices in the various tuts. I take it that you are the voice in the TPF tuts?

Nice to see you around here. Maybe you guys will learn to love TG as you do vue, and build a few tuts for us too?

Cheers.

Thank you!

Quote from: geekatplay on November 13, 2013, 04:12:22 PM
I have few tutorials here : http://www.geekatplay.com/tpf.php

For anyone interested, TPF 2014.5 is out. The blog entry can be found here: http://www.e-onsoftware.com/news/blog/index.php?post/2014/05/19/TPF-2014.5-Now-Available

In contrast to public expectation, the upgrade is free for everyone and not just for maintenance customers.

Some of the new features:

- Better rendering with billboards

- The ability to create presets for age, health and season

- Drastically improved export, new export formats such as C4D and LWO

- Changes to the EULA. You can now exchange or sell static plants that you created for work purposes (e.g. work for hire). There is still DRM on scene files from TPF and on the TPF species file, but it is now possible to give away plants for free through a dedicated area on C3D. You don't need to be a vendor for this. Just upload your plants there and then other people can download it for free, tailored to their license. If you want to sell plants to end users, you still have to use C3D, though.

- There's a new free application called Plant Factory Exporter. This allows everybody to open *.tpf species files that you might have purchased and export static meshes from the file. So, you do not have to own Vue or TPF to make use of TPF variations. Just use the exporter and create as many variations (including, age, helath season, if built in by the plant modeler) as you wish and export them as static meshes.

Until June 1st, TPF Studio is offered for 695 $ if anyone is interested. I still think that the regular price is too high, but the 695 $ are a price tag that I consider to be quite fair. You really do get a pretty extensive software with similar capabilities to Speed Tree and much more functionality than XFrog. And it really is quite stable, I have rarely had any crash. E-on did some good work with the code on this software.

Quote from: Bluestorm on May 21, 2014, 04:48:14 AM
For anyone interested, TPF 2014.5 is out. The blog entry can be found here: http://www.e-onsoftware.com/news/blog/index.php?post/2014/05/19/TPF-2014.5-Now-Available

If you want to sell plants to end users, you still have to use C3D, though.

So they profit from all your work?

Thanks for the info bluestorm. Have to upgrade.

@Reck
Im very critical of these no share rules too. But to be fair, its not really all our work. Since it is node based the user is making things out of parts made by others. A node is kinda like in asset I think. So arguably everything one makes with node based software is derivative to a degree.

Anyway, there are ways around it. But who wants the trouble.

Just thinking out loud.

Badger, I just don't like the sound of a company selling you expensive software only for them to then insist that you hand over money for anything you sell.

It's like Planetside insisting they get a cut of of any prints you sell of your Terragen landscapes.

What about 3D modelling software as well. Can you imagine spending time creating objects in a particular 3d graphics package and then having to give the developer a cut of the objects you sell.

Why is the Plant Factory any different?

I am 100% on your side on this. I Just like to think about the possible arguments. Its an interesting topic to me.

But really, I don't believe that a rule like TPF and speedtree use would hold up in court. Its just that cases like we are thinking about have not gone through the system too much.

But like I said, who wants the problems?

Quote from: TheBadger on May 23, 2014, 07:35:58 PM
But really, I don't believe that a rule like TPF and speedtree use would hold up in court. Its just that cases like we are thinking about have not gone through the system too much.

Would that hold up in American courts? That is exactly the equivalent of a hardware store insisting it has ownership rights to your house because they sold you the hammer you used to build it.

Below is what I replied on a FB page:

Quote
I'm curious how a serious court case would end if such thing would ever happen.

Patenting software to protect IP and investments is quite undisputable, but I have a whole house stuffed with all kinds of things created by many patented technologies. Yet I can do whatever I like with it.
As soon as the model is exported to polygons & textures it's the same as everything else on the web and totally not unique except for the process of creating it which you have a license for.

Companies are free to apply conditions to the use of their software and so they do.
Breaking those conditions allows them to take action accordingly, which may end with various consequences for the person in question who broke the conditions. Often these conditions or disclaimers are purely to heavily discourage one to act otherwise.
If you agree with the penalty then all is "fine" and you have played their game along.
However, it remains to be seen how valid the rules of that game are.
Rules/conditions need to meet conditions of various laws to be valid.

A simple "you agreed to the conditions when buying the software" argument is not valid and the whole story, simply because they might not be within the boundaries of existing laws.
So, if you disagree and make a case then the conditions will need to pass scrutiny of EU laws as well (since E-on is EU based).

There's a guy here in The Netherland who is specialized in these kind of things and has a blog where you can ask these things. Might be interesting to ask, just for the sake of knowing.
I'm not planning on selling anything at the moment or in the near/mid-distant future, but am rather curious to know.

Well after some reading it seems that "The law surpasses EULA" does not always apply.
I have e-mailed the guy I mentioned, because now I'm really curious.
For the time being I assume that it's false alarm.

Off to Rome for 5 days this afternoon. I hope to have his reply when I'm back and will share with you then.

Cheers,
Martin

Quote from: masonspappy on May 23, 2014, 10:26:39 PM

Quote from: TheBadger on May 23, 2014, 07:35:58 PM
But really, I don't believe that a rule like TPF and speedtree use would hold up in court. Its just that cases like we are thinking about have not gone through the system too much.

Would that hold up in American courts? That is exactly the equivalent of a hardware store insisting it has ownership rights to your house because they sold you the hammer you used to build it.

I was thinking along these lines too. 3D pipelines are a lot like building. Labor and trade/specialties. But with nodes its more like building with pre assembled chunks than from scratch... I was thinking... Maybe its not so, exactly. But thats what came to mind.

Lets us know martin. Its interesting anyway.

I just downloaded the new update. Was the new export tool (Plant Factory Exporter) included? I did not see a separate download or anything. Looks like the OSX download is the same as Win download. Must be included then?

I did a beginner tutorial on how to model a leaf in TPF with real 3D geometry and no alpha maps. Maybe it's useful to some of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYKrt5sE2c8

Also, I did a quicktip on a very useful node called "Multicurve" that can be used in a huge number of situations, but is also especially suitable for leaf modelling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miubh05-VV0

Quote from: TheBadger on May 27, 2014, 07:04:52 PM
I was thinking along these lines too. 3D pipelines are a lot like building. Labor and trade/specialties. But with nodes its more like building with pre assembled chunks than from scratch... I was thinking.

This would mean, that virtually anything you build in Houdini could not be "protected" and also if you look into Maya, a lot of stuff behind the scenes is done by nodes.
Nodes or not - that doesn't make a difference per se. The question is, do you have the freedom to build virtually anything you want, or not.
There are plant generators out there, that offer a certain set of "sliders". And basically you are limited to a certain amount of different objects/results, you just would have to create all different combinations of slider settings. True, that might be millions or billions or even more variations. But you could say that the programmer already has "created" all possible models, he just would need a macro to run through all different slider settings.

I can not comment on PlantFactory, as I never tried it. But for a programm like Xfrog this simply is not true. There is no limit. So it is not possible to say, there is just a certain amount of possible objects. This is the difference between plant generator and plant modeler in my eyes.

hello, i recently bought plant factory studio, and im currently producing plants by species and i am stuck on something if anyone can help?

i want to change the length/radius of segments based on the height of that segment from the ground plane, rather than using the parent primitive instance filter.

I want to add some leaves to the branches but i want the size of the leaf to depend on the vertical height that the leaf is at rather than its position on the parent (in this case the position of the leaf along the parent segment (branch)

almost like a grandparent primitive instance filter?


another use for this would be placing leaves or branches at the intersection between branch and main stalk of a plant. this can be done by connecting the leaves node to the trunk node and making the leaf have the same position parameters as the branches, however, any randomisation added to either will result in the leaves and branches positions no longer staying aligned.

another thing i tried was attatching the segment node to the branch rather than the main stalk and changing the start and end parameters so that the leaf grows at the base of the branches, however with this technique the length nor the width of the leaves can be controlled.

i hope this makes sense! this will surely become a very useful trick if anyone else has figured this out?

also are there any other forums for learning plant factory and how to use all the nodes?

i have watched all of the youtube videos by vlad chopin on youtube.

thanks,

Yuma :D

Hi yuma,

what you are trying to do is not that easy, if I understood your questions correctly.

Quotei want to change the length/radius of segments based on the height of that segment from the ground plane, rather than using the parent primitive instance filter.

Do you mean that you want to make the leaves smaller or bigger (in radius or length) the further they are away from the ground plane? If so, this is not possible. Here's why: The ground plane isn't part of your plant. It is just a visual reference in the OpenGL view for an easier orientation. Thus, you cannot access its position, length or any of its other parameters and make other things depend on it.

QuoteI want to add some leaves to the branches but i want the size of the leaf to depend on the vertical height that the leaf is at rather than its position on the parent (in this case the position of the leaf along the parent segment (branch)

almost like a grandparent primitive instance filter?

For this, you have to use the "Parent parameters" control node. Add one to your graph (Control => Parent Parameters), select your "stalk" (or whatever node comes before your branch node in the graph hierarchy) and then "Position on primitive instance". With these settings, this node will yield a value of 0 for the bottom of your stalk and 1 for the top of your stalk. Now, go to the "Global scale" parameter on the "Transform" tab of your leaf node, click on the word "Global" and select "Connect parameter". This will extract the scale value of your leaf as an extra node. Now all that is left to do is to multiply the value from the "Parent parameter" control node with the value of your Global scale (the random range node that was just created when you selected "connect parameter"). Add a multiply node between your leaf node (Combiner => Multiply inputs) and your "random range" node and connect your "parent parameter" node to the multiply node.

You can take a look at the node setup and also how the leaves get bigger the higher they are in the tree in the screenshot that I attached. If you want the leaves to get smaller the higher they are in the plant, then just connect an Opposite Filter node (Filter => Opposite) between your "Parent Parameter" and your "Multiply inputs" node. This will invert the values from the PP node (0 top 1 bottom) and thus will make the leaves bigger at the bottom.

Whenever you need a grandparent dependency, or even a grand-grand-grand-parent dependency, the PP node is the way to go.

As for the TPF community, I'd suggest you have a look at this Facebook group which is all about 3D Plant Design in general, be it with TPF, XFrog, ngPlant, Speed Tree or whatever: https://www.facebook.com/groups/699076176775692/

There are users of every major plant software in this group, so you usually get an answer for most problems :).

Daniel

 :D

thanks so much for the response, Im slowly getting used to the node based workflow..

i will let you know if i have any other difficulties.

are there any good learning resources for plant factory that i should look at before i go asking you everything i dont know? :P

thanks again,

some of my plants that i made with plant factory are on my blog if your at all interested. so far just been modelling flowers and plants i have yet to make a tree.

kitamago.tumblr.com



Yuma

oops, youv already suggested a good resource for learning, thanks!

No problem :) I just granted you access to the group.

Hey guys. You can now sell your plant factory plants freely*. You can also share plants with your friends.
Update to latest version is free.

More import export options.

Looks like they decided to give the people what they want. So I think this is a very good thing.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/I-oj352Ih-c

I actually never imagined my self making money creating plants although I do like the idea. But I did have hope to share and trade with people around these parts. So now I have absolutely no complaints. Don't even mind buying from the TPF store now that its my choice.

Cheers.

Ps. There was an asterisk on the "sell plants anywhere". But I think this is better.

Cool! All the plant samples were also updated. The nodes in the graph now all have proper explanations what they do. You need to redownload and reinstall the application from your e-on account though to get the updated content.

Quote from: rcallicotte on October 15, 2013, 10:18:37 AM
Thanks Robert.  I like your compilation.  Plant Factory hasn't been out very long.  How could you have been making plants for years or did I misunderstand you?  Seems like a great program.

Since 2004 I made Solid Growth plants for e-on using L-System code. 
Since 2007 I developed TPF conceptually (what features it should include, interface design, how it should operate, but without typing the code, which was done by other guys)  So till TPF was released last year I created quite a collection of models on e-on account.
e-on is  selling them now on cornucopia (as "Plant Factory" broker)

Since last year I created TPF models which I sell on C3D on my account ("Green Gene")
Here is the page with my models :
http://greengene.republika.pl/3D_PLANTS/1_ccc.htm

:-)

An interesting development.  By my reading the eula seems very fair. Nice to see e-on listen to their customer base, if that's what drove the reversal in policy. I've worked some in the PLE; the program definitely has some powerful tools and much potential, seems also to be a fairly stiff learning curve based on my efforts and some of the comments by Vue plant providers . I'm certainly looking forward to seeing some TPF objects in  TG.

Here is the link to e-on forum post with the last version of EULA :
http://www.e-onsoftware.com/support/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8128
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact little has changed :

1) e-on continues locking tpf files you create to your Vue/TPF license, so you can't freely use them on someone else Vue /TPF - They won't open.

2) possibility to distribute static meshes (ex. OBJ, 3DS) is rather virtual.  e-on requests that you sent them (on C3D) the original source files in tpf format.  Since e-on has removed graphs hiding feature from last updates of TPF, it means that now you can't protect your graphs, and after you sent a model with such unprotected graph on C3D, anybody who gets it,  can simply copy-paste your graph, or parts of it and use them as his own.

I am not surprised that  e-on wants to get access to as much TPF models graphs.  Easy to deduce what for.

Apparently it does not bother e-on, if intellectual property rights of people who create TPF models are infringed....

lol
Man, now I think their just playing with people.

As far as I could tell, the EULA only effects sales. Not sharing?

Or borrowing...

Reading these EULA's is truly a major slog through a legalistic jungle. However, I still think they have loosened the restrictions while maintaining a level of integrity to the original creator. TPF like Speedtree has a powerful 'randomization' tool. This allows an almost infinite variation on any mesh and could easily be used to muddy any trail back to the original. For commercial producers this would certainly be a deal breaker. Vue and TPF actually allows individuals to become commercial creator/vendors within a protected environment. For non-license holders the possession of the base mesh files from TPF could not be used at any rate. As Robert Czarny points out in the Vue forum thread referenced earlier; the graph charts are quite complex, and hard to decipher even for the originator after a little time has elapsed. But having them archived by E-on would certainly help prevent quarrels over who made what and when. After another re-reading of TPF's EULA it still seems to me that 'static' meshes can be freely given (shared). If that is indeed the case, than good for E-on!  I'm really curious as to how many freelance plant builders could really make a commercial go of it if these EULA's were to be fully opened?  I've now built a number of plants in ST, but while they may look good in the context of that scene, for the most part they are not strictly botanically correct. For commercial presentation that's more than a little sloppy. Folks like Walli, and Robert Czarny, et al; they build to a more exacting standard, one that would entail much work and talent to emulate. Both E-on and IDV (ST's producer) sell vegetation meshes that enable their users to modify that specific plant almost endlessly within the proprietary software, very different from buying an Xfrog  static model (I realize with the Xfrog software you can make variations as well, but the program is years out of date and lacks the tools that both ST and TPF contain). I would really like it if  IDV would follow E-on's lead here and allow the free distribution of the static meshes to the general CG public, but that is certainly a different topic from this thread.

Is it easy to create plants in Plant Factory?

Quote from: Bluestorm on September 24, 2013, 12:33:17 PM
Something new...

A pansy, comaptible with Age and Health.

(http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=16202.0;attach=45832;image)

Is this the kind of complexity you have to deal with when creating in Factory Plant such a small flower as pansy?

And I was thinking that Terragen interface is too complex.

How much time have you spent creating such model?

I would say that adding user controllable age and health options to that plant has increased its complexity ... If you look at the diagram and discount the items that stem from the Age and Health nodes, really only the right 1/3 or so of the node view seems to make up the plant. From  the "Stangel" node (forgive me for the missing umlaut!) to the right looks to be the plant minus Age and Health.

~Micheal

Michael is totally right. Also, this was one of the first plants I made in TPF. When I took the screenshot, I hadn't created an order for the nodes yet, so the graph is clearly a mess. I should revisit the flower and simplify the graph anyways, now that I know the software almost inside out with about every nook and cranny after one year. There are many ways to achieve certain things and I am sure I could now find more elegant solutions for a couple of my graphs.

In general, all the green lines are responsible for the geometry. All the blue lines are responsible for the interactive changes when using the Age and Health sliders. I attached a screenshot of another flower that I gave away for free on C3D where you can clearly see that the amount of nodes is a lot less. Most of the nodes with the blue lines make up the custom interface that you can see in the screenshot and also enable the user to select between five different colours of the lily with the season slider. So yes, there is indeed a little bit of additional complexity involved in this graph, too, but it is entirely optional. The plant itself is made up of all the green lines and nothing more.

If all you need to build is a simple plant without Age, Health, Season or any other custom controls, then 5 - 15 nodes should usually do the trick. If you know what to do to achieve a certain effect, then building a plant in TPF is a relatively fast process. I personally did not find the learning curve to be that steep, but I know that I am relatively alone with this assumption. All the people around here who are used to TG's node-based workflow will DEFINITELY be able to master the software with a little time and dedication, though. Personally, I find TG to be a lot harder to get to grips with, but that's just my opinion. It could be different for everybody else.

Regarding the EULA, yes, there still are restrictions. But I am with zaxxon - they got a lot better now.

- You can give plants away for free on the C3D exchange area. Everyone can download the plant and use it with the free exporter. All the limitations of the exporter were removed. You can now export static meshes with arbitrary resolution, generate new variations of the plant (if the designer included variability, but that's basically the case with every TPF plant out there), tweak published parameters ( = custom controls), use Age, Health or Season (if built in) and work with presets that the designer included. Vue users can use the plant directly inside Vue, too.

- You can privately give away a plant to a specific person. You can directly upload the plant to C3D from within the software and TPF will generate a download link that you can send to someone else. The download link will work only once and then the item will be automatically deleted, but you can re-upload the item and get a new link as often as you wish.

- You can sell static meshes in any online shop and price of your choice with the requirements mentioned by Robert. You need to mention that the object was created with TPF and you need to upload the original native *.tpf - file to C3D. My guess is that this is partly a commercial choice (so as not to exclude C3D completely from sales), but also to prevent plagiarism, as zaxxon explained. It's debatable, yes, but I think that not supplying the source file opens the door for everyone who ever purchased a payed-for or free TPF plant to simply use the exporter to export static meshes from their purchase and sell them as their own.

- You cannot share scene files with other people, except if you own Producer. Scene files from lower versions are encrypted to your license.

- You cannot directly share an exported tpf-species-file, because this one is also encrypted to your license. It has to be parsed through C3D first to taylor it to the buyer's license.

Honestly, I think e-on loosened up quite a bit and listened to the negative feedback. I don't want to defend every choice or neglect the remaining limitations (heck, I love the software for its capabilities, but I am not a fanboy of a specific company), but with the current EULA, I really feel as if it's a compromise you can live with, especially if you look at the alternatives:

- XFrog: clearly the best solution for vendors. No restrictions in selling whatsoever. The downside is that the software is relatively outdated (especially the standalone version) and not up to par with ST or TPF.

- Onyx Tree: No sales allowed, because you modify existing presets.

- Speed Tree: no sales allowed, no freebies allowed.

- TPF: public freebies allowed, private freebies allowed, sales allowed if the source is sold on C3D. Static meshes can be sold anywhere then. Sharing or selling of files - in any case - is only possible through downloading them from C3D due to DRM and encryption mechanisms that will be taylored to the buyer.

TPF is somewhere inbetween all the solutions mentioned. It is not as free as XFrog, but also not nearly as restrictive as Speed Tree. Here's a more readable version of what the EULA means: http://www.e-onsoftware.com/wiki/ThePlantFactory/index.php/Documentation/Appendices/Questions_and_Answers

If you want to use the plant that I attached, you can get it from here, btw: http://www.cornucopia3d.com/purchase.php?item_id=13127&from=Exchange%20Area&page=0

Good Back and forth guys! Thank you. It helps me to sort through it all!

@Bluestorm
Good info from you as well. I saw that you have some kind of group. Do you have Tuts?

If you are referring to the 3D Plant Designer Group on Facebook, then yes, people post tips and tricks there for every kind of plant software they use. XFrog, TPF, Onyx ...

It's a very good resource for anyone who is getting into procedural vegetation modelling :).

If you are referring to "real" tutorials, then I have a couple of them on my YT channel. I am not that skilled in narrating yet and English isn't my native tongue, so there are a lot of "uhms" and verbal repetitions in there, but I hope to get better and increase my fluency.

Here's a video on how to model a leaf in TPF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYKrt5sE2c8 . I do have another one in English on my channel (the third one is in German) and I hope to find the time soon to do more. (Edit: Just saw that I posted the video some months ago on page 8 of this thread, anyways. Ah, well, whatever, you asked for tutorials :P).

Daniel, nice to see you here :-)   Already back from holidays ?  :-)

The problems with TPF licensing remain quite unchanged :

1) e-on forces locking of every tpf model only to your license of TPF, which makes your tpf files unreadable on anybody else Vue of TPF.  There is no such restrictions on any other 3D software, neither XFROX, ONYX, or Speed Tree.  *

2) Option of selling models on Cornucopia3D is just theoretical considering their always changing requirements and whims, or how they torpedo your products.   Vendors are abandoning Cornucopia3D because of such attitude.

3) In your opinion, what e-on needs your tpf models for ? 
So they request that every model passes through C3D ? 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* e-on seems quite paranoiac about copy protection systems - they force the same "locked to your license"  system on other Vue content distributed from C3D, and I was also confronted with problem that Vue Complete users could not open materials saved from Vue Infinite.  Apparently it was intended to force artist versions owners  to buy content from e-on C3D instead of getting it directly from other people.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://GREENGENE.republika.pl/ (http://greengene.republika.pl/)

QuoteYou need to redownload and reinstall the application from your e-on account though to get the updated content.

Just before this post I updated my soft. There was no note on the download page that I had to do a complete reinstall. Im on mac, but the widows version is on the same download page.

So I have to reinstall or just run the update? Did not find any links or posts on this matter.

???

....

Well just tried exporter for the first time. Crashed when I clicked on one of the listed plants... was open for all of 7 seconds.

You just have to reinstall if you want to get the updated sample plants with better and more understandable graphs (for studying purposes). The content is encrypted to your license during installation, that's why you can't download it seperately, but have to do a full re-install. If you don't care about the updated sample scenes, then just a regular update is fine.

Never tried Exporter, maybe I should.

TPF 2 also shouldn't be too far away, I guess. One thing that e-on made public with a screenshot on Facebook a few weeks ago was that TPF 2 will have full Quad support. Not much more is currently known.

Robert, thanks for your nice and long mail! I'll reply to it, soon, but I have so much at hand at work and university right now. I am swamped :(