Testing some water settings with fake water on one layer. The speed isn't right yet, second half moves faster, but this avi is set at 10frames/sec. so that's no good anyway.
Impressive
Really great!! Somehow the foam patterns remind me of Maya's ocean shader. Did you create and animate the pattern directly in TG? If so, how did you do that? It really looks very natural.
The terrain seems to be displaced a bit too at the edge of the water?!
Really interesting. Looks like the 'movement' of the water is close to being 'tweakable'. It's the lack of 'collision detection' against a confined channel that is troublesome to me. I guess a selected camera view would resolve that issue somewhat. Have you tried Realflow/Hybrido with T2? Not to divert the topic, but it would be great to have flowing water in a T2 scene. The example you created here is really inspiring however!
Nice and interesting Ulco :)
Impressive indeed. The edges of the river do appear to be "bulging" a bit with displacement though.
- Oshyan
I remembered promising doing some testing for the Ponte Salario animation, Oshyan, so I finally did something about it. Hopefully you already had a look at the file?
It's a very simple setup for render speed sake, just a fake river in a gully, no water shader or separate plane or lake object. That's why you see the sides moving with the water (there's a small soft edge separating them).
I used some new alpha settings, so I can't really elaborate on it, but it's basically a Y movement of the larger perlin waves, another Y movement on the smaller ridged wavelets on top of the perlin (which are, obviously, blended by the perlin's high color), and a transform shader animation, moving the whole lot down stream.
The only problem is that this was 10 frames per second, over the first 100 frames I moved the water 2m, over the second 100 frames 4m. I made another one, having done some 'smart' calculating, with movement 1/3 as much, because I wanted something at 30 frames per second. But that turned out awful, hardly any movement in the water, but great turbulence. Mmmmm, huh?
Yes, I've had a look at it and did some camera experiments. It will not take long to come together, and now that you have this (which in that context will work well I think, as it is not the focus), it can go fairly quickly.
- Oshyan
That's good to hear, Oshyan! I'll experiment a little further, last night I got some ideas about making 'standing waves', which is often partially the case in fast streams. I only have to figure out how much to move the water given a 30frames/sec basis. I think 1 m per second would be good for a fast flowing river, so that would be about 3 meters over 100 frames. Agreed?
That sounds reasonable for speed, but it all depends on how it *looks*, of course. ;)
- Oshyan
The more I dive into this, the more complicated the nodes get, but I think I almost got it nailed. This is a crop sequence to test, and in the meantime I have reduced the flow speed, as this avi is set at 20 frames per second instead of 30.
I got some slower foam near the river's edge, some 'stagnant' foam behind the rocks, etc.
WOW :o
Hey Plannetside,
this need to be a preset node in the next version. 8)
Great :)
That does indeed look very good! Hopefully you can easily retarget it for 30fps.
- Oshyan
Next (nr 7) try. Low in quality (0.4), but only a POP.
On Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/59302161 (https://vimeo.com/59302161)
Mighty impressive. So now you're into animation, Ulco?
Not really, as it takes too much time, even on my i7, to render nice large animations. I did this with a simple colored fake water and a reflective shader, no water shader (though I might try how that goes). This is merely trying to get something into the Ponte Salario file, for Oshyan to make the animation a tad more realistic. This render took 5 hours, and I'm not a very patient guy.
Bien réel. ;)
I think you've pretty much nailed it Ulco. that looks really good. I'd like to try it with transparency, although I doubt it would be visible in the animation (unless I go out of my way to make it visible... hehe).
- Oshyan
With transparency, but it's not what I expected. I miss the small wave movements, maybe forgotten after all the changes I made. A bit of a disappointment, took a long time to render. I'll try something with a fake transparency, which is probably a lot faster. I did use the dope sheet for the first time, works great.
It's on vimeo here: https://vimeo.com/59471754 (https://vimeo.com/59471754) Too big to add as attachment here.
Perhaps still processing or something? It says unavailable... Cool you were able to render it so far, or maybe you already planned to see it with transparency and so were rendering it by the time I responded? Always one step ahead of me. :D
- Oshyan
It should be there now, Oshyan. I indeed already planned the transparency, but also upped detail from 0.4 to 0.5 and larger frames.
Yeah, I did eventually get to see it. I think it actually looks pretty good. Like you said, lacking in smaller scale details and roughness a bit, but that should be easily resolved. I think the transparent version looks overall more realistic for that scale of stream. The way it moves slower (or appears to) at the edges is really impressive.
- Oshyan
Hope it just fits..... no... so up to vimeo, but the quality will be decimal. For some obscure reason my Virtualdub won't compress using xvid anymore, while it used to work.
In about 44 minutes it's here: https://vimeo.com/59799222 (https://vimeo.com/59799222)
Hmm, it's rather hard to compare with such a different angle and lighting. I honestly feel like previous versions looked a bit better, but again the changes in setting make it hard to say for sure. I trust your judgment though, so if you feel it's an improvement, that's good. :)
- Oshyan
Well, it won't be the main focus anyway, so I'll send you the file, so you can get to work ;) It's very vague in detail, the vimeo presentation, it doesn't show the smaller waves very well. Maybe you have a chance to better see it if you render a small test.
Certainly impresses the heck out of me! The last one works very well, but I think the prior one was a little more 'realistic', but given the resolution hard to really evaluate. The submerged rocks look great, and the partially submerged ones that the water 'ebbs and flows' over work really well (really well!), not so much the more exposed rocks along the bank. The lack of deflection and swirl with the water seeming to flow under and thru the rocks is a bit awkward (at least for me). Still, with the right camera view this is dynamite stuff! Wow! Love to see a "Stream Pack" at NWDA!
I think I can do a lot more regarding your observations, but this stream is part of a more complicated landscape, and I can't for instance (just in this case) have the flow run 'with the river'. And I took out all vegetation and some other stuff, just for testing the water. In a different setup I think it's possible to have more realistic flow over and around 'boulders' at the shores. I might take up that challenge...
awesome job so far !
goddamn, that is close to getting real !