Intrigued by Inky's fumarole, I did some research.
8)
Very nice, I think that the warp was what I really wanted, but the technique I used is quite flexible, I will experiment too,
Just did not have time to tinker too much during competition time...
:))
Cheers J
Will there be a disclosure?
Quote from: j meyer on February 15, 2015, 11:33:31 AM
Will there be a disclosure?
after the comp I'm guessing, but maybe sooner (hope hope)
Amazing result. I am really anxious to see whether there is an easier way than what I have done so far. The question seems to be not if but how :)
That looks good too.
Disclosure: rotate simple shape!
Thanks?
Quote from: Dune on February 15, 2015, 03:36:01 AM
Intrigued by Inky's fumarole, I did some research.
My goodness, this would have been a precious procedure for the Iceland challenge; but, the future looks bright. Many places around the world where these beauties exist. A wonderful enthusiasm generator you have created here Ulco!
And, maybe kind of an image will be possible...
Hm, sounds intriguing, I always thought of a simple shape as two dimensional. Must try. Thank you.
Not the answer; but an experimental start...
A simple shape IS 2-dimensional, but you can still rotate it. But Bob's setup is not the answer ;) I'll let you experiment a little, won't I?
I've one question, can you make a vertical triangular shape by rotation of a triangular SSS? I've spent hours on it and I haven't had much success
Now all that is over... I can disclose:
I used multiple cloud layers, all restricted, using larger diameter for each progressively higher layer, the core of the geyser is a modded version of Ulco's volcanic plume/ cloud column... Though barely visible, so you could do without it. :))
My hdd is playing up big time, which is not good, but if possible I will experiment more and post a clip....
Cheers folks,
Away for a beer
J
Thanks J.
More than one layer was my assumption.
And I don't think it's possible to get a widened top by just rotating a SSS btw.
"And I don't think it's possible to get a widened top by just rotating a SSS btw." Yes, those are my thoughts also. Looks like we'll be here for awhile.
Quote from: Dune on February 15, 2015, 03:36:01 AM
Intrigued by Inky's fumarole, I did some research.
Did you have to do a lot of density reseeding to achieve this shape?
It is possible with the SSS, why don't you guys just try it? Simpler than a stack of clouds.
I've tried it several times with transform shader and what not,wasted hours that
kept me from doing the stuff I should do.
But most likely I'm just too stupid again.
Very nice result Ulco. I think we are many who would like to know how achieved such smoke. The explanations seem incomplete for most of enter us. You would not be interested in making a final file that you would sell on NWDA for example. I'd buyer.
I'm more patient than smart ...bad combination; but, I'll keep on trying.
Quote from: j meyer on February 23, 2015, 09:46:57 AM
I've tried it several times with transform shader and what not,wasted hours that
kept me from doing the stuff I should do.
But most likely I'm just too stupid again.
You're not alone in the *stupid today* camp Jochen...wasted far too much time. stolen from my music on this....maybe next week I'll take another stab at it....
Quote from: choronr on February 23, 2015, 10:23:03 AM
I'm more patient than smart ...bad combination; but, I'll keep on trying.
I understand you choronr but personally I'm not very patient because I know my limits a long time with all that is a little complex with terragen. In my case , even though it seems to me that it is EXTREMELY easy to do this type of smoke if I did not tgd any verbal or written explanation appears just like gibberish.
Quote from: inkydigit on February 22, 2015, 09:00:18 AM
Now all that is over... I can disclose:
I used multiple cloud layers, all restricted, using larger diameter for each progressively higher layer, the core of the geyser is a modded version of Ulco's volcanic plume/ cloud column... Though barely visible, so you could do without it.
My hdd is playing up big time, which is not good, but if possible I will experiment more and post a clip....
Cheers folks,
Away for a beer
J
Thank you Jason !!! :D
I'll give you another hint (I'd rather sell my railroad setup than this ;) )...... use the X for rotating the triangular (!) SSS by -90º and raise it a little(90m), depending on the sizes (100-250 is good as a start) .... then merge (multiply) another rotation of this rotation, but this time by 90º over Y.
Who will have found it the first?........
now I see this, I was experimenting on a similar theme this morning trying to get the same thing so I placed a vortex warp shader and a transform too...but got unexpected results, originally I was aiming for a rainbow : O
posted a few in facebook as capture snips, so I cannot post images here on what I did
This is what I get doing what you suggested.
[attachimg=1]
Quote from: Dune on February 23, 2015, 12:43:22 PM
I'll give you another hint (I'd rather sell my railroad setup than this ;) )...... use the X for rotating the triangular (!) SSS by -90º and raise it a little(90m), depending on the sizes (100-250 is good as a start) .... then merge (multiply) another rotation of this rotation, but this time by 90º over Y.
Who will have found it the first?........
I'm lost with this explanation. Are you saying the ..."use the X for rotating the triangle...". Do you mean the X in the Density shader? The only X Y and Z us in the Density shader. And, my SSS is a rectangle, not a triangle. Maybe it is a second SSS overlaying the first in such a way as to form a triangle - a geometry trick?
BTW, I'll be ordering the railroad setup.
The X in the transform shader (because that's where you rotate), and the SSS has much more options than just a rectangle. Try polygon and set the number of cornerpoints to 3.... triangle.
Come on guys, you can do it :D
As soon as I rotate more than -60 the SSS disapears!
Cloud and SSS have to be at 0!!! before rotation. Got the basics now - just need to fiddle to get it right.
Cheers Dune for the tip! Only one issue left - moving it to anywhere other than 0,0,0!
is this what u guys are trying to achieve?
Yep!
You can add another transform shader after you've done your thing (warping and such) and move the whole shebang there.
That distorts the shape...
Well, I don't know actually. I haven't got that far yet, no time.
To illustrate my point I wasted some more time and paid a bit more attention.
Remembered that I had the necessary setup in an old file and tried it with that.
I was the one suggesting it a few times over the years after all.(3 axes projection)
First the original:
[attachimg=1]
It works obviously.
Now with clouds:
[attachimg=2]
Doesn't work correct.
No matter what.Tried it again and again with every setting the merge shader
provides and with functions.
Noticed some strange behaviour of the clouds earlier - playing with the rookpluim -
but didn't care too much at that point.Was and still am busy with other non TG stuff.
So either I made a really dumb mistake or my version of TG is broken or Ulco is
doing it with the alpha version or I don't know.
This is really funny. And no, it's not a new alpha with secret new shaders ;) Just a triangular simple shape, 2 transform shaders (one to sit the triangle upright, and one to rotate this 90º to avoid a long stretch of triangle, a merge shader to * both and some cloud (I use the final density to test). By the way, another transform shader before warping for location does work.
And that's exactly what I did for the example from yesterday.(page2)
j meyer,
I think I can offer a solution to your 3-axis projection problem:
[attachimg=1]
I also attached the TGD and images used for the camera projection.
And actually, you might also want to put in a 'clamp 0 1 scalar' in there after the last 'subtract scalar'. It might prevent unwanted behavior for certain things.
But really, you can control the density of your clouds in a much better way using blue nodes and some high-school level analytic geometry along with 'smooth step scalar' nodes and whatnot. You can use formulas for cones, circles, spheres, parabolas, or whatever.
I am getting ready to share how I did my waterfall and I will make a couple of screen recording videos along with voice to explain some of the ideas. Some of that might be helpful for this fumarole kind of thing as well. You can shape the density of or mask your clouds in all sorts of interesting ways if you get into the blue nodes.
I'll give it a try,thanks.
QuoteBut really, you can control the density of your clouds in a much better way using blue nodes and some high-school level analytic geometry along with 'smooth step scalar' nodes and whatnot. You can use formulas for cones, circles, spheres, parabolas, or whatever.
Maybe you can,I can only use the files Mr.Lamppost provided or Matt and I did that
every once in a while.Matt's softcone for example two days ago. ;)
With the reflective shader ?
Bastien - ???
oysteroid - Had a look at your file in the meantime and that's not my problem.
I know the basic technique.
But thanks for being concerned.
Je voulais dire, si c'était possible de mettre du reflet.
I mean, if it was possible to reflection.
Here is another try. First, using the X for rotating the triangle by 90 degrees and raise it 90 meters; I'm assuming all the inputs want meters, not degrees - as usual, I'm confused.
I did set to polygon with 3 corner points; still appears as a rectangle although the 3 points are visible.
The image is still wrong; I'm losing hope and growing older.
j meyer,
QuoteHad a look at your file in the meantime and that's not my problem.
I know the basic technique.
But thanks for being concerned.
Okay. :) What is it that you are trying to do then with the three-axis projection that isn't working?
bla bla 2,
Are you asking about reflection on the cloud layer? Is that possible? No. There's no surface with which to calculate reflections. Is that what you are asking?
i think should be simpler maybe something like the .tgc attached. Ulco: Does is it the right path? :)
Ulco, thank you! Would not have been able to come up with anything like that on my own. Being able to this with just one cloud layer is fantastic!
Quote from: otakar on February 24, 2015, 04:32:07 PM
Ulco, thank you! Would not have been able to come up with anything like that on my own. Being able to this with just one cloud layer is fantastic!
Spectacular! How you did it @otakar?
This is my last for today, very close to Ulco result but i think there is something that is not working properly. see the image and .tgc clip attached.
Quote from: kalwalt on February 24, 2015, 04:38:58 PM
Spectacular! How you did it @otakar?
Just followed Ulco's instructions. You need to up the density obviously and play with the density fractal settings so that the coverage border is not too obvious. Also, I stretched the triangle a bit in the transform shaders (to stretch out the funnel shape).
Quote from: otakar on February 24, 2015, 05:36:24 PM
Quote from: kalwalt on February 24, 2015, 04:38:58 PM
Spectacular! How you did it @otakar?
Just followed Ulco's instructions. You need to up the density obviously and play with the density fractal settings so that the coverage border is not too obvious. Also, I stretched the triangle a bit in the transform shaders (to stretch out the funnel shape).
thank's, for the infos. i will do another test tomorrow. :)
Quote from: kalwalt on February 24, 2015, 04:51:17 PM
This is my last for today, very close to Ulco result but i think there is something that is not working properly. see the image and .tgc clip attached.
Your triangle is too thin and that powerfractal mask is creating problems I'd say. Just mask by that whole SSS setup. Start simple and develop from there.
At the end of my rope for now. Must be satisfied with the marshmallow until my thoughts entertain some better ideas.
OK, I'll help you out of your misery ;D Very basic, but lots of possibilities for warping it.
Thank you Dune. It will be interesting to compare my solution to yours and see what I can learn.
I can learn alot!
thanks Mick, make it work!
Well Ulco, you know us "Bob's" here are a bit older than the average(been baffled by this myself)age I'm sure of modern software users and we are grateful....Thank you
Hi Dune just made one small mistake which stopped me being able to translate it properly - All sorted now even wind effect. Now all I need is a pic to use it in. Mind you the same technique can be used in many ways....
Quote from: Dune on February 25, 2015, 02:41:14 AM
OK, I'll help you out of your misery ;D Very basic, but lots of possibilities for warping it.
Thank you Ulco, I'll be doing much experimenting with this gift. When you do some visualizing, there are many applications for the Fumarole in scenes. I'm looking forward to some new projects.
oysteroid - I'm just trying to find the culprit/mistake.See below.
Think I've found the mistake:didn't set the merge shader to mix to 1.
Tried that,too,the other day,but most likely mixed up something setting wise
like having switched to another setting than multiply or so.
Still have to test it on my work PC though,but chances are good,hopefully.
I'm an old scatterbrain.
Thank you Ulco!!
Bastien - oysteroid is right the reflective shader doesn't work on clouds.
In case you meant the sphere it would of course work there.
Quote from: j meyer on February 25, 2015, 11:55:46 AM
Bastien - oysteroid is right the reflective shader doesn't work on clouds.
In case you meant the sphere it would of course work there.
C'est bien, dommage. ^^
Quote from: Dune on February 25, 2015, 02:41:14 AM
OK, I'll help you out of your misery ;D Very basic, but lots of possibilities for warping it.
lol! thank you Ulco!
Quote from: mhaze on February 25, 2015, 09:27:58 AM
Hi Dune just made one small mistake which stopped me being able to translate it properly - All sorted now even wind effect. Now all I need is a pic to use it in. Mind you the same technique can be used in many ways....
Mick, let us know how the wind effect works for you. I don't think warping alone will give you that.
Ulco thank you for your tgd. I do not know if this is how you give a wind effect?.
Another small issue I can not seem to put in another place the fumarole. How do I move the fumarole on the terrain? thank you.
Thanks for the files! These are interesting approaches. I'll have to take a little time to try to understand what is going on in there.
Just for fun, I decided to take a stab at making another fumarole in a way that fits my own style of thinking about these things and I thought I'd share the result.
[attachimg=1]
I'm not sure if it makes sense for it to be so much denser at the source like I set it up here, but I've fiddled with this enough!
Since rendering that image, I added some perlin variation to the path of the plume in the TGD. I also forgot to add a constant scalar node for the seed on that perlin node. You can add that if you want it.
Oysteroid; it's awfully good to have you on board! Thanks a lot, this smoke looks really good. Better than mine, I think. Most of us lack good blue node knowledge, so please stay to solve all our blues :D
@Jo: use the 'relocate from 0-0-0'
After the first problem was solved and out of my brain my memory came back. ;D
Replaced 2 adds by multiplys and got it working.
[attachimg=1]
Thanks again!
Thanks, Dune! You're fumarole is awfully nice too!
The one I posted has a few issues though. I'll probably post an update to it at some point. And I am sure that some of you cloud experts could improve the thing further.
Impressive setup oysteroid,thanks for sharing. 8)
Quote from: j meyer on February 26, 2015, 12:04:41 PM
After the first problem was solved and out of my brain my memory came back. ;D
Replaced 2 adds by multiplys and got it working.
[attachimg=1]
Thanks again!
that's very cool cloud modeling man.
@Jo: use the 'relocate from 0-0-0'
Thank you for the information.
Does anyone have an idea how to invert this so I can use it a rocket plume?
:o
j meyer, thanks and you're welcome.
Here is version 2 of that file. I needed to put in a seed node and I also had some things competing against each other. The 'narrowness' factor I had in there was pointless and just forced high values elsewhere, so I took it out. I'm not sure why I ended up with it like that.
Here is a render with the default settings in that file:
[attachimg=1]
Note that there is a 'rotate y vector' node that is disabled. I've found that this slows things down some, so leave it disabled unless you really need to rotate the plume such that it is leaning in a direction other than X, -X, Z, or -Z, as by swapping or negating some things, you can get any of those directions without the 'rotate y vector'.
lat 64,
QuoteDoes anyone have an idea how to invert this so I can use it a rocket plume?
I made a few modifications to the file, negating the y axis to turn it upside down, shifting the source upward, removing the perlin variation stuff, the parabolic shift, and a few other things. It should offer you a starting point. The smoke could use some extensive fiddling with to get it to look a bit more accurate, to get just the right kind of billowy character, the right feature size, and so on. I've played with this file enough! ;)
It is too bad the GI surface details stuff doesn't seem to work on clouds. The smoke looks pretty flat in the shadows. A little ambient occlusion or something would make it look a bit nicer.
[attachimg=1]
I like the mufti-directional billows here - very good.
With Dunes version just rotate your initial triangle sss y*180
Or the X a positive 90º instead of negative... for angled jets other angles may also work.
Wow...this is one of the best learning threads in a while. Big thanks to oysteroid and Ulco for all their input here.
Omigosh!
Thanks.
I will do some forensic work on the file to try to understand a bit.
R.