Planetside Software Forums

Hello,

I went through some of the hurricane and tornado TGDs on this site and thought it had to be possible to achieve this effect -to some extend- from within TG. It got me pondering and I came up with this "macro" (see below).

The whirl works. The density fractal is stretched in either X or Z, so that more or less linear clouds are generated. These are then rotated around a centre. The amount of rotation is a function of two parameters (speed and angle) and of the ditance from the centre of the whirl that will be generated.

?: I'm struggling to get the last few functions in place so that the density shader for "cirrus layer 01" represents the whirly clouds.

Any help is much appreciated. Hope to hear.

Warm winds! And blue skies!

AM.

I gave up trying to understand the nodes before even I started to look at them.....lol...I hope it makes sense to you....

anyways....this could be a breakthrough for achieving the tornadoes/hurricanes....atleast for orbital renders if not for regular on land renders.....

good work!....a rendered example would be good....although I am certain that the render time is way too high!


**EDIT**

being the density shader down to where it is when you create a new cloud layer, then add a surface layer as an input of density fractal and then use the macro you have created as the child layer.....also use this as the blending shader!

Great job!  I have tried a couple of times to get something like this, but I'm finally happy to see it realized.  Hopefully you'll share the final result :).

Looks very promising indeed.And i also hope that you'll share.

Please share.  Looks complicated.

Quote from: dhavalmistry on January 22, 2008, 12:01:00 AM
I gave up trying to understand the nodes before even I started to look at them.....lol...I hope it makes sense to you....

anyways....this could be a breakthrough for achieving the tornadoes/hurricanes....atleast for orbital renders if not for regular on land renders.....

good work!....a rendered example would be good....although I am certain that the render time is way too high!


**EDIT**

being the density shader down to where it is when you create a new cloud layer, then add a surface layer as an input of density fractal and then use the macro you have created as the child layer.....also use this as the blending shader!

Thanks Guys,

It was actually quite simple. I'll have a look at the suggestion above and come back in a bit, probably not today though. I'll then post a tgd or clip too.

Thanks again.

AM.

Hey dhavalmistry, I had a go at your suggestion, but can't get it to work. I still miss some basic knowledge... on many subjects. Thanks anyway!


I have attached the tgd for anyone to play with and hopefully someone can get it to work. This is as far as I could take it.

The whirl is simple and the function with which the angle of rotation differs can be adapted to change the shape of the thing.

Hope someone can get it to work for the clouds, that would be cool. Thanks in advance.

Good luck and hope to hear!

AM.

Good Idea,

not sure if it makes a diffrence to anyone, but I've made a slight change to node structure:

I'll upload the TGD if its requested, but heres the Screen Print of the results so far (Still needs work)

I have added a node as well....

and AM you were doing right you connected the surface layer as the blending shader but you didnt turn on the blending.....

anyways....I think we need more control over the spirals and distance between spirals and some other things....

**EDIT**

sorry forgot to add the tgd file....

Thanks zionner and dhavalmistry.

I agree it'd be nice to have more control over the spiral, but I am only a simplemind. (I'll have a go at it a bit later)

Thanks for the screenshots. I'll copy the nodes and have a play.

AM.

Made some rather quick tests and this is what i got
so far.Don't know if i'll find the time to go on with it
in the next days though,but maybe someone else can
take it further. ;)
The tgd is attached so you can see what i've done.

Made some adjustments to the lower, different than anything done so far.  Not a vortex, but very interesting clouds.

Thanks for your hard work, Alfamike.  This has generated some interesting responses.

Thanks for all the responses.

Hi j meyer & calico,
Will download your tgd's in a mo. I like the clouds in calico's screenshot. .

Just started to try and add some noise to the whirl, make it look less perfect, more distorted and add some more parameters for control.... really no promises there though. Got bogged down on my first attempt.

Please, anybody who's interested take any of the TGD's above and try what I'm trying here, or any alternative ways, maybe not using functions but shaders instead(?). I am still fairly new to TG2 and definately to the function nodes.

Good luck and hope to see some more stuff here. Thanks again.


AM.

EDIT:

The 4 trig functions can be replaced by just two if you look carefully.. speeds it up a little.

This looks extremely promising. Keep it up folks!

- Oshyan

http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3251.0 - work done from this modified TGD from Alfamike.  Need more work on it to eliminate unnatural lines.

Hey all!

Have been trying to get some better whirls the long way around without succes. As always, the beauty is in simplicity.

This is the TGD as my first one posted here was supposed to be. That's why I had the Y to scale connected to the build vector at the bottom... however there don't seem to be Y-values coming out of the Get Pos function....?

Am still working on more.

Looking forward to your reactions.

Good luck.
AM.


EDIT: Sorry the TGD is a mess, will sort it out and repost in a bit.

EDIT^EDIT: Ok, done.

EDIT: Render example. 800*600,detail 0.3, AA 3, 3D vol clouds quality 0.3. Render time 6.5 mins.
Using free version at work now, can't get my license key to work here. boo.

ohhhhh....very very nice....good progress.....

Keep it up!

Alfamike - I have not been using this most recent file, but here is a TGC with your original work along with quite a few changes at the bottom.  My problem now is figuring how much rotation to give to each component (x or y or z).  I'm assuming y is the right coordinate for the sort of rotation we'd like to create.

I'll check your newest files later today.

Someone have any input or insight?

Hi calico,

I'll have a look at your clip in a bit. Thanks for the efforts, appreciated. I think the nodes can be simplified and so the function as a whole sped up a bit, but that's for later.

Just logged on to see if I could find a tgd someone made before that i saw on this site a while back. I think he/she managed to apply a 3D shader to the clouds. This is what I am currently struggling with. 's Got to be possible!

Plugging my new whirl into a displacement shader, gives something beginning to look a little like a 3D "vortex".

Back later.

AM.




EDIT:

Try this: Put a rotate vector function (any) between your cloud density shader and the cloudlayer and set the rotation angle to anything but 0... watch the render preview.... weird or what?

This is impressive work!

I just wish we had a way to vary a cloud layer vertically as well.  This clip file would make that very interesting.

Quote from: moodflow on January 25, 2008, 06:50:24 PM
This is impressive work!

I just wish we had a way to vary a cloud layer vertically as well.  This clip file would make that very interesting.

Hey moodflow,

You saying it's not possible to vary them along the y-axis? I've just been trying for a few hours to no avail... guess I was going to come to that conclusion a bit later today.

This is unfortunate. Guess The cloud height and depth settings sort of give it away.

AM.

Drat! Well...... failing that, how about applying it to water instead?

Anybody have any ideas about applying vertical cloud density shading? Suggestions will be much appreciated... and disected! Hah.

I have one idea of putting many (and I mean MANY) thin multiple cloud layers on top of eachother (leaving a little vertical spacing between each layer) and rotating each layer is if it was a horizontal slice of a whirl, sort of thing. But I don't think I'll try that one for now.

Still working on the shape of the eddy.

AM.

Nice whirlpool  ;D

I have my own ideas about procedural hurricanes so have deliberately not looked at the details published so far.  I don't want to be influenced until I have tried my approach.  What I have in mind may not work but if the methods are different someone may be able to take the best of both and...

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 25, 2008, 08:51:17 PM
Nice whirlpool  ;D

I have my own ideas about procedural hurricanes so have deliberately not looked at the details published so far.  I don't want to be influenced until I have tried my approach.  What I have in mind may not work but if the methods are different someone may be able to take the best of both and...

Sounds good. Please come back when you're sort of happy with your findings. I definately still have lots to learn.

Hope to hear from you and others!

AM.



EDIT:
Maybe Planetside can let us know for sure whether this vertical cloud density shading is (im)possible as a direct input into the Cloud Layer Density? 'Cause I'll keep at it for a wee while longer.

Hi,

Here's one I put together quickly. Hell of a render time, and that with shortcuts!

Needs lots more work.

Any suggestions?

AM.

If you are able to you could try to use a logarhythmic spiral
instead or any other spiral type that gets wider to the outside.
(i hope that makes some sense) I hope that that the outer
regions would show more space between the clouds this way.
Would do that myself if i had the slightest mathematical
understanding. ;)

Quote from: j meyer on January 26, 2008, 05:14:36 PM
If you are able to you could try to use a logarhythmic spiral
instead or any other spiral type that gets wider to the outside.
(i hope that makes some sense) I hope that that the outer
regions would show more space between the clouds this way.
Would do that myself if i had the slightest mathematical
understanding. ;)

Yep, correct.

This one was just a formula I came up with myself. Will try your logarithmic spiral or an Archemedean one, once I'm happy I can get closer to some sort of satisfying result overall.  :P

It's a shame the density shader probably only works in the XZ plane because I wanted to rebuild the function to a Concho spiral. Even though that would be slightly more elaborate than my current whirl function, it would very likely beat the render times for the image I put up above.

AM.

Here is the first test rendered with any real quality of my procedural hurricane set up. There is some work to do yet.

The node network is a total mess at the moment I will go away and tidy it up before posting  ;D

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 07:56:44 AM
Here is the first test rendered with any real quality of my procedural hurricane set up. There is some work to do yet.

The node network is a total mess at the moment I will go away and tidy it up before posting  ;D

O wow man, this looks really great! Can't wait to see Stephen (NVSeal) implement this in of his orbital renders ;D

Sorry to go way off topic but would these techniques work for terrain as well (Wild I know) you might get some vary unique spiral shaped terrains with this (or it might not work at all) might be fun if some one has time?  ;D

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel

Quote from: Cyber-Angel on January 27, 2008, 09:09:54 AM
Sorry to go way off topic but would these techniques work for terrain as well (Wild I know) you might get some vary unique spiral shaped terrains with this (or it might not work at all) might be fun if some one has time?  ;D

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel

it should work if you use displacement shader....


and very nice work AM....this is turning out to be a real goodie!

Quote from: Cyber-Angel on January 27, 2008, 09:09:54 AM
Sorry to go way off topic but would these techniques work for terrain as well (Wild I know) you might get some vary unique spiral shaped terrains with this (or it might not work at all) might be fun if some one has time?  ;D

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel

Sure, if it works on the water plane shader it works on the terrain as well.

Quote from: dhavalmistry on January 27, 2008, 09:22:44 AM

Quote from: Cyber-Angel on January 27, 2008, 09:09:54 AM
Sorry to go way off topic but would these techniques work for terrain as well (Wild I know) you might get some vary unique spiral shaped terrains with this (or it might not work at all) might be fun if some one has time?  ;D

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel

it should work if you use displacement shader....


and very nice work AM....this is turning out to be a real goodie!

Ghehe, 10 sec. earlier than me ;D

Hey Mr.L. that's excellent!Can't wait to have a look at your file. ;D

This is very good, Mr. L.  Hope you share.   ;D

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 07:56:44 AM
Here is the first test rendered with any real quality of my procedural hurricane set up. There is some work to do yet.

The node network is a total mess at the moment I will go away and tidy it up before posting  ;D

Hey Mr_Lamppost, that's a great spiral you've got there.

I think my attempts at getting heights in the spiral are not going anywhere at the moment, but am still sticking with it for a while.

Hope to see a tgd or clip of your work here some time.

Good luck.

AM.

As promised here are the tidied up nodes and tgd.

As stated previously I have not looked in any detail at the previous methods; not because there is anything wrong with them, the results look interesting just different from what I had in mind and I wanted to follow my idea through without getting sidetracked.  A while ago I had posted a first thought on how a procedural hurricane could be made in a thread started by nvseal:

http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3116.15

I have more or less followed this reasoning although I have had to modify things a bit because there doesn't appear to be any way to manipulate the integral Get Position of either a Power Fractal or cloud Density Fractal. 

The first step was to come up with a function that would start at zero, rise quickly to a peak then falloff slowly to zero again.  I ended up using the combined result of two functions (I have included a POV render of a graph showing these). This falloff function is used in two ways, firstly as a control for the density of the clouds and also to vary the amount of twist with distance from the centre.

I ended up using a simple Perlin noise function for the large features because I could get at and distort the output from the Get Position.  What I am doing is using a Get Position, rotating the output around the origin by an amount controlled by the falloff function as applied to the distance from the origin; there is also a control for the overall amount of twist.  This modified point is then passed to the input of the Perlin 3D Scalar.  I have included one of the tests showing this distorted Perlin used as a colour blend controller.

The final step is to take the output from the (Distorted), Perlin 3D Scalar, multiply it by the falloff function so that the hurricane is dense towards the centre and more wispy on the edges. This is then used as the Mix Controller for a Merge Shader merging a normal cloud Density Fractal and a constant zero (Clear sky).  The falloff function is also added into this density controller and the combined result passed through a Colour Adjust, these additional steps kept the hurricane confined without the whole thing going wispy.

I have marked the main controlling nodes in the diagram.

Last but not least the tgd have fun   ;D

Woah, this is incredible work all.

Hi Mr_Lamppost,

That's a great function, the way you've set up the control parameters. Still got to figure out an easy & customisable way to get heights in there.

I noticed the way you've built your spiral. You might want to have alook at changing the way you build your argument for the rotation. For my logarithmic-like spiral I worked this out.

Compute the distance from GetPos to the centre of the spiral, plug that into the input of a PowerScalar and then put a ConstantScalar into the other input. Plug that output into your sin and cos arguments. Play with the ConstantScalar values.

Maybe this speeds up your rendering, maybe not.

Great post and thanks for the TGD.

AM.

There are a few things that could be improved

I have already been looking at using a power of the distance from the centre to drive the density curve as a way to make the eye bigger.  Having the functions set up in a POV-Ray scene lets me very quickly make changes and see the graph of the result.  Once I have a result I like I can then build an equivalent node group.

There may also be some merit in using different functions for the rotation and density.  I used the same function for this test as they both needed a similar curve and it saved on the number of nodes, now they are more organised adding a second function shouldn't be a problem.

I am also looking at ways of adding roughness to the Perlin. 

I am not sure how vital this is but it may be worth adding the ability to set an arbitrary centre.  The hurricane can be positioned by adding a transform shader to the cloud layer but it would be neater to have this as part of the hurricane.


I noticed that Cyber-Angel asked about applying these functions to the terrain.

Hurricane Island  ;D
There is some fairly extreme displacement there so the shadows are mush but I kind of like it.

Wow.  Great work Mr. L.  And thanks for the instructions.

Great,thanks Mr.L.!

Did some tests with AM's file as displacement and got some nice
crashes and peculiar render behaviour.Couldn't figure out why though.

Quote from: j meyer on January 27, 2008, 05:43:46 PM
Great,thanks Mr.L.!

Did some tests with AM's file as displacement and got some nice
crashes and peculiar render behaviour.Couldn't figure out why though.

I have only applied it to a watershader and cloud density. I have played quite a bit with the function nodes (apart from puting them into a displacement shader) but TG never crashed. I'll have a try later.

AM.

Quote from: Alfamike on January 25, 2008, 09:15:53 PM
Maybe Planetside can let us know for sure whether this vertical cloud density shading is (im)possible as a direct input into the Cloud Layer Density? 'Cause I'll keep at it for a wee while longer.

The density function is 3D; functions that use the Y component are perfectly acceptable and variation along the Y component is certainly possible, even if it is not very easy to see whether or not it's working. Just make sure that your positions are derived from "Get position in texture".

Matt

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 07:56:44 AM
Here is the first test rendered with any real quality of my procedural hurricane set up. There is some work to do yet.

The node network is a total mess at the moment I will go away and tidy it up before posting  ;D

WOW!! :o :o That is looking amazing already. Me want!

Quote from: Matt on January 28, 2008, 11:56:17 AM

Quote from: Alfamike on January 25, 2008, 09:15:53 PM
Maybe Planetside can let us know for sure whether this vertical cloud density shading is (im)possible as a direct input into the Cloud Layer Density? 'Cause I'll keep at it for a wee while longer.

The density function is 3D; functions that use the Y component are perfectly acceptable and variation along the Y component is certainly possible, even if it is not very easy to see whether or not it's working. Just make sure that your positions are derived from "Get position in texture".

Matt

Thanks for the reply, Matt.

I think I rely too much on the shader previews to see whether some setup will work or not. I noticed before that the cloud layer shader preview can be misleading... showing clouds where the density shader does not allow them.

Will go and play some more with the Y-component for the cloudlayer density now.

Quote from: j meyer on January 27, 2008, 05:43:46 PM
Great,thanks Mr.L.!

Did some tests with AM's file as displacement and got some nice
crashes and peculiar render behaviour.Couldn't figure out why though.

I had a go at this but don't get crashes. Only thing I could think of is a division by zero... but that does not cause my TG to crash.


AM.

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 04:12:59 PM
There are a few things that could be improved

I have already been looking at using a power of the distance from the centre to drive the density curve as a way to make the eye bigger. ...

There may also be some merit in using different functions for the rotation and density.  I used the same function for this test as they both needed a similar curve and it saved on the number of nodes, now they are more organised adding a second function shouldn't be a problem.

All of these would be good  :)

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 04:12:59 PM
I am also looking at ways of adding roughness to the Perlin. 

I am not sure how vital this is but it may be worth adding the ability to set an arbitrary centre.  The hurricane can be positioned by adding a transform shader to the cloud layer but it would be neater to have this as part of the hurricane.

Maybe multiplying by a smaller scale perlin for added roughness?

For positioning you might add a constant X,Y,Z to the values extracted from Get position. This should also provide some altitude control.  Unfortunately the use of XYZ means that you can't use it too far from the origin or the formation will start to lean with the curvature of the earth (I've had the same problems with image masks on clouds) but it's an great application of math  ;D

Many thanks for the TGD

Quote from: nvseal on January 28, 2008, 12:01:01 PM
WOW!! :o :o That is looking amazing already. Me want!

You got it  ;D

The tgd is included with my long post showing how it was made.  There are loads of improvements that can be made so you may want to keep an eye on this for improved versions.

Quote from: bigben on January 28, 2008, 03:09:38 PM
Maybe multiplying by a smaller scale perlin for added roughness?

For positioning you might add a constant X,Y,Z to the values extracted from Get position. This should also provide some altitude control.  Unfortunately the use of XYZ means that you can't use it too far from the origin or the formation will start to lean with the curvature of the earth (I've had the same problems with image masks on clouds) but it's an great application of math  ;D

I am already experimenting with combining several layers of Perlin at different scales.  My results so far have been useful but not really what I was after for this application.  It would be nice if the Perlin 3D Scalar node had inputs for Octaves and Turbulence.  Spot the POV-Ray user  ;) 

I am expecting that we will want hurricanes well away from the origin and was sort of hoping that someone else would sort out the math.  I am embarrassed at how long I spent working out how to do the rotation.   :-[  :o :-[

Oh, well then I don't feel so bad for not having a frikking clue until I saw your work.   ;D  And explanation.   ::)

Dude, this has been awesome.  I've been playing with this TGD setup almost all afternoon...in between work, of course. 

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 28, 2008, 05:30:30 PM
I am embarrassed at how long I spent working out how to do the rotation.   :-[  :o :-[

Quote from: calico on January 28, 2008, 05:57:15 PM
Oh, well then I don't feel so bad for not having a frikking clue until I saw your work.   ;D  And explanation.   ::)

Dude, this has been awesome.  I've been playing with this TGD setup almost all afternoon...in between work, of course. 

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 28, 2008, 05:30:30 PM
I am embarrassed at how long I spent working out how to do the rotation.   :-[  :o :-[

As long as you show us what you come up with  ;)

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 28, 2008, 05:30:30 PM

I am expecting that we will want hurricanes well away from the origin and was sort of hoping that someone else would sort out the math.  I am embarrassed at how long I spent working out how to do the rotation.   :-[  :o :-[

Had a few thoughts on this today.  It should be possible to use the same function but use different inputs.

X,Z - Calculate the angle between a vector from the center of the planet to the center of the hurricane, and a vector from the center of the planet to Get position, converted to an appropriate scale for the function (provides positioning of the storm as well)

Y - Substitute Get altitude for Get position (Y)

This should create a hurricane that matches the curvature of the Earth so you could recreate "The Day After Tomorrow" with really large hurricanes.

I regret that my view is cropped, due to miscalculation during setup.  But, I've been fiddling with values to create a tornado, which settings are based upon Mr. Lampost's file.  I think I have something here, but need a couple more setting changes.  One is density.  The other is shape - thinner and taller.  Here's the WIP.

looks like the cloud of sand with colors way off!

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 28, 2008, 05:30:30 PM

I am expecting that we will want hurricanes well away from the origin and was sort of hoping that someone else would sort out the math.  I am embarrassed at how long I spent working out how to do the rotation.   :-[  :o :-[

Hi,

You can shift the centre of your spiral anywhere (XZ); in the first post of this thread you can see how to rotate around any point on the XZ plane.

Now knowing the density shader can be 3D, I might put some effort into doing a rotation around Y-axis and Z or X, given some spare time..... should prove to be interesting, but painfully slow in the rendering.

AM.

calico:

It's a shame your tornado is being spoilt by the "Horizon through the cloud" bug because it looks very promising.


Alfamike:

I have a couple of ideas about methods for positioning the hurricane anywhere on the planet. I am just not sure when I will have the chance to try them.

The guy over at this thread (http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3287.new#new) seems to have at least partially solved the problem.  I asked if he'd be willing to share his techniques.
--Dale--

Hi everybody,

This is what I worked out for 3D rotation, with a translation to put the centre anywhere and a scale factor too if needed. (Version 1)

Don't know if I'd like to go down this road any further, it's going to cause major render times.

It's easy to check the rotation around the Y-axis works, but I find it very hard to check the other two rotations. Even doing them one axis by one it's very hard to tell whether or not the right thing is happening. Makes it hard to fault-find.

AM.

nvseal's work is awesome, but I don't think he did this through functions.

Quote from: Bidmaron on January 29, 2008, 07:23:45 PM
The guy over at this thread (http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3287.new#new) seems to have at least partially solved the problem.  I asked if he'd be willing to share his techniques.
--Dale--

I have just had a quick look at your nodes AM and I think you are doing something similar to what I have in mind.  I have several things on the go at the moment and when I do spend any time on let's call it version 2 I am working on splitting and improving the density and rotation curves.    Version 2 has basic scale built in   ;)

Even when you know what the aim is it is quite difficult to follow someone else's mode network.

Quote from: calico on January 30, 2008, 09:30:13 AM
nvseal's work is awesome, but I don't think he did this through functions.

Quote from: Bidmaron on January 29, 2008, 07:23:45 PM
The guy over at this thread (http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3287.new#new) seems to have at least partially solved the problem.  I asked if he'd be willing to share his techniques.
--Dale--

nvseal  (who is aware of this; first post on page 4), is using image masks to absolutely amazing effect. 

UPDATE:

I made some progress on version 2

I am now happier with the density and twist functions, now separate but am having little success with the multiple Perlin.   :(

I have not implemented positioning yet

This is pretty cool.  I'm still tinkering with your work and Alfamike's work and the changes I made to both.  I've combined both storm systems...the render should be done by next Monday.  I've more or less been messing with it all week.

Cool  8)

Bring on Monday  ;)

ooo progress.

 8) yeah,keep it going! 8)

Your work here is looking real great M_L. I tried version one and it came out ok.
But when I looked at it from orbit, it was very small, so I was thrilled to see your image of ver. 2
I can't wait to see if you'll be able to stack them for a more emmm "Luc" type look to the system.
Keep up the great work, as this node system is way off my charts right now. ;)

Well this entire technique has gone way over my head, but what I'm seeing and from the math jargon I do understand, this is impressive work! I look forward to seeing your results calico and I'm excited to see what lies ahead for this little project.

Not very happy with the end result.  Needs a lot more work - http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3338.0

Please let us know how you did this spiral out of the ground.

Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on January 27, 2008, 04:12:59 PM
There are a few things that could be improved

I have already been looking at using a power of the distance from the centre to drive the density curve as a way to make the eye bigger.  Having the functions set up in a POV-Ray scene lets me very quickly make changes and see the graph of the result.  Once I have a result I like I can then build an equivalent node group.

There may also be some merit in using different functions for the rotation and density.  I used the same function for this test as they both needed a similar curve and it saved on the number of nodes, now they are more organised adding a second function shouldn't be a problem.

I am also looking at ways of adding roughness to the Perlin. 

I am not sure how vital this is but it may be worth adding the ability to set an arbitrary centre.  The hurricane can be positioned by adding a transform shader to the cloud layer but it would be neater to have this as part of the hurricane.


I noticed that Cyber-Angel asked about applying these functions to the terrain.

Hurricane Island  ;D
There is some fairly extreme displacement there so the shadows are mush but I kind of like it.

Never mind.  I figured it out.

Just replied to your other post   ;D

While playing with Mr_L's file i've noticed that it works
without the merge shader set up aswell.Just for the
record. ;)

Quote from: j meyer on February 05, 2008, 10:11:32 AM
While playing with Mr_L's file i've noticed that it works
without the merge shader set up aswell.Just for the
record. ;)

??? Sorry I am in the middle of something else but I don't see how it can work without the Merge shader.  ;)

Please elaborate.

My last attempt.  Anyone want to mess with the TGD? 

I'm afraid i can't shed any light on it as to how it can work
without the merge shader set up,but it does.Maybe some
fault in the maths or perhaps one of TG2's marvels,i have
no idea,honestly.I just tried it for some reason and the
result seems to be the same,see attachment,please.

Edit:I've set the quality to det0.5 and GI 1/1 to save
some time.

The hurricane network is being used as a blend shader for the clouds density fractal, at least that is what worked for me.
@jmeyer: It looks like you did the same way, correct?

That's roight. ;D

The attached image shows what you get when you connect
the hurricanes color adjust output directly to the density
shader input of the cloud node.Some other quick crop renders
imply that you can get flat cone shapes decreasing the size
in the fall off section and increasing cloud depth.So maybe a
more math oriented mind than myself can figure out how to
make some inverted,thin cone or so,which could be used as
the lower part then.

Some more examples.
The first one took approx. 2h49m,that's why the others
are cropped and/or at lower quality. ;)

That looks remarkably good.

- Oshyan

Thanks Oshyan,also in behalf of Mr_L.,whose file was used.

Now for a if not the problem of these tests.I've noticed in
my earlier tests that it's hard to gain some height and that
everything seems to get rounded off somehow.So i made
a few tests with Dave Burnetts functional pyramid and a
cone derived from it.See attachment,please.

And the sideview of the cone,which was made earlier and
has slightly different settings.
Tried it with another circular shape,but similar result as
with the cone.
Any ideas?

I see a giant clouds with a space ship coming out of it :)

@j meyer - This difference between the square and cone is what I have been experiencing with my experimentation.  There is no present way to make a tornado with what we have so far...as far as I can see.

calico - your huge cloud ball was kind of a trigger for the above
tests. ;) I still hope we can find a solution though.

I'm not sure where this problem comes from (hopefully Matt will weigh in again). But you might try playing with Coverage Gamma to see if it has any effect...

- Oshyan+

I'll give it a try.

Tried it,but it has no effect in regard to this problem.
I've also tried to combine the hurricane and the square
tower yesterday and ran into some more problems.And
today i wanted to see if it would be possible to move
the cone along the y-axis and if so what would happen.
So i did,the results are attached.Tried it with the pyramid
also,but that turned the square base into a circular base,
too and the result was similar to that from the cone.
Then i tried something else with that modified pyramid
file and got some unexpected results,have a look. ;D

Get that bottom one thin enough and figure out how to get the color progression going and you got the start of a fine rainbow. (But thats a whole thread in it's self ;D)

Thanks for trying.  I'd like to see what Matt might say about this...when he isn't programming.  Priorities, priorities.   ;D

This is pretty cool, nevertheless.  Don't want to minimize what doors you're opening, j_meyer.

From whipped cream to abstract sculpture  ;D

These shapes have me intrigued, I did have other things in mind to do tonight but I am away to experiment  :-\

The Cloud Layer varies the bias that it applies to the density function with height, so at the top and bottom of the cloud the density function has to be much higher than in the middle to create positive cloud density. One effect of this variation is to change the apparent depth or height of the cloud as you change the density function. But it's not a linear relationship. If it were, it would be too easy to create clouds that get cut off sharply at the top level of the cloud. As you can see in some of your tests, you can get a sharp edge at the top of the cloud but the density function has to be very high to get that. The profiles built into the Cloud Layer are designed to give reasonable cloud shapes considering it has no prior knowledge of the functions you choose to input. You can make some simple changes to those profiles with the "invert profile" and "flatter base" options.

Matt

Thanks Matt,going to play with that now.

Mr_L.: From whipped cream... ;D  that's exactly it! ;D
Looking forward to see your results.

calico:no problem  ;)

sonshine777: at least one  ;D.In case you're interested to try
that rainbow i'll be glad to provide the file as a starting point.

Quote from: j meyer on February 13, 2008, 10:19:20 AM
sonshine777: at least one  ;D.In case you're interested to try
that rainbow i'll be glad to provide the file as a starting point.

Sure I 'll give it a go. :)

sonshine777:i'll post the file in an hour or so,it'on another machine.

Meanwhile i tested "Flatter Base" and "Invert Profile",but for most
of the cone and pyramid files there was almost no visible effect.
On the other hand "Invert Profile" showed some effect on the
hurricane.A quick low quality crop is attached.The size of the
hurricane was set to 2500 and cloud depth changed to 8192
with "Invert Profile" checked.

Edit:replaced the pic with a better one.

Oooh, this looks promising.  Can I have a look at that file as well?

Big Nose with a baseball cap on  HeHe ;D

I am putting together some geometric cloud examples I will post them when they are finished.

Here is the starter file for the rainbow.(if you want a single arch
just replace the modulo node with a subtract scalar)
Good luck! ;)

calico:it's still Mr_L's file,unaltered except for the above mentioned
changes.Size in the fall off section from 10000 to 2500 and you
know where to find cloud depth and Invert Profile i guess,anything
else remained the same.But if you still want it i can post it tomorrow.

Mr_L.: ;D just noticed your post and i'm eager to see those.

Just in case. ;)

I have had a bit of a play and here are the results: 

I had found the effects of the variation of the density function with altitude by a process of trial and error.  The first image shows the cloud settings, 256 samples.

Following are several examples along with screen grabs of the node networks.  Disabled in all but the sphere there is a Subtract Vector, this is used to transform the position of the geometric cloud.

You realise that this could be the best way to create snow, if it could be made to distribute on a terrain properly.

Quote from: JimB on February 15, 2008, 07:31:58 AM
You realise that this could be the best way to create snow, if it could be made to distribute on a terrain properly.

D*mn, was about to post the exact same comment/idea ;D
It would be great if we could generate terrain driven clouds for this purpose or for making clouds climb up hills for examples.
Nonetheless very interesting experiments, keep it up!

Martin

 :o Mr_Lamppost you da man!!!  8) 8) 8)
Thanks,J. ;D

You guys are brilliant.  This is awesome.

Quote from: JimB on February 15, 2008, 07:31:58 AM
You realise that this could be the best way to create snow, if it could be made to distribute on a terrain properly.

Curiously enough I had a similar thought "Those clouds look like snow" after missing out the decimal point when entering the density value, making it something insanely high. 

Mapping clouds to the terrain has been mentioned before, I don't think it was ever solved or even worked on very much, it was a long time ago when most people, myself included, were staying well away from "The SCARY blue boxes".   

Had some fun with Mr_L's geometrical clouds. ;D

Freaky.  Cool.  And has anyone tried a tornado shape?

I've done some tests with an inverted cone,but couldn't
get the right size as far as combining with the hurricane.

Not saying I've done anything yet, but we don't need to use the hurricane clouds.  Just some dark clouds with some dark green and black colors with a solid spooky looking front would do.  I'm sure this sounds simpler than it might be, but it could work to drop the tornado right out of that.

Quote from: j meyer on February 21, 2008, 09:07:53 AM
I've done some tests with an inverted cone,but couldn't
get the right size as far as combining with the hurricane.

Wanna play?

Do the clouds made this way always touch the ground? And (Question for Planetdie Staff) is there a way to get rid of the horizon line that runs through the cloud?

Oh, yeah!  Great! 

Quote from: j meyer on February 21, 2008, 12:27:37 PM
Wanna play?

sonshine777: as for the single objects no you can have them
floating above the ground and for the more complex thingies
i don't know yet,have to do some more tests.Will keep you
posted. ;)

calico:  ;D

Yep,it works,you can let them fly.Sometimes little adjustments are
required to retain shape,but that should be no problem.
If you need a tgd just tell me which and i'll clean it/them up and post
it/them.

sonshine - the horizon problem is already fixed in the current alpha :).
Very cool formations you all have going here!  I haven't had time to contribute anything, but watching the progress and development has been quite interesting :).

Those are some freaky formations

The method I have been using gives all the shapes a definite hard boundary but they may be more useful it they were re-jigged so that they had soft boundaries which could be blended with fractal shapes to give a more "Natural" look. I have some ideas and will look at this when I get a chance.

I have been away from this for a bit but worked on this yesterday, I think this is the shape people are waiting for  :) ;)

Mr. Lampost, can we rely on the numbers we see in your illustration to recreate this.  This is a wonderful discovery and could even apply to whirlpools.  With water tranparency, this could get pretty cool, as well as it makes me wonder about waves (aka - crashing waves).

...and, by the way, the gauntlet has been tossed down about making waves, now that this has been done.  I sorta am stirring the pot.   :-[

Mr_L. you did it again 8) ;D
Can't wait to see the "natural" look.

Quote from: calico on February 21, 2008, 09:05:36 PM
Mr. Lampost, can we rely on the numbers we see in your illustration to recreate this. 

Yes, I all the numbers you need are there. The node network is the one actually producing the render, I just moved the render window over the preview and did a screen grab.  The cloud layer settings are the same as used in the previous examples.  Experiment with the second Constant Vector (To the right of the disabled Subtract Vector), to change the thickness and shape.

Be warned this one is quite slow.

This thread is amazing, folks!

Quote from: Volker Harun on February 22, 2008, 03:49:17 PM
This thread is amazing, folks!

Hows it going Volker? Long time no see. :)

Mr_L.: i've got a question for you,too.When rebuilding your nodes
i have to swap the first two connections on the conditional scalar
to get the desired result (see attachment) and i can't figure out
what is going wrong here.Do you have an idea or do you see my
possible mistake?Or might it be a glitch? ???

Edit:forgot to say that this goes for the geometrical clouds too.

My guess is that since you swaped the conditional shader's output, you've now got clouds everywhere except where the cone is. So you got an infinit cloud with a cone-shaped hole in it....

Quote from: j meyer on February 22, 2008, 04:23:04 PM
Mr_L.: i've got a question for you,too.When rebuilding your nodes
i have to swap the first two connections on the conditional scalar
to get the desired result (see attachment) and i can't figure out
what is going wrong here.Do you have an idea or do you see my
possible mistake?Or might it be a glitch? ???

Edit:forgot to say that this goes for the geometrical clouds too.

I changed the test setting of my conditional shader to test for Less Than.  If you are using a default Conditional It will be testing for Greater Than. You have produced the same result by reversing the order of the values being compared.  You could have also achieved the same thing by swapping the outputs.

Quote from: Virex on February 22, 2008, 05:54:51 PM
My guess is that since you swaped the conditional shader's output, you've now got clouds everywhere except where the cone is. So you got an infinit cloud with a cone-shaped hole in it....

Yes correct.

When the conditional shader makes its test it splits the cloud layer into two regions, in this case a funnel shape,. One inside the shape and the other outside the shape, the outputs determine if you have a funnel shaped cloud or a cloud with a funnel shaped hole. 

Thanks for the heads up.I was not aware of the fact that
one can change these settings.

Booleans?

That's super cool! ;D

- Oshyan

Beat me to it BELGIUM!  >:(

Now I'll have to go away and do something else  ;D

Where did you find Styrofoam that big? ;D
The top one looks like a Styrofoam Mother ship.

Oshyan: ;D

Mr_L.:sorry.     Belgium???
How about a Dodecahedron or an Icosahedron,that would be great! ;)

sonshine777: got me,it's actually package material from a mothership
and little moon i bought recently. ;D

Quote from: j meyer on February 25, 2008, 10:47:02 AM
Oshyan: ;D

Mr_L.:sorry.     Belgium???
How about a Dodecahedron or an Icosahedron,that would be great! ;)

sonshine777: got me,it's actually package material from a mothership
and little moon i bought recently. ;D

:D LOL :D

Quote from: j meyer on February 25, 2008, 10:47:02 AM
Mr_L.:sorry.     Belgium???

HEY! Stop that before this forum get's censored!

Anyway, the problem with Dodecahedrons and icosahedrons is that they're quite dificult to describe mathamaticaly. A sphere, cone, cube or tetraeder can just use mathamatical functions. Imagine programing an dodecahedron with linear functions!

Quote from: Virex on February 25, 2008, 12:50:28 PM

Quote from: j meyer on February 25, 2008, 10:47:02 AM
Mr_L.:sorry.     Belgium???

HEY! Stop that before this forum get's censored!

I'm pleased to see that someone knows where their towel is  ;D

Dodecahedron or Icosahedron hmmm I might have to think about that; hmmmm the program could take a while to run.... 

There is a wikipedia entry for the Icosahedron at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron and the Dodecahedron at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodecahedron
if those are a help.

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel  ;D   

As for the polyhedrons: too complicated? ;D nevermind,it's not important.

Hmmm,why is it so delicate to mention the home of french fries?I'm afraid
my english is too limited. :( ;)

Quote from: j meyer on February 25, 2008, 05:22:37 PM
As for the polyhedrons: too complicated? ;D nevermind,it's not important.

Hmmm,why is it so delicate to mention the home of french fries?I'm afraid
my english is too limited. :( ;)

In the second radio series of The Hitch-Hikers Guide To The Galaxy BELGIUM! Is revealed to be the ultimate profanity. 

Towels are the most useful things that any interstellar hitch-hiker can carry so it is a good idea to "Know where your towel is", at all times.

I have spent most of the evening constructing a huge node network to make a dodecahedron that doesn't work  ??? >:( Time for that word again; almost  ;D

 ;D  aaaaah now i understand.Btw i didn't know there were radio series
of that too.I faintly remember the towel thing from watching the TV
series long ago though.Thanks for explaining.
I'm sorry to read about the dodecahedron failure,must be frustrating.There
are problems and issues with that kind of geometry in other applications also
and i can imagine that it's really hard with functions.In case you really want
to try again: good luck!

The Guide started out on Radio in 1978,  Then came the books, with several revisions and re workings then the TV series, more revisions.

Them more books eventually adapted to radio after Douglas Adams' death; although he is in the third and fifth series, his lines are lifted from the Audio book versions which he read himself.

Don't give up all hope on the Dodecahedron; I have a cunning plan (No turnips required).

Thanks for the additional info,i do appreciate.
And i'm agog.... ;)

While everyone is playing with these shapes, don't forget it started with hurricanes...  :P

This is a great thread, that needs to continue! I love tornados!


That last post of the funnel shape (whith the 'less than' - 'greater than' issue) made me think of a waterfall... The shape, less filled with clouds, so foamy bits remain, and a reflective surface behind it, could very much resemble a waterfall don't you think?


BTW, I don't get these functions, because I don't know which does what. Is there a simple guide for them, or can one of you guys make one?

Mohawk20:there are some tuts by David Burnett right here:
http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?board=6.0
In case these are too mathematical you could download some
of the easier examples to be found on these forums and try to
study and/or reengineer them and thus learn what at least
some do.

Quote from: Mohawk20 on March 02, 2008, 01:30:54 PM
While everyone is playing with these shapes, don't forget it started with hurricanes...  :P

Yeh but silly clouds are more fun  ;) ;D

Quote from: Mohawk20 on March 02, 2008, 01:30:54 PM
That last post of the funnel shape (whith the 'less than' - 'greater than' issue) made me think of a waterfall... The shape, less filled with clouds, so foamy bits remain, and a reflective surface behind it, could very much resemble a waterfall don't you think?

I'm not sure if this is what you are after but here is a high quality render of the funnel shape using only 4 cloud samples.  Tgd is also attached.