JRoberts86 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Hi Everyone, I am working with the Ocean Toolkit and currently developing the a system to drive the crest particle simulation. I am using the mineigval attribute to source the particles which works well but once I apply displacement to the surface via the shader the location of the particle source does not match. I looked into transferring the HOT values into a vopsop to match the displacement prior to the simulation but although results are close there is still an in discrepancy between the two. In the shader version there is a lot more surface detail which although is the main difference between two I am more focused on the position of the larger peaks which do not have the same position. Is there a way similar to using a SOP attribute to drive a shader; but use a shader attribute to drive surface geometry in VOPs. If anyone has any ideas how to solve this I would love to hear your suggestions. I have attached a .hip file to this post. Kind Regards J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Perhaps you could bake the values into a texture map (of sufficient resolution). See ShaderUnwrap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRoberts86 Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 Hi Edward, Thanks for such a quick reply, ill take a look at the Shader Unwrap and post my findings. Many Thanks and Kind Regards J Perhaps you could bake the values into a texture map (of sufficient resolution). See ShaderUnwrap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkBru Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hi Everyone, I am working with the Ocean Toolkit and currently developing the a system to drive the crest particle simulation. I am using the mineigval attribute to source the particles which works well but once I apply displacement to the surface via the shader the location of the particle source does not match. I looked into transferring the HOT values into a vopsop to match the displacement prior to the simulation but although results are close there is still an in discrepancy between the two. In the shader version there is a lot more surface detail which although is the main difference between two I am more focused on the position of the larger peaks which do not have the same position. Is there a way similar to using a SOP attribute to drive a shader; but use a shader attribute to drive surface geometry in VOPs. If anyone has any ideas how to solve this I would love to hear your suggestions. I have attached a .hip file to this post. Kind Regards J you could write out a pointcloud of the wavetops in the shader and import this back into sops and use it as a source for the particle sim... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.