ejr32123

Its because you are not sourcing any temperature or burn. If you go to volume rasterize attributes and only use temperature and burn it will be empty. You need to change the coverage attribute to either nothing or change the way you are sourcing (like giving each particle a density value higher then 0). You have density as your coverage attribute and your points that have burn/temperature have a density value of 0. So you are effectively multiplying your burn/temperature by 0. So only density is being sourced.

sorry, I cannot. But using the different methods listed above pretty much have me covered

Thanks all for the answers

the flame range doesn't actually seem to work for me. Smoke is always emitted everywhere even from the very start.

Unfortunately that doesn't work. The collision is way too thin. I did something similar. I use a vdb from polygons then reshape sdf on dilate to make it thicker

oh nice, I will try that

1000 iq move, lol. I will give that a shot

haha, unfortunately that doesn't work in this case

Hello, For some recent freelance work I have received geometry from modeling which will interact as a collider for some smoke simulations. The geometry (as often is the case it seems) isn't properly closed up in areas that are not rendered. I assume modeling thinks if something isn't being rendered the topology isn't important. It's difficult to set up sdf collisions for pyro because everything is open. Any advice for how to deal with this? Is there some alternative to pyro collisions that do not require sdf's, or do I just need to close everything up. I feel like I would spend more time fixing the geometry then doing the simulation : ) Thanks

found the problem in an older forum post. In the bake rop driver settings, the the alpha channel is being copied to the extracted image planes. You can just leave that empty and your texture will work.

Hello, I used to have no trouble baking textures, but no matter what I do I always have seams. I am not sure which version this started happening. If I use the lab bake texture node (which seems to be using an older version of the texture bake rop) it works perfectly fine. Look at my viewport render. the left side is using the texture bake rop and the right side is using the labs texture bake (as I said, I think its using an earlier version of the bake rop node). I practically mirrored bake texture rop settings to the labs bake texture, but its still not working. Any thoughts? edit: you can see the export from the regular bake has an alpha channel for some reason so you dont see the diffuse fill. bake_test.zip

you mean like this? hip included pop_curve.hiplc

Hello: I am seem to be having trouble getting pyro to look the way I want it too, especially with stylized fire/smaller flames. (For me at least) the worst looking part of any sim I do is either the sourcing or smoke close to the source. It seems like interesting detail doesn't really happen in smoke until disturbance/turbulence hits later on in the sim's life. If you look at this fire sim I rendered, https://vimeo.com/440159408 it looks fine, but if I want the flames to be smaller it looks pretty bad (no detail or nice motion). See where my blue line is on the photo, if I add dissipation or change the flame lifespan to end around the blue arrow, the fire looks pretty bad and you don't get too see nice swirls/licks as you can once it reaches the pink-ish arrow. The TLDR is I can get nice looking sims at bigger scales, but when I need smaller flames/smoke its hard to get nice motion early on in the sim. Any tips?

I do not have much experience with hair other than using xgen for a bit and watching tutorials/demos of other software like ornatrix. I recently spent a lot of time learning hair in houdini and I was wondering if other people had a similar experience. Sops vs OBJ. I hate working at obj level with hair nodes (or in general). You have to keep diving back and forth to different objects to access data, and it's really frustrating and painfully slow. So I switched to mainly using sops. However, things were really strange there too. The first thing I noticed is that none of the radial menus work. Since you can’t really freeze hair (so they won’t be affected by the brush) you can select hair then use the radial menu to get back to the brush and only brush those selected hairs. However, that doesn’t work in sops because the radial menu and most of the shelf tools only seem to work at obj level. To brush only selected hairs, you have to click the guide groom node, click the selection arrow, select the hairs you want, then hit enter, then manually switch to the brush tool. That is just way too slow. Then, if you change the amount of hairs, your selection breaks and the hair does weird things. Changing the amount of hair going into a brush node generally works fine because it interpolates, unless you made selections in the process (which is what I have been doing). Some things just don’t make sense or are slow. The tools were clearly designed to work at obj level, even though you can access them in sops. 1. Manually placing guides at sop level. I turn on shade open curves so I can see the hair width when working at sop level. When you use the guide brush tool to place guides, the guides immediately disappear. I found out that working in sops, the guide groom plant guide tool does not allow you to create a width attribute. This means the width gets assigned a value of 0 and thus disappears because you need a width attribute. The way I fix it is to unlock the digital asset and manually add the attribute. See video 2. Changing the length of the hair does not resample the width along length. This literally makes 0 sense. If I use the guide brush to lengthen tapered hair, it seems to not really get longer. However, when I rendered it my hair was much longer than the viewport. Then I learned that it's because width was not resampled to match the new length, so 60% of the hair was invisible in the viewport. To fix it, I add a resample to add a curveu attribute, then I resample the width along curveu. See video 3. Some brushes are insanely slow. The smooth brush is the slowest of them all, you can only brush a few hairs before it gets too slow to use. 4. The brushes in general just don’t seem to work well compared to other software I have seen. They are generally slower and harder to use/give you worse results. 5. The clumping can give you different results based on your uvs, and if you update the uvs the clump node doesn’t always update correctly. I have to delete the clump node then hit undo to get it to update, or restart houdini. 6. Recaching. This is so annoying. If you work in sops, the recache menu button doesn’t work so you have to manually select all the guide grooms and hit recache. I also noticed in sops that I have to do this when I load my project, otherwise I get shown incorrect results. When working at obj this was not an issue. I don’t want this to be all negative so I will say this: The parts that are procedural, the guide process nodes are amazing. The guide advect tool is amazing too. You can get very good results without ever touching a brush-this is the great part. Does anyone else have any thoughts on how grooming compares to other softwares? To reiterate, I just found manual grooming with brushes to be really slow and painful, with a lot of manual setup or switching between obj nodes.

seemed to fix it by adding a fbik configure joints and limiting rotation to x axis