JaydenDP

Thanks guys, some things to think about there. I'm also wondering, what's better: A: One course that goes briefly into eg Grains, volumes and magical FX (particles) with a small final render of each B A more detailed course on just one of those topics with a more complete FX shot for a reel. Wondering whether people prefer a broad stroke understanding of "bread and butter" FX tasks or if more would prefer to enrol in something far more focused. Any thoughts and suggestions or maybe options C and D would be great to hear Thanks Jay

Hi Guys, I put my reel out a while ago and since then I've recieved quite a lot of emails asking questions about some of the work and for tutorials etc. Mostly from people who are still trying to get into the industry. My reel: I'm thinking about making a course for those people specifically, focusing on some of the usual FX challenges and helping to create some work to add to their reels and hopefully make them more hire-able! I do a fair amount of interviewing people and watching reels for potential new people to bring onto the team, so I have a good grasp of what we/others look for in showreels. So I'm looking for some advice or suggestions, should I do a course that covers a broad range of topics and how to make them as pretty as possible for a reel? Should I maybe focus on one type of effect and then introduce other courses to tackle the rest one by one? Any other suggestions or requests from people who would be interested in this sort of thing would be much appreciated! Thanks in advance Jay

Can't really speak for modelling tasks, but I use it quite often to rename fields from DOPS if I want to use them in a different way in shading. Not really what you're asking I guess but there you go ;P Actually thats the only thing I've ever seen it used for so would also be interested in what other uses it has.

Thats horrible!

Hmm, is it a .sim file you're outputting from inside DOPS?

A glue network is probably what you're after. Watch the masterclass if you're not familiar with any of it: Jay

I guess there's no clear good or bad way to do this I think I'll be cheating it. Sim first, key-frame later...

I didn't make that setup! Just fixed a few things I agree with Hudson, Hardik, keep learning about solvers and micro solvers first.

Oh yeah, I think it might have been the noise applied to your source volume. There were areas where there was no volume emitting so the resize container didn't know where to go. Try disabling your noise to see if that helps. If that fixes it then switch it back on and tweak it so that there's always at least a small amount of volume? I can't check the file right now so there might have been something else I changed, if yours is still broken I'll try check it again tomorrow and see.

+1 That would be great

and here's one with the resize node plugged back in to resize to the static maximum defined by your attribute. The biggest problem I could see was your size attribute on your clusters was huge. Instead of editing that, you changed the scale of the cube that was being visualized. Hope this helps? trail_04_copy_FIX_resize.hip

Hi, I changed a few things in your file, have a look and let me know if that is more of what you're expecting? Jay trail_04_copy_FIX.hip

Hi! I've seen a few examples of mixing key-framed or deforming geometry with simulated stuff. I'm not sure how feasible some of these methods are a lot of the time. For obvious reasons the RBDKeyActive DOP won't work with packed primitives because you really want to call an active attribute for each fractured piece to activate in DOPs. Which will only work if you use normal bullet, without packing it. Firstly, is there any workaround here when mixing keyframe and simulation with PACKED fractured geometry? Also generally, I seem to still get unnatural results whenever I try activating sims on top of animated. For instance take the building collapse in Transformers 3. The top half of the building would have been keyframed, even possibly some deformation keyframing, with simulation data activated to supplement that animation...I think? What would be the best way to do that? Any ideas much appreciated, its a tricky one for me for sure... Thanks! Jay

This is all going way over my head at the moment but I understand the principle. Looking back at the original image in this post though, I don't see how you would achieve that using this setup? ie, displacing in every direction on internal fractured edges and inside faces. Where the original appearance of the mesh isn't compromised by that displacement. Or at least, using a similar technique for that still seems like it will be a lot more complicated... Are there any examples of ways to closer match the original post and image? Thanks! Jay

Happening because of the resizing container I should add