Alexander Weide Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Hi best community on planet, i made some Test to use Houdini for everything and i come to the conclusion i don't need any other software for mature tasks.In that Animation i used Blender a bit for modeling because its a bit fast than houdini, but check it out by yourselfs;) Wish you nice watchig and enjoy it. Houdini is the best peace of Software in VFX. Shot: Shotbreakdown: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 PS an there is no PBR^^ i dont like PBR^^ Rendertime per frame(helicopter with all Layers) on Full HD was 30 seconds on dual core with 4gb ram AMD and for fluids and Particles around 2 minutes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopbin9 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 That turned out great. Explain why you don't like PBR? I use it all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 That turned out great. Explain why you don't like PBR? I use it all the time. because rendertimes are to bad in most cases, if you got not that big renderfarm and not a large budget. -> no client will pay if you got some kind of noise inside a frame everyone wants the perfect picture and that means large sampling count and very large Rendertimes. = dont below 12x12 Sampling and in PBR not everything is working inside the surface shader ->if you will create a realistic looking Glass you cannot use the Attenunation inside the surface shader - it only works in Micropoly or Raytrace renderer -> not in PBR. . in order to holding very short deadlines i made the experience that i only use it if i had to light rooms and inside building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netvudu Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Very nice job! What I found most interesting was the outward motion of the particles. Were those particles advected by SDF smoke? Also, what did you render for particles? did you render points or small volumes? Congrats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopbin9 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 because rendertimes are to bad in most cases, if you got not that big renderfarm and not a large budget. Well, keep doing work like that and you won't have to worry about renderfarm issues for long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryew Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The shot and breakdown are both well done, nice work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 thanks..iam impressed by myself..sometimes;) and that shot was a real challange because of that dust and that bad looking footage.. i thought its not possible to do it but after three weeks i got it^^ and tracking was the worst i've ever done^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 (edited) Very nice job! What I found most interesting was the outward motion of the particles. Were those particles advected by SDF smoke? Also, what did you render for particles? did you render points or small volumes? Congrats. particles advected by sdf you are right. bounding box and spawn of fluid where animated for direction of rotor blades. its hard to describe but it was one week of hard try and error in rnd of the dust.. btw only moving particles are visible so that the cach files are not to large. for little flying sand stones i used the particle points with a point sop to scale it. The dust is converted to volumens.... and i find out that its better and fast to render particles in sop and not to flag "Point rendering" you can render points of particles without point render flag. Edited September 7, 2011 by Mainframe123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netvudu Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Thanks for confirming the sdf advection. Just to be sure I understood you properly,did you render dust as points, as volumes, or both? I knew that it´s possible to render points without that flag, but I find it surprising that it could be faster! I didn´t know that...it sounds weird... Once again, it´s a great job, which shows how capable Micropolygon rendering can be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 8, 2011 Author Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) Thanks for confirming the sdf advection. Just to be sure I understood you properly,did you render dust as points, as volumes, or both? I knew that it´s possible to render points without that flag, but I find it surprising that it could be faster! I didn´t know that...it sounds weird... Once again, it´s a great job, which shows how capable Micropolygon rendering can be. i am combine both ways dust as points and as volumens. but most is volume. only close to camera it "morphs" to points... its like a difference key;) i can use this system in the future for every dust operation...this asset is beautiful;) and i hope you will understand that i dont share not everything because i will use it in future.. btw i think you will get it in better ways you are a master with more experience than me;) i only know houdini since 4 years^^ and of course it sounds weird but it render faster;) Edited September 8, 2011 by Mainframe123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Great shot! Am I the only one who read it as "Black Hawk Down VFX Shot" ? I was saying to myself, "Yes, Houdini was used for shots in that movie." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smaugthewyrm Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 i also noticed that you composited the project with COPS rather than some other app, like nuke. i kept replaying the shot to see if i could tell what bits were cgi. the breakdown vid surprised me. i was wrong on almost all my guesses. lol. pro level work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Weide Posted September 8, 2011 Author Share Posted September 8, 2011 i also noticed that you composited the project with COPS rather than some other app, like nuke. i kept replaying the shot to see if i could tell what bits were cgi. the breakdown vid surprised me. i was wrong on almost all my guesses. lol. pro level work. thanks alot. What can i say. If Houdini gets a tracker and a paint modul you dont really need other apps like nuke. Because you can do most of the same in chops. and dont forget you got a real 3d composition app in combination of rops and chops...inside houdini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fayal Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 nice work !! the dust source is it pop particles or flip fluid simulation? can you share some technical detail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larra Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 WOW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traiano Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 nice job i like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sankar Kumar Posted September 8, 2013 Share Posted September 8, 2013 Impressive.... 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.