PaulM3D Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Hello everyone! I need temperature values render pass for some post compositing purposes from Pyro simulation. When I'm rendering it as "temperature" float 32 pass, I'm receiving negative values near the borders of volume. Why does it happening? Attaching picture. I can normalize this somehow after render, but I want to now why it is that way. There is dead end node "Fit Range Unclamped"(picture attached) in default shader(Fireball in this case). I can pass "temperature" parameter through some "fit ranges" or even "Reshape" node. But it doesn't answering the question Why? And I don't think that is the right way. Should say that remapping from shader tab from shades hasn't worked properly for me - even with clamping and fit set for 0 - 1 there was negative values and values bigger than 1. Basically, I need normalized (from 0 to 1) temperature render pass for my simulation. Maybe someone can help my with this? Will be much appreciate. Attaching 2 screenshots. Don't attaching .hip file because there is a simple sphere with Pyro Explosion shelf preset on it. P.S. Don't want to make another post right now, so should ask - is anybody know proper way to make a vectorfield texture from Pyro Sim in Houdini? Right now I'm using Volume Slice, rendering remapped normalized (from 0 to 1) motion vector pass from top orthographic view and compositing it in kind of flipbook, which is converted into volume texture dds next. Maybe there is another way to do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 for temp, just use a volume wrangle and max it with 0. "f@temperature = max(f@temperature,0);" i noticed the same thing the other day. i suspect it's some kind of mathematical artifact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulM3D Posted December 28, 2015 Author Share Posted December 28, 2015 Fathom, thank you for answer! Your method is working propertly, of course. Basically, better than mine previous normalizing to only positive on comp stage. I think you're right about mathematical artifact, so I won't to dig it anymore. It's just working fine. 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.