PDA

View Full Version : Deep Rising fluid sim



Sean Martin
01-28-2017, 12:41 PM
Not sure if this is has been posted already but it looks pretty close to release.
Owch! That price tho! Guess the dev has to make his money back and he does have the market pretty cornered.

http://deepfxworld.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=50

Let me also be the first to say "Mac version" pretty please🙂

mav3rick
01-28-2017, 01:17 PM
one thing cough my eye... is there interaction btw hard/soft body and fluids .... also would like to see more complex sims with lot more particles as some of sims look bit bloby fat instead natural

prometheus
01-28-2017, 02:45 PM
I think itīs great his doing this, though I think it needs to be evaluated with users returning decent sims out..right now the price seems way too steep as to the state it is in, but itīs promising.
Though I donīt like all the module windows needed to work with this, itīs a bit to messy as UI for me that is.

That said, I hope it can pick up pace and improve on the UI as well as getting some nice sims out there.

vonpietro
01-28-2017, 03:33 PM
i would like to see something that wasn't slow motion.

also something with finished texturing would be nice.

darkChief
01-28-2017, 03:51 PM
You can play around with the demo and see whats possible. What type of texturing did you have in mind?

bazsa73
01-28-2017, 03:52 PM
You can do similar in Blender with molecular addon and using Clintonman's particle importer it is supereasy to load it into LW. I did lots of testing with it 2 weeks now. I am fine with it.

jwiede
01-28-2017, 04:22 PM
Not sure if this is has been posted already but it looks pretty close to release.
Owch! That price tho! Guess the dev has to make his money back and he does have the market pretty cornered.

:twak: Instead of complaining about the price, you really ought to count your blessings there are still devs making plugins for the relatively-limited LW market. That price is a serious bargain compared to similar liquid simulation plugins for other 3D packages.

samurai_x
01-28-2017, 06:05 PM
Agree. The price is very competitive and a welcome addition to lightwave. People are just too cheap.

samurai_x
01-28-2017, 07:18 PM
Hopefull newtek will include this in the next newsletter.
Or Liberty3d will have this on their news feed.

Greenlaw
01-28-2017, 07:38 PM
:twak: Instead of complaining about the price, you really ought to count your blessings there are still devs making plugins for the relatively-limited LW market. That price is a serious bargain compared to similar liquid simulation plugins for other 3D packages.
Agreed.

If Deep Rising is easy to use and works well, I think it's a very fair price to pay, especially for a solution that works natively in LightWave. I have generally avoided other fluid sim solutions like RealFlow and Blender because I simply don't have time to learn yet another 3D package.

Trying out the demo this evening. Will post what I think over in the 'official' thread. (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?151880-Deep-Rising-Fx-Potential-fluid-simulator)

mav3rick
01-29-2017, 04:09 AM
Agreed.

If Deep Rising is easy to use and works well, I think it's a very fair price to pay, especially for a solution that works natively in LightWave. I have generally avoided other fluid sim solutions like RealFlow and Blender because I simply don't have time to learn yet another 3D package.

Trying out the demo this evening. Will post what I think over in the 'official' thread. (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?151880-Deep-Rising-Fx-Potential-fluid-simulator)
i have no problem to pay for it once it cover all my needs. from what i seen i think it still miss final polish and at least hard body interaction -ice cubes anyone?

samurai_x
01-29-2017, 05:24 AM
So far so good. Pretty stable and multi threaded.
Only issue is I want to test kinematic objects but is disabled.

Norka
01-29-2017, 07:07 AM
D'oh! Why couldn't this be a GPU-based fluid solver?!! I would plunk down the dough today. I'll probably still get this, since a couple clients have water-related products, and it would be nice to not have to fake it. Thanks for the heads-up. It would really be wise for Deep Rising to put out press releases to CGChannel.com, CGPress.org, creativebloq.com, etc...

prometheus
01-29-2017, 07:43 AM
The big major question is probably how well it interacts with other dynamics, it may be that it wonīt work with bullet dynamics and in such case it will always fall behind the plans and the native tools that deals with that, and you would have to rely on the
dynamics in the break up plugin he did earlier, and that wonīt be able to cope with bullet bone dynamics for characters, or any potential particle intergration the lw team improves on to work with the bullet system.

So the question for me is wether or not he would have to implement his own physics engine to cover all other aspects with particles, bone dynamics etc ..if it canīt be made to work with bullet engine.

Michael

ianr
01-29-2017, 07:52 AM
D'oh! Why couldn't this be a GPU-based fluid solver?!! I would plunk down the dough today. I'll probably still get this, since a couple clients have water-related products, and it would be nice to not have to fake it. Thanks for the heads-up. It would really be wise for Deep Rising to put out press releases to CGChannel.com, CGPress.org, creativebloq.com, etc...


Dark Chief, Any future ( 2017 -2018 ? )plans for a toggling version CPU / GPU version if sensed on system GFX cards

Congrats! But don't forget to register it on the ' Third Party Page' at release, Chief.

m.d.
01-29-2017, 09:28 AM
absolutely thrilled we have committed plugin dev's for lightwave

one thing.....is there some viscosity adjustments possible, as every sim shown has a milkshake like consistency

CaptainMarlowe
01-29-2017, 09:37 AM
Well, I would seriously consider buying it, but no Mac version yet. So, I'll wait and hope (like for LW 2017 :p)

darkChief
01-29-2017, 09:45 AM
The big major question is probably how well it interacts with other dynamics, it may be that it wonīt work with bullet dynamics.

The one way rigid coupling (and two way coupling in the future) is based on current research, and in most of those papers Bullet or Physx is used, and integration is loosely coupled. The simulators exchange force information between steps.

darkChief
01-29-2017, 09:47 AM
is there some viscosity adjustments possible, as every sim shown has a milkshake like consistency

Yes it has viscosity.

prometheus
01-29-2017, 09:49 AM
absolutely thrilled we have committed plugin dev's for lightwave

one thing.....is there some viscosity adjustments possible, as every sim shown has a milkshake like consistency

Absolutly, I hope my...(itīs not for me in the current state) doesnīt discourage development, we have to bear in mind itīs in a very early state.
And I encourage darkchief to keep working on it, cause frankly we do not have much options that works inside the lw environment today, so it would be going houdini, realflow or blender with itīs cheap alternativ, but neither one of them works inside the lw environment as this is supposed to do.

I do hope he getīs some folks investing and supporting it, even though I will not at the current state...I do not have much time for dynamics now, but I sure want to..maybe later this year.

darkChief
01-29-2017, 09:52 AM
Dark Chief, Any future ( 2017 -2018 ? )plans for a toggling version CPU / GPU version if sensed on system GFX Cards.

GPU is a goal, but the CPU implementation can't be ported directly. Also looking at Opencl.

Algorithms already parallel though.

prometheus
01-29-2017, 09:57 AM
My concerns is that I would really..really want to see dynamics system working and speaking the same language in terms of dynamics engines does and intergrates (though the best bet would be houdini for that)

Mostly what we may see is just third party developments of various developers introducing their systems that doesnīt speak to eachother, first we got particles not working in dynamic sync with bullet..which is up to the lw team to fix, then you got jawsets fire and smoke ..which canīt implement particle advection since the sdk doesnīt allow it.
So getting a fre and smoke simulation properly run on rigid bodies floating on and in this new fluid simulator would probably not play well.

a scene case ..
Use turbulenceFD with fire to burn/push the deepfx fluid simulation so itīs fluids disperse, in that fluid simulation lays dynamic bullet items, perhaps figures with bullet bone dynamics, you would need the turbulenceFD engine to speak with the deepfx engine I guess.
Or else a lot of workarounds.

darkChief
01-29-2017, 11:26 AM
Intergrating different simulations has been big research topic for years. I'm sure you've heard of Nucleus for Maya, and position based dynamics. They try to implement one framework that allows all these elements to mix. It's essentially multiphysics. Even with access I believe it would be hard to get everything to work together.

Even if things can interact in Houdini I doubt there's one universal solver to link everything.

prometheus
01-29-2017, 12:21 PM
Intergrating different simulations has been big research topic for years. I'm sure you've heard of Nucleus for Maya, and position based dynamics. They try to implement one framework that allows all these elements to mix. It's essentially multiphysics. Even with access I believe it would be hard to get everything to work together.

Even if things can interact in Houdini I doubt there's one universal solver to link everything.

Thanks for your thoughts and the perspective feedback on that.

m.d.
01-29-2017, 01:58 PM
Intergrating different simulations has been big research topic for years. I'm sure you've heard of Nucleus for Maya, and position based dynamics. They try to implement one framework that allows all these elements to mix. It's essentially multiphysics. Even with access I believe it would be hard to get everything to work together.

Even if things can interact in Houdini I doubt there's one universal solver to link everything.

i'll echo that as well....
Houdini runs multiple solvers and multiple systems, bullet is pretty popular within Houdini for RBD as an example, (even though their own RBD solver is likely more robust)
It was designed to integrate any solver available....and custom ones created by studios during production.

The difference with houdini is all the relevant data generated from the various solvers can be wired into a totally separate and disparate dynamics context within Houdini, you could send velocity from a particle sim to drive vorticity in a FLIP sim, RBD glue strength could be affected by a fire sim....heck you can even filter stray particles using a CHOP compositing context using noise filtering.
All this allows a similar functionality as a unified solver....but much more useful with back and forth connections with any built in, custom or third party solver.

Lightwave is a bit of a mishmash of closed loop solvers and dynamics....virtually nothing talks to anything else outside their own context...Bullet only works with bullet. It can't interact with clothFX, Turbulence, ect ect.
Hopefully the node editor is opened up a bit more to allow dev's to have hooks to pass and receive data from different contexts, but as of right now the node editor does not cross boundaries outside of its own context even within the LW native systems.

prometheus
01-29-2017, 04:51 PM
i'll echo that as well....
Houdini runs multiple solvers and multiple systems, bullet is pretty popular within Houdini for RBD as an example, (even though their own RBD solver is likely more robust)
It was designed to integrate any solver available....and custom ones created by studios during production.


Lightwave is a bit of a mishmash of closed loop solvers and dynamics....virtually nothing talks to anything else outside their own context...Bullet only works with bullet. It can't interact with clothFX, Turbulence, ect ect.



True, but clothfx..doesnīt matter since they implemented a soft body (deform) ...but they need to improve that or add additional soft body more designed for cloth.
turbulenceFD interaction? well it does generate fluids and should be able to work with the bullet items as collisions..I think?

Greenlaw
01-29-2017, 06:23 PM
i have no problem to pay for it once it cover all my needs. from what i seen i think it still miss final polish and at least hard body interaction -ice cubes anyone?

Yeah, I was thinking about that too. A couple of years ago, I was creating a lot of animations involving ships, ice and creatures in the water. I can think of some possible cheats and workarounds to make that work but, yeah, it would be good if the plugin could handle this sort of thing without trying to trick it.

I just finished my first sim with the demo and playing with the meshing options now. Fun stuff! I'm running it on a Windows tablet computer (Wacom Cintiq Companion 2 Enhanced) and both the sim and meshing stages ran surprisingly quickly. Based on these goofy tests I'm doing, I'm already wishing I had this tool two years ago.

TBH, I couldn't do exactly what I wanted in my test because I couldn't access the square emitter and some of the other 'Commerical Build'-only features but I think I've seen enough with the demo to seriously consider purchasing.

Greenlaw
01-29-2017, 06:28 PM
Oh, it's worth noting that I've been messing with the demo for a couple of hours now and it hasn't crashed once.

Okay, I'm convinced. :)

Greenlaw
01-29-2017, 06:34 PM
Just checking: Is Deep Rising not available for purchase yet?

I'm getting a message that "Products marked with *** are not available in the desired quantity or not in stock!"

Oh, well. Will just have to be patient then. :p

samurai_x
01-29-2017, 06:43 PM
Oh, it's worth noting that I've been messing with the demo for a couple of hours now and it hasn't crashed once.

Okay, I'm convinced. :)

Me, too. Even without the save capability you can evaluate it.
No crashes testing for a couple of hours removing, adding items, changing settings.
Dstorm Liquidpack crashes on me a lot. DeepR is much more stable.

I do wish kinetic items were unlocked to see how fast DeepR calculates when there are moving items with fluids.

hrgiger
01-30-2017, 11:02 AM
$325 is not a lot of money for the amount of work that would need to be put into this. seems like a deal to me if you need fluids.

Every4thPixel
01-30-2017, 11:10 AM
325$ might not be so much money but if you add up all the plugins you need to make lw a complete program you end up spending a lot more then you expect. FTD, LWCad, UBERCam, exr trader, etc.

hrgiger
01-30-2017, 02:47 PM
That really depends on what you do with LightWave. Fluids are a niche item and they do not make a program complete or not complete, not everyone needs them. If you need any of these plugins to work, they'll pay for themselves. If LW and all the plugins you need to do your job are more expensive than another app that has the features you need, then you use something else. But that's no argument for a 3rd party developer to cheat himself of getting paid for his hard work by slashing his prices. If you need the plugin, you'll buy it. If its too much, then you probably didn't actually need it.

erikals
01-30-2017, 06:22 PM
yep, and even with tons of plugins, most of them don't require paid upgrades. often it's a one-time fee.

i'd expect to upgrade to DRFX 2, if available, though.

jwiede
01-30-2017, 07:33 PM
i'll echo that as well....
Houdini runs multiple solvers and multiple systems, bullet is pretty popular within Houdini for RBD as an example, (even though their own RBD solver is likely more robust)
It was designed to integrate any solver available....and custom ones created by studios during production.

It's not specifically a node editor problem, it's that there's no LWSDK APIs/method for extracting dynamics info from or injecting same to LW's dynamics plugins (or other types of info, but dynamics is most pressing) at _all_. That's why Bullet won't interact with pfx or hardfx/softfx, they're separate plugins with no exposed methodology for interchanging data between systems. The silo isolation between LW node editors currently doesn't _help_ the problem any, but solving node editor silo isolation still won't automatically solve the more general dynamics interchange problem.

And that's not even considering that the interchange of calibrated force info, etc. isn't something that lends itself to simple inter-node info exchange data types, nor do LW nodes have quite the same flexibility regarding exchanging structured operand types as Houdini offers.

C4D has ability to support dynamics interchange between native and external systems, and if you take a look at the APIs, parameter types, and methods involved to manipulate such data, you'll better understand how they are a bit too complex to usefully (let alone efficiently) express in LW's node system. The current LW nodal system was not really designed for expressing those kinds of complex data relationships and interactions, so eliminating silo isolation alone is kind of the tip of the iceberg in terms of LW node system changes that'd really be needed.

samurai_x
01-30-2017, 08:37 PM
That really depends on what you do with LightWave. Fluids are a niche item and they do not make a program complete or not complete, not everyone needs them. If you need any of these plugins to work, they'll pay for themselves. If LW and all the plugins you need to do your job are more expensive than another app that has the features you need, then you use something else. But that's no argument for a 3rd party developer to cheat himself of getting paid for his hard work by slashing his prices. If you need the plugin, you'll buy it. If its too much, then you probably didn't actually need it.

Yep. I'm guessing not many people have heard of Liquidpack from Dstorm. Its in the same price range. And probably not many people bought it unless they needed fluids for commercial projects. I used that and blender fluids because I needed to. If people don't need to use DPR there's no reason to buy it, just like TFD or any specialized plugin. Really depends if you need fluids, smoke, fire effects for your work.

Every4thPixel
01-31-2017, 12:52 AM
That really depends on what you do with LightWave. Fluids are a niche item and they do not make a program complete or not complete, not everyone needs them. If you need any of these plugins to work, they'll pay for themselves. If LW and all the plugins you need to do your job are more expensive than another app that has the features you need, then you use something else. But that's no argument for a 3rd party developer to cheat himself of getting paid for his hard work by slashing his prices. If you need the plugin, you'll buy it. If its too much, then you probably didn't actually need it.

It's not about what I do or somebody else does with lightwave it's about the comparison between quality/price/competitors that are just facts you can compare and then say hey "this" or hey "that".

samurai_x
01-31-2017, 02:03 AM
I'll compare it to Modo which is the closest competitor for lightwave and many users are actually using both like me and I'm glad DPR is in lightwave but I'll also be glad if its in Modo in the future because both of them don't have any native solutions for liquid sims.
People should be happy these plugins exist in lightwave. TFD is not even avail for modo. TFD has made lightwave viable for pyro work even without fumefx in lw.

OT: If someone ported Redshift for Lightwave that would be a gamechanger for gpu rendering in lightwave.

prometheus
01-31-2017, 11:51 AM
That really depends on what you do with LightWave. Fluids are a niche item and they do not make a program complete or not complete, not everyone needs them. If you need any of these plugins to work, they'll pay for themselves. If LW and all the plugins you need to do your job are more expensive than another app that has the features you need, then you use something else. But that's no argument for a 3rd party developer to cheat himself of getting paid for his hard work by slashing his prices. If you need the plugin, you'll buy it. If its too much, then you probably didn't actually need it.

You can see it with different perspective in terms of "needing it"

One where you know you have work to do that will pay off, and as such..you may just jump on with it to produce the stuff.
One where you Think you may need it, as making your own reels that may lead up to something, I am guessing many users may fall in to this categorie, as such it would be highly speculative to wether or not this plugin will pay itself, then again you may counter..thatīs a case where you really do not need it, but it could be useful perspective, but then you really should think about the price and what it does.

As for turbulenceFD, I never bought in to it, I really do not need it, I would like to have it and use it maybe..but itīs a long stretch and highly speculative if I ever would end up working with it...even though I am sure I could handle the plugin well and probably create good output, the environment and situation and where I live among other factors, doesnīt justify it for me to buy it and do reels only with it.

erikals
01-31-2017, 12:20 PM
it's not that hard to find a project that you can sell that will cover the cost of Deep Rising.

selling LightWave tutorials for example. easy.
personally, if i weren't this lazy/slow i would have sold several tutorials by now.

ianr
02-01-2017, 09:42 AM
I'll compare it to Modo which is the closest competitor for lightwave and many users are actually using both like me and I'm glad DPR is in lightwave but I'll also be glad if its in Modo in the future because both of them don't have any native solutions for liquid sims.
People should be happy these plugins exist in lightwave. TFD is not even avail for modo. TFD has made lightwave viable for pyro work even without fumefx in lw.

OT: If someone ported Redshift for Lightwave that would be a gamechanger for gpu rendering in lightwave.


Congrats

One Down ( Earth landed) & one to Go !

Norka
02-03-2017, 07:59 AM
Hey darkChief, congrats on your launch! I do hope your Deep Rising flourishes! And I was very happy to see a release article on CGChannel.com. I think it is very likely that I will be getting DRFX, even without gpu support currently.

Please excuse that I have not had a chance to read the entire manual, but does DRFX use Narrow Band FLIP as seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETr1Fptm6Z8? I am seeing Narrow Band in the manual, in the OpenVDB Surface Meshing section.... but I am reading that as just Narrow Band for the meshing, and not for the solving.. at all... Do I have that right?

Sorry, I am completely new to real liquids in 3D, though I have been faking them for years.

darkChief
02-03-2017, 11:46 AM
You are not far off, narrow band is a term used for signed distance fields. FLIP solvers use these fields for surface tracking.

Deep Rising FX doesn’t have a FLIP solver, it use's SPH. There is no equivalent to Narrow band FLIP for Sph, but that could change in the future.
OpenVDB is library for signed distance fields, Deep Rising use's it for meshing.