Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Rocks and FFX Grass

  1. #1
    Newbie Member cgb777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    88

    Rocks and FFX Grass

    Still working on creating grass with FFX
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ffx-grass-rocks.jpg 
Views:	681 
Size:	375.6 KB 
ID:	126892

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	wire.jpg 
Views:	587 
Size:	445.1 KB 
ID:	126893

  2. #2
    Lightwave rebel Pensart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    291
    Hope u dont mind me saying, i do not want to disappoint you.
    But if no one reacts, it would not help you get any better results.
    To be honest, at first sight it looks more like moss and melting snow?
    If u focus some more, it becomes clear. Still, i hope u give it another try.
    Maybe raise the rocks, some longer grass? And maybe some variation
    in the grass?
    -------------------------------------
    Joined the Rebellion

  3. #3
    Newbie Member cgb777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    88
    Definitely good advice. It really was a quick test experimenting with ffx. Thanks for the feedback!

  4. #4
    the blender guy basically says grass is not a single blade, but a series of blades, if you pull a piece of uncut grass it's made of like 4 or 5 parts, when you model this, and add weeds you get realistic grass.

    blender guy also uses about 49 variations in his instancing - so there is tremendous variety, typical lw grass stuff i see uses - ONE blade of grass, one and only one usually - but for good realism - 49 high res varieties plus weed types gets the job done and is prob overkill- you'll get though with 49 variations for sure.
    dont settle for "too simple" blender guy pretty much showed - 49 types is enough to get convincing realism.

    blender uses a particle format to spread all 49 types about. lw uses instancing (there is instancing using particles as well)

    Instancing for us would be 49 layers added - kind of unwieldy - i think the blender method is better for variations.
    still - his examples are proof - 49 layers gives enough variety to be fully realistic.

  5. #5
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    15,128
    thereīs no real difference in blender particle vs lightwave particles, lightwave can do that with particleFX linking or through instancing with particles.

    Donīt forget to keep an eye on this...



    I wish the lw team enhances the preset shelf, with thumb images and drag and drop of premade grass patches/sections, then we can drag and drop to instance UI, then the option to set distribution amount/weigh percent per section/grass patch.

    Michael

  6. #6
    absolutely - in fact - There is a way to use the particles to do a sort of cheap object collision detection with instancing. I've worked out some of it in modeler, but i've got to test it alittle more. Just a technique. The idea is to use the merge points to eliminate points within a certain distance. SO if your instanced object is 1 foot by 1 foot, you could merge points for a 1 on your point cloud, and then no point would be close enough that your instanced object would intersect. thats the idea, but its rough still i haven't figured out the particulars with it working yet.
    =) what do you think?

    Yes, instancing using particles - better than blender because instancing uses less memory, - i'm not sure if blender is instancing or duplicating geometry - i think it's real geometry and not instancing. Blender guy quotes 5gigs of ram being used, that coincides with real geometry on particles and not instancing, but i dont know, have not looked it up yet

  7. #7
    Space Monkey 3DGFXStudios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,121
    You'll probably get better result using instances. You scenery looks like it's under water. The color control over the ffx grass isn't that great. For hair it works but for grass it's just not that good. Try to make the grass stand up a little more.

  8. #8
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    15,128
    Too bad sasquatch never got developed further, and too bad saslite was removed from later lw version due to license issues it seems, sasquatch pro had dynamics and the grass looked better....

    http://www.worley.com/E/Products/sas...rendering.html



    grass and located wind force....
    http://www.worley.com/Media/animatio...ch/chopper.avi

  9. #9
    Adapting Artist jasonwestmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,399
    HAS built in dynamics, Sas still works with classic camera.
    All that is powerful or long standing is first conceived in the imagination; supported by the hope of possibility and then made manifest in our commitment of our current physical reality.

  10. #10
    Newbie Member cgb777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    88
    Still tweaking some settings. Not getting enough variation yet.


  11. #11
    I would add some fish to the scene. This looks a lot better but the motion in the grass is a bit odd. short grass like that doesn't really move.

  12. #12
    Newbie Member cgb777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by Every4thPixel View Post
    I would add some fish to the scene. This looks a lot better but the motion in the grass is a bit odd. short grass like that doesn't really move.
    Ha! Adding fish is a great idea! Yeah, I'm kind of just experimenting with the gravity settings to get the short grass to move. Probably way over done.

  13. #13
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    15,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Every4thPixel View Post
    I would add some fish to the scene. This looks a lot better but the motion in the grass is a bit odd. short grass like that doesn't really move.
    I think that observation is correct, what makes the grass move?, yes wind..and what scale has the wind and the grass?, this grass is small..wind turbulence scale are usually larger outside..unless there is a man made multi propelled force making very small force of wind turbulence.

    So naturally wind in more true scale are several meters or down to a meter, and at that scale the wind will affect the whole grass patch, not individual small grass strands like this.
    larger grass fields like seen in the "thin red line" movie..or in the beggining of "witness" when the wind sweeps over the very high grass, thatīs another thing.
    If this were high grass at meter length..it would look more like how it may have swayed.

    Michael

  14. #14
    Eat your peas. Greenlaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,166
    Sasquatch grass was great for large fields but it was less convincing up close. Back when I was using it in production, I typically used Sas for mid- to background regions and used modeled geometry for foreground grass.

    Nowadays, Instancer is probably more efficient for large fields of grass. The downside with instanced grass is that you can't get the global wind effects on it like we had with Sas. I've faked this with some success by displacing the emitter points or emitter surface though. (If you use a ground surface, be sure to apply Instancer to a hidden copy of the mesh. If you displace the 'render-version' of the ground, it's going to look hideous.)

    Here's another good way to cheat wind over terrain effects: you can displace the rendered image of the grass in comp. In my experience, this usually looks better, it's much faster and I don't have to deal with AA chattering. Naturally, this depend on the composition of the shot and how the camera move through it, but I've done this post wind effect even on big sweeping 'helicopter' shots on some car commercials with success.

    G.

  15. #15
    hehe - looking nice after all is said and done. definitely needs weeds and stuff for variety - they dont have to move by the way. You probably can get away with the weeds being static.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •