Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Hypervoxels feature request

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131

    Hypervoxels feature request

    Hypervoxel features request

    There is a huge number of effects that could achieved with these features if they were added to hypervoxels, and they would greatly improve realism of smoke and other types of effects, especially with sprites, but also with volumes and surfaces, and in other parts of LW as a whole.

    1. as a gradient option, light incidence would be incredibly useful. Hypervoxels are usually added to single point polygons that don't have normals, but they can also be added to objects with polygons, which have surface normals. I light incidence gradient would open up new worlds of realism for hypervoxel sprites. Enough said, I hope.

    2. Normals for single point polygons. I know, single points don't have normals, but they are easy enough to calculate. A normal is nothing more than a normalized vector. Just average the vector to other points in a local area, flip it, normalize it, and you have a perfectly usable normal.

    3. Vertex shading option for gradients in hypervoxels.

    4. Normal displacement for single point polygons. Assuming we have a normal for single point polygons, there's a whole class of effects that can be improved with normal displacement, including magic swirling smoke tendrils. I can't stress the usefulness of this one enough!

  2. #2
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,693
    vertex shading is there today in hypervoxels, you can assign color gradients by using set particle weight or use a colorvmap.
    you have to activate it in the points displacement tab, under hv particles and double click hv particles and the properties to change it will show up.

    I rather see other things for hypervoxels as more important.
    1.blending tension as the old dynamite plugin has, and modo has it better, hvīs volume blending sucks today.
    2. density curves to control edge softness/thickness.
    3. a volumetric Mesh item, not only particles,vertices appliance.
    4, fireshader to steal from dynamite.
    5. better illumination methods.
    6. group assignement to use several nulls with the one and same hv instance, not possible today..thus using nulls for clouds will be rendertime consuming since it needs to calculate double up or worse, the other option is to use points or particles,
    but that isnīt the strong point of lightwave to move around or edit in layout.
    7. distance between particle gradients on all possible channels.

    I donīt follow you on the normals for a single point polygon, whatīs the use of that, and when? and in what hypervoxel mode? I fail to see how that should work to make magic swirling smoke tendrils?

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    I donīt follow you on the normals for a single point polygon, whatīs the use of that, and when? and in what hypervoxel mode? I fail to see how that should work to make magic swirling smoke tendrils?

    You need normals to get a light incidence to calculate "proper" shading that could be used to shade sprites. Sprites with lighting look worlds better than flat lit sprites.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	CloudRender02.jpg 
Views:	131 
Size:	32.1 KB 
ID:	123365

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131
    Ok, so maybe I need to sell the idea a little more. I've been researching this for a month now, so it seams obvious to me, but maybe not everyone else.

    Here is a comparison of sprites rendered in Lightwave, and sprites rendered with point level dot product shading, which needs a normal.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	WithandWithoutNormals.jpg 
Views:	103 
Size:	15.4 KB 
ID:	123371


    Now, regarding normal displacement verses world coordinate displacement (x,y,z channel)
    Displacing a set of points this way requires 3 layers, one for each dimension. It also requires an offset in the texture for each channel, otherwise the particles would only move to the lower right and upper left. It requires some setup time. It looks ok, but it looks more like inert particles floating through a medium, rather than a throbbing, living entity. Displacement in this fashion can also start to exhibit a 3D equivalent of the "screen door" effect, which is unappealing.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v...type=2&theater

    Normal displacement solves most of these problems beautifully. Here, combined with shaded sprites and something like lazy points.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v...type=2&theater
    Last edited by Dan_Ritchie; 07-31-2014 at 06:47 PM.

  5. #5
    Profesor Pixel Poo Mr Rid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,792

    Please, LW gods



    Long overdue.
    Last edited by Mr Rid; 08-01-2014 at 01:10 AM.

  6. #6
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,693
    Ok..Dan_Ritchi
    I understand you about the point level dot product shading, It will only be useful and adaptive for sprites though, you might think why not simply use fully volumetrics and you are there, then again that would be slower, so techniques
    to fake volumetrics are interesting.

    But I donīt think that will help in whispy tendril looks, for that you donīt want a dot product shading method wich in fact further will emphasize the round blobby look, for sprites you would like the light angle to only affect the whole particle system as a full volume and not individually shading per point, thatīs why it in fact can look better with sprites for some smoke stuff when it comes to how sprites and particles seem to blend in, rather than using volumetric mode, the problem is we miss a proper illumination method and angle and shadows on the whole particle cluster group/system...so faking with gradients and textures helps a little, but not fully.
    and for hypervoxels volume mode ...we would need a proper blending tension between each particle and thus the shadow and shading will not conform to a per particle/point basis but instead be more smooth applied along the tension blending between and all over the particles..modoīs voxel system, and the old dynamite had it almost working, it will be slow to calculate though I guess.

    for displacement, it indeed seems points canīt be displaced on a normal vector..since it has none,(maybe it works with some clever node setup?), but you can use geometry instead and displace that on the normals and then apply sprites to the vertices, as I have done here...
    http://vimeo.com/35978253

    for whispy tendrily look, you wouldnīt go for large hypervoxels sizes, you should aim for insane amount of particles around 8 millions or more and a decent system to handle all that particles like krakatoa, and
    a volumetric shader or sprite shader with tiny tiny particles size....otherwise you are better of using turbulenceFD.

    as I mentioned and Mr rid showed with distance between particles...that is something we have been screaming about for years, and I think it will have more impact on both liquids and the smoke look than anything else.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    Ok..Dan_Ritchi

    But I donīt think that will help in wispy tendril looks, for that you donīt want a dot product shading method which in fact further will emphasize the round blobby look.
    You're missing the point. Shading by a point normal would emphasize the shading of the entire cluster of points, not individual points. I "think" what you have in mind is if you were calculating normals from each point in the object to the pixel being sampled, which would be like each point being a complete sphere, and it would look like a lot of marbles sitting on a flat plane, but that's not what we're talking about.
    We're talking about each point in the object having 1 normal that faces in one direction. Just like regular geometry, each point (each vertex) has one normal that faces in one direction, usually in the direction away from the polygons. When geometry is shaded in this way, the shading emphasizes the overall shape of the object. That's precisely how I'm getting the puffy clouds and smokey tendrils in the images and animations in my first post.
    Now, if we could get at those normals from within hypervoxels (yes, and I'm speaking of mainly sprites, but I think there could be uses with volumes as well) then shading of sprites could also emphasize the overall shape of the underlying shape of whatever geometry/points/whatever they are based on. In my first post, I presented a simple way to calculate normals for points that don't have geometry. In theory it could be even used for particle systems, although it's a bit computationally expensive with a large number of particles.
    Last edited by Dan_Ritchie; 08-01-2014 at 12:53 PM.

  8. #8
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan_Ritchie View Post
    You're missing the point. Shading by a point normal would emphasize the shading of the entire cluster of points, not individual points. I "think" what you have in mind is if you were calculating normals from each point in the object to the pixel being sampled, which would be like each point being a complete sphere, and it would look like a lot of marbles sitting on a flat plane, but that's not what we're talking about.
    We're talking about each point in the object having 1 normal that faces in one direction. Just like regular geometry, each point (each vertex) has one normal that faces in one direction, usually in the direction away from the polygons. When geometry is shaded in this way, the shading emphasizes the overall shape of the object. That's precisely how I'm getting the puffy clouds and smokey tendrils in the images and animations in my first post.
    Now, if we could get at those normals from within hypervoxels (yes, and I'm speaking of mainly sprites, but I think there could be uses with volumes as well) then shading of sprites could also emphasize the overall shape of the underlying shape of whatever geometry/points/whatever they are based on. In my first post, I presented a simple way to calculate normals for points that don't have geometry. In theory it could be even used for particle systems, although it's a bit computationally expensive with a large number of particles.

    I obviously still can not follow you on this, the tech stuff anyway, and I think your animation is to puffy and blobby, so it isnīt a good example unfortunatly for me to shout...wow.
    what software are you using to calculate by normals?

    And please..you say it will not shade per point instead a point cluster, can you show me that more specific? since the images looks the opposite and more per point shaded.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131
    A matter of taste, I guess. I was going for puffy.

  10. #10
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan_Ritchie View Post
    A matter of taste, I guess. I was going for puffy.
    please Continue to research and bring forward "Your hv tech" and showcase it as good as you can, I donīt know if youīre on to something since I fail to grasp it, just letīs hope the lightwave team might
    have a better understanding of what you are trying to say.

    is there any other software you are using or know about that is using this tech?

  11. #11
    Registered User ianr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Chiltern Riviera
    Posts
    1,379
    RealFlow app.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wichita Kansas
    Posts
    41
    The RealFlow in the video looks better (more natural) than the Hypervoxels.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    131
    Hypervoxel blobs should also shrink when they are blending with other blobs, because part of their mass is migrating to the center.

  14. #14
    Unemployed Jester sandman300's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    1,005
    I think a Node Editor would be a big improvement for HVs.
    For Is and Is-not though with Rule and Line
    And UP-AND-DOWN by Logic I define,
    Of all that one should care to fathom, I
    was never deep in anything but--Wine.

  15. #15
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by sandman300 View Post
    I think a Node Editor would be a big improvement for HVs.
    we do have a hack on that with dponīt node volume..and you can access some stuff with the node procedural, in nodes the falloff is actually working..which it doesnīt in the main hypervoxesl panel.
    a good fallof type or controlling hypertextures so you donīt get that sharp spherical texture cutoff, will be very welcome.

    But there are really a basic stuff that will do it a lot, already mentioned, distance between particle gradients on all channels possible, proper blending tension ala dynamite, a full geometric mode to make any object volumetric ala modo houdini, a density or thicknes spline curve to
    control edge softness.

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
  •