LightWave open VDB Gas Solver based Environment Example.

LightWaveGuru

Active member
Here you can see a landscape/environment created with the LightWave open VDB gas solver. the helicopters are just for fun to use the flocking system again. this will be continued. you see here only the first rendered layer to taste what the gas solver can do...


snip LWGuru
 

LightWaveGuru

Active member
that´s incredible, it has a great level ob detail and depth...

:)

in combination with the LW procedural textures as deformers for the exported/freezed gas solver mesh and on top the surface editor from octane + lw instancer for some more little details make it possible (and its a easy workflow....no hazzle with 50 different tools....so its 100% LW + Octane.)

snip LWGuru
 

prometheus

REBORN
Here you can see a landscape/environment created with the LightWave open VDB gas solver. the helicopters are just for fun to use the flocking system again. this will be continued. you see here only the first rendered layer to taste what the gas solver can do...


snip LWGuru
Well..I have to be honest here, I applause you for the experiments and I do recognize the potentionals with this workflow.
That said..the result I see isn´t of particular impressive wow factor for environment design according to my taste anyway, what I am more impressed of is the choppers flying around:)

As for environments, well..this is a showcase where you get some forms of stalagmite type forms, very loose hanging shapes, and also holes in the environment..which of course will be hard with just displacement, Unless you sculpt and remesh the shape terrain environment, so that is of course a potent factor with this method.
But it is also driven by, and forced to extract its natural growth based on the fluid sim, and that is hard to control to your desired vision, Unless just letting the sim try and find something nice by itself, so you have to keep track on simulations settings, which forces or fractals to use to get what you want in desing, and that isn´t any direct approach by any means.
Occasionally you may get a result you simply like..without having envisioned it, but that will not be on your schedule and not easy to predict.

When it comes to these kind of experiments with fluids and remeshing for terrain etc, I personnally would try a different approach (of course we all have our own prefered taste unless a producer/client would order it to look like something)
but for main terrain I would still go for displaced main shapes or modelled/sculpted ones, then the additional detail by either displacements, normal mapping, bumps etc...Or to use a fluid system and remeshing that affects that main shape by wind or sediment force impacting the terrain..just like in real life.
If you would use gaea or worldmachine etc, you would have algorithms calculating it and produce the results as a terrain in the software and displacement maps.
A fluid system to handle some of that..would be much more difficult to get to something really interesting and also natural looking to some degree.

That said, don´t get me wrong..just because I do not see This result as particulary impressive, I know you are most likely in the beginning of exploring the potential of it, I just think you need to get it up to 3-4 levels more in terms of how the terrain, fluid meshing is shaping up.
To beware of, you do not want loose rocks or mesh parts unconnected from the main terain, unless you happen to be in a flux vortex.
O yah..massive entertainment is working on the Avatar game now and are looking for environmental artist in Sweden/malmö.

Avatar environment in the first movie? I really didn´t fancy it that much..especially Not the floating rocks, guess I prefer a bit more down to earth environment style..perhaps more to the style Ridley Scott wanted for the Prometheus movie, though that was in my taste even too down to earth with too much wadis rum perhaps.
Originally there was some fantastic concept art with more alien looking structures, but Ridley discarded that as too alien looking oddly.

On you vid and environment, The color surface detailing however is pretty nice.

Unfortunately..I had/have decided to put much of the 3D work at rest for some months and focus more on 2D work, vector art, fractal art and simply other things as well and let vizrt work on another release that would be interesting.

Otherwise your work is inspirational as a teaser..and I would have jumped in with you and tried more by myself, but I don´t think I have the time..it´s time and passion, and health and energy that has to be on the right level to motivate me to jump in and go further with it...but will see, I think I am soon finnished with a majour house and attic cleaning from old stuff..which could give me some more time in a couple of months.

These are promizing, but I think they need a more defined Base structure and then a level of these fine fluid growth forms on top of that, so two-three layers of various forms.
This fluid method is not bound or related to what we can see on land surfaces as rocks, at least very rarely, under water the dynamics are different and this would be very ideal for underwater vulcano and similar structures that has been cooling down.

Or on some other planet where atmospherics and dynamics are different.
These elements in the vid below, is otherwise pretty unrecognizable as rock, cliff elements we are used to see..since these are cooled down only, or frozen, but it has no time weathering, thermal, erosions, wind etc..would be nice if you could filter it with wind and thermal forces to acheive that.


 
Last edited:

LightWaveGuru

Active member
Well..I have to be honest here, I applause you for the experiments and I do recognize the potentionals with this workflow.
That said..the result I see isn´t of particular impressive wow factor for environment design according to my taste anyway, what I am more impressed of is the choppers flying around:)

As for environments, well..this is a showcase where you get some forms of stalagmite type forms, very loose hanging shapes, and also holes in the environment..which of course will be hard with just displacement, Unless you sculpt and remesh the shape terrain environment, so that is of course a potent factor with this method.
But it is also driven by, and forced to extract its natural growth based on the fluid sim, and that is hard to control to your desired vision, Unless just letting the sim try and find something nice by itself, so you have to keep track on simulations settings, which forces or fractals to use to get what you want in desing, and that isn´t any direct approach by any means.
Occasionally you may get a result you simply like..without having envisioned it, but that will not be on your schedule and not easy to predict.

When it comes to these kind of experiments with fluids and remeshing for terrain etc, I personnally would try a different approach (of course we all have our own prefered taste unless a producer/client would order it to look like something)
but for main terrain I would still go for displaced main shapes or modelled/sculpted ones, then the additional detail by either displacements, normal mapping, bumps etc...Or to use a fluid system and remeshing that affects that main shape by wind or sediment force impacting the terrain..just like in real life.
If you would use gaea or worldmachine etc, you would have algorithms calculating it and produce the results as a terrain in the software and displacement maps.
A fluid system to handle some of that..would be much more difficult to get to something really interesting and also natural looking to some degree.

That said, don´t get me wrong..just because I do not see This result as particulary impressive, I know you are most likely in the beginning of exploring the potential of it, I just think you need to get it up to 3-4 levels more in terms of how the terrain, fluid meshing is shaping up.
To beware of, you do not want loose rocks or mesh parts unconnected from the main terain, unless you happen to be in a flux vortex.
O yah..massive entertainment is working on the Avatar game now and are looking for environmental artist in Sweden/malmö.

Avatar environment in the first movie? I really didn´t fancy it that much..especially Not the floating rocks, guess I prefer a bit more down to earth environment style..perhaps more to the style Ridley Scott wanted for the Prometheus movie, though that was in my taste even too down to earth with too much wadis rum perhaps.
Originally there was some fantastic concept art with more alien looking structures, but Ridley discarded that as too alien looking oddly.

On you vid and environment, The color surface detailing however is pretty nice.

Unfortunately..I had/have decided to put much of the 3D work at rest for some months and focus more on 2D work, vector art, fractal art and simply other things as well and let vizrt work on another release that would be interesting.

Otherwise your work is inspirational as a teaser..and I would have jumped in with you and tried more by myself, but I don´t think I have the time..it´s time and passion, and health and energy that has to be on the right level to motivate me to jump in and go further with it...but will see, I think I am soon finnished with a majour house and attic cleaning from old stuff..which could give me some more time in a couple of months.

These are promizing, but I think they need a more defined Base structure and then a level of these fine fluid growth forms on top of that, so two-three layers of various forms.
This fluid method is not bound or related to what we can see on land surfaces as rocks, at least very rarely, under water the dynamics are different and this would be very ideal for underwater vulcano and similar structures that has been cooling down.

Or on some other planet where atmospherics and dynamics are different.
These elements in the vid below, is otherwise pretty unrecognizable as rock, cliff elements we are used to see..since these are cooled down only, or frozen, but it has no time weathering, thermal, erosions, wind etc..would be nice if you could filter it with wind and thermal forces to acheive that.



WiP 01​


snip LWGuru
 

LightWaveGuru

Active member
Hi Prometheus,

i like my gas solver based environment Wip 01.
this is a good test for the first prototype.

and now that i know the workflow i tell you this.
uninstall blender and start LightWave!

ROFL :)

snip LWGuru
 

prometheus

REBORN
Hi Prometheus,

i like my gas solver based environment Wip 01.
this is a good test for the first prototype.

and now that i know the workflow i tell you this.
uninstall blender and start LightWave!

ROFL :)

snip LWGuru
That´s never gonna happen, I love twosomes, so when Lightwave isn´t tickling in the right place, I turn to blender, and the other way around 🤪
There are so much I can do with sculpting, and even working with editable curves non destructively and have a remesher on top of it so I can mix several none destructive curves, changing resolution, edit handles, scale any node on the curve to inflate the shape in that area, and have the remesher update it so each curve shape is actually fusing together with the others, similar to skin modifier, this is doable if you work in edit mode with the remesher to be active in edit mode as well, there is nothing in Lightwave that can do the same in the same easy manner, perhaps some spline control with remeshing, but I think that is a tough one.

I have to demonstrate that I guess.
 

LightWaveGuru

Active member
LightWave OPEN VDB / GAS SOLVER BASED ENVIRONMENT WiP 02

Here you can see a landscape/environment created with the LightWave open VDB gas solver.
here is a version without z-depth so you can see the gas solver background properly.
also includes another flock generator tests.


snip LWGuru
 

prometheus

REBORN
Rene,
I don´t get it, I don´t see much of the gas solver in that latest vid..I can in the middle of the clip see some indications of ticks, which could be what you ment as display from the gas solver, it´s just a little in the middle of the timeline, and in the middle in the clip area, and you can´t really extract anything useful in terms of seeing the "gas solver background"
Is my age and sight getting that bad nowadays or? :love:
 

LightWaveGuru

Active member
Rene,
I don´t get it, I don´t see much of the gas solver in that latest vid..I can in the middle of the clip see some indications of ticks, which could be what you ment as display from the gas solver, it´s just a little in the middle of the timeline, and in the middle in the clip area, and you can´t really extract anything useful in terms of seeing the "gas solver background"
Is my age and sight getting that bad nowadays or? :love:

Hi Prometheus,

How about asking if you don't understand something?

the environment is the center of a gas column that we see from the inside out.
after remeshing, the poly-normals were flipped so that we now see the column of the gas solver from the inside.

BTW if I want to build an environment based on the gas solver it does not mean that you have to see that the gas solver was used.

therefore.

yes you are old. very old.

you want me to build something you like because you might know it from real nature?
good. then i can photograph it in nature, then i don't need to make it in 3d.

in this respect. your taste is not the norm.
and 3d is not for imitating or recreating reality.

3d is for the imagination and for things that don't exist yet.
and that's why your postings are outrageous.

So.

do it yourself differently if you want to see something different.
but i do it the way i like it.

thank you for your understanding. :)

snip LWGuru
 

prometheus

REBORN
Hi Prometheus,

How about asking if you don't understand something?

the environment is the center of a gas column that we see from the inside out.
after remeshing, the poly-normals were flipped so that we now see the column of the gas solver from the inside.

BTW if I want to build an environment based on the gas solver it does not mean that you have to see that the gas solver was used.

therefore.

yes you are old. very old.

you want me to build something you like because you might know it from real nature?
good. then i can photograph it in nature, then i don't need to make it in 3d.

in this respect. your taste is not the norm.
and 3d is not for imitating or recreating reality.

3d is for the imagination and for things that don't exist yet.
and that's why your postings are outrageous.

So.

do it yourself differently if you want to see something different.
but i do it the way i like it.

thank you for your understanding. :)

snip LWGuru

How about asking if you don't understand something?
🤣 Tada...I just did.
Perhaps the phraze, I just don´t get it..isn´t translating well in your mindset to have the meaning, " I don´t understand" and with a presumption it is actually a Question?

therefore.
yes you are old. very old.

Don´t worry, you´ll get there to be just as wise as me😆

you want me to build something you like because you might know it from real nature?
good. then i can photograph it in nature, then i don't need to make it in 3d.

in this respect. your taste is not the norm.
and 3d is not for imitating or recreating reality.

No..you can build to your hearts desire, but I have to be honest, it may sound rude..but I would guess many VFX guys...even for a scifi film would rate it and discard it, not followin certain principles and rules, and it´s because these kinds of shapes follows One set of rules and that is gas form, which appearantly isn´t something to be seen in the worlds we see, nor depict to be possible within most types of planets of a certain atmosphere, that is why we rarely have seen the stuff you showcase in any scifi movie, there may be exceptions, but generally we see some resemblance with what we are used to, some I say, even the cliffs on pandora, even if that goes wild in how they are anchored on earth😈

Your conclusion that "my taste" would not be the norm?
Highly..Highly unlikely that is to be the case..I would with a strong certainty state ..that is false ..explaination was just made above.

And 3D is not for imitating or recreating reality?
It is simply not true either, reality is the foundation to imitate something in most cases, often with twist to shape distorted reality, but without any reallity guidelines, you can dip your brain in to acid and all that comes out in the end is a fluid chaotic mess, and from that mess, we can´t distinguish anything of much interest.
And in many cases, 3D is all about imitating And recreating reality to it´s fullest extent.

then i can photograph it in nature, then i don't need to make it in 3d.

That´s how Ridley Scott did it for Prometheus, both for reference and textures and lighting, then extracting google data of the real thing to elevate displacement maps based on wadi rum for the Planet they visited on that film ..in that film.
And also real scans of vulcanic rocks from island, instanced and placed with special scripts on to the scene in 3D form.
surface texturing for the ground area mostly a mix of Iceland dark soil and wadi rum soil I think.
the real photos was made to make a skeleton to support the flesh of their design, it´s a rule..without it ..it has no support and will collapse in efficiency to impact the audience.

Now..for you to do that, it would cost you quite a bit, comparatively ..using lightwave and a rough fluid simulation and those techniques is cheaper, but it doesn´t matter, with that you would never be able to shape design to a vision you have similar to that magnitude.

But please, try and keep a sober perspective on it, just say you are not interested in doing it the normal way or the vxf standard way..you dont have to try and defend your style and approach by saying the other route isn´t the normal taste, because you would just wrestle yourself in to logic that isn´t true to what most environment artists seemingly is using as technical approach.

That said, the technique and results you are using, may or may not some day end up in something really nice, it´s of course completely up to any client to decide what they need.

But again in the end, I think most environment artist tries to follow certain rules if the environment they envision has some, and mostly they seem to do that, from star wars tatooine, hr giger nests, prometheus planet sites, krypton old movie ( which was one of my favourites)
Bought that book ages ago about the production design by the way.

Withough a sense of something following a certain rule, people will mostly just feel lost without guidance..things like that matter in many designs, even in scifi-environmental design.
do it yourself differently if you want to see something different.
but i do it the way i like it.
Relax, I didn´t ask or demanded you to do it for my account, the critics was to prepare for the discussion and clarify what I ment later on with reality rules to some degree, and what most environmental artist seem to follow, and how we perceive things.
when I get the time, Ill do my own stuff.

Davig Aguera does some nice stuff mostly from the mind it seems, with fractals and displacement, but he follows principles I would say, that I just talked about.
For me what you do up til now seems more of experimental workflows than actually following any planned envisioned designed demanded by anyone or to fit in to a context of a special environment, but any such agenda can only be described and know by you of course, it doesn´t come across as such though.

You should have stated as a defense guard before release, this is how the land, rock area looks like on this gas planet or this alien planet with some physics description, it would be harder for me to criticize.

the samples I refered to which you made, and then follow by a suggestion to weather it, is one example of introducing physics to the environment where it would make sense..in most cases, and from what we usually can see, but still maintaining a certain chaos.
Otherwise it´s just a shape of fluid mess mostly, better to be explicitely described as underwater vulcanic formations or similar..which then would make any sense.
..if you indicate it in some context in the narration, it would also help sell it better.
 
Last edited:

Rayek

Active member
the environment is the center of a gas column that we see from the inside out.
after remeshing, the poly-normals were flipped so that we now see the column of the gas solver from the inside.
Hey, that's an interesting approach - I never really worked with volume objects before, and I replicated your technique in Blender. Super easy, and non-destructive! Very effective for quick random rocky landscapes. :)

Going to play around with converting gas sims to volumes and meshes now.

Today I also received an update of the GI addon for Eevee, so I am hoping to be able to render something similar to your experiment very quickly. Thanks for the idea.
 

prometheus

REBORN
Hey, that's an interesting approach - I never really worked with volume objects before, and I replicated your technique in Blender. Super easy, and non-destructive! Very effective for quick random rocky landscapes. :)

Going to play around with converting gas sims to volumes and meshes now.

Today I also received an update of the GI addon for Eevee, so I am hoping to be able to render something similar to your experiment very quickly. Thanks for the idea.

Yes, I had planned to set some time off with blender and volume to mesh there as well...I was a bit dissapointed that I couldn´t find a way to use the older smoke fluids, since I loath the mantaflow when it comes to simulation speed and updating any change you do on forces, it needs a constant re adjustment click on replay it seems.

Had it worked with the old legacy fluids as imported vdb´s, then converting that..then I would already have worked on it and demonstrated it.
So once example of where it needs a fuller vdb implementation, which Rene is complaining about.

About meshing, are you aware of that you can use the remesher modifer on curves in edit mode and while working with that you can contine to draw or edit none destructively and have the curves melt fuse depending on resolution of the remesher, hardly anything you can do in lightwave.
Also works nicely by just copying rock parts with shift d in edit mode and move with the remesher active in edit mode, so you instantly can see the shape blend melting.

I am actually in sleeping mode right now, just happen to have to go and p...at night, and looked at the mobile and saw some answers I thought I had to reply on directly, not good.
 

Rayek

Active member
It does work with the gas solver - the cache saves to openvdb files, and I can load the entire sequence in a volume object, then turn that into an animated remeshed object! I have two instances of Blender open, so working on a gas sim in one, and loading the vdb volume sequence in the other.

Now I start wondering why I never played with volumes before. :)
 

prometheus

REBORN
uhm..
I could probably convert blender 2.79
smoke fluids to mesh by loading it into lightwave and process it there..have to try that since I dont like mantaflow..and I dont think mantaflow can read in the older fluid vdbs.
 

prometheus

REBORN
It does work with the gas solver - the cache saves to openvdb files, and I can load the entire sequence in a volume object, then turn that into an animated remeshed object! I have two instances of Blender open, so working on a gas sim in one, and loading the vdb volume sequence in the other.

Now I start wondering why I never played with volumes before. :)
you mean two instances of the latest blender..or did you mean 2.79 and a later version..
thats what ive been using for vdb clouds generation.
faster and more predictable with 2.79 smoke..but renders faster as vdb in 2.83 or 2.9..so i use two version..but older an newr..the downside is the sequence isnt correct in order snd i have to batch rename it for blender 2.9 to recognize it properly.
 

prometheus

REBORN
and now off to sleep..I fear we have been talking too much blender again...which belongs better in that specific thread.
though as i described..both software together can solve some of my issues...when used together.
 
Top Bottom