- Page 1 of 1
Gallery + Critique
/
3D Still + Animation
Fume breakdown
-
22 Dec 2008This is just my latest in fume........I included a breakdown of the fume sims.........hope you like ,...crits welcome
http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/farmland.mov 10.2 mb
http://www.3dglove.com/08/testrenders/f ... .htm...low res -
22 Dec 2008wow every iteration is gettin better.
Here are some crits
-the camera shake and focus thingy you have at the beginning and the explosion are too close you need at least 2-3 seconds as a human being after the focus to realise to what the scene is so i would try to put 2-3 seconds between the focusing and the explosion.
-the camera shake at the explosion would be cool if it had a little delay because the "shockwave" needs at least 2-3 frames to reach the camera and it helps to show people whats going on so they see and understand that it was an explosion. its maybe not realistic but thats how we learned it at school
. maybe only 1 frame could be enough.
-the smoke that rises in the sky somehow feels like big air bubbles under sea. Try to put some air resistence at the end so it gets slower.
-and i would try to make a little shockwave that wiggles the grass (in afx with bulge it could be probable).
so keep going -
22 Dec 2008thank you mate........great crits...... and yeah I will be redoing those very things you said. the smoke,camera shake, animating grass and sky.
thank you -
23 Dec 2008oh and some motion blur would be cool
-
24 Dec 2008
-
24 Dec 2008
-
26 Dec 2008
-
02 Jan 2009
-
07 Jan 2009
-
08 Jan 2009
-
08 Jan 2009
-
14 Jan 2009
-
22 Jan 2009
-
29 Jan 2009
-
16 Mar 2009update boom,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,having a blast................
thanks mates,,,,,,,,,,,, -
16 Mar 2009something about the scale of the fire feels off. the smoke and the debris are spot on though.
-
17 Mar 2009the compositing is more the problem then the explosion it looks very nice!
but there are major errors in the comp.
the main problem is that the fire is in front of the dust cloud.
and the debris that flies away was rendered with no multiplied alpha thats why there are black edges.
normally the fire is in the explosion the dust and the fire is mixed together. but here you can see that the dust and the fire are seperate layers.
and the style of the fire is more like a big firery one where a barrel of gasoline explodes up.
but its more like a hand grenade size explosion.
so the layers seperate are very good but its the composition process that needs little tweaks
-
17 Mar 2009diemacht man your right..............i'm doing something wrong going from max to AE. the renders out of max look sweet then after exporting loks like crap...how dpo I fix my alpha issue.........I'm exporting as rpf. files and thats it. help me out here..........what would you guys do?........... fume has it's own fire and smoke passes you render out seperate....should I use tga????
thanks Bcolbourn............. yeah I think I'll dich the fire............ -
18 Mar 2009yeah i export my layers as tga mostly or sometimes as tiff. it depends on my mood
use tga and use this settings
32 bits color depth
compress : check
alpha split: uncheck (sometimes its usefull to have the alpha map seperately but mostly not)
pre-multiplied alpha:check (this is VERY important if you dont check this youll get black edges and weird looks in after effects)
rpf is cool for many things because you can store many render passes but for production its like crap :S
it never works as it should. i render all my passes seperately. its kinda chunky but its at least clean. -
18 Mar 2009diemacht..........thanks mate, that is sweet..............wow .....im gonna re-rerender and repost soon. this site rocks.
thanks again -
TheOnlyAaron 188 posts19 Mar 2009I would agree with diemacht on his comments, It looks like your fire is on top of your smoke in most of these.
Some nice AE tricks which help alot with fire is to render it a little on the redder/orange side, and then in AE dupe the layer and change it to an add layer, then blur it a little bit, and dial back the opacity to taste. This gives it a nice healthy glow and is super handy to make fire.
Another thing that I couldnt quite tell, but it looked like it, was the blur method that you were using for the out of focus stuff at the beginning of the shot. Now i couldnt see it exactly because of the compression, but I would always go with a "lens blur" instead of a fast or gauss blur. It gives you that awesome bokeh http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh effect. Which i personally cannot get enough of.
One last question, for the rocks in that last one, they seemed a tad bouncy. I am assuming that you are using particle flow. Well something that I often do for rubble is to send them out of the event after their colission (after "n" bounces) and in that new event have a drag force that is 100% in z, and 50 or so in x,y. That way you get a little slide in there, as opposed to a dead stop. Also you can manually set the particles rotation in there, so you can have particles that dont seem to be standing on end or a wierd angle (not that you have any) and inbetween those events you can use the new test "send to rotation" so they dont pop.
Anyways this is looking nice, each one is better than the last. Looking forward to seeing the next one. -
21 Mar 2009
-
27 Mar 2009
-
28 Mar 2009
- Page 1 of 1
Simply CG Contributors
