Jump to content

Turbulence FD Discount


Recommended Posts

Hey everyone, so Jawset got back to me this morning about the Licensing. Here's what they said:

 

you can request a reset of the Volume license via email. It's not 
intended to be used frequently, but definitely when you upgrade your 
hardware.

The Single User License is the middle ground between Volume and 
Floating, as it does bind only to the C4D license, which tends to change 
least often.

--
Jascha Wetzel
Jawset Visual Computing
Munich, Germany
Link to post

Okay....if you are NOT yet convinced to stick with XP, this should do it:

 

 

 

Honestly....this just blows my mind.  It looks WAY more easier to use than TFD with far better results!

 

Again, Insydium just kills it!  Unbelievable.

 

Dave

Link to post
  • 3 weeks later...

Hey guys, its been 15 days since ya'll got me convinced on learning X-Particles, and boy what a fracking program, Its amazin, intimidating, but like you said, few clicks and you can get an awesome effect, and if you want to build on it, you can. Below is a link to a simulation that I did from explosiaFX, finally got to that lesson. Was wondering if you can give me some advice, to me it looks cool, but a bit cartoony, I used  XP's new Upscale technique, and voxel size was 1.5 at the end.

 

Can you guys please take a look and give me a few pointers?

 

https://we.tl/t-TrSLz0zJxp

 

Best,

Budda

Link to post
10 hours ago, BuddaZero said:

Hey guys, its been 15 days since ya'll got me convinced on learning X-Particles, and boy what a fracking program, Its amazin, intimidating, but like you said, few clicks and you can get an awesome effect, and if you want to build on it, you can. Below is a link to a simulation that I did from explosiaFX, finally got to that lesson. Was wondering if you can give me some advice, to me it looks cool, but a bit cartoony, I used  XP's new Upscale technique, and voxel size was 1.5 at the end.

 

Can you guys please take a look and give me a few pointers?

It really looks dope, and render is great. But it seems that there is not much black smoke there, which is a case with fires. Maybe you should do a reasearch a bit about flames and smoke. 🙂 

U Render Quality Assurance Specialist

Link to post

 

@paulselhi Here it is!

 

@Igor I agree. When I was playing around with shading the smoke, the smoke is actually following the same motion as the fire. When I make the smoke darker it completely enveloped the same, as if it didn't have its own motion, I will do research on fire, and I thank you for taking a look.

 

@3D-Pangel You were right, X-Particles may be intimidating, but once you dive in its not that scary, just take it in steps.

Link to post

Not sure what shader engine you are using (C4D, Redshift, Cycles 4D)....but the ambient level of the smoke is too high and that is what makes it look cartoony.  The actual fluidity looks great and I do love the lens flare.  Also, if you feel that the motion is too light, there is a setting under the xpExplosia ---> Simulation tab called gravity.  Gravity controls the overall strength of heat, smoke and fuel buoyancy so if you want to DECREASE their buoyancy then you also DECREASE the gravity setting....which is a bit counter-intuitive (normally, things should get more buoyant if gravity decreases).

 

Personally, I have found that creating the fluid motion is easy...but the real effort goes into shading and getting the density, temperature and fuel settings just right.  Working with actual liquids (for me at least) always takes less effort than creating that "perfect" explosion where hot fire turns to smoke as it cools.  That takes a lot of fiddling through the entire process (simulation --> rendering --> post processing).

 

Dave

Link to post

I am sure XPExplosia is a powerful tool but without GPU simulation TFD blows it out of the water. I can easily create sims of millions of voxels in minutes when it would take hours on the CPU

Link to post

@3D-Pangel You're right. I'm using Redshift, and the last thing I was messing with was the Smoke settings, the HDR image I was using was making the smoke too white, so I thought I darkened the smoke, but all I did was made it less opague. I'm actually working on another simulation now. I'll do another one and mess with the shading a bit more.

Link to post

@paulselhi You're absolutely correct. You may not remember, but I actually purchased your tutorials when I was doing the TFD Trial, and it helped me understand explosions quite a lot, and especially TFD, and that information actually translated over to Explosia, even though the parameters are different, the physics are somewhat the same.

 

That being said, I have in my possession X-Particles, Cycles 4d [which I don't use anymore] because of a summer deal, as well as Redshift [which I'm in love with] because of the summer deals, a great bargain for the price. And since I paid for these programs, I see no reason as of yet to get TFD as another addition [I've spent so much dough as it is].

 

I mind as well focus on X-Particles & Redshift right now. It's such a powerful piece of software, TFD only utilizes one GPU I believe, which is still faster, however XP, especially this year, has come up with massive updates for creative freedom, I won't be surprised if GPU support finally releases.

 

If it doesn't, it'll be a shame, but as for my needs, explosions I do, yes, but  85%  of the time I want to create Nebulas, and for those, all I need is one frame to be rendered.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/18/2020 at 10:29 AM, 3D-Pangel said:

Not sure what shader engine you are using (C4D, Redshift, Cycles 4D)....but the ambient level of the smoke is too high and that is what makes it look cartoony.  The actual fluidity looks great and I do love the lens flare.  Also, if you feel that the motion is too light, there is a setting under the xpExplosia ---> Simulation tab called gravity.  Gravity controls the overall strength of heat, smoke and fuel buoyancy so if you want to DECREASE their buoyancy then you also DECREASE the gravity setting....which is a bit counter-intuitive (normally, things should get more buoyant if gravity decreases).

 

Personally, I have found that creating the fluid motion is easy...but the real effort goes into shading and getting the density, temperature and fuel settings just right.  Working with actual liquids (for me at least) always takes less effort than creating that "perfect" explosion where hot fire turns to smoke as it cools.  That takes a lot of fiddling through the entire process (simulation --> rendering --> post processing).

 

Dave

 

I've spent these last few weeks learning about the Physics of fire and how to create certain flames. As well as Shading the Volume once it's complete. Here's a still of the first Explosia Render that I did, with the Density and Flames shaded correctly.

 

explosia rs render.jpg

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...