My pleasure, Silverblade :-)

Thanks for the link. Beautiful collection of unusual clouds. The amount of cloud variations possible seems to be unlimited.

Here is a link to a  couple of timelapse movies feauring clouds. It`s probably the most impressive collection I have seen on the web.

http://www.youtube.com/user/nambroque

Here is a short tutorial showing a possible way to create a towering cumulus by using  Vue cloud layers. The purpose here is not to show each and every aspect of it, but rather to present a method how to "sculpt" a basic shape representing a towering cumulus.

I won`t explain the basics of Vue cloud layers or the function editor.

Also, the starting scene file is made in Vue 8. However, even though it cannot be loaded into Vue versions prio to Vue 8, the tutorial might still make sense for non Vue 8 users, since the method explained here works also in Vue 7.

Here is the starting scene file:
http://www.artmatica.ch/Vue_temp/TC-Tutorial.zip

Please give me some time so I can add all steps of the tutorial.

Got to the Atmosphere editor/Clouds tab.

The current Altitude is 0 and the layer Height is 2km.

So in short: we have a cloud layer of uniform density, a thickness of 2km and it`s starting at 0 altitude.

Right click the Density Production preview to the left in order to access the function editor.

The current function has 4 nodes.

1- Gaussian Tooth: This node generates a "blurred" sphere. The Scale parameter is set to 5.
   
2- Offset node: This node lets you move the location of the "sphere".

Note: For some reason, when using the Offset node directly, you need to enter inverted values.
In this example a Z-value of -5, causes the sphere to move up 5 units vertically (roughly 1km).

3-This is a Metanode which lets you Offset/Rotate/Scale. It`s a Metanode that has become "standard" in all my cloud layers. The Y-Offset parameter has been set to 20 (this moves the sphere roughly 4km in the Y-direction.

Note: In this Metanode "Offset"  works as expected because it has been corrected internally.

4- This is another Metanode which rotates the cloud layer function 45 degrees counterclockwise. (A Vue cloud layer by default seems to be rotated 45 degrees, which makes it kind  hard to control the position of the clouds.)  By using this Metanode you will be able to move the cloud layer function as you would expect it to move. This means that for instance an
Y-Offset actually moves the cloud layer function in the Y direction (forth/backward)

Note: This Metanode has no parameters because usually you do not need to change its settings.

Play a bit with the parameters, like Scale parameter of the Gaussian Tooth node, or the Offset parameters of the Offset node above the Gaussian Tooth node.

What you can also try is to change the Wavelength parameters of the Gaussian Tooth node. For instance, when you set Wavelegth Z to 0.5 you "squeeze" the sphere.

Always check what happens in the Main Camera preview.

What we will do now is add some more nodes so we get a second sphere.

Select both, the Offset and the Gaussian tooth node. Copy it (Control/C) Click on an empty area to the right of the exiting function, then paste it.

Now between the 1st Gaussian Tooth node and the Density output node, add a Blender node.
(which should be in Blend mode)

Next create a Constant node. Make certain it selected so you can do some edits. Set it to Constant Number, then set its value to 1.

Now, connect the Constant node to the 2nd input of the Blender node.

We want the blending to be controlled by the 2nd Gaussian Tooth node. A Blender node expects values between 0 and 1. Since the Gaussian Tooth node outputs values between -1 and 1 we first need to remap them.
Create a filter, then select as a filter type "Map", make certain its parameters are set to: Input Range: Lower value -1, Upper value 1/ Output Range: Lower Value 0, Upper value 1. This remaps the values from -1/1 to 0/1.
Now connect the output of this Map filter to the Ratio parameter of the Blender node.

The reason for this is that the 2nd sphere appears exactly at the same position as the 1st sphere.
So we need to offset its position. Select the Offset node above the 2nd Gaussian tooth node and set its Offset Z parameter to -8.

You should now see a different shape in the Main Camera preview, which kind of resembles a Metablob created with 2 spheres.

Ok, so far we have 2 spheres which can be changed in size and position and which can be squeezed (or stretched) by using the Wavelength parameters of the Gaussian Tooth node.

You might now say:  With Metaclouds I can do the same and it`s more convenient to handle.
So why this extra effort to create spheres inside of a cloud layer?

Well, here are some of the differences:

1. Using the cloud layer method you can squeeze/stretch each sphere separately
2. Each sphere could be further treaded, for instance by using a Turbulence node which would deform the sphere shape.
3. With cloud layers we have a Custom Cloud Layer Profile and we have a Uniform parameter,
   which lets us further modify our cloud.
4. We can (by using a Rotation&Twist node) rotate each sphere (Makes sense when it`s stretched/squeezed).
5. You can, with the blending method used in the previous step, achieve a perfectly smooth blending between spheres, while with Metaclouds you always have hard blending (sometimes it more, sometimes less visible).

To correct this we will change the altitude of the cloud layer. Set the altitude to 300 meters. The thickness is still 2km , but the cloud layer is shifted upwards and the entire shape we created in the FE should now be visible.

But we will decrease the size of the spheres instead.

Go back to the FE. Make the following changes:

1st Gaussian Tooth node: Set Scale parameter to 3
2nd Gaussian Tooth node: Set Scale parameter to 4 (so it`s bigger than the 1st sphere)
Offset/Rotate/Scale Metanode: Offset Y parameter to 15 and Offset Z parameter to -1.

In the Main Camera Preview we now should something like on the picture.

So what we will do (once you have found some nice parameter settings) is to save the cloud layer.
Save it as "Cumulus Tower"

Then load the cloud layer you just saved and we will modify it with the purpose of creating a cumulus base.

*Note:when you load a second cloud layer, its altitude is changed. In our case the altitude will be set to 2.3km, which of course is not useful if we want to create a cumulus base. So for now it`s ok to set the altitude of our new layer to 0.

Before we go back to the FE, change the name of the new layer to "Cumulus Base".

Now enter the FE. For the cumulus base we do not need 2 Gaussian Tooth nodes.

Connect the 1st Gaussian Tooth node directly to the Density output, then delete all the remaining unconnected nodes (now you should have a function that looks like the one we started with).
You can also delete the Offset node above the Gaussian Tooth node, because we can change the position by using the Metanode (Offset/Rotate/Scale).

Gaussian Tooth node: Scale: 7 / Wavelength Z: 0.3
Offset/Rotate/Scale Metanode: Offset Z: 3

Now leave the FE and play with the parameters. I suggest you increase the Feathers parameter and increase the Detail parameter also.

Well, that`s all for now.

I hope this technique and the discussion has been useful. Of course it needs a lot of experimenting to get really good results. The picture above is just a quick example. I am certain the look could be further enhanced by using the right parameter settings in the FE, as well as in the Vue Cloud Editor.

Note:The height of the cumulus we created here does not correspond to the real altitude. The base should start at something around 1km.
But if you have understood the above tutorial it should be no problem to change that.

If you have questions just go ahead.

Yeah that's 'a-wow-course' !
Really, great!
THANK YOU (again :-)!!! for sharing the topic .
My great respect !
 

My pleasure :-)

Wow, thank you :) I'm off to try this out now...

Good luck, Pajama :-)

In order to get more realism, you may want to select "Projected shadows on clouds" in the Atmosphere Editor.

If you want to add a bit of complexity to the tower part of the cumulus you can add another sphere
(See below).

All you need to do now is to make some new connections.

1.Connect Input 0 of the new Blender to the output of the previous Blender.
2.Connect the Density output node to the output of the new Blender.

This adds a 3rd sphere, which you can position and scale exacly like the 1st and 2nd sphere.

Hi -

I've also purchased the CloudScapes pack ,and they're truly great - did so soon after I upgraded to Vue 8 Complete (haven't really made anything with 8 so far, it runs a little buggy on my system - graphic card issues, mostly).
But as for the "placement" of the cloud formations, there's a relatively simple way to try, and that's to rotate the camera/scene - I occasionally do that to get the position right. It's a "cheap" solution, of course (as opposed to fiddling with the metanodes) but it's quick :)
It's also a nifty  trick if you work with HDRI maps.
(Haven't read all the posts in this thread, maybe I'm just repeating someone).

• Lars "bigbraader"

Quote - Good luck, Pajama :-)

Thanks, I'm not so good with the FE, I'll think I'll need it :)

BTW, has the starting tutorial file been saved in Vue 8 by any chance as I can't open it in Vue 7 Complete. If so, any tips on how to set up the starting scene in Vue 7?

Thanks in advance :)

Quote -
But as for the "placement" of the cloud formations, there's a relatively simple way to try, and that's to rotate the camera/scene - I occasionally do that to get the position right. It's a "cheap" solution, of course (as opposed to fiddling with the metanodes) but it's quick :)
It's also a nifty  trick if you work with HDRI maps.

• Lars "bigbraader"

Hi Lars,

Sure you can do that.

I am aware that having my suggestion to start with a camera position around 0/0/0 and a camera yaw of -180, and then offsetting the layer from within the FE may sound a bit like a restriction/detour. On the other hand it makes certain that you are actually able to move the cloud layer in a controlled manner and  not get confused.
Personally, when Im  working on a scene (which does not happen too much these days) and Im using clouds I often have an idea where I want to have them. And that`s when I find it most useful to have a solution to move the cloud layer, with X shifting the layer left/right and with  Y  forth/back.

In the end it`s just a suggestion and everyone is free to ignore it .

Quote -    > Quote - Good luck, Pajama :-)

BTW, has the starting tutorial file been saved in Vue 8 by any chance as I can't open it in Vue 7 Complete. If so, any tips on how to set up the starting scene in Vue 7?

Here is a scene file that should work with Vue 7.  It`s is no special setup,  just a Vue default scene, of course with a cloud layer using the starting function. The parameters of the clouds editor need to be tweaked in order to get really good results.

http://www.artmatica.ch/Vue_temp/TC-Tutorialv7.zip

Eonite, I'm worried ! :)

I got vue 8.5 xStream today and I love it, no doubt, it adds some features I have been dreaming of for a long time (gamma correction would be at the top of the list).

Why do I worry ?

Because it adds some very nice features relative to cloud placement and I REALLY hope it won't stop you. I know that controlling the cloud positioning was one of the main target of Cloud Control but even with the great new improvements it would be a shame not to see more package from you (especially after seeing your latest images).

So, please, do not abandon us ! :)

Jean-Luc

(nb, your skies are even more beautiful now that they render 3 times faster :) :

No worries, Abraham. :-)

I have no intention to abandon you. As you can see from the last cloud render posts there are things on the way.

But I must also say that I have spent months just dealing with cloud functions, so I needed a little pause to gain some distance.
So in the recent weeks and month I spent some time learning about other aspects of Vue. I went through some terrain training material and explored some of the terrain and rock options.

Will be back on the Vue cloud project  and also hope that I can get a new set together soon.

Btw. I have grabbed a copy of Vue 8.5 and want to check out the new options and enhancements, especially what clouds are concerned. Great to hear that clouds are rendering much faster in Vue 8.5!

This is a great new Eonite :)
I understand the burn-out feeling you can sometimes get when working a long time on something and the need to "take a break". But it's nonetheless great to know that their will be a follow up and the improved control in the cloud placement doesn't mean the death of "Cloud Control".

Something important too, something that made me incredibly happy and would have justified the upgrade for me in any case is the new gamma control settings. It will have an impact on clouds obviously since it greatly influence the light distribution (or more accurately, the light transition curve between dark and light). I have been using a linear workflow for a couple of years now and it really change the way you light a scene.

As for the speed, I'm sorry, it's not what you think. I just got my 980X two days ago which is about 3.2 times faster than my "old" XQ6700, that's why it's faster. This being said, it's funny how our brain work, because, despite the fact that the render time is divided by more than 3, it still "feels" as slow (I guess it has to do with "expectations")

Quote - This is a great new Eonite :)
I understand the burn-out feeling you can sometimes get when working a long time on something and the need to "take a break". But it's nonetheless great to know that their will be a follow up and the improved control in the cloud placement doesn't mean the death of "Cloud Control".

Something important too, something that made me incredibly happy and would have justified the upgrade for me in any case is the new gamma control settings. It will have an impact on clouds obviously since it greatly influence the light distribution (or more accurately, the light transition curve between dark and light). I have been using a linear workflow for a couple of years now and it really change the way you light a scene.

Have not really tried the new cloud placement option yet, so I cannot actually judge what portions of  CloudControl it might replace.

The gamma thing sounds great. Could you elaborate a bit. Maybe with an example or two. Of course it would be interesting to see the difference it will make with clouds.

Ouch :) I think that linear workflow and gamma correction is one of the easiest thing to understand, but hardest to explain :)
A modo user made two very nice videos he posted on youtube ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEbH62a1YqA ).
His explanations aren't complete but he actually does a great job at explaining why and how.

If you are curious to know why I make such a fuss about this, create a simple sphere, a quadratic light, and render make two renders, one without gamma correction, and one set to 1.8 or 2.2 (it really depends on the physical characteristics of your monitor, much, much more than the traditional distinction between mac and PC). Despite the fact that traditionally PC are supposed to be 2.2, in my experience most pretty high quality LCD monitor will work "better" with a gamma of 1.8 (I use a hardware calibrator, and I did try both gamma). No matter what gamma you choose to use, it's also generally a good idea to keep the "bitmap input gamma" value to 2.2 since it's the most extensively used (sRGB), for the output, I like to use 1 and save as EXR or float Tiff (float 16 bit) to be able to adjust in post.

I know my explanation are probably much more confusing than helpful, but I'm pretty sure if you play a bit with the values, you will see how much it improve the realism produced :)

One side note, something extremely interesting (at least in my opinion). When you rendered an spherical image in previous version of vue and saved them as HDR image, if you opened them in HDR Shop, the maximum values you got when hovering over the sun (dangerous, ask the Icarus guy about it :) ), now, they are above 15 which is much closer to the values you get with a real HDR image of good quality. This is most certainly a side effect of the new implementation :)

Thanks, Abraham, for the explanations and the link.

Although I think I have understood now what gamma is, there is still some confusion about whether we should apply gamma or not.
If Vue keeps the whole workflow linear, wouldnt it be sufficient to apply a gamma correction only on the image maps?  Isnt  the computer monitor doing a gamma adjustment already?

Btw. Have tried to use a gamma higher than 1 on clouds. It seems to me that,  the more I increase the gamma value, the more the clouds are getting washed out?

Quote -

Have not really tried the new cloud placement option yet, so I cannot actually judge what portions of  CloudControl it might replace.

Have played with the 8.5 cloud placement options a bit and indeed this is really a helpful feature.
Unfortunately on the cloud layers I tried there is currently a big time lag between entering a value and the camera preview refreshing.

It is indeed complex when it comes to finding the right settings (in fact, I became aware of the whole "linear workflow" problem about 5 years ago when it became "the subject" among mental ray users aka "to be linear or not to be".
I haven't had time to play a lot with 8.5 yet (my new computer components actually arrived on Tuesday, so as you can imagine, still installing, customizing and stuff).

Now, when it comes to "using gamma or not", they are (as for all things in life I guess) many schools.
Here are for me the important points:

Always using the right gamma for the various color inputs (most of the time it will be 2.2 since most images are created with this gamma - main exception being the various REAL high dynamic range images which should not be corrected - gamma = 1). A good way to know if 2.2 is the right setting is simply to open the image in your image editor: if it looks right on your screen, then its gamma is the same as your screen, probably 2.2)
E-on engineers did something very clever in their implementation: any texture used in one of the gray scale channel automatically use a gamma of 1, which is what you always want (a gamma of 2.2 for a bump or displacement channel is BAD :) )

The right settings for the "Gamma option" dialog are in my opinion:

Display Gamma = the gamma to which your monitor is calibrated (usually default to 2.2 but if you use a hardware calibrator, you can find out that your display looks "better" with a gamma of 1.8, sometimes even less on very high end monitors).

Affect Color Editor = checked (that way, the color editor apply a negative gamma to the color switcher, what it does is showing you the color you want, but sending to the render engine the color it excepts).
Affect Material Preview = checked (for the same reasons as above).
Affect Color Functions Preview = cheked (same reason)
Afect Scalar Functions Previews = checked (same reason)
Preview Gamma and exposure in main view = checked (it allows you to see the final result as saved for your current display gamma settings, if unchecked things will look darker and you might tend to increase the lighting intensity and send "bad" information to the render engine.

Texture Maps Input Gamma = 2.2 (you can override on a per texture basis when loading them if you know that a texture was created in a different color space / gamma space.
Output Gamma = 1 or your display gamma (here they are no right or wrong, it all depends on what you do with the image: basically, if you save it to a low dynamic range format (8bpp) then it's better to back the gamma in it (use the gamma of your display or, 2.2), if you save to a high dynamic range format (16 bpp or more) then, go for an output gamma of 1, it will give you much more freedom in post composition.

As for the clouds being washed out, I noticed that too, there might be two reasons to that: maybe e-on didn't yet (or forgot) to take the gamma correction into account for the auto-exposure control (an easy fix is to lower the exposition, around half a stop seemed to be good here)

I hope it's helpful, I'm aware that my poor English is a bit limited to explain such a subject :) (French are NOT gifted for foreign languages :) )

Cool, thanks for your additional info :-)

You are right, when activating gamma, and setting it to the right value, it makes a huge difference.
I experimented with rocks where displacement mapping was applied. Not only are the areas which are in the shadow more natural looking, but also, as you said earlier, it results in a much nicer transition between shadow and light.

I will post an example in the "Does anybody know..."thread.

Great!

Happy to see you like this feature :) When people will get used to it, it will lead to much "softer" images. As a side note, thank you, you just made me discover the "Does anybody know..."thread, very, very interesting :)

Hi folks,

Time is rushing by, it`s incredible. Actually I wanted to release some new cloud sets a while ago,
but this stuff is still sitting on my harddrive, for some reasons I do not want to comment.
Anyway  the cloud quest went on, and besides other things I was able to finally get some satisfying results with Metaclouds.

What`s great of course is that they are much easier to be positioned than cloud layers. And as you probably know you can group several metaclouds and save them as objects.

Below is a picture that uses 2 regular spectral cloud layers and a bunch of Metaclouds.
Judge for yourself.

(Since I fear the Renderosity TOS, I won`t mention that I intend to release a set of Metaclouds ;-) )

And then there are those flat layers I have presented earlier this year. Here I was able to make some refinements, especiallyx what banded clouds are concerned. Below are some examples, that I am really happy with.
(Again, no word about those being released soon)

I'll buy them now if they will work in Vue Infinite 8.0 like your first collection does.  I'm not using 8.4 or 8.5.

Ok,  let`s test it.

Have uploaded a scene test file with one of the 2D layers. Its been saved using Vue 8.4 Infinite. It will most probably not load in Vue 7, but lets see if it  loads in Vue 8.0 (it should actually).

For download click here

eonite, very nice to see you back with your amazing clouds :)

Quote - Ok,  let`s test it.

Have uploaded a scene test file with one of the 2D layers. Its been saved using Vue 8.4 Infinite. It will most probably not load in Vue 7, but lets see if it  loads in Vue 8.0 (it should actually).

For download click here

opens and renders fine in V8 Complete 8.4-04 Build 52241

64 bit Win 7

I had my fingers crossed.  But Vue Infinite 8.0 build 47776 crashes while opening the file and asks for an E-on Software Error report.

Works great in 8.4 build 52293.
Renders very fast and look amazing

Thanks for the feedback, folks. Glad you enjoy.
I`m happy it works also in 8.4 Complete.

Not so good news from you, Shawn. Thanks for checking anyway.

Actually I would love if it worked with all versions icluding Vue 7. But this would require me to restart more or less from scratch. Simply  too much work. Also, doing longer sessions in the FE with older versions can be a real pain, especially in Vue 7 (slow rsponse, too many crashes etc.).

Even in Version 8 I had to find a compromize. Wanted to pack as much as possible into Metanodes, but it seems that when fractal nodes are involved, Vue`s response is much better if those nodes are not inside of Metanodes.

Btw. Those with Vue version 8.5 can easily move the cloud layer since it`s listed as object in the world browser.
This is not possible with Vue 8.4, but if you enter the FE for the cloud layer, you can click the 3rd node from the top ("OSR r"). This reveals the parameters. Click "Random Offset" and you will get a variation of the layer.