Monsoon opened this issue on Mar 19, 2010 · 165 posts
Monsoon posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 7:48 AM
Does anyone know of an equivelant to 'blur' in the function editor?
bruno021 posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 8:59 AM
I don't think so. What would you want to blur, Mark?
Monsoon posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 9:59 AM
Thanks for the reply Bruno....
I'm working with a black and white distribution map and trying to do some basic Photoshop stuff in the function editor...brightness/contrast works great but I've been searching for a blur and can't find one. Thought someone else may know......
bruno021 posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 11:47 AM
Oh, you want to blur a fonction? I think the way to achieve this is to reduce contrast, the more grey in the function preview, the more both outputs will be blended together.
Monsoon posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 11:56 AM
Thanks Bruno....I'll give that a shot.
R.P.Studios posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 12:29 PM
i dont think contrast would "blur" a function, just make it less sharp. However that could be useful if it is a distribution map for an eco, it will just blend it more around the edges.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
FrankT posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 2:44 PM
isn't "less sharp" blurred by definition ? :biggrin:
R.P.Studios posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 3:14 PM
Eh, softer edges COULD be percieved as "blurred" if you wanna go that route :biggrin:
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
Monsoon posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 3:41 PM
We'll find out in about 20 minutes when I hightail it out of work here, go home, crack a cold one and plop my carcass down for some Vuein'........
R.P.Studios posted Fri, 19 March 2010 at 5:01 PM
Grab the Samuel Adam's Cherry Wheat !!! :D
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
Monsoon posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 4:13 AM
Well, the gray does help a bit but doesn't pass as blur I'm afraid.
bruno021 posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 4:59 AM
Have a few more beers, then...-:)
nruddock posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 6:16 AM
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=1793847&ebot_calc_page#message_1793847
If the map does have some graduation, you might be able to use one of the "Gamma", "Bias", or "Gain" nodes. I suspect you'll need to setup the Vue equivalent of the node network in the linked post (make a meta-node if you need to apply to several maps). This is a very simple implemenation of [Box blur](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_blur).With (many) more nodes you could get close to implementing Gaussian blur, but doing this in an image editor would be more time efficient.
Monsoon posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 10:40 AM
window.onerror=function(){return true;}; Bruno...LOL.....
nruddock.....thanks I'll try some of these suggestions after work today.
I cannot use an external editor because when I do, it causes the uv seams on the object to become visible and ugly upon reapplication in Vue. (modeled in 3dCoat with those UV islands)So I'm trying to do the augmentation in the function editor.
eonite posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 10:56 AM
I might be wrong but from my experience there is currently no node or set of nodes that lets blur an image in Vue.
There are the Smooth Clip and Smooth Map nodes that are sometimes useful for softening edges.
For example if you have a noise (non fractal) with the option "ridged" checked it will result in sharp ridges.
In such a case the above mentioned filter nodes can be used to soften those edges. But this works only because the edges all have the same value.
silverblade33 posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 1:53 PM
Hm, what about a Gaussian function applied ot it? :)
"I'd rather be a
Fool who believes in Dragons, Than a King who believes in
Nothing!" www.silverblades-suitcase.com
Free tutorials, Vue & Bryce materials, Bryce Skies, models,
D&D items, stories.
Tutorials on Poser imports
to Vue/Bryce, Postwork, Vue rendering/lighting, etc etc!
eonite posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 3:46 PM
Quote - Hm, what about a Gaussian function applied ot it? :)
Good question. Maybe ArtPearl can help...
nruddock posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 3:49 PM
Quote - Hm, what about a Gaussian function applied ot it? :)
If you mean the Gaussian filter node, it doesn't do what's required (no single node does).
ArtPearl posted Sat, 20 March 2010 at 5:34 PM
Quote - > Quote - Hm, what about a Gaussian function applied ot it? :)
Good question. Maybe ArtPearl can help...
No help from me I'm afraid. Well, not positive help.
nruddock is absolutely right - there is an inherent deficiency with the fe nodes - they only operate on one point of the map at a time. For any sort of blurring you need to know what the values of the neighboring points so you can average them. So you cant simply use one node.
It shouldnt be hard to set up something similar to his suggestion - having 4 (or 8) copies of the map each shifted slightly in the u/v directions and add/average them up.
But I dont think that will help the OP.
First, there is a problem at the edges, because there are no neighboring points, at least on one side, to average. That may or may nor be important depending how much the texture map covers and how close it is to the edge.
What is worse is the area of seams. The suggested method will add and average the wrong values. Next to a seam point there will be points with no meaningful value (possibly white) and adding them will screw up the blurring. Instead of averaging those points, one should add the corresponding point on the other side of the seam. These will not be right next to each other on the map.
You could easily try this out in a 2d editing program - just make 4 layers with shifted maps and merge them. I think you'll get the same (or similar) unsatisfactory results as you got by using the blur function directly - screwed up seams.
The only way around it that I can think of is to get duplicate regions near seams. Then you can apply the blurring in the 2d application or in vue the way nruddock suggested. The practicality of this depends on the complexity of the specific case.
Are you sure there isnt something in 3dcoat that could do it? (never used it myself) because that is the only stage that 'knows' what's on both sides of the seam.
Sorry I dont have a practical/quick solution, maybe someone smarter & more knowledgeable will.
Good luck
"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams,
or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not
wish to paint, the things which already have an
existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/
eonite posted Sun, 21 March 2010 at 5:08 AM
ArtPearl,
Thanks for your explanations. What the FE is concerned, this is about the smartest and most knowledgeable information I have read to date.
Makes sense.
When you say "there is an inherent deficiency with the FE nodes" do you mean that its generally not possible with Vues FE nodes to work on several points of the map simultanously, or is this something that is just not implemented (yet)?
For instance WorldMachine2 (a terrain terrain generating app like GeoControl2), with a somewhat similar system of nodes (node network), has a blur filter with gaussian blur as an option, which blurs the input map.
ArtPearl posted Sun, 21 March 2010 at 11:41 AM
Thank you eonite:)
I have no direct knowledge of the programming of vue. My conclusion about the 'inherent deficiency' is based solely on the fact that I saw no node which enabled access to more than one point at a time. I may be wrong - maybe there is a node lurking somewhere that can do something like that, but I havnt seen it.
Of course it is possible for e-on to implement nodes which use multiple map points. If you can imagine it, it can be programed:)
They have already enabled the use of other objects location (external dependencies) so I guess they are on their way.
Interesting about worldmachine's blur. It is not difficult to imagine a simple blur filter (like in photoshop, or similar to nruddock's method) but does it do it correctly for uv mapped objects, with seams? It is possible - after all it (and vue) know how to use the info in the uvmapping for texturing, why not for a bluring node? Still I'll be impressed.
"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams,
or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not
wish to paint, the things which already have an
existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/
Monsoon posted Sun, 21 March 2010 at 3:04 PM
I finally got the effect I was after.....I stopped thinking blur so much as 'smudge' and with a little creative fractal mixing, I was able to break up and spread out the edges I needed to and bypass any UV seams showing up.
Thanks for the informative dialogue folks!
M
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 7:28 AM
Here's a slideshow of some of the results. These are part of my upcoming Rock of Ages package. Take a look if you're interested......
www.monsoonsky.com/RockShow.exe
M
bruno021 posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 8:26 AM
Wow, intersting rocks, Mark!
sirrick posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 10:38 AM
Very Cool, well done.
ArtPearl posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 11:14 AM
ah...so its another 'sales pitch' thread :)
Not helpful for me even if I was in the market for more 'stuff', as your link is MS specific and I'm on a Mac. I know mac users are unimportant:)
"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams,
or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not
wish to paint, the things which already have an
existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/
eonite posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 11:36 AM
Quite stunning results, indeed!
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 11:36 AM
I hadn't considered a sales pitch but I guess it does the trick.....Sorry, but homey don't know Mac from Maytag...:(
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 12:10 PM
ArtPearl posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 12:34 PM
A few words of explanation, even though its a bit of topic:
Did you know that it's against rendo rules to post in a forum an advertisement for a product? (Unless it's sold in rendo and then you can only post in the marketplace forum).
One of these bizarre rules which rendo powers that be enforce in a random way. They seem strict about it on poser but not vue forum apparently. Even blatant adverts like 'buy my product it's on sale' goes by here without a comment from a moderator. No wonder more subtle adverts are not objected to.
IMO threads which mix educational info(that can be used even if I dont buy the product) with sales pitches should be allowed . For example - eonite's cloud thread, I learned much more from it than from many pure 'help me' or social banter threads.
But if it just discribes the product - it shouldnt be allowed.
Either that or cancel the sily rule all together.
So it isnt against you monsoon - I'm sure the product is great. I have one of your products, and even though I havnt used any part of it 'as is' I learned from it a lot, so I'd recomend this product even though I couldnt see the images on any of my white goods, homey:)
Maybe the moderators will clarify what's allowed and waht isnt now that its come up in public, not just by off-forum requests.
"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams,
or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not
wish to paint, the things which already have an
existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/
ArtPearl posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 12:41 PM
Oh - I got distracted doing other things in the middle of my previous post, and didnt see your image.
Thanks for posting it- looks good. Would it be too much to ask for a picture of the plain object and an FE screen shoot to see what the part is geometry and what texture? If this is giving away trade secrets I'll understand you dont want to post it:)
"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams,
or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not
wish to paint, the things which already have an
existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 1:37 PM
Yeah sure...no problem. I don't have any trade secrets. I'll do a comparison post when I get home. Good. This brings us back around to the impetus of this thread ( and I agree with you about the informative thread thing) which was 'process' not 'product'.
My mention was a reference not a pitch so perhaps 'project' would have been more apt instead of something with a name that doesn't exist yet. My bad. But, as stated some clarification may be in order.
So moderators, while we're here if you please....some clarity.
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 5:12 PM
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 5:17 PM
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 5:20 PM
Monsoon posted Tue, 23 March 2010 at 5:24 PM
R.P.Studios posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 1:17 AM
I have always found your packages more brain thank rock, but the materials are always(mostly) kick-ass (;
Honestly you do tend more towards the cauliflour look than actual rocks/stones/mud/earth/
Meteors/asteroids do look like this, but not rocks, well not rocks on the 5 continents i have been to anyway. :D
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
Monsoon posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 5:59 AM
That's exactly why all my products (except for the four currently at 3dC) from the old Commune have been tossed in the trash and no longer exist.
That's why this one doesn't exist yet and I'm still working on it. It won't exist until it's rock solid...pun intended.
I don't care much for cauliflower so I'm open to any and all suggestions for improvement. And I do appreciate the honesty.
silverblade33 posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 7:39 AM
Looks like rock I've seen, fallen from small cliffs eroded by river, too big for small river ot move much, but enough to wear it down slightly. shrug
:)
"I'd rather be a
Fool who believes in Dragons, Than a King who believes in
Nothing!" www.silverblades-suitcase.com
Free tutorials, Vue & Bryce materials, Bryce Skies, models,
D&D items, stories.
Tutorials on Poser imports
to Vue/Bryce, Postwork, Vue rendering/lighting, etc etc!
Monsoon posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 8:06 AM
My goal for this project has not been rocks for ecosystems or for ground covers but rather cliffs, boulders, formations and as Steve suggests, ones perhaps fallen from a cliff into a river.
Everywhere I've looked on the web, there are some great mats and objects out there but the overall effect in render many times is smooth and roundy.....my goal has been to capture jaggedness and cragginess, cracks and cleavage as seen in nature. It may not even be possible with what we have to work with, I don't know. But it's something to do and heaven knows, it keeps me out of the way and out of trouble lol.....
ShawnDriscoll posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 6:50 PM
Have you seen the rocks in Fallout 3? One day I will try to model terrain like that.
Monsoon posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 7:29 PM
It was the rocks in Fallout 3 and Call of Juarez Bound in Blood that got me started on this. I can't count the number of times I got pumped full of arrows in Call of Juarez because I was standing around looking at the scenery and admiring the texture work.
Vue reminds me of a game sandbox editor sometimes but I tried to emulate Fallout's rocks in Vue using the actual textures from the game but I couldn't get the same result. In the game it seemed that where ever the rock textures were laid, the geometry rose to match it. Could'nt figure out how that was done. Some kind of displacement for sure but I couldn't reproduce it in Vue.
ShawnDriscoll posted Wed, 24 March 2010 at 10:21 PM
I'll take a look at the rocks now in the game to see if they look displaced or normal mapped at least with my video card. Have to find a safe place where I can look at them without being interrupted by the locals.
bruno021 posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 3:21 AM
Games ussually use normal maps, Mark. Can 3D Coat export normal maps?
ShawnDriscoll posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 3:30 AM
I got lost in the game. One can't simply just visit there without getting caught up on current events. I did get some time to find your rocks. They are very lo-poly. It's very clever how they did them. The concrete debris is even more cool. The objects are all lo-poly with normal maps applied. Some objects have decals applied on top of the normal maps which are also normal maps, such as the chipped edges of the broken concrete blocks. The resolution detail of all the normal maps are triggered by the level-of-detail software used in the game.
Anyway, I got addicted to Med-X while on this quest. So now I have to find a doctor near Arlington Cemetary if there is one.
ShawnDriscoll posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 3:46 AM
Quote - Can 3D Coat export normal maps?
Yes. It is a perfect tool to use with Vue.
Mazak posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 3:49 AM
Attached Link: http://www.vimeo.com/channels/3dctraining#10291522
> Quote - Games ussually use normal maps, Mark. Can 3D Coat export normal maps?3D Coat can pretty much everything. So the answer is yes :) Very useful tool.
I post a link to an example Video.
Mazak
R.P.Studios posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 12:54 PM
I have yet to see anything done with Vue's new normal mapping capabilities, does anyone have anything for referance i can see.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
Mazak posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 1:41 PM
Attached Link: http://market.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2784690&page=2
> Quote - I have yet to see anything done with Vue's new normal mapping capabilities, does anyone have anything for referance i can see.In this thread I posted on page 2 an example dress for the Girl4 with normal map. This was only a test! There are a lot more talented people out there than me.
Mazak
btw. The dress was made in 3DCoat
FrankT posted Thu, 25 March 2010 at 2:02 PM
Quote - I have yet to see anything done with Vue's new normal mapping capabilities, does anyone have anything for referance i can see.
I've been doing some very simple tests with normal maps exported from ZBrush and they do look pretty nice.
R.P.Studios posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:06 AM
Frank, can you link a couple of your gallery entries that contain Normal mapping ?
I just think it is retarded that NOTHING native to Vue can be normal mapped LOL !!!
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:16 AM
If it can be UV mapped, it can have normal maps.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 3:31 AM
The left side used a different image that was not the same resolution... oops.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 3:51 AM
eonite posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 8:57 AM
I am following this thread with interest and as I said already I was impressed by Monsoon`s slideshow. There are a couple of rock examples I have not seen in Vue so far (especially those with edgy shapes).
Still, what rocks are concerned, I am asking myself: why do we have to use an external app in order to achieve this? And is there an other reason than faster rendering which makes you guys want to use normal maps?
Maybe those questions are silly because I am missing the point. But currently I dont see any reason why realistic rocks could not be generated all within Vue. What Im thinking of is taking for instance a standard Vue rock and then working on the color and bump displacement mapping by using noise/fractal noise functions.
Monsoon posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 12:00 PM
Better rocks or more natural looking rocks is exactly the point. Especially for large scale formations, cliff faces etc. now that Vue has terrain sculpting abilities. I'm not exaggerating when I say it's all I've been working on for the past year in my Vue sessions. I've been studying geology and photos by the gazillion and conferring with our resident geologist/paleontologist at work. And every time I think I have it, I don't. Or I've gotten close but no cigar.
One of the things I've encountered trying to work totally within Vue is that I'll create something that looks pretty close to perfect......from one vantage point. But turn the thing around and it's not so hot. Or change the lighting and there it goes out the window.
Now I must say that I haven't been using a lot of displacement. Rarely. I'm shooting for the effect with just bump and texture and going for something that looks good in all situations but can be displaced if wanted. I still have a relatively low end system and since the early days of Vue I've become accustomed to working with a low render budget
On the other hand I haven't had total luck by using just outside apps either. For instance I did the Gnomonology cliff face with alphas tutorial that's online. Did all the Zbrush stuff and brought the object into Vue and it was just ok.....nothing to write home about. Great tutorial though. Another instance would be the UV thing from 3dCoat that I started this thread with.
I think that the ideal solution, is going to be some kind of combination of the two. Hence my present course and the ensuing issues. I broke out Laurent's sculpted rock package and saw that he used a combo of image color and Vue bump to great effect.
Getting cleavage right, crack flow and angles, detritus, a nice base mesh are all considerations.
I think in Vue, one of the secrets of success is leaning toward very subtle filtering.......
But better answers may be right under my nose lol....compared to many Vue folk out there, Monsoon's Vue world is very small indeed. :)
R.P.Studios posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:03 PM
Interesting how the normal mapping does not cover the edges like displacement mapping, i guess for that you would have to round the geometry of yourself. I suppose normal maps would be best used for animation as opposed to stills though as don't they contain all the lighting/specular/bump/occlusion information ?
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:16 PM
Quote - And is there an other reason than faster rendering which makes you guys want to use normal maps?
My take on normal maps is that they allow for high-def looking raised textures on very low-def poly models. Saves RAM as far as poly count goes.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:40 PM
Quote - And is there an other reason than faster rendering which makes you guys want to use normal maps?
Maybe those questions are silly because I am missing the point. But currently I don
t see any reason why realistic rocks could not be generated all within Vue. What Im thinking of is taking for instance a standard Vue rock and then working on the color and bump displacement mapping by using noise/fractal noise functions.
Oops. I forgot to add that I use texture baking to speed up rendering because generating the texture while rendering is much slower.
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 1:46 PM
Quote - Interesting how the normal mapping does not cover the edges like displacement mapping, i guess for that you would have to round the geometry of yourself. I suppose normal maps would be best used for animation as opposed to stills though as don't they contain all the lighting/specular/bump/occlusion information ?
Normal is just a bump with more depth information stored in it. Neither normal or bump alter the polygons. Models with normal maps applied still need spec, occlusion maps applied if you want even more surface detail.
The main problem with my texture is that I used a rock image that already had a highlight on it. The trick that Fallout 3 uses is their texture images all have neutral balanced shading (no shadows). That way the game engine can fake the correct surface bump and spec no matter what direction the light comes from. If I change the lighting direction on mine, the texture is exposed for what it really is. Just a sprayed on photo using 3D-Coat.
FrankT posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 2:06 PM
Quote - Frank, can you link a couple of your gallery entries that contain Normal mapping ?
I just think it is retarded that NOTHING native to Vue can be normal mapped LOL !!!
There aren't any :biggrin:
A render of a sphere with a normal mapped blob on it wouldn't be something I'd post here (or anywhere come to that)
ShawnDriscoll posted Fri, 26 March 2010 at 2:37 PM
R.P.Studios posted Sat, 27 March 2010 at 2:56 PM
Ah ok, i always though that normal maps contained all that information already, I love learning new stuff :D
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
ShawnDriscoll posted Sat, 27 March 2010 at 4:39 PM
Quote - Ah ok, i always though that normal maps contained all that information already, I love learning new stuff :D
Most 3D apps (renderers) contain that info in their material/shader settings. But each piece has to be baked out into a JPG image somhow if OBJ models are to be used in other apps. Some file format out there might transfer all this info together (included normal mapping)? But each new version of a program creates a new version of its file format that all the other programs have to incorporate into their import-export I/O (if they have a license, or if they have and SDK, or if they have hours/people in a day to code for that file format).
So baking gets the job done in most cases these days since a lot of apps are now able to part out their material/shader info separately into image files for sharing.
R.P.Studios posted Sat, 27 March 2010 at 4:53 PM
I have been using CrazyBump, since it's inseption and have been moaning about Vue not supporiting normal mapping as I use them a lot in Cinema 4D for my renders. I always thought from a video game perspective the "glossiness" of a texture resided in the normal map.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
R.P.Studios posted Sat, 27 March 2010 at 4:56 PM
@ Frank, i meant even the terrains, i use a lot of image maps for my terrains and would be cool if i could Use the normal maps that CrazyBump generates for this, but is there a way to "UV map inside Vue ? i know it triangulates everything, but not UV maps obviously.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
FrankT posted Sat, 27 March 2010 at 5:21 PM
I use either GeoControl or the Vue terrain fractal for my terrains mostly, I don't really have a need to UV map them, I just tile textures on it when I need to do that sort of stuff.
I always thought that the glossiness was down to specular maps rather than the normal map but ICBW
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:25 AM
Here are some tests I did just using Vue functions for displacement, trying to capture some of the complexity and look of real (big) rocks. (So this is an attempt to create everything within Vue)
Before I post some pictures let me say that I do not claim this to be the best possible way, or that this is the way to go at all. Also this should not question any other workflow that has been suggested.
The renders all used the same basic function. This is not a function which is especially elaborated. But it was interesting enough to play with, and to find out a bit how the look of Vue rocks, on which the function was applied to, could be changed.
No baking has been applied before rendering the "rocks" in order to preserve as much detail as possible. Btw. the contribution of the color to the details is only minimal.
The lighting model used was Global Radiosity ( Global Ambience did not look nice).
In some cases I had trouble getting rid of displacement artifacts. Playing with the various quality options, or replacing critical noise nodes, seemed to help.
Of course, when using fractal noise for bump displacement, without first converting into polygons, takes longer to render. However the benefit is infinite amount of detail (which certainly makes sense when rocks are placed in the foreground).
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:42 AM
1- Simple fractal/ Noise: Cellular pattern/voronoi 1st-2nd neighbors/spikes followed by filters (as Monsoon suggested). The noise has been chosen to create cracks.
2- Simple fractal/ Noise:Cellular pattern/Crystals. This function should add sharpness.
3- Simple fractal/ Experimented with various noises, mainly Gradient Perlin Noise and Terrain Perlin Noise. This noise is converted into a vector and feeds the origin of the two fractal nodes below. The effect is what can be achieved with turbulence noise. However with the way I chose, the unconverted noise can be mixed with the two other fractal nodes.
The left part is for coloring
4- Color is very simple. The left node is a Color Variation Map.
To the right is a Color Map node into which the "cracks" are fed, in order to apply a darker color to them.
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:53 AM
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:54 AM
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:56 AM
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 8:59 AM
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 9:02 AM
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 9:03 AM
That`s all for this experiment.
As I said, I don`t claim this method or this function to be the ultimate method, or replacing other ways of producing rocks. Nevertheless I found the results interesting enough to be posted here (and to continue experimenting with this or other functions).
Monsoon posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 10:35 AM
Question......What are those 'composer' nodes I see there and why do you have 'offset' at the top like that? Not quite sure what offset's all about.....
Here's my latest experiment......an ode to Fallout 3.....all Vue except for the color in the rocks which is an image map. Displacement is used in the pebbly ground noise. That's basically sick rock bump inverted and pebble noise function.
I managed to get some nice cleavage in the main rocks by using a basic repeater of crystal stretched along one axis then rotated laterally. Duplicated vertically and blended. They aren't straight up and down but tilted slightly. Fractures and facets in nature are rarely at 90 degrees.
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 11:31 AM
That looks great. Convincing shapes and mats.
I like the geometry of the main rocks, and with the pebbles you are on a very good way. IMO the tops of the pebbles are a bit too flat.
I also like the mats you used. Convincing and natural looking.
I was wondering why the main rocks did not cast any shows on the pebbles.
As for your comment on my posts:
eonite posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 11:40 AM
Monsoon posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 1:48 PM
Thanks for the explanation. Shadows were being cast but I had them turned down to see what I was doing and never put them back for the render...........
R.P.Studios posted Sun, 28 March 2010 at 11:28 PM
Now THAT is a great rock material Monsoon, and eonites rocks are looking great as well (;
You guys um... well ROCK !!!
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
Monsoon posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 6:29 AM
I've been experimenting with adding detail with light/dark distribution of the same material. But since Vue can't do cavity or AO mapping, it has to be done with an image map.
Here is an object created quickly in Metasequoia. In the upper left it has a Vue material that has bump of stretched and angled crystal basic repeater mixed with a touch of the terrain fractal eonite used earlier. In the upper right, I took the object into 3dCoat and painted with black in the cavities and a touch of white on the edges. Then in Vue, I mixed black with white via this map in the distribution box.
Then I simply pasted the first mat into the black and white mat boxes. Then I turned down the effects on the first making it darker.
Then you can just move the mix slider for more effect or less.
Monsoon posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 6:31 AM
R.P.Studios posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 1:46 PM
Looking good, maybe a bit on the "square" side.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
eonite posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 3:17 PM
Hmm... I like the basic shapes and actually also like them to be on the "square side" .
I just googled "rocks" and watched a couple of pictures, and when directly comparing those to your rocks, there is still something that makes them look like CG.
Maybe what you need is to check and experiment with displacement mapping.
It would certainly add roughness to the actual geometry.
The more I experiment with displacement (mapping) the more I find that rocks look significanty more realistic with displacement checked (if I manage to render them without artifacts)
But this is just how I personally perceive it.
eonite posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 3:33 PM
I would be curious to see how such a displacement function would look on objects you generate with external apps.
Monsoon posted Tue, 30 March 2010 at 5:59 PM
I like this last one the best. Fabulous... Looks very natural.....
Are these metablobs or Vue generated rock objects?
I've been trying to reproduce your mat but have been unsuccessful. I couldn't make those metanodes I guess or crossed my vectors or something lol......I need to study more.....
But here's that squarish cliff object for you to try it on if you wish. Made in Metasequoia, voxelized and exported in 3dCoat and then optimized in Meshlab.....
www.monsoonsky.com/MetatestOpt.zip
I really like this render....
ShawnDriscoll posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 12:09 AM
I've seen vids showing how to make rocks with the hyper thingie in Vue. I can't remember what site it was, but the rocks looked great.
Monsoon posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 6:41 AM
Hey eonite.......if you wouldn't mind.....what's the turning a number to a vector thing all about? I've gone through all my trainings from Asilefx and other places and I can't find anything that references that or why one would do it.
I'm trying to reproduce your mat but I don't know what I'm doing or why. The fractals and filters I have down but it's the composer nodes that are throwing me........Thanks.
I'm still in the shallow end of the FE pool :)
Monsoon posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 8:22 AM
I went to geekatplay and watched their FE tuts. I think I get it a bit more now. We'll see when home from work today.......
eonite posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 8:27 AM
Monsoon: Glad you liked the last example. Some enlightenment on the vector conversion thing will follow (it`s quite powerful).
Thanks for your Metasequoia example. (Just loaded it into Vue and applied the same mat as in my last example. Did a render. It seems the current displacement function does not work very well on your object. Noticed some artifacts. But this does not mean too much. Maybe some modification somewhere will eliminate them.)
Btw. my last example was not a Metablob, but two of the standard Vue rocks, which were placed one on top of the other. The Vue rocks seem to be rather "displacement friendly", maybe because "smooth mesh" has been checked or the quality has been boosted (not sure if this is the real reason).
Have not really experimented with Metablobs yet.
Anyway, here is a scene file with my last rock example, so you can check out the function/settings directly. Please let me know when you (and everyone interested) have downloaded and loaded the scene, so we can discuss it further.
http://www.artmatica.ch/Vue_temp/Rock5d.zip
eonite posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 8:39 AM
Quote - I went to geekatplay and watched their FE tuts. I think I get it a bit more now. We'll see when home from work today.......
We just crossposted. Indeed there are some enlightening tutorials at G@P!
Monsoon posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 8:53 AM
Awesome...thanks for sharing. Uh oh....feel a 'functional' illness coming on....may have to leave work early lol.......
eonite posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 8:58 AM
Shawn: Hypertexture, if this is what you refer to, is certainly something that has a huge potential because it allows to "sculpt" 3D shapes directly inside of a primitive.
Last year I spent some weeks experimenting with Hypertexture. What I was trying to achieve was a real way to create 3D terrains. And, believe it or not, it actually works. IMO, it works even better than all other terrain options.
Of course, since the terrain is calculated in real 3D space, it`s slow to render. Also rendertime is directly dependent on the function used to create such a terrain. As soon as fractal nodes are involved, rendering is getting really slow. Personally I never went past using a couple of noise functions and one single fractal noise.
But the real downside is that the resulting surface is not fully supported by Vue yet. For example in the camera views you just see the primitive, but not the actual terrain that has been sculpted. Also the surface is not recognized by ecosystems. Therefore it becomes really frustrating trying to populate such a terrain.
What seems to work well however is the assignment of mats.
eonite posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 9:06 AM
Quote - Awesome...thanks for sharing. Uh oh....feel a 'functional' illness coming on....may have to leave work early lol.......
lol...it`s a dangerous kind of illness, you better leave work right now ;-)
eonite posted Wed, 31 March 2010 at 10:24 AM
Monsoon, FYI, your imported object is as displacement-friendly as a Vue Rock!
( I must admit that working with mesh objects is new to me. Prior to this thread I have never used such objects, so, little to no experience...)
eonite posted Thu, 01 April 2010 at 10:55 AM
Here is another scene file. The sole purpose is to provide a simple function which hopefully sheds some light on the vector conversion thing. This function, although in this example its applied on a Vue rock, is not meant to create some suitable displacement for rocks. At this point its not even important that it`s connected to the displacement output and is affecting the geometry of the rock.
Everything the nodes do can be observed directly inside the function editor.
So all you need to do is to select the Vue rock and then accessing the function via material editor.
Here is the link to the scene file:
http://www.artmatica.ch/Vue_temp/Numbers-Vectors.zip
Below is a sceenshot of the function along with some explanations.
eonite posted Thu, 01 April 2010 at 11:52 AM
A noise node outputs numbers. Imagine an infinite 3D space and this noise node assigns a value to each point in this space. Often it`s a value between -1 and +1. The result is a (random) pattern accross this 3D space.
Now, when you connect a Composer 3 node to the output of for example a noise node you transform numbers into vectors.
A vector has a magnitude and a direction. Vectors are not directly visible but, as you can see the effect in our example.
2-This is a Math Pattern Line node. Just like the Nose node, they output numbers. This node in specific outputs numbers that result in a line pattern.
3- This is a constant vector node, which is connected to a multiply node along with the output of the composer nodes. This way you can conveniently determine the the direction and magnitude of the vector. This constant node has 3 input fields, one for each dimension.
4- It`s a Combiner node in "Add" mode. I added it, so I could mix the output of the Line Pattern node with the (unconverted) output of the Noise node (1).
As you can see, the Multiply node (which outputs a vector) is conncted to the Origin parameter of the Line Pattern node (2). This allows the vector to "disturb" the pattern generated by the Line Pattern node.
Now what is important, when you experiment with this function, is to observe the preview of this Line Pattern node. You will be able to directly see the effect the vector has on the pattern.
Check out how entering a value into one of the input fields of the Constant Vector node effects the pattern. Try to understand what happens there (for instance entering a value into Input field X will affect the line pattern by pushing the pattern in the x-direction (depending on the value of the vector at a given point)
Its not really easy to explain. Its best if you experiment untill you are familiar with it. It`s easier than it sounds.
Note: This technique is not really very important when you build Displacement functions. But it can for instance be helpful when you have a node that generates straight lines/borders and you want to get it to look more natural.
Note 2: Instead of using a nose node and converting its output into a vector you could of course use a Turbulence node (which already outputs a vector). One of the reasons why I`m using Noise/Fractal Noise nodes and convert the into vectors in order to apply Turbulence is because this way I have the option to also use the unconverted output.*
I hope it was not too confusing 
Monsoon posted Fri, 02 April 2010 at 10:53 AM
Fabulous indepth addition.....so much better to dissect and see a node in action than try to glean something from a handbook entry. Thanks again.....I'll post some experiment results soon.
Monsoon posted Tue, 06 April 2010 at 9:07 AM
It does have some interesting capabilities beyond previous versions but it certainly crashes a lot.
I like how the constant vector perturbs the main functions of the material....subtle yet definitive. The turbulence nodes were sometimes too swirly for my tastes. I like this better.
The native Vue rocks in V8 take displacement exceptionally well. This is a single rock with criss crossed crystal basic repeaters..one horizontal, one vertical...perturbed by the veronoi spikes as suggested above. It exhibits some nice angular cleavage with a hint of cracks.
We're getting somewhere. The toughest one to emulate is cubic fracturing and cleavage like you saw in Avatar. Even though the Halelujah mountains were image mapped with photos of China's karst formations, the cubic fracturing was obvious...especially in the little sample of 'unobtainium' that the corporate rat held.
I think some variation of the crystal function will lead to that answer.......
eonite posted Tue, 06 April 2010 at 10:39 AM
That definitely looks great!
It has all those elements that are needed to set it apart from regular CG rocks. In fact, it has the look of a rock that could be found in nature.
Also it seems that Vue is rendering those sharp edges and the shadows correctly.
When experimenting with the object you posted I got some good results, but it was not easy to get renders with no errors. So maybe Vue rocks are better suited for displacement.
Agree, displacement in Vue 8 looks a lot better than in Vue 7...and you have those additional displacement options.
As for the Hallelujah Mountains it would love to know how they were generated. As you said, probably lots of image mapping involved. For the fracturing I really don`t know.
If it was actually done with noise/fractal noise, I also assume that some kind of cellular pattern, like crystal noise, was involved.
Btw. If you liked the vector technique, here is something you should definitely check out:
Take the function thats explained further above. Replace both noise functions with a fractal. Whats important is to make certain that both fractal noise nodes have exactly the same settings (at least to start with).
Then use the Constant Vector node and enter a positive or negative value for example into the X input field and see what happens. It`s better to start with low values and then gradually increase, if the effect is too subtle.
eonite posted Wed, 07 April 2010 at 1:25 PM
Have been running some displacement mapping tests with the new Vue beta version, and it seems that there are far less artifacts with this build ( 51487) .
The object that Monsoon posted some days ago works much better now when displacement mapping is applied.
Dont know how stable this version is otherwise, but its definitely worth trying it and testing the improved displacement (You can always revert to the previous version).
eonite posted Fri, 09 April 2010 at 1:39 PM
Used Vue rocks again with the vector technique explained somewhere above.
The displacement function in short consist of some custom cracks and a Cellular Crystal Noise (wavelenght 0/0/1 in order to get some horizontal layers).
A Grainy Fractal is transformed into a vector, which is displacing the cracks. The "layers". are affected by this vector as well. But here I blended it with another vector coming from a second Cellular Crystal Noise ( wavelength 1/1/1).
The rock looks a bit special, or at least it`s not a rock we see every day, BUT I am amazed at the sheer amount of detail. Rendered it quite big to make sure I did not miss any rendering errors.
Click on the pic to see a bigger version.
Monsoon posted Sat, 10 April 2010 at 8:22 AM
The detail is pretty awesome and this thread has lead to several different avenues of doing a thing. But I must say Vue 8 recent build is giving me fits. If I can keep it running, I'll have another pic to share as well.....
Excellent eonite.
M
eonite posted Sun, 11 April 2010 at 1:49 PM
Most of my session time I experimented with displacement functions. While the Crystal Noise is a nice ingredient for a sharper look, I also started to use the Distributed Pattern node.
The picture Ive posted is using exactly this node, along with Grainy Fractal and some cracks Ive used before. I keep being amazed by the amount of detail one gets with displacement mapping. The color part of the mat is simple . I don`t really see any need to make it very complex.
Was playing with some vegetation as well, mainly to find out how well Vue is "aware" of the displaced surface.
Seems we`re getting somewhere...
Monsoon posted Sun, 11 April 2010 at 4:03 PM
I think we are certainly getting somewhere
I had to go back to 7.4 to get anything accomplished. Too many crashes. This is a color experiment in pursuit of the natural look. A dark/light color map according to the crystal displacement and a dark/light for the cracks and an image map through a color combiner.
This is fun stuff.....
R.P.Studios posted Sun, 11 April 2010 at 9:40 PM
WOW eonite, that is just sick !!!
You guys sure have taught me a LOT about the Vue rocks, which aside from crappy looking close up trees is one MAJOR and always overlooked parts of Vue.
Learning is awesome !!!
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 9:55 AM
Monsoon and and R.P. Studios: Glad you like this one.
Maybe I exaggerated a bit with detail.
However I like the fact that there are lots of variations in the patterns and also that it`s hard to see that there were 3 separate Vue rock objects involved. To achieve that I switched the mat to World Standard because this allows to move, resize and rotate the objects while the mat is just continually applied on the geometry (as if it was one object) .
Using World Standard has a downside. If you move the object (group) the look will change, so this would be no issue as long as you have positioned, sized the object before working on the final look of the rock.
Of course one could work on the group of rock objects first and then bake it, so it becomes one object, and then apply the mat (in Object Parametric mode)
Btw. I went through an AsileFX training lesson named "Painting Rocks". This lesson suggests to use an ecosystem and paint dozens of rocks, turn them into objects, group them and then bake them in order to get one complex looking rock.
This is certainly another possible approach.
Quote -
I had to go back to 7.4 to get anything accomplished. Too many crashes. This is a color experiment in pursuit of the natural look. A dark/light color map according to the crystal displacement and a dark/light for the cracks and an image map through a color combiner.
Strange, Vue 8 is quite stable on my system. I remember that I had some trouble with crashes when I started using Vue 8. But then I got the advice from someone on this forum to try with "Fixed Hardware Pipeline", found in the Display Options menu. This has solved the crash problem for me.
Interesting color experiment. Looks quite natural indeed.
Re: dark/light color map. Did you directly apply the crystal/cracks function to the color map?
If so, this is what I am doing a lot, not only with dark/light, but also with colors, sometimes by adding a filter in between.
Personally, I avoid using image maps, and try to get a similar result by using functions instead, simply because often times when I am using image maps to color terrains or rocks I have trouble with insuffient resolution, seams or it`s getting somewhat obvious that the image is repeated.
Also, when using image maps, I am missing the option to have bumps and colors really matched, and of course to have infinite level of detail (as with procedural functions).
Quote - You guys sure have taught me a LOT about the Vue rocks, which aside from crappy looking close up trees is one MAJOR and always overlooked parts of Vue.
Learning is awesome !!!
I agree with you, a lot of improvement is possible...and required to get a more natural look.
Re: learning. I second that :-)
In my case I constantly try to expand my knowledge and skills, and I am really glad about all the stuff that is available from G@P, Quadspinner and AsileFX, to name a few...and of course the forums.
The training videos of G@P for instance greatly helped me to get familiar with Vue, also I went through the terrain tutorials that were added recently, and although I had some knowledge before, I learned a lot of new stuff.
Recently I got myself some training videos from Asile FX and Quadspinner to learn some more about terrains. It was all just awesome.
Especially AsileFX was enlightening to me because I did not only learn some new techniques and tricks on terrains, but also learned quite a lot of things about functions.
Although the training materials from AsileFX (and Quadspinner) are not exactly low priced, they are worth every penny. Nick Pellegrino is digging really deep and comes with professional solutions which are well founded ...and which will really work. Also, while he is talking freely about Vue bugs, he is offering workarounds.
Anyway, this forum is a great place to exchange techniques, expand our knowledge ...and to always get the latest news
Monsoon posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:00 PM
The crystal and crack fuctions were applied directly to the color map. Since I'm using a negative displacement, I had to place an 'opposite' filter between the color map and the cracks. If I use just an image map on a displacement, there's noticable stretching on certain facets of the displacement, but I like adding one to the other procedural functions. It drives a subtle color variation.
In the image above, eonite topped his rock off with a sprinkle of tree to great effect...
In this experiment, I'm combining the displaced rock with a scree like material........
Mixing a displaced material has it's own dynamics worth exploring......
Mazak posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:01 PM
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:24 PM
Quote - .
The crystal and crack fuctions were applied directly to the color map. Since I'm using a negative displacement, I had to place an 'opposite' filter between the color map and the cracks. If I use just an image map on a displacement, there's noticable stretching on certain facets of the displacement, but I like adding one to the other procedural functions. It drives a subtle color variation.In the image above, eonite topped his rock off with a sprinkle of tree to great effect...
In this experiment, I'm combining the displaced rock with a scree like material........
Mixing a displaced material has it's own dynamics worth exploring......
That looks cool!
I especially like the rock in the background with a kind of layering.Really nice.
Indeed getting some subtle color changes can be beneficial.
Question: What`s the benefit of using a negative value for displacement (besides that the vaklues are inverted)
2nd question: The small rocks in the foreground which jump out, are these generated by the function or is this a separate ecosystem?
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:33 PM
Quote - If you need beta testers... hint hint... hehehe :laugh:
Mazak
Well, I suppose your question goes to Monsoon, since he was mentioning a possible future rock product.
Currently I have no intention to create a rock product myself. I just happen to be inspired, thrilled and challenged by this discussion. My next product will rather be another cloud collection.
But who knows... should I change my mind then I would surely appreciate to have you in the boat :-)
Monsoon posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:43 PM
For certain functions such as the crystals or certain of the voronoi like angles, a negative displacement will sometimes look different than a positive one....sometimes better, sometimes not. It's just a preference. If I have a function that just looks puffy under displacement, a negative turn may look better. I've been using that and negative bump since V4 and 5. Again, just for what looks better.
The foreground terrain mat has an ecosystem on the top portion. The skree material mixed on the rock itself is just the 'pebble noise/sick rock' portion of the terrain mat, mixed according to the functions just like the dark/light color.
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 12:48 PM
What I really like is the ecosystem featuring some of Wabe`s amazing moss plants.
Btw. The file without the ecosystem uses only a bit more than 3000 polygons. However with the moss applied it sums up to almost 6billion polys.
P.S. We just cross posted. Thanks for the quick answer.
Monsoon posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 1:00 PM
Love that crack pattern and love wabe's moss as well.....and now I think I gotta get me some eonite cloud too.
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 1:11 PM
Well, the cloud layer I used here is not part of the currently available cloud collection. It will be in the next set. But thanks for your interest anyway :-)
I will post the scene file a bit later (without the moss, but with the clouds)
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 1:25 PM
Ok, here is the download link
Please note that this is a Vue 8.4 Infinite file, so probably will work with other Vue 8 versions too, but not with pre-8 versions. Sorry.
Monsoon posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 2:49 PM
Same object, same angle, same mat, same functions. Negative displacement is on the left. Positive of the same value is on the right. Notice the differences. I've been working on big jagged rocks and cliff faces so for my purposes, the one on the left is better suited. For a rock on a seashore or one jutting up out of a forest floor, the one on the right might be preferable.
Enough differences in appearance to warrant using both I think.
Thanks for the link!
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 2:56 PM
My pleasure :-)
I see. The one to the right looks more rounded, eroded.
But still, I am wondering if there is another difference besides just inverting the function (which could also be achieved by using an opposite filter).
Monsoon posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 3:09 PM
I guess you could leave it postive bump/displacement and just invert the nodes. I just do it the other way around. Take the bump down negative and then just invert nodes that I need to. I imagine you could do both and have a positive/negative displacement mix. Hmmm........
eonite posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 3:14 PM
Yeah, that`s what I assume. It seems we get the same effect. I have to try...
Btw. I played with the file I posted a bit more. The spikes I mentioned will disappear when you move the position of the rocks and also when you offset the function.
FYI the mat is scaled to 8. Now, in case you want to add an ecosystem, the scaling will jump back to 1. It`s sufficient to put it back to 8 and it will stay there afterwards.
tsquare posted Mon, 12 April 2010 at 5:30 PM
At last, folks that talk rocks! I have spent the better part of my summers for years photographing and gnawing on how to get those cliff faces and boulders into my art. My family gave up asking me for a photo show years ago.... "rocks, rocks, squirrel.... oh! another rock!" Heh.
Both of you have gotten mighty close. Thank you for sharing the process here.
Just ordered Vue 8 Complete, after using Vue 4 for the interim years. Can't wait to crack it open and take a look at all the additional tools.
Teque
Monsoon posted Tue, 13 April 2010 at 5:33 AM
Well that was fun for a weekend. Now it's back to the 9-5.
I looked more closely at the positive/negative thing and indeed, it's simply two different roads to the same destination. It's just a matter of choice. However, I discovered that, which ever one you choose, placing an opposite filter on one or any of the fractal nodes used in the mat makes for interesting mixes of positive and negative displacement.
Monsoon posted Tue, 13 April 2010 at 6:14 AM
Some desert type boulders...two Vue rocks with a positive displacement of vertical and horizontal stretched crystal functions mixed with 'granite' fractals and perturbed by eonite's constant vector cracks as described earlier in the thread. I used voronoi 'angles' instead of 'spikes'. You have to play with the filter a bit. The colors are dark to light color maps driven by the functions and mixed with an image map of rock texture through a color combiner.
I then placed an 'opposite' filter on just the horizontal crystal function giving it a negative displacement. It immediately made for some more interesting movement in the rock's structure.....
Hey tsquare....glad you like what's going on here. I'm sure there's more to come!
eonite posted Wed, 14 April 2010 at 8:51 AM
Quote - At last, folks that talk rocks! I have spent the better part of my summers for years photographing and gnawing on how to get those cliff faces and boulders into my art. My family gave up asking me for a photo show years ago.... "rocks, rocks, squirrel.... oh! another rock!" Heh.
Both of you have gotten mighty close. Thank you for sharing the process here.
Just ordered Vue 8 Complete, after using Vue 4 for the interim years. Can't wait to crack it open and take a look at all the additional tools.
Teque
Glad you like our rocks, Teque. I am convinced that we can go even further by experimenting with functions.
Good to hear you have Vue 8 now. The displacement does not only look better but you have more options now.
I can well understand your interest in rocks. Last year, I was in the mountains a couple of times
(I`m from Switzerland, so we have plenty of them). I remember that each time when coming back home, I started Vue and tried to capture the look and feel of the rocks that I had just seen.
No need to mention that it was frustrating at times to just not be able to get realistic results.
But in the meantime I am confident that it`s just a question of time till we see rocks that are really hard to distinguish from real rocks.
eonite posted Wed, 14 April 2010 at 9:07 AM
Quote -
Some desert type boulders...two Vue rocks with a positive displacement of vertical and horizontal stretched crystal functions mixed with 'granite' fractals and perturbed by eonite's constant vector cracks as described earlier in the thread. I used voronoi 'angles' instead of 'spikes'. You have to play with the filter a bit. The colors are dark to light color maps driven by the functions and mixed with an image map of rock texture through a color combiner.I then placed an 'opposite' filter on just the horizontal crystal function giving it a negative displacement. It immediately made for some more interesting movement in the rock's structure.....
Looks great! I`m curious to see such rocks in a desert scene.
Inverting the function makes a great difference in look, but only if the "valleys" of the function are different from the "hills". A Simple Fractal Node with Perlin Gradient Noise for example won`t look really look different, however as soon as the ridged option is checked, it will look entirely different when inverted. (Not inverted it will have a ridged look, while inverted it will have a billowy look.)
eonite posted Wed, 14 April 2010 at 9:25 AM
Monsoon posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 6:28 AM
Daniel1705 posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 7:34 AM
This thread is absolutely awesome. Eonite, everytime that I think you can't surprise us anymore you pull another trick out of your hat. I really admire you for your faboulous cloud techniques and now I guess we have a second area where you can showcase your talents with th efunction editor :- ).
I bought Terragen 2 at the beginning of the year because I was so frustrated with Vue's instability and the non-working displacement on high resolution terrains in Vue 8. I have to say it's really amazing what you can do with Terragen's displacement engine and I'd love to see Vue's function editor get used in a similar way.
So my question is: has anyone managed yet to displace a very high resolution terrain (4096x4096) properly without crashing? I can't displace anything beyond 512x512, not even 1024x1024 (haven't tried the most recent update, though). Displacing rocks or primitives is not an issue, this works quite well. But I want to displace terrains in order to create real overhangs and rock structures. The new terrain editor is not suitable for micro detail, just for some general shapes.
I do hope so much that someone will come up with a solution of displacing standard terrains as easily as primitives. After all Vue is meant to be a "natural 3D solution", so the development focus should be put on displacing natural 3D environments like terrains and not some low-poly primitive objects.
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 2:10 PM
Quote - Here you go eonite. One rock duplicated 7 times and 2 terrains. The same material is applied to everything. Displacement is off for the terrains. There are some trouble spots but other than that, we get closer to the natural look.....
Ha, that looks impressive! Along with a terrain, especially with a smoother surface your rock scape looks georgeous...and natural. Cool!
Know what? Yesterday I started to esperiment with metablobs. As far as I know, Dax Pandhi uses Metablobs to create his Hyperterrains.
In my case I did not bake them. I just applied some displacement mat. Was using cubes, rotated and also varied then in size, or "squeezed" some. I then applied the displacement function (in world standard mode) directly on the Metablob. The results were quite promising.
Will probably post something later.
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 2:27 PM
Hi Daniel,
Thanks!
I`m glad you like the thread. It triggered a couple of exciting rock related developments.
Yeah, Vue can be frustrating at times. I would lie if I said that I have always been happy with Vue.
No doubt, Terragen is a powerful landscape app.
What terrains are concerned, I encountered similar problems with standard terrains. Just tested today. Tried to apply a displacement map on a higher resolution terrain and Vue stopped reacting. I guess there is still a bug somewhere...
BUT my experience with procedural terrains are quite a bit different. I did get nice results already in Vue 7. And although it may take some time to render the results are rather convincing.
Today, triggered by your post, I experimented with prodecural terrains on which I applied displacement. I don`t want to say the it works perfectly with any function. But with the right combination of nodes and filters you can get convincing results.
Will post a render a bit later.
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 2:33 PM
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 2:42 PM
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 2:46 PM
Daniel1705 posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 3:09 PM
That's quite an impressive procedural terrain, eonite. However, what I am missing is the possibility of explicitly creating a procedural terrain with certain shapes (rivers, cliffs, whatever...) and then enhancing those shapes with a displacement material. It's not that it's not possible, it would simply make the rendertime explode.
Ironically I downloaded the most recent update today and tried displacing a 4096x4096 terrain from Geocontrol 2 and it worked with reasonable render times (10 minutes for 800x600 on "Final" on my Core i7 920), but the preparation time takes quite long. But it seems that e-on is finally on the right track on getting displacement to work properly on all objects. Vue even showed me the estimated preparation time and responded when I switched to another application. This is a big plus considering the last updates. :-)
eonite posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 3:25 PM
I know what you mean. Of course we should be to be able to create any type of landscape.
In Vue we already have a powerful terrain editor now and displacement that works. It`s just a matter of time for the the E-ON developers to optimize all this (and for us to learn and get experienced with all those options).
Yes, E-ON is on the right track.
It`s great to see things improving :-)
Btw. do you have links to some really convincing Terragen images using displacement?
Daniel1705 posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 3:57 PM
Yes, there are many examples.
There are several people who are Terragen masters and who are also extremly helpful in the official planetside forums. It's really worth not only checking out the images below but also their galleries:
Scene from Martin's gallery:
http://tangled-universe.deviantart.com/art/Strata-Rock-Wall-152572301
Scene from Frank's gallery:
http://nwda.deviantart.com/art/Rock-wall-22b-153286594
My personal favorite from Ryan's gallery:
http://www.archer-designs.com/zp/index.php?album=digital-art%2Fterragen-2&image=climbing-the-chimney-v3.jpg
Some more:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2/7-canyon16.jpg.html
http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2/file_1367648.jpg.html
One of TG's best displacement functions is the so-called "Fake stone" shader. It can create absolutely convincing stones of all kinds that blend seamlessly into the surrounding. It looks more realistic than just painting some stone objects, because those stones are computed together with the terrain's surface and react accordingly to the underlying geometry and surface restrictions. Dave Burdick made a very good stone generator Metanode for Vue (I think it's included in Vue 8 by default now), but it's still nowhere near the Terragen shader. That's a feature that e-on should definitely look into :-)
Monsoon posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 6:34 PM
I have David's rock generator and it's great. And those are fabulous images...the clarity is astounding. But I dare say from viewing those that we are well on our way to getting there in Vue.
That little rock function in TG2 though...that's sweet.
I just wish Vue weren't so fragile and temperamental.....I'm thinking about getting the maintenance plan and swinging an upgrade. Or a new computer. But I can't work for long in 8 without it crashing.
Love that displaced terrain!
silverblade33 posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 7:08 PM
Monsoon
build 49020 Vue 8 infinite seems fine for me :)
but as often said I have a custom, art apps only, built to spec, art rig.
64 bit WIn 7, 8 gig RAM, Asus motherboard, Nvidia 9600 GT vid card, 3 HDs. Ok price was painful, but soooo much better than old P4!
works very sweet, mate :)
oh and watch antiVirus, avoid Norton and some others, ugh.
"I'd rather be a
Fool who believes in Dragons, Than a King who believes in
Nothing!" www.silverblades-suitcase.com
Free tutorials, Vue & Bryce materials, Bryce Skies, models,
D&D items, stories.
Tutorials on Poser imports
to Vue/Bryce, Postwork, Vue rendering/lighting, etc etc!
ShawnDriscoll posted Thu, 15 April 2010 at 7:46 PM
Quote - Monsoon
build 49020 Vue 8 infinite seems fine for me :)
but as often said I have a custom, art apps only, built to spec, art rig.
64 bit WIn 7, 8 gig RAM, Asus motherboard, Nvidia 9600 GT vid card, 3 HDs. Ok price was painful, but soooo much better than old P4!
works very sweet, mate :)oh and watch antiVirus, avoid Norton and some others, ugh.
The keyword being 64bit.
Poser doesn't work with 32bit in build 49020.
eonite posted Fri, 16 April 2010 at 9:54 AM
Quote - Yes, there are many examples.
There are several people who are Terragen masters and who are also extremly helpful in the official planetside forums. It's really worth not only checking out the images below but also their galleries:
Scene from Martin's gallery:
http://tangled-universe.deviantart.com/art/Strata-Rock-Wall-152572301
Scene from Frank's gallery:
http://nwda.deviantart.com/art/Rock-wall-22b-153286594
My personal favorite from Ryan's gallery:
http://www.archer-designs.com/zp/index.php?album=digital-art%2Fterragen-2&image=climbing-the-chimney-v3.jpg
Some more:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2/7-canyon16.jpg.html
http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2/file_1367648.jpg.htmlOne of TG's best displacement functions is the so-called "Fake stone" shader. It can create absolutely convincing stones of all kinds that blend seamlessly into the surrounding. It looks more realistic than just painting some stone objects, because those stones are computed together with the terrain's surface and react accordingly to the underlying geometry and surface restrictions. Dave Burdick made a very good stone generator Metanode for Vue (I think it's included in Vue 8 by default now), but it's still nowhere near the Terragen shader. That's a feature that e-on should definitely look into :-)
Thanks or the links, Daniel!
The images are indeed impressive and Terragens displacement options are really cool. I looked not only at the linked pictures but also had a look at the galleries. Ryans gallery is absolutely stunning!
With that said, we should not judge the 2 apps only by the pictures we see. Let`s not forget that Terragen has always been a landscape generator and it has attracted many really talented guys, who explored the app for years, trying to enhance realism on their landscape scenes.
So what we see is the result of many years of experience with Terragen.
Vue on the other hand is an app with a huge potential of which only a part has ever been explored. This thread is a good example. When you go through it you can see how exploring alternate options to create rocks may lead to results which have not been achieved in Vue before. And probably we have only scratched the surface.
As Monsoon said, we are on our way...
Monsoon posted Sat, 17 April 2010 at 7:27 AM
Well I made the jump to maintenance and 8.5. We'll see what happens after work today. I like some of the new features so I'm rather psyched.
Didn't have enough spare cash for a new machine yet.
I have noticed during this experiment thread that not all rocks or meshes look good with displacement. Sometimes, things look better with just some serious bump. It depends on whether it's foreground, midground, or distance, terrain or object, lighting or what have you. So regardless of cool capabilities, artistic discretion is still an important factor. I'm looking forward to seeing what 8.5 has to offer.
eonite posted Sat, 17 April 2010 at 9:40 AM
Quote - I have noticed during this experiment thread that not all rocks or meshes look good with displacement. Sometimes, things look better with just some serious bump. It depends on whether it's foreground, midground, or distance, terrain or object, lighting or what have you. So regardless of cool capabilities, artistic discretion is still an important factor. I'm looking forward to seeing what 8.5 has to offer.
Have noticed that also. What I experienced was for instance that a too complex underlying geometry resulted in more artifacts.
Also, when the displacement function is too simple (Just a simple noise, no fractal noise, seems to not work very well.
Have also noticed a difference, depending on the distance to the camera.
But on the other hand, with the right underlying geometry and a good displacement function the result can be really convincing.
Quote - Well I made the jump to maintenance and 8.5. We'll see what happens after work today. I like some of the new features so I'm rather psyched.
Have you seen Abraham`s posts in the "Vue Clouds" thread? He put some great infos on gamma settings in Vue 8.5.
Below is a comparison between a render with no gamma and a render with a gamma setting of 1.8.
The difference is huge.
eonite posted Sat, 17 April 2010 at 9:41 AM
eonite posted Sat, 17 April 2010 at 9:42 AM
Abraham posted Mon, 19 April 2010 at 4:46 AM
Very, very interesting :) This would be great to recreate the a "Meteora monastery" like scene, I can perfectly imagine a little house or monument at the top of one of this rock (and even more imagine myself living in it :) )
eonite posted Tue, 20 April 2010 at 9:53 AM
Glad you like it, Abraham :-)
Funny I imagined a monastery as well when I looked at the render. What I find cool about such rocks is that the structure and detail are interesting enough, so the rock does not need to be totally covered with vegetation.
Monsoon posted Wed, 21 April 2010 at 5:42 AM
Here are six Vue rocks with a function driving the displacement and an image driving the color. In the displacement function there is also color but it is only gray light and dark according to the displacement fractals. The image map is applied as a layer with bump set to 0, alpha half way, and the bump slider set all the way to 'add' on the right. Image mapping is set to 'faces'. Makes for some natural looking variety.
Monsoon posted Wed, 21 April 2010 at 6:54 PM
The tips shared and info gleaned in this thread have been invaluable. I've been having more fun in the Function Editor than I've had in a long time. So thanks to everyone who joined in. And an added bonus.....I've been working in 8.5 for hours and hours without a crash. What a treat!
eonite posted Fri, 23 April 2010 at 7:14 AM
Quote - Some jaggy craggy displacements with image overlays.......V7.4.
Here are six Vue rocks with a function driving the displacement and an image driving the color. In the displacement function there is also color but it is only gray light and dark according to the displacement fractals. The image map is applied as a layer with bump set to 0, alpha half way, and the bump slider set all the way to 'add' on the right. Image mapping is set to 'faces'. Makes for some natural looking variety.
Very nice. Seems you have found a good solution for jagged rocks.
eonite posted Fri, 23 April 2010 at 7:24 AM
Quote - The tips shared and info gleaned in this thread have been invaluable. I've been having more fun in the Function Editor than I've had in a long time. So thanks to everyone who joined in. And an added bonus.....I've been working in 8.5 for hours and hours without a crash. What a treat!
Yeah, the function editor can be a lot of fun...and extremly thrilling.
Agree, 8.5 is very stable, at least what editing in the FE is concerned. I`m also very happy with the new gamma options. With the versions before I always found that the areas in the shadow tended to be way too dark.
I also feel that this thread has gathered a lot of valuable infos and techniques regarding rocks.
eonite posted Fri, 23 April 2010 at 7:32 AM
Used a Metablob and mat is in World Standard mode (there is currently a bug with mats in Object Standard mode along with Metanodes. The more you increase the size of the Object the more you lose detail (harmonics)).
eonite posted Sun, 25 April 2010 at 10:36 AM
tsquare posted Sun, 25 April 2010 at 11:09 PM
Great progress on the rocks and ooo metablobs in use!
Fellows, the function editor grew up in the time between my old Vue 4 and Vue 8 Complete that I am now having fun playing with. I am a bit perplexed. Any tips?
Monsoon posted Mon, 26 April 2010 at 5:40 AM
Way too many to begin listing here. Best thing to do is watch the tutorials at Geekatplay called basics of the function editor to get you up to speed. There's a few other tutorials out there as well.
Great examples once again eonite!
eonite posted Wed, 28 April 2010 at 1:43 PM
Thank you, guys :-)
tsquare: Make certain that you have a good understanding of the basics. It will be much easier to control what you intend to create.
Basics like:
Another advice I can give is to experiment with simple functions, just 1-3 nodes, and to find out what effect each parameter has. Also, try to create your own (simple) functions and play with the parameters and connections.
...and as Monsoon mentioned already, the function editor tutorials from Geekatplay may help you to get familiar with it (I found them really useful).
artrager posted Fri, 30 April 2010 at 6:47 PM
After stumbling across this thread yesterday and reading it completely (twice), I am in awe. As a Vue user I have been trying to add realistic looking fractured rocks and cliff faces to my scenes. Since I haven't learned the Function Editor yet I have been modeling mega-poly objects externally and importing them in. I foolishly thought the geometric approach was the way to go. The images and discussions posted here have blown me away.
Monsoon and eonite: the results you guys are getting using the FE has inspired, motivated and challenged me to learn this fascinating feature of Vue that I have ignored. Now I can clearly see that geometric modeling should be used for the basic shape and form of the natural objects, and all of the sub-form, flow, fractures, cleavage, details, etc. should be done procedurally.
Now, it's off to G@P for some beginner FE tutorials and then to experiment with eonite's example scenes and tips so generously provided. Thank you eonite, Monsoon and all participants!
tsquare posted Sat, 01 May 2010 at 5:08 AM
If you find any other FE things that are helpful, please let me know, Artrager. I am in the same boat, so to speak. :)
Thank you, Teque
Monsoon posted Sat, 01 May 2010 at 6:04 AM
The function editor is full of power and mystery and it's depths can be daunting. When knowledge is shared among users like in this thread, it can spur wholly unexpected explorations. I would have never, on my own, discovered the whole 'vector' thing. Or, it can just refresh. I used a lot of displacement when it first came out but subsequent versions' inability to handle displacement made me get used to not using it. It was one of the things I was missing in my quest for craggy, jaggy rocks. I also discovered that some of my material 'mixing' was unnecessary. With some further linking in the function editor I was able to emulate the mix in a single layer. What started out here as a search for 'blur' ended up with a lot of clarity. Life is good.
eonite posted Sat, 01 May 2010 at 8:28 AM
artrager and tsquare: its great to see that you guys show so much interest in the thread. Indeed, the function editor is powerful and it massively extends Vues scope. Of course it takes some time to get into it, but once you have gotten to the point where you have a certain control over the nodes and the function as a whole, things are getting very exciting. Especially when you are able to create a function from scratch, you can use the experience you have gained to get the look and feel that you want to achieve.
As for rocks, indeed it seems that using simple basic geometries and then further refine the geometry by using displacement seems to offer more flexibility and power than using complex imported objects. Also, this way you can, at any stage, change the geometry completely. Another powerful option is, as Monsoon mentioned, to make parts of the coloring dependent on the displacement function. This is easy to achieve, because both, the displacement function and the color function are present in the same window and you can link any part of the displacement function to any input of the color function.
But we also have to be aware that displacement as such has not always been so clean as it is now with the latest version of Vue 8. I remember, when I experimented with Vue 7 using displacement, I was often disappointed because I could not get rid of some artifacts. Artifacts can still be produced, even with the latest version of Vue, but they can be avoided rather easily by using simple underlying geometries and by avoiding exaggerated displacement. Also one should be careful when using nodes with sudden value changes (for example "Flat Pattern" nodes).
I understand that a lot needs to be learned and I do not think that there enough tutorials around to cover all possible aspects of the function editor (the possibilities are staggering). So IMO what`s important is to have a good understanding of the basics (no need to be a mathematician though).
A good way to learn (once you have understood the basics) is to analyse some of the existing functions.
Once you know what the basic options are you can explore things on your own. It`s a constant learning process.
And of course it`s always good to discuss certain aspects (I think that this thread is beneficial for all participants/readers).
artrager posted Sat, 01 May 2010 at 10:38 AM
tsquare: it's a big boat!
Monsoon: yes, life is good!
eonite: it seems that my manic excitement of possibilities envisioned has been replaced by the sobering realization that this is going to take some time. Looking at your examples, I am totally baffled. I will start with the basics as you suggested.
After all: to quote R.P.Studios - "learning is awesome!!!"
R.P.Studios posted Sat, 01 May 2010 at 1:29 PM
Hm, I have never been quoted before... maybe a t-shirt is in order ?!? :D
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
tsquare posted Tue, 04 May 2010 at 9:12 PM
oh, yeah.. t-shirt challenge time! :)
ShawnDriscoll posted Wed, 07 July 2010 at 9:26 PM
Quote - Some jaggy craggy displacements with image overlays.......V7.4.
Here are six Vue rocks with a function driving the displacement and an image driving the color. In the displacement function there is also color but it is only gray light and dark according to the displacement fractals. The image map is applied as a layer with bump set to 0, alpha half way, and the bump slider set all the way to 'add' on the right. Image mapping is set to 'faces'. Makes for some natural looking variety.
I bought your Rock of Ages product, Monsoon. Thanks for making these.
R.P.Studios posted Thu, 08 July 2010 at 3:33 AM
That is one awesome package. He only gets better with age :D
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am
not.
maotie110 posted Sun, 13 July 2014 at 2:22 AM
我一直就想利用VUE这个工具来制作张家界的石柱。但VUE的函数我难以控制。无法做出石柱那种斑驳的凹凸效果。最终效果差强人意，感谢你们的思路。至少我现在知道从什么开始。thanks!