#particle attributes
15 messages in this thread
Hi GreG!
Got a question about using objects to particlize other objects (in the
detail editor that is, not particle fx). Anyway, is there any way to make the
particles retain any of their original attributes?In other words, if I map an
image to a sphere, and use this as a particle on a plane, I just get an array
of default white balls.If I map the image to the plane, the image will be
divided up among all the spheres. It would be cool if there was some way the
objects would keep their same attributes when turned into particles. Even
cooler would be if they could use states!
TIA, Phil.
Phil,
I'll ask Mike and see if this will be resolved in a future version, if it's not
already addressed in 3.1.
-GreG
Phil,
Right now assigning image maps or textures to the individual particles is not
supported. The only way to assign attributes to particles is by defining them
on the object that will be particalized as you mentioned.
The overhead in memory required to render say 5000 particles, each with it's
own image maps is just too great. When virtual memory is put in, this issue
can then be tackled.
-GreG
GreG,
It would be nice if the particles could retain at least some of the color
and/or attributes of the object from which they were particalized.
For instance, if I map a simple image to a plane, particalize it and explode
it, each particle should retain some of the color from its respective triangle
in the plane.
This way you would actually see the image fly apart. The details of the map for
the triangle would not need to be maintained, ie. each particle would not need
a map, just color the whole thing with the average of the colors at the corners
of its triangle. Virtually no extra memory and very little computation, but a
big impact (IMHO).
-Marco
>>
It would be nice if the particles could retain at least some of the color
and/or attributes of the object from which they were particalized.
<<
Marco,
This can be done. Make a plane and define a DEFAULT state. Apply an imagemap
or a texture, and lock that to the DEFAULT state. Now when you particalize the
object each partical will be colored from the triangle it occupies. I just did
this…and it looks really cool when you fracture the plane into many smaller
subdivisions.
-GreG
GreG,
I've tried playing with particles on a simple plane with a .TIF image. I've
noticed that as I'm playing with different parameters that sometimes a particle
or two will just freeze in one position. I can't seem to figure out what I'm
doing to cause this. Has this ever happened to you before?
TIA, Sharky
-07:51:45 HST, Honolulu, Hawaii, NAVCIS Pro 1.21
>>
I've tried playing with particles on a simple plane with a .TIF image. I've
noticed that as I'm playing with different parameters that sometimes a particle
or two will just freeze in one position…Has this ever happened to you before?
<<
Sharky,
Exactly how are you "playing" with the parameters…and specifically where? In
the Detail editor?
-GreG
I'm playing with it in the Action editor:
1) Create a 100×100 unit plane, with 20×20 sections.
2) Apply a .TIF as a color brushmap with lockstate default.
3) Create a default state with all properties set.
4) Go to Action editor and create a particle sequence using the settings shown
in the manual on page 279-280. Although I've dropped the number of frames to
20.
1st frame is the default object, and frames 2-20 contain the particle FX.
The overall effect works, but sometimes a face will just do some hang time.
Not sure what I've done wrong though.
Sharky
-16:41:16 HST, Honolulu, Hawaii, NAVCIS Pro 1.21
>>
The overall effect works, but sometimes a face will just do some hang time.
Not sure what I've done wrong though.
<<
Sharky,
By hang time do you mean it doesn't move at all? Or that some of the particles
don't land yet by the last frame? If it's the later, it's tough to say. There
are SO many variables to tweek….having them bounce and having wind blow them
doesn't help either. The particles that seem to hang longer are ones that are
blown into the sky, it takes longer for gravity to affect them. As you've
guessed, I haven't mastered the PARTICLE global effect yet <g>. Lets see if
Mike can shed some light.
-GreG
Thanks for the response GreG!
It seems that the particle is stuck. I'm going to keep playing with it to see
if I can consistently make it happen. I really want a fast machine now…<G>
Sharky
-07:01:44 HST, Honolulu, Hawaii, NAVCIS Pro 1.21
Hi GreG!,
Found out after a bit of playing that my Z wasn't where I thought it was. My
object Z and world Z where in the same spot. Some particles were just sitting
there, cuz that's all the distance they needed to hit the 'floor'.
Ugh….goober mistake. Sorry. I've now got it working pretty good and have
played with different ways of blowing up my object.
Do particles respect objects around them? Like bouncing off of them?
Thanks again for your help!
Sharky
-11:57:05 HST, Honolulu, Hawaii, NAVCIS Pro 1.21
>>
Some particles were just sitting there, cuz that's all the distance they needed
to hit the 'floor'. Ugh….goober mistake.
<<
Hey Goober! <g> Glad you figured it out!
>> Do particles respect objects around them? Like bouncing off of them?
No..the particle effect is a more robust explosion effect. The particles
themselves are stupid…they don't care what is in their way, they'll just pass
right through it.
What you are describing is some type of collision detection….which Impulse is
addressing for a future version. Don't ask me when! <g>
-GreG
>>Don't ask me when!<<
OK…I won't <VBG>. BTW, has 3.1 started shipping yet?
It takes awhile, but I am definately learning. Sorry I don't have many cool
images up yet to show for it. It's taking awhile to play with each feature.
Each time I get one down, the number of cool things you think of doing
increases geometrically. Most of it has been thumbnail and crude, but I may
upload my somersaulting disk box that I did after seeing your bottle anim and
objects.
Starting 'Path' studies tonight. I may have more goober questions……<G>
Learning quickedges and quickdraw features were a godsend….it makes up for
how slow my machine feels now…..<G>
Sharky
-15:15:08 HST, Honolulu, Hawaii, NAVCIS Pro 1.21
Greg,
Just my 2 cents. . . Wouldn't this be possible for procedural textures since
they don't suck up ram? After an image map is applied to an object which is
made up of particles, why can't the image stay with the particle bits if you
blow up (as an particle effect or explode) the object? Maybe the state function
could "remeber" the bit of the map on the affected faces. . .
Although I know the programming is not trivial, this would go a long way
towards realism. Can you tell us how the new map fli or anim will behave if you
blow an object up? (I love to blow stuff up)
Ed
>>
After an image map is applied to an object which is made up of particles, why
can't the image stay with the particle bits if you blow up (as an particle
effect or explode) the object?
<<
Ed,
See my reply to Marc Reinig. Right now this is possible. What is not possible
is to have each particle have it's OWN image map associated to it.
As for the new FLI mapping, haven't seen it yet….awaiting version 3.1 just
like everyone else. <g>
-GreG