Fume and Krak?

Deprecated Krakatoa 1.0 Beta Discussion
1

I am wondering if someone can outline really quick how to use Fume as a source in Krak? What is the process that is used? Does it just work? Can’t really test it right now just my copy expired (getting that fixed), but would love a head start.

2

I am wondering if someone can outline really quick how to use Fume as a

source in Krak? What is the process that is used? Does it just work? Can’t

really test it right now just my copy expired (getting that fixed), but

would love a head start. <<



FumeFX provides 3 particle flow operators (and I think, 4 Thinking Particle

operators).

In the simplest approach, you can basically run your FumeFX simulation, and

then use a FumeFX Follow operator to advect particles through the

simulation.



Of course, there is a lot more you can do between the particle system and

FumeFX, but that’s the simplest way to start.

3

Here’s a setup I made a while back and the thread on this board.



http://www.joconnell.com/uploads/guinness/guinness_fume_scene.zip



http://support.franticfilms.com/wb/default.asp?action=9&boardid=4&read=430&fid=23&FirstTopic=50&LastTopic=74

4

Thanks a LOT guys. We have started to get some great results. Really appreciate the hints, got us on the right path. Seems to be a great pipeline.

5

Thanks a LOT guys. We have

started to get some great

results. Really appreciate

the hints, got us on the right

path. Seems to be a great

pipeline.





Just a note: There is a bug in FumeFX which prevents it from processing PFlow partitions on Deadline. (The PFlow using the FumeFX Birth operator would generate incorrect amount of particles or empty streams).



As far as we know, a point release of FumeFX is supposed to fix this. We are still waiting for it and have to process our simulations on local workstations… :frowning:



This is the only issue with the FumeFX-Krakatoa we are aware of.

6

thanks for the heads up… will keep that in mind.

7

>As far as we know, a point
>release of FumeFX is supposed
>to fix this. We are still
>waiting for it and have to
>process our simulations on
>local workstations... :(

On a positive note, this caused some nice additions to the Local Partitioning toolset - the next Beta will allow you to specify a RANGE of partitions to process locally instead of just ONE or ALL. Thus, you can load the scene on 5 workstations and set each one to process 5 partitions in a single run (1-5, 6-10 etc.), thus reducing the need for babysitting.

Also, we added an option to skip existing PRT files, so if you were forced to cancel partitioning in the middle of a sequence, you can continue from the middle of a partition without resaving what is already saved. (Saving takes just a small portion of the processing time, of course, so you would still have to pre-roll the PFLow, but over hundreds of frames the seconds saved can accumulate to minutes)
8

Just got FumeFX here and I’m trying it out with the Pflow and I’m noticing something obvious…



When the particles are advected together, they end up in the same voxel and thus “clump” and continue moving together, never diverging. I’m getting strings instead of puffs.



Is there something I’m missing that would help prevent this from happening?



I’ve only been using it for 2 days but each test I do ends up like this.


  • Chad
9

you could try using less influence from the fume follow and mixing in other movement or random speeds, or if you have box 3 probably layer a data op on after to mix it up a bit - aside from the make smaller voxels it’s a fairly simple op - there’s no random or offsets :confused: