Jump to: Board index » General » Fusion

Feature request - VolumeFog improvements

Learn about 3D compositing, animation, broadcast design and VFX workflows.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Theodor Groeneboom

  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 pm

Feature request - VolumeFog improvements

PostWed Mar 30, 2016 7:55 am

-
Last edited by Theodor Groeneboom on Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 2491
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Feature request - VolumeFog improvements

PostThu Mar 31, 2016 12:58 am

You'll need Studio, yada, yada, yada, but I have a plugin that has a volume datatype. So instead of passing images, you pass whole volumes, which makes animated volumes much easier to manage. As for OpenVDB, hope to have reading done eventually. Writing is already implemented as a saver.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com
Offline

Theodor Groeneboom

  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: Feature request - VolumeFog improvements

PostThu Mar 31, 2016 11:09 am

-
Last edited by Theodor Groeneboom on Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

Chad Capeland

  • Posts: 2491
  • Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:40 pm

Re: Feature request - VolumeFog improvements

PostTue Apr 05, 2016 3:42 pm

Theodor Groeneboom wrote:Hows the datatype stored ? I do actually like the idea of storing volumes as images as it lends itself to some fairly interesting 2d manipulation possibilities. I'm already pushing stuff around in houdini and volume vops, but you can achieve some really interesting stuff when its stored as images.

I wouldnt mind testing them if possible, I have a studio lic.


It's stored as an XYZT array of voxels (so no tree, just flat) with a 3D/T DoD/RoI. Tools can convert to images for compatibility with existing Fusion tools, but if the input accepts voxels, then no conversion to image takes place. So for instance if you wanted to apply a BC to it, you could, but you would have to do it over all the empty voxels, and you'd have to multiplex over time. And you'd have to manage potentially huge images which can be problematic. Like if you output XYZ per time sample, you could only handle 1024^3 out to an image before Fusion gets cranky/crashy. But if you used a tool that accepted the voxels, like BilateralFilter or SignedDistance, then you wouldn't have to convert anything and it would be more efficient. And with say, Texture3D, you could create a OpenGL texture from the voxels and raymarch in the OpenGL renderer. This helps a lot for visualizing your data as you use it, especially in space. And with 12GB and now 24GB cards, it's not crazy to do that. Like you can cache a second or three of animated 512^3 data for realtime playback.

Ideally, though, you'd want to have a system where the data isn't passed at all, just the functions, and have a compiler when you actually need to see the state at a point in the flow. Basically the way the Cg shaders work. That way you don't have to push so much data around and cache it. Don't have that, that's just what I would rather have. :)

What's more likely to happen, though, is just switch from voxels to OpenVDB.
Chad Capeland
Indicated, LLC
www.floweffects.com

Return to Fusion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests