i thought of the idea of an addition to the fluid simulator. a fire simulator. Now i don’t know how good the new particles for 2.5 will be at creating realistic fire. If it was created you could recreate the ghost rider. Now i’m no coder, but i think this is something that could be implemented in a later release.
Basically it works by having a certain amount of vertices during the fluid simulation affected by a possitive z force, instead of all of them. So by doing this you create a basic fire simulator.
fire thickness: this would be controlled by the amount of vertices that would be pushed up in the z force. fire height: this would be controlled by the power z force amount of fire: this would be controlled by the size of spaces between vertices pushed in the z force. fire sensitivity: this can be achieved by how strong the fluid is. lighting the fire: i believe this could be done by having an object have a characteristic called “lighter” selected (like selecting domain, obstacle,etc), when the object collides with the fluid the fire starts from the collision. texturing the fire: this could be achieved by having the objects texture being alpha, then the areas of the fluid that start to become flames become opaque.
so tell me your thoughts of this and whether you guys have any ideas to improve it.
rodicul that looked really good, but what i’m proposing is lots of fire, like fire being lit from oil the kind of fire animation in ghost rider, stuff where the fire collides with each other like fluid. i’m suggesting big fires where things catch a light and spread. but don’t get me wrong i’m going to have a lot of fun when 2.5 comes out.
Fire is stil the holy grail, because of exactly what you are getting at - there are nearly infinite KINDS of fires, based on what is being combusted, the temperatures involved in the fire itself, the object burning and the air temperatures, the SIZE of the fire, the COMPOSITION of the thing that is burning (impurities, pressure, temperature and thus color spectrum), the amount of TIME that the process has been taking place and thus the effects it has had on the surrounding area, the ENVIRONMENT it is combusting in, the SMOKE and incomplete combusition, and whether that smoke then combusts at some higher point.
Just in natural gas, there is stove top fire, gas lamp flame, HVAC burner fire, fireplace starter fire, gas log fireplace fire, ruptured gas line explosion fire, and oil well burnoff fire.
And then in your Ghost Rider example, (which I really didn’t like that much IMHO), you have this totally artificial fire. I think that video above was really good.
Unfortunately that video isn’t done by me. :^j Francois Grassard, who made it, is still working on the tutorial section of his website, so hopefully his tutorial on how to do it in 3D studio max will at least become available soon.
You can see the video from the max tutorial in his gallery, but I actually think the blender version looks better.
@papa smurf, i believe most of what you said could be made from my proposed fire simulator idea. I mean i haven’t had anyone say why the method can’t work, and it’s a very simple idea. the only hard part is to work out how to affect selected vertices in a simulation. It may not be super realistic but because of it’s simplicity i think it could realistically be put into a version of blender. I doubt 2.5, but maybe the next (trying not to sound arrogant) .
@ Jogai, the problem though with that method is that the blender fluid sim in general is definitely lacking compared to maya, which is easier to create fire from fluids.
I strongly encourage people to suggest ways in which to improve or add on to my method.
would be cool to see a tutorial on how the fire in the video was made.
YEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!
and now…@hakatu:
I don’t know nothing about ocding, but as user i think that implement a fire simulator would be a great tool. Besides that this awesome fire can be achieved through the new particle system.
one thing to remember is that their fluids iirc are particles based,
ours use a more accurate(mesh triangulating) algorithm,
so maybe for fire, particles are better though i agree our fluids don’t have real volume,
so that makes them not very suitable for 100% realistic fire(though i could be wrong).
New particle system allows you to have multiple types of particle systems interact and even particles can deflect particles, so you can use both meshes and particles and halos all from the same object. Check out the wiki; I just did some mucking around and the dev is doing an excellent job on the manual.
In the manual I will move toward providing starter tables of settings for average kinds of things. I thought about this with softbody…but had to go to work.
So, you could have a burning rat all from one mesh: the hair, the lurking coal fire, sparks, smoke, and flame1, flame2 halo, flame3 alpha mapped meshes, and flame4 fast rising flame particles…in a windy sewer.
If creating fire in the new particles isn’t a big challenge to do and that we get realistic results, then i agree that the need for a fire simulator wouldn’t be necessary. But the simulator was just one of those ideas i had to share. You know i really hope 2.5 raises the bar for blender. I mean blender is a great example of how something tht’s for free can evolve and challenge the things that aren’t.
I don’t understand, do we just wish for features now? Sort of like the “Secret”. Oh well good luck, great idea but I’d rather have a smoke maker and leave the fire to a user built effect.
David, it’s just a bit of discussion, like i mentioned before i can’t make a fire simulator but i drew up the plans for one. If there was a great need for one then the post would have attracted quit a few comments and then maybe someone would have pointed out to ton the idea. I gave a head start, an idea and method. Architects don’t build houses, they design them. But i’m now trusting the new particles to deliver good fire effects.
ok, im going to say something very annoying now: