fire simulator

that is awesome, I hope he makes a tutorial of this extremely realistic fire.

Michael’s .Blend files are not built the same way, that video appears to be with the new particle system.

Wow. I have seen better fire simulations, but not in software within (legal) reach of mortals. This is soooooo nice!

Droooooool… :smiley: 2.5 will benchmark 3D software packages completely! :cool:

Creating realistic fire will still be a big challenge, just not impossible as it is with the old system. :^)

(I have tried with the new particles and failed miserably)

the video is beautifull
Actually the fluid sim currently in Blender could be capable to simulate gasses under some circumstances, as the coder of that project said years ago.

that is truely the best fire I ever saw in Blender, terrific work !!!

Best Fire. Nice It looking like that this fire has life in it. Any tutorial please.

This really gets boring. “I have an idea thread”. To many of them by people that want something for free without contributing something back.

Even worse. People that put a link to a pdf and say: “Here coders. Do this. No need to thank me”

Even more worse. A link to an other software with that function.

Uhm… It’s recommended that if you have an idea for a new function, you should do a mock-up, preferably one that either shows a fake tutorial with pictures (made in image editors) or even better, a fake video tutorial. So doing what you describe is actually the right way to things.

Even more worse. A link to an other software with that function.
Aaaaand that would be one of the more basic and commonly accepted ways for new stuff to be suggested.

Or does one have to be a coder to have an opnion on good new features?

(note: I am not condoning people who bark that “you coders HAVE to do this, or I don’t like you”. But new functions have to originate somewhere, and the above two ways are just the best and commonly suggested ways for functions to be suggested)

Cognis: Yes it would be all valid If there was a fire simulator in Blender then this thread would be ok. But there isn’t any.

btw having an idea is the easiest thing ever. I have ideas for making galaxies. Yes there should be a button that you press and you’ll have a random good looking galaxy.

My Animated Movie button comes first. Ton said so.

btw, I was up until 4 am working on the SSS shader for skin and the new softbody system. Posted results in wiki. It’s hard work! Of course, if it was easy, every 13-year old would do it.

You don’t have to be a coder to help out; there’s a thing called DOCUMENTATION that anyone with a grasp of the english language could help out with.

True, there is no fire simulator. The thread started by someone suggesting there might be one made at some point, and he/she supplied some suggestions. If you don’t like the idea of a fire simulator, no problem with me. I like it.

btw having an idea is the easiest thing ever. I have ideas for making galaxies. Yes there should be a button that you press and you’ll have a random good looking galaxy.
I think I saw one, though it was stand-alone. Having lots of fun producing random planets with a plug-in for Paint Shop Pro, though. Basically some fractal stuff. Hey, maybe Blender could do the same one day! If it’s alright with me having an idea and saying so, of course…

I agree that would be wonderful (once I have the prerequisite skills, I am aiming at doing some video tutorials myself). But I don’t think the OP was looking for a way to help out. He/she just had an idea and posted it, and in a better manner than I see many other posts written up. Blender is built on ideas. Saying people should not post ideas is basically saying that Blender should only evolve based on coders, and not the rest of us. I think that idea sucks, big time.

As for the infamous “Make Me A Movie” button, I’ll wait uploading the script until the “Quality Sequel” button works right.

Yes. Documentation is important. Extremely important. That’s why I think people should put energy on stuff that exist instead of making up “5 minutes of thought”-ideas.

bigbad ??? upset ???

You just need to learn how to fake fire.

Yes. Documentation is important. Extremely important. That’s why I think people should put energy on stuff that exist instead of making up “5 minutes of thought”-ideas.

We already have so many features, that in some ways, I think some of us should just master the existing stuff a bit more before requesting new features (not that new features are bad or anything).

Yes I remember looking for tutorials on how to do stuff, instead of pressing the Water/Fire/Smoke/DoF/Unwrap button.

Those were the days!

bigbad i know you insisted on people like me providing documentation, but here’s the thing, i’m not and the reason for this was that my fire simulator idea is not based on realism, but merely art. It if it worked it would create beautiful fire, but remember not realism. plus in my first post i mentioned anyone could add on ideas to the way to achieve this fire simulator (so please anyone join in the ideas, even though i agree the particles might get the job done)
anyone could also crticize why it wouldn’t work. But for some reason none has criticized why it wouldn’t work. So bigbad next time your gonna criticize my fire simulator come up with proof why it won’t work.

So, a little off-topic, but relevant. I was talking to my daughter about the video someone here posted a link to - about the future - which said something like by 2050 a $1000 PC will have the compute power of the human race, and I said that when she is my age, screens and phones will be obsolete. Your computer will be on your ear and a little rod or glasses will project a display right onto your eye. You will talk to it and it will be like a personal assistant to you. She said “no way”. Ah, youth.

so, there will be a better Fire Simulator, I have no doubt. However, you guys forget that one exists right now. It is cumbersome, quirky, hard to use, and gives somewhat adequate results. But you all saw the videos of it (about 6 were there, if I recall) via the links in a previous post). Just like hair.

I was suggesting in my first post to this thread that the next gen system have controls that are more user-friendly than the current. I’ve been staring at the four panels of controls on the new particle system, and thinking “How the heck can I write a User Manual for this?” because users think in terms just like this thread - how do I make fire? and "so, what should the Tangent velocity be on the Physics panel if I want my smoke to look like it’s coming from a very hot fire in a cold climate?? (just picking a setting at random).

But, we have what we have, and I was hoping to garner some support from you dear readers on getting some good doco on how to use the new particle system to make great looking fire.

On that note, has anyone tried following the steps that Francois (Grassaro) put into the fire animation? I have yet to install the SVN because, well, it takes time I doubt I will have right now. But the guidelines in the vid seem disturbingly simple… do they work?

If they work, we already have one step towards a tutorial, though not in-depth particle documentation (which I understand is being worked on by some of the veterans involved).