Supermassive Blackhole

Hi everyone! My latest, Supermassive Blackhole i made for Lynx Observatory

Simulation and rendering in Blender, Cycles. Compositing in Fusion


That is absolutely beautiful! Amazing work!

1 Like

Sphere with insanely high refraction? :grinning:

1 Like

damn… nice work !!!

1 Like

Not really. I just gave suzanne really high mass and pushed simulation button. :sunglasses:


@BlackRainbow Here’s my spy plan: get a job at DNEG, sneak in the development area and inspect the DNEG Gravitational Renderer code. Come back and make an open source gravitational renderer. Sounds easy enough?

1 Like

Great plan! Feels like scene from “mission impisible”. I’m Tom Cruise-ing myself through dnegs corridors, casually smiling at staff while walking by to the ‘main computer’ room. Next scene: i’m hanging down from the ceiling, typing in the dos command line “dir gravrender.exe /s /p”

I did not know that you could import blackholes into Blender. Is this an addon?

Jk aside, great job. Is Blender a prominent tool there?

1 Like

Well, it’s not houdini (yet, i hope) but it did surprisingly good considering volume resolution was almost at limit for my ram (16gb). And cycles behaved very well, no crashes, no surprises. Looong rendertimes though. 4 days on 2 workstation for 7k. But i had almost all render setting on top. 128 ray depth for volume scattering and volume step size was at its effective minimum where considerable difference was starting to show up. Simulation took a bit of tickling, but it was fun. It would be greater if vdb-s could have more manipulation options, rendertime loading, easy transform options etc… but i think eventually we’ll have everything.

Do you think Blender simulation skills are close to Houdini’s (Houdini user here, although simulation was not something I did much in Houdini)?

I find that I can emulate some of the tools that I used to use in Houdini by using Animation Nodes + Sverchok in Blender. I personally like that the speed of the workflow aligned with the practical results that I can get inside Blender vs Houdini stuff.

1 Like

Nice work,

1 Like

I cant say Blender’s sim skills are close to houdini, but in some cases, when you’re almost sure you’re gonna need houdini or realflow, cuz the sim you want to get seems too complex, in some cases i can pull it off with blender surprisingly easy and fast. Had that situation quite a few times already.
I’m very confident in Blender’s future, especially with 2.8-s huge leap forward. I cant say that about Fusion which is nothing short of a tragedy. Makes me sad.

1 Like

Some high-res prints here on lynx observatory-s download section.

1 Like

I wonder why neither here nor in the movie we see the repeating pattern of the sky near the photon sphere. Is it because the accretion disk is so bright that the stars can’t be seen?

That’s a valid question! From what i know accretion disk is very bright, even in it’s “quite” times, so it might indeed dim stars at the background quite a bit. I dimmed it becouse my rendering of stars didnt come close to photosphere, as it probably should, it’s because of limitations of grav. lening setup. It just mimics the correct one without killing the gpu. But i tried to do some tests with milky way BG.

Here you can see repeating pattern. But it doesn’t comes close to photosphere, goes to black.

Here is the actual stars background rendering i used.

i tried to use a texture of stars, but i didnt get correct sharp curvy lensed stars close to BH. Realised stars should realy be a tiny bright dots. But samples had to be high (5k+)

Tried to mimic a bit more realistic expectations of black hole colors… :thinking:

1 Like

Very nice!
Looks awesome BlackRainbow.
Great work!

1 Like

@BlackRainbow Can you tag your topic with astronomy and space?

done, thanx for the tip

1 Like

Got to have that red-shift…?