Volumetric Effects in Daz Studio.

ecks201

Tried DireWorks example using a larger primitive.
I created a larger cube, exported and reimported as obj.
Then added explosion VDB as before (also threw a point light in to see what would happen)
Almost there, but it was still clipped at the top

 

EDIT:

Third attempt. I'm happy with that as a test.
Wish Daz had made the instructions clearer though.

The white square on the floor is the inside of the cube, just nudge it 0.1 on the Y-axis to move it below the floor and get shadows

 

 

Oso3D

From what I can tell vdb auto scales to the container object.

I agree that it would be nice to have a way to scale the vdb separately.

ecks201

Oso3D said:

From what I can tell vdb auto scales to the container object.

Logic dictates that's what should happen, but I wish Daz would tell me what I need to click to achieve it.

DireWorks

ecks201 said:

Oso3D said:

From what I can tell vdb auto scales to the container object.

 Not sure i made a test just now and updated my elementary tutorial on DA with a comparison with various box primitives with different original dimensions so there(not there they maybe?) are all at 100% scale

It looks like a matter of unit setup of the source vdb file, 1 does thing in mt 1 in cm, one in Ft

the vdb file used is the explosion.vdb from the openvdb archive

 

and try to move the orign, useless(maybe not) but cool :)

RobotHeadArt

I think the weird ground shadow artifacting with the domain geometry at Y axis 0 is a bug.

Oso3D

Increase Y of the container; I think that's basically a weird z fighting artifact of the container and the floor. Given the container is invisible I'm not sure why it would fight, but I've seen that in a bunch of situations with surfaces.

 

Richard Haseltine

DireWorks said:

ecks201 said:

DireWorks said:

i made a quick guide on my DA. I will upgrade it, during my testing today.

https://www.deviantart.com/direworks/journal/Daz-Tutorial-new-Volumetric-Feature-in-DS4-20-907585466

Thanks for that, it helped point out that I wasn't doing anything wrong.
I'm sure the clipping of the VDB in Daz is confusing a lot of people.
e.g I was expecting this VDB explosion cloud to look like, er... an explosion cloud. Instead it's getting the top half of it clipped off by Daz.
Left to right: Cylinder, Cube, Sphere

 

It needs some kind of fix, like scale VDB to primitive size etc. Definitely needs Daz to clarify what's happening and suggest a workaround or fix.

 

Glad it helped, thx for feedback.

Well, that cube clipping looks anyway cool as always say a "bug" can also become a feature if you can handle it.

Im going to make some test right now and i will update the tutorial if i find something useful.

Check also Jay's video on YT pretty more articulated than mine :)

It isn't a bug - it is a feature, http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log_4_20_0_2#4_15_1_90

"Clip To Geometry" is used to indicate whether or not the volume ("domain") should be clipped by the geometry of the associated node - i.e., act as a "boundary hull"
...
This parameter only has meaning in the context of a surface named "Volume" - for a surface that is not named "Volume", this parameter has no affect and is always treated as though it is set to "On"
...
When "On", only the portion of the volume ("domain") that resides within the geometry of the associated node will be evaluated
...
When "Off", the entire volume ("domain") is evaluated regardless of its intersection with the geometry of the associated node - i.e., it is treated as a "Volume Object"

Richard Haseltine

DireWorks said:

Dim Reaper said:

DireWorks said:

Gordig said:

Increasing the density multiplier past 1 just makes it even more jagged.

 

i like the voxels :)

btw, you can use a way less detailed mesh, apply the shader, attach the vdb file  exported from cinema, in the dedicated paramenter.

The rpimitive sphere works, but a custome mesh like yours will be more handy.

i made a quick guide on my DA. I will upgrade it, during my testing today.

https://www.deviantart.com/direworks/journal/Daz-Tutorial-new-Volumetric-Feature-in-DS4-20-907585466

 

 

Thank you for the tutorial - very easy to follow.

 I had an issue on the first render because the "Density Multiplier" was set to 1, but looking at your screenshot and matching the parameters sorted that.

I've been reading about the volumetrics on the forums for a few days since I downloaded the 4.20 beta - your quick tutorial was easy enough to give me the push to give it a try. 

Thanks again!

Oh! Really appreciated! :) Thanks for the feedback.

And yeah, quite strange its set to one.

Thje default is 1 because that is, for multiplication - which is what this is - the identity operation (it leaves the base value unchanged).

wolf359

VDB imported to Blender can be scaled as needed. The smoke effects in this clip Were originally at least 60 meters high but scaled to fit into this cooridoor I modeled last year.

Richard Haseltine

wolf359 said:

VDB imported to Blender can be scaled as needed. The smoke effects in this clip Were originally at least 60 meters high but scaled to fit into this cooridoor I modeled last year.

VBDs scale in DS as far as I can tell.

barbult

Richard Haseltine said:

It isn't a bug - it is a feature, http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log_4_20_0_2#4_15_1_90

"Clip To Geometry" is used to indicate whether or not the volume ("domain") should be clipped by the geometry of the associated node - i.e., act as a "boundary hull"
...
This parameter only has meaning in the context of a surface named "Volume" - for a surface that is not named "Volume", this parameter has no affect and is always treated as though it is set to "On"
...
When "On", only the portion of the volume ("domain") that resides within the geometry of the associated node will be evaluated
...
When "Off", the entire volume ("domain") is evaluated regardless of its intersection with the geometry of the associated node - i.e., it is treated as a "Volume Object"

OK, the real significant statement here (for me) was "This parameter only has meaning in the context of a surface named "Volume" When you use a DS primitive to start with, the surface is named Default. I selected the Geometry Editor tool and went to the Tool Settings pane and changed the surface name from Default to Volume and now Clip To Geometry works the way you'd think it should.

I don't really understand the thought process behind requiring a specific surface name. A person wouldn't apply the new volume shader to any surface that they didn't want it to apply to.

Here is the OpenVDB explosion in a 1 cm default primitive cube with Clip to Geometry Off.

DireWorks

This make sense, thanks Richard for the clarification. 

barbult

Richard Haseltine said:

wolf359 said:

VDB imported to Blender can be scaled as needed. The smoke effects in this clip Were originally at least 60 meters high but scaled to fit into this cooridoor I modeled last year.

VBDs scale in DS as far as I can tell.

Yes, they scale fine for me. I just used the Parameters pane to scale the cube that has my Volume surface and VDB file.

barbult

I think next time dForce explodes I'll add a volume explosion and call it a scene.

DireWorks

barbult said:

I think next time dForce explodes I'll and a volume explosion and call it a scene.

 

Chezjuan

Thanks for all the discussion in this thread. I started messing with volumetrics today and this was a big help! I appreciate all the work everyone did to start figuring this out 

Here's what I put together with what I learned reading this thread:

I've been waiting for this sort of thing since I started dabbling in Daz Studio years ago.

 

Gordig

Figured out how to properly export volumes from C4D.

DireWorks

Gordig said:

Figured out how to properly export volumes from C4D.

It uses plugins or its a native feature?

              ....ready to hammering my piggy bank

Gordig

I used X-Particles. What I did before was mesh an X-Particles simulation, then turn that mesh into a volume, which is why it came out so janky. Now that I know how to export volumes straight out of X-Particles, I have a lot more options.

The downside with Daz's implementation as it currently is is that the shader has a field for volume fields. The volume I exported has three channels, so I have three cubes, all with the same volume, but using different channels, and apparently only one will render at a time.

I did, however, play around with the absorption and scatter multipliers, and this came out.

Gordig

Gordig said:

The downside with Daz's implementation as it currently is is that the shader has a field for volume fields. The volume I exported has three channels, so I have three cubes, all with the same volume, but using different channels, and apparently only one will render at a time.

Hilarious discovery: I tried to solve this problem by slightly offsetting the cubes from each other, and things started getting wacky.

ecks201

I'm with barbult on the above, but specifically:

I don't really understand the thought process behind requiring a specific surface name. A person wouldn't apply the new volume shader to any surface that they didn't want it to apply to.

I'm puzzled too, only reason I can think is that there's an internal Daz problem to do with surface names/properties and this is a fudge to get around it.
 

 

DireWorks

Gordig said:

I used X-Particles. What I did before was mesh an X-Particles simulation, then turn that mesh into a volume, which is why it came out so janky. Now that I know how to export volumes straight out of X-Particles, I have a lot more options.

The downside with Daz's implementation as it currently is is that the shader has a field for volume fields. The volume I exported has three channels, so I have three cubes, all with the same volume, but using different channels, and apparently only one will render at a time.

I did, however, play around with the absorption and scatter multipliers, and this came out.

beautiful, and the checker effect is brlliant :) 

JoeQuick

To anyone who's playing in Embergen, how easy is it to make "weird' stuff?  Effects that look like magic or... anything besides smoke, clouds and fire?

Richard Haseltine

ecks201 said:

I'm with barbult on the above, but specifically:

I don't really understand the thought process behind requiring a specific surface name. A person wouldn't apply the new volume shader to any surface that they didn't want it to apply to.

I'm puzzled too, only reason I can think is that there's an internal Daz problem to do with surface names/properties and this is a fudge to get around it.

There is, I gather, a distinction in Iray between volume textures and volume objects which introduces certain limitations and requirements.

fastbike1

 Did you not see Stonemason's example on page 2 of this thread?

AllenArt said:

prixat said:

Hylas said:

Everyone's talking about Ground Fog... but what about Matte Fog? Was that always there? I don't remember...

Ground Fog was in the previous verson and possibly earlier. Matte Fog even earlier than that.

For those asking about the CUBE effect. It's the 'Scattering Offset' that has to be kept very dark or preferably completely black! Otherwise it allows scattering up to the edge of each Voxel, making them all visible.

The denoiser has a quite nice effect too.

Mine is black. I still get the Lego bunny. I've updated the drivers, updated the menus and restarted DS, redownloaded and installed the default filters....

Nada. I'm gonna take a break ;)

 

fastbike1

Stonemason (pg 2 of this thread) also suggested setting Absorption Offset to Black as well as Scattering Offset. 

prixat said:

Hylas said:

Everyone's talking about Ground Fog... but what about Matte Fog? Was that always there? I don't remember...

Ground Fog was in the previous verson and possibly earlier. Matte Fog even earlier than that.

For those asking about the CUBE effect. It's the 'Scattering Offset' that has to be kept very dark or preferably completely black! Otherwise it allows scattering up to the edge of each Voxel, making them all visible.

The denoiser has a quite nice effect too.

barbult

Richard Haseltine said:

ecks201 said:

I'm with barbult on the above, but specifically:

I don't really understand the thought process behind requiring a specific surface name. A person wouldn't apply the new volume shader to any surface that they didn't want it to apply to.

I'm puzzled too, only reason I can think is that there's an internal Daz problem to do with surface names/properties and this is a fudge to get around it.

There is, I gather, a distinction in Iray between volume textures and volume objects which introduces certain limitations and requirements.

So for our education, which of those is what is being used in the new 4.20 volumetric shader? Since it is a surface shader, I would guess "volume texture". But since we have to add a VDB file that defines a 3 dimensional shape, it might be "volume object". 

Richard Haseltine

barbult said:

Richard Haseltine said:

ecks201 said:

I'm with barbult on the above, but specifically:

I don't really understand the thought process behind requiring a specific surface name. A person wouldn't apply the new volume shader to any surface that they didn't want it to apply to.

I'm puzzled too, only reason I can think is that there's an internal Daz problem to do with surface names/properties and this is a fudge to get around it.

There is, I gather, a distinction in Iray between volume textures and volume objects which introduces certain limitations and requirements.

So for our education, which of those is what is being used in the new 4.20 volumetric shader? Since it is a surface shader, I would guess "volume texture". But since we have to add a VDB file that defines a 3 dimensional shape, it might be "volume object". 

There is quite a bit of detail in http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log_4_20_0_2#4_15_1_90

AllenArt

fastbike1 said:

Stonemason (pg 2 of this thread) also suggested setting Absorption Offset to Black as well as Scattering Offset. 

prixat said:

Hylas said:

Everyone's talking about Ground Fog... but what about Matte Fog? Was that always there? I don't remember...

Ground Fog was in the previous verson and possibly earlier. Matte Fog even earlier than that.

For those asking about the CUBE effect. It's the 'Scattering Offset' that has to be kept very dark or preferably completely black! Otherwise it allows scattering up to the edge of each Voxel, making them all visible.

The denoiser has a quite nice effect too.

I did that. Same thing. Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I've given it up for now :) 

Wonderland

Charlie Judge said:

I installed DS 4.20 on both my computers (one with GTX 1080 ti and the other with a lowly GTX 970). While I haven't tried volumetrics yet, I am definitely impressed both with the speed the DS program loads and with the  speed the Iray view port responds and renders.

I’m still on DS 4.14 beta because 4.15 and above crashes with my 1080ti. Are you saying DS 4.20 works with a 1080ti without crashing?