I guess for cases like "snow-piling", it would be
best to build specifically designed systems for
just this task, by cropping some useful algorithms
from the existing system and creating a new,
less versatile system.
In this case, I'd say:
-Drop particles onto surfaces with the typical
particle routine, just let them drop until they
sort of stay where they are.
-As soon as they've stopped, add them to a
file which is loaded to be part of the object that
particles are to bounce off from

This might require some tweaking to the systems
core routine, cause new objects will be popping
up all over the place...

Might make an interesting project though.

Well, just my 2 cents worth,
Tim


--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde

> > Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> > > Would this work for making a still shot of a snowy
> > > scene where it has been snowing for some time from
> > > various directions.
> >
> > No, that would require too many particles, and the system is not at all
> > optimized for this task.
> >
> > > Would the snow accumulate over time? Stick to surfaces?
> >
> > No and no. Sorry. :/
> >
> > But thinking about it, I don't think that any particle system would be
> > well suited for a task like this. Assuming that we are talking about at
> > least semi-realistic snow spread over a somewhat large area...
> Hmm.. I don't know, if your surface was a blob or something like one then
> each particle that died as it impacted could be added to the structure of
> the blob with some threshold that caused multiple objects to be replaced
> by a single larger object or the like. Of course from what I read
> someplace else about blobs, this may not work quite right...
>

Post a reply to this message