> I compared to your posted animation which is rather different than what
> the scene describes.

Yeah, Christoph mentioned that as well. Here at home I've worked further on
that scene and the scene-file I posted was different from the animation in
just those regards: amount of particles and amount of frames (which lead to
9 seconds, not 18).

> Perhaps there are slight precision errors visible, but I still think the
> animation shows that quite acceptable results can be obtained with very
> few "samples".

If you look closely at the last particle that bounces back into the glass
funnel, you'll notice it "wiggles" visibly. I guess that's a side-effect
from using less samples than frames. Something of the sort was what I had
noticed during your beta-tests, but it seemed to have been taken care of at
that time. Well, testing is never finished, is it? ;-)

> A nice thing was that the parameters between the two systems seem to be
> very compatible. I used:
>
> #declare particle_bounce       = 0.75;
> #declare particle_bounceturb   = 0.10;
> #declare particle_friction     = 0.0;
> #macro particle_gravity  (Clock,Point) <0,-9.81,0> #end
>
> And it rendered with the attached result which is very much similar to
> the one you posted. :)

I would think that the results should all look pretty much alike with the
described things like losing velocity on impact, where particles start and
with which speed and so forth. BTW, does your particle-system take several
objects into account with different "bounce"-settings (which is a modifier
for the reversed velocity when it hits a surface, right?)? I've designed my
UI to be very modular, and you just "plug" another object in there with its
own settings. This way, you can even create Impact-Effects based on the
object getting hit, which is something I'd probably need at some point
during the work on my Long Term Project, the Short. I basically wanted to
create a highly flexible System with many possibilities for enhancements.
I'm still thinking about that subset-framing issue, so that I don't have to
run simulations from the beginning, but do it like you do: just generate the
required data that leads to the frame I'm currently rendering. So far, the
results were different due to adaptive-timesteps. I have to somehow adjust
the system to do a maximum of clock_delta-timesteps, but do those repeatedly
if I for example render frame 15 without having rendered the other 14 frames
first.

-- 
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Email: tim.nikias (@) nolights.de

Post a reply to this message