Inspired by Rune's first glitter image, I decided to try a simple image with
water particles.  Although he beat me to it, here is mine thrown into a
simple scene.

I wasn't brave enough to attempt to keep the water particles in the
fountain.  The water actually goes right into the ground.  :)

I tried using Divx;-) and I was surprised that it shrunk the animation down
to 56k and looked as good as this one!  I posted the mpeg though so that
everyone can see it.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'fountain.m1v.mpg' (251 KB)

"Richard Dault" wrote:
> Inspired by Rune's first glitter image, I decided to try a
> simple image with water particles.  Although he beat me to
> it, here is mine thrown into a simple scene.

Nice!

It looks good in the scene context. Something I haven't had time to do
myself yet...

> I wasn't brave enough to attempt to keep the water particles
> in the fountain.  The water actually goes right into the
> ground.  :)

You can always use CSG to "clip" the water. Maybe that's what you did.

What is the water particles made of? I can't quite see it. Isosurfaces?

Does the simulation change if you change the frame-rate of the animation?

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 28)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

> Nice!

Thanks!

> You can always use CSG to "clip" the water. Maybe that's what you did.

No, I just left them inside the other objects.  Although I should clip them
to speed things up.

> What is the water particles made of? I can't quite see it. Isosurfaces?

Blobs.  I find it does a pretty good job.  The more particles there are, the
smoother water-like it gets.  I think there are 700 particles in this
animation.

> Does the simulation change if you change the frame-rate of the animation?

I'm not sure what you mean by this, but if I change the number of frames,
then it does get smoother and slower.  Basically, every frame I rotate the
particles by 360*clock around the center.  So the more frames, the more
often the particles get drawn.

Post a reply to this message

"Richard Dault" wrote:
> > What is the water particles made of? I can't quite see it.
> > Isosurfaces?
>
> Blobs.  I find it does a pretty good job.  The more particles
> there are, the smoother water-like it gets.  I think there are
> 700 particles in this animation.

I use blobs too. The reason I was confused by your animation is that the
blobs seems to be cluttered together in groups. I wondered if those groups
were small iso-surfaces, but I understand they are groups of blob elements.

> > Does the simulation change if you change the frame-rate of
> > the animation?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by this, but if I change the number
> of frames, then it does get smoother and slower.

That's not what I meant, but never mind, my question was only relevant if
you #write data to files and read them in the next frame. (Some of those
kind of particle systems create more particles if you have more frames.) But
I guess your animation is based on the clock keyword alone, in which case my
question was irrelevant.

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 28)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

> I use blobs too. The reason I was confused by your animation is that the
> blobs seems to be cluttered together in groups. I wondered if those groups
> were small iso-surfaces, but I understand they are groups of blob
elements.

I see.  They are a little cluttered together, but as I mention, the more
frames, the less they clutter.

> That's not what I meant, but never mind, my question was only relevant if
> you #write data to files and read them in the next frame. (Some of those
> kind of particle systems create more particles if you have more frames.)
But
> I guess your animation is based on the clock keyword alone, in which case
my
> question was irrelevant.

Actually, I do read/write from files, but I do not create new particles,
it's just that some of them aren't visible.  Once a particle exceeds a
certain time value, it gets reset and repeats.  This allowed me to do cyclic
animation.

Post a reply to this message

"Richard Dault" wrote:
> Actually, I do read/write from files

Aha, then the question is relevant after all.

> > The reason I was confused by your animation is that the
> > blobs seems to be cluttered together in groups.
>
> I see.  They are a little cluttered together, but as I
> mention, the more frames, the less they clutter.

That's exactly what I was talking about when I asked if it looked
differently dependent on the frame-rate. :)

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 28)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message