Can I do this in Canvas Standalone?

imdingimding Posts: 16
edited August 2016 in Canvas Standalone

hi Fabric community,

I'm looking to do some 3D motion graphic based on a motion captured dance routine. I know I can create some basic mesh and bind them to the bones, then import the animation into Canvas. From there I want to do some simple stuff like "emit from surface/volume" that was in ICE, and play around with the particles from there.

  • there is no ready-made node that offers the "emit from surface/volume" functionality, am I correct? and if I were to create that from scratch, is that something Canvas can comfortably provide? what about "flow along surface" etc?
  • I am not a hugely technical person, would say I'm beginner/intermediate (probably more beginner) level according to this video. am I picking too big an apple to chew with this?

would appreciate any feedback from you guys, I will be sharing anything I manage to put together.

S. Ding

Best Answer

  • borjaborja Administrator, Fabric Employee Posts: 480 admin
    edited August 2016 Accepted Answer

    Hi @imding

    We currently don't ship high level presets for particles like "emit from surface/volume" nor flow along surface. In fact, we currently don't have such a particle primitive but a points object that you can use for these purposes. There have been some conversations in the forums to implement such particle systems.

    What we do have is presets to generate pointsets on surfaces and volumes that might help you like

    GeneratePositionSet (generates an array of positions on the surface of a polygon mesh)
    Voxelize (Creates an array of grid-aligned Xfos that are contained in the volume of the input polygon mesh)
    ConstrainToSurfaceVec3 (Constrains the input positions to the surface of a polygon mesh)
    AlignToSurface (Aligns the orientation of the input Xfo array to the surface normals of a polygon mesh)

    There are samples in Fabric using these presets that you can play with like

    constrain_on_surface_torus_wave
    align_to_surface_torus_golden_hair
    voxelize_frog_wobble

Answers

  • JM Kin TelaJM Kin Tela Posts: 89
    edited August 2016

    why there is not High level presets?,.. it's to maintain a low level neutrality principle inside FE as tool for bulding things??
    ...it's not helping to reach houdini and maya markets if so, they already have this preset build in :(
    maybe you could impulse solvers and high level preset a little bit more.
    why don't you support opensource projects targeted to generate presets for all of us artist who dooesnt want to fight with implementing a particle emitter from scratch for example?
    if you don't, naturally some presets will be build and sell by skilled programmers, and others will independently be published by advance users, at a not-the-best-quality-possible but free ,
    while you could make a bunch of high level presets come natavly on FE withouth us paying for them or consructing them.

    sorry if being to harsh... but FE must be the next big app guys

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭
    edited August 2016

    Moin,

    not sure if this is the right place for this kind of discussion, but ...

    why there is not High level presets?

    ... my guess is that it is mainly a business thing. If you are going to provide dozens or hundreds of high level presets that may have to get reworked on major releases of the underlying tech, you are creating a serious support drain both for the presets as such (because the next thing artist-users are going to scream for are tutorials, then you have to provide them as well) and for the tech (reworking presets that may need changes when underlying tech changes).
    My understanding is that the currently paying customer base for Fabric has no need for such high-level presets, because they use Fabric as a solution tool box for their concrete jobs. Therefor concentrating on providing a rock solid tool box (with fundamental tools as opposed to fancy artwork helpers) caters the targeted customer field, while also supplying the means for others to create their own solutions on top.

    why don't you support opensource projects targeted to generate presets for all of us artist who dooesnt want to fight with implementing a particle emitter from scratch for example?

    ... "support" funded by what money, exactly? I am very happy that Fabric Engine is free to use for my projects (not that I wouldn't mind paying the price asked, as I consider FE worth that money, but I am more happy with the free access ;) ). "Supporting" projects always costs money, lots thereof. If you are never ever going to make money from that kind of support (because the freelancing artists will always use the free version of FE), this would mean killing your own job.

    In my experience the Fabric guys have been incredibly supportive in almost every regard, even to free-access-suckers like me. I hope they will manage to stay that way. Diluting this support by maintaining an "open source project support department" would harm my use of Fabric Engine, because I am a clueless, uneducated and stubborn brickhead that can't do squat without support.

    My 2 cents.

    ...

    Re "particles"
    I am sure that some extended (software) support for particles will come one day. For the moment you can actually get pretty far with the Points object and attributes. Yes, dealing with attributes is a bit clumsy, but once you understand it, it works. And this "it works" is what makes Fabric Engine so valuable.
    The advantage of keeping the particle approach very basic right now is that you will always have to deal renderside-wise with them after the fact. Without a built in render system, Fabric can only provide points (aka particles), and that it is already doing. You will have to do something to these points any way in your DCC, so providing a more sophisticated bunch of particle presets would really just be about "emitters" and maybe some "solvers".

    There is a simple 2d fluid solver in Fabric 2.3.0 that you can (ab-)use for particle emission and flow control (I have based my own 3d gas solver on that basic idea).

    My humble particle system in Fabric works. But since I am constantly learning, I would now rewrite it - and that is exactly what I meant above: High level stuff can always, always be improved. That's effort. That's money (or time, much more valuable than money!).
    I would love to cooperate with someone, closely, seriously, as I think that a good, solid particle framework can be very helpful for all kinds of tasks. But it would mean that, if the Fabric guys come up with their own system, it might be redundant. So the best approach would be to provide as many interfaces to "standard Fabric entities" as possible. That's why my gas solver in V2 incarnation provides a Points interface, even though it is a grid solver.

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • JM Kin TelaJM Kin Tela Posts: 89
    edited August 2016

    Hi Mark , I see,
    well with those compeling arguments I understand why Fe Doesn' include Higher level Preset s,
    FE is a tool targeted to studios with the technical staff to write this custom solutions,
    and non technical artist should just realize that it's not really a tool aimed to them...
    they must step up in their profession and become technical artist if they want to use FE at it's highest level.
    Still cause me a bit of sadness that FE doesn't come with basic High level presets.. like particle emitters... :(

    The thing is, Ok at some point this low level tool will reach a very high level of Robustness and completion..
    and at that point a bunch of clever programers(Mostly comming from ICE Com) will already have colonize FE with high Level Presets,
    And the total cost of FE will depend of the Preset Combination of this high level presets that the clients needs.
    what will sustain an ecosystem of programmers living from FE...until autodesk buys this tech,
    Includes the most used presets on this buying, and launch it as an unifying tool for their dispersed softwares...

    :)

  • Kevin TureskiKevin Tureski Posts: 126 ✭✭

    Without getting into a debate or the rationale behind our business model, we have a finite set of resources and we do our best to balance the many requests (for features and for support) that we get from our commercial customers and the community of users that are using Fabric at no cost. We are looking at a rationalization of the presets that we make available; we recognize that some things are not that obvious or just plain missing; we want it to be easier use Fabric to create tools that optimize your production workflows.

  • JM Kin TelaJM Kin Tela Posts: 89
    edited September 2016

    Just saying FE could include and coordinate the individual efforts of the opensource community
    and make higher level tool development into one common effort...

    in fact the list of all this tools could be made by the whole community in a reddit fashion
    only if we coordinate efforts it would be possible to build this tools and not send FE out of resources.
    without this tools fe is not an option for freelance artist or small studio in a lot of cases,
    but since your aiming into big studios and very technical artists,
    that are able to build this tools themself and not share them with anyone else ...good luck.

Sign In or Register to comment.