Hi Bunkai.
My experience with i3D is not so good.
I have tried to make some effects like some shots I have seen from afterburn and is almost impossible, at least for me.
I have writted some i3D shaders along as atmospheric and surface shaders to try to get the best from 3D TExtures but you need too high resolutions that is no viable, the 3D textures needs a lot of time to be gerated, at the end I return to sprites, that have a lot of controls and possibilities in Houdini.
If you need a lot of local noise, different colors and these kind of stuff like in Afterburn, i3D textures are not good enough at the moment.
At least this is my opinion, maybe somebody have got some better results.

Bunkai
are you guys sure, that what you can do with Afterburn, you can do very ewsity with i3D as well?

I would say i3D is much more difficult, but it may be, because I dont know i3D.

Peple talk a lot about i3D - does Houdini Contain all the tools to make new 3D volumetric textures - i3D, or are i3D textures supposed to be brougt to Houdini from another specialized i3D package if such exists?

Personally to me, i3D seems to be much more difficult than Afterburn, but I did not get too deep into i3D.

With regards,
Rene.

I don't think anyone is saying it is easy to do in Houdini. It can be done, but you have to create the workflow yourself first. Please see my post eariler in this thread.

Hello Wolfwood,

Yeah, not you, but Val mentioned that generating afterburn like effects with i3D is easy. Maybe he has some good experience and good results with Houdini in i3D. I would love to see some realistis i3D results.

With regards,
Rene.

hey all.

So, to sum it up, Afterburn makes cool fire ..

I think it is imposible to make good fire with afterburn..
(maybe fireball, but not fire with flames)

about i3D and afterburn…
I've done quite bit of work with afterburn
and when I start learning i3D I find very easy to do
same thing in houdini.. and I think you can do lot more.

I think it is easy to do same with i3D just have to spend
long time to setup.. even simple stuff, like just to begin
using i3D you will spend 20min!
(and no presets like in afterBurn.)

val
hey all.

So, to sum it up, Afterburn makes cool fire ..

I think it is imposible to make good fire with afterburn..
(maybe fireball, but not fire with flames)

about i3D and afterburn…
I've done quite bit of work with afterburn
and when I start learning i3D I find very easy to do
same thing in houdini.. and I think you can do lot more.

I think it is easy to do same with i3D just have to spend
long time to setup.. even simple stuff, like just to begin
using i3D you will spend 20min!
(and no presets like in afterBurn.)

Yes you can d ograet things with i3D, and is by far more flexible than afterburn, but times are impossible.
when you have some particles, 1000 for example and need a lot of per point noise the 3d texture generation times are very very hight, too much high, more than afterburn.
If 3d texture generation would be faster then 3d textures would be a real alternative to many effects rather than only clouds.

…and just to clarify, nothing really good is “easy”. If it was as simple as all that we'd all be out of work. Monkeys can be trained to push buttons. People can be trained to evaluate a shot, collect real world references, design and debug the pipeline, and implement it with lots of feedback(sometimes conflicting and incorrect) from others. That's not to say a plugin here or there might be useful, but don't believe everything you read.

Cheers,

J.C.

JColdrick
…and just to clarify, nothing really good is “easy”. If it was as simple as all that we'd all be out of work. Monkeys can be trained to push buttons. People can be trained to evaluate a shot, collect real world references, design and debug the pipeline, and implement it with lots of feedback(sometimes conflicting and incorrect) from others. That's not to say a plugin here or there might be useful, but don't believe everything you read.

Cheers,

J.C.

Yes Coldrik I am agree with you.
When I am talking about that 3D Textures are almost unavailable to make effects like afterburn is not because you need more or less time to setup the effect, anyway you use 3d textures, or afterbern or Maya fluids you need a lot of time and dedication to get good results.
For me the only problem with 3d textures are that to get pyro effects like explosions with this technique is the amount of time you need to create the texture. Is very much time compared with afterburn, if only the 3d texture generation time could be compared to afterburn render times, then 3d textures would be the best option.

Hello, just look this site, with their plug-ins like Hydrous Tools you can create nice effects with Houdini.

http://www.martian-labs.com/martiantoolz/ [martian-labs.com]

Hello Appersoft,

very nice fire indeed.. Maybe it still can be distinguished from real fire, but it is very close to it, and it looks very well..

Thank you, and have a nice day,
Rene.

hi
I think there was same question at renderman forums

As I said there I think creating shader like this is amzing task and way to learn but after I saw NUKE DVDs from gnomon I would never go and render this in 3d but do it in compositing.
If you check those dvds you will see its a matter of minutes in nuke or shake
and it looks great
In fact the guy who is doing tutorials was working on Stealth where there was alot of afterburn going on so he probably knows what hes doing
regards
z

I'm a beginner.Thank you everybody for your technics