See. Compare. Sim.

ComparaSim helps you gain artistic control over simulations by providing visual comparisons for a variety of parameters and scenarios. FX artists often waste hours on tweaking and guessing at what the right parameter values may be. ComparaSim solves this problem and saves you time.

In addition to visually comparing settings, you'll also find useful pop-ups that provide definitions and info for a variety of parameters. That makes ComparaSim a great educational resource as well.

To get started, choose a topic on the right or keyword search a parameter that you're interested in exploring. All simulation settings are tested at the defaults unless specified otherwise.

Pyro

Disturbance Magnitude

Disturbance Block Size

Disturbance Continuous

Sourcing Variation

Turbulence Magnitude

Turbulence Swirl Size

Viscosity Magnitude

Timescale

Substeps

Dissipation

Buoyancy

Temperature Diffusion

Temperature Cooling Rate

Collision Breakup

Substeps + Advection Reflection

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The turbulence tests use the turbulence microsolver within dops rather than the turbulence settings found directly on the sop-level pyro solver. The reason for this is because it's easier to control the Threshold Field / Influence threshold by setting the "Influence Threshold" to -1. This allows turbulence to affect all areas equally. The seed for the turbulence is also changed for each simulation.

---------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The timescale parameter is tested with 99,999 substeps and a CFL condition of 7. By doing this, it allows the pyro solver to use as many substeps as necessary to solve an accurate result. This is especially important to do when increasing the timescale because otherwise you will get inaccurate values and volume loss. In addition, during testing, there were some issues when using the turbulence microsolver within dops. Higher substeps led to higher values in the turbulence. So, if you decide to increase the timescale of a simulation, it's important to also double check that all your other microsolvers remain unaffected. If you are encountering issues with timescale, another method is to cache out additional frames at a regular speed and then use a retime node to speed things up when reading the cache from disk.

------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

Substeps are very important to pyro simulations because they provide extra detail, prevent mushroom shapes on the leading edges of plumes, prevent data loss when moving at high speeds, and assist in collision detection. In practice, I often rely on the CFL condition and set the max substeps to a very high value (like 99,999). For more info on the CFL condition, visit the keyword links below. In situations that feature really heavy pyro simulations, however, it may be better to explicitly state how many substeps you're looking for. Note that going from 1 to 2 substeps makes a dramatic difference. The change after 2 substeps becomes less impactful. However, once you reach about 5, the smaller impacts add up to a significant change in shape / detail.

------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

This test explores the visual impacts of Advection-Reflection. This is a great way to introduce extra details in your pyro simulations. It can help break up mushroom shapes on the leading edges of plumes. It also works better when you add substeps. It can also help preserve circular shapes in the plume.

--------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The sourcing variation demonstrates the effect of sourcing breakup. It ranges from very small breakup to the left to heavy breakup on the right. Both density and temperature have their volumes broken up in the same manner.

--------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

In this test, we explore the impact that sourcing has on a default smoke plume. These collisions are placed within the barrels at their openings. There are a few interesting things to note in these tests: For one, it's interesting to note that the first two collisions spread the narrow smoke source wider to encompass the tops of the barrels. As the smoke is advected, they also create interesting details right above the barrels. The second collision object features a more organic, spherical openings, and also slows down the smoke more than the checkered grates do. The last couple of collision objects are interesting because they break up the shape of the smoke plumes without affecting their width as much. If you compare the first barrel (with no collision) vs. the last barrel, you'll notice how much detail is being added into the leading edge of the plume. This greatly helps in breaking up mushroom shapes. Last but not least, when colliding against smaller objects, it's important to use more substeps in order to ensure collision detection. In these tests, the CFL condition is set to 6. This means that if a value travels more than 0.075m (6*0.0125), the solver will introduce more substeps. More substeps = more simulation time, however, in the case of using collisions to break up shapes, it tends to be well worth it for the quality that you get. For a more intense effect, you can also increase the collision velocity. This will push the smoke away from the collisions more aggressively to introduce more breakup of the shapes.

------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Timescale

Shredding Squash

Disturbance Magnitude

Viscosity

Turbulence Magnitude

Shredding Threshold

Shredding Stretch

Shredding Magnitude

Substeps

Dissipation

Buoyancy

Temperature Diffusion

Temperature Cooling Rate

Collision Breakup

Substeps + Advection Reflection

The timescale test is interesting because it shows that the fire looks unnatural when it gets too fast. In the real world, fire does move very quickly, but it’s important to also keep in mind that shredding intensity and motion blur play a large role in how “fast” something feels. If you just turn up the timescale, then you’ll most likely encounter unnatural looking fire. To fix this, you can balance the right amount of motion blur and shredding to accomplish more natural looking results.

------------
The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Shredding Squash describes the horizontal flattening velocity that is produced by the shredding microsolver. Note that if you’re using the SOP level solver, the shredding tab will not feature squashing. Instead, it’s recommended that you use the gas shredding node.

Adding more squash will cause the flame to flick closer towards the threshold value. So, as an example, if you were to have the threshold field value at 0.5, lots of squash will cause the flame to flick closer to that 0.5 value. Visually, this creates shorter and broader looking fire. In addition, you will get a slightly faster edge of the flame due to the upwards movement being disrupted more aggressively.

-----------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

For the disturbance test, we decided to remove shredding in order to isolate the moment that’s only created by disturbance. The first thing you’ll notice is that disturbance does not provide a flame like motion. Instead, it makes it everything a bit more wavy. In practice, you might want to consider disturbance if you’re aiming for something like a candle. In that situation, you could use disturbance at a high element size to subtly move the flame around. Another situation which may benefit some fire simulations is using smaller sized disturbance to add some detail. You never want disturbance to drive the main detail of the motion, however, it can be used for large, gradual movement or detailed, subtle movements.

----------------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Turbulence magnitude demonstrates how a large element sized turbulent noise can help in creating wind effects. For a more detailed, natural look, consider layering on 2-3 turbulent noises of different element sizes and subtly blending them together. Note that turbulence is something you should consider layering after viscosity and shredding have been established. It's not reccomended to use turbulence as the primary way of controling the motion of flame. Instead, it's best for wind or subtle detail passes.

----------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

The shredding threshold describes where the shredding squashes and stretches the flame. Think of it like this: Fire will go upwards due to temperature, but eventually its shape gets disrupted as it encounters colder air. The threshold determines where this shape is disrupted.

In our tests, we decided to use the “Flame” field instead of the default “Temperature” field when determining where the shredding takes place. The reason for doing this is because it’s easier to control. When setting the threshold field to “Flame” you can use a volume slice on your fire, visually determine where you want it to flick, and then set your threshold value there. In this way, it’s much easier to control where this break happens.

You’ll notice that the higher the threshold, the higher the flame goes without breaking its shape. Because the threshold is set to flame, sourcing more into the flame field will cause this value to change/vary.

--------------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

The shredding stretch magnitude describes the upwards and downwards motion caused by the shredding microsolver. There are a couple of important things to recognize in this test. Firstly, the stretch magnitude plays a large role in the perceived speed of the fire. Higher stretch magnitudes will make the fire feel like it’s moving faster. Secondly, the stretch occurs both in the positive and negative y direction. This is important to keep in mind for scenes that shouldn’t feature downwards moving flame.

In practice, higher shredding stretch magnitude values might work quite well in forest fire and/or larger scale environments that feature violent, epic flames. Another scenario might be a burning engine. Keep in mind that faster looking fire often equals smaller scaled fire. The larger your scene is, the slower your flames need to move. So, be sure to look at reference and watch out for this issue if you decide to increase the shredding stretch magnitude. Otherwise, it can be an effective way of making your fire feel more violent.

----------------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

The shredding magnitude test demonstrates how shredding impacts viscous flames. Usually, when creating fire, you want to start with turning up viscosity (as shown in the first test) and then add shredding to create the fire motion. It is not shown in this test, however, if you use too much shredding, then you will start to notice horizontal and vertical splinters as your fire breaks apart. Add the right amount of shredding with the right amount of viscosity before adding any other layers to your fire simulation.

------------------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

Substeps are very important to pyro simulations because they provide extra detail, prevent mushroom shapes on the leading edges of plumes, prevent data loss when moving at high speeds, and assist in collision detection. In practice, I often rely on the CFL condition and set the max substeps to a very high value (like 99,999). For more info on the CFL condition, visit the keyword links below. In situations that feature really heavy pyro simulations, however, it may be better to explicitly state how many substeps you're looking for. Note that going from 1 to 2 substeps makes a dramatic difference. The change after 2 substeps becomes less impactful. However, once you reach about 5, the smaller impacts add up to a significant change in shape / detail.

------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

This test explores the visual impacts of Advection-Reflection. This is a great way to introduce extra details in your pyro simulations. It can help break up mushroom shapes on the leading edges of plumes. It also works better when you add substeps. It can also help preserve circular shapes in the plume.

--------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

This test clearly shows the impact that viscosity can have on your fire simulations. It also shows that you need more shredding as you increase viscosity in order to preserve the fire motion properly. It’s also important to note that higher viscosity value shortens the length of the flame as you reach higher values. Without any viscosity, the fire has a lot of detail, but it doesn’t match fire reference very well. In reference, most fire will have smoothened locks of flame that are created by higher viscosity. In most situations, a viscosity value between 0 and 0.2 will be an ideal balance of smooth flame shapes, maintaining detail, and preventing too much volume loss at the same time.

-------------

The fire scenario places a higher emphasis on shredding parameters. Just about every fire simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. More specifically, it’s important to balance the right amount of viscosity and shredding. With more viscosity, you will need more shredding. In these tests, we’ve established a default shredding / viscosity amount, but keep in mind that this may be different in your scene. If you’re establishing a fire simulation from scratch, then the first thing you ought to balance is the right amount of viscosity and shredding.

Another important thing to consider with fire is that the perceived “speed” of the fire will also be reliant on the amount of shredding. More shredding = fire that feels like it’s moving faster.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

In this test, we explore the impact that sourcing has on a default smoke plume. These collisions are placed within the barrels at their openings. There are a few interesting things to note in these tests: For one, it's interesting to note that the first two collisions spread the narrow smoke source wider to encompass the tops of the barrels. As the smoke is advected, they also create interesting details right above the barrels. The second collision object features a more organic, spherical openings, and also slows down the smoke more than the checkered grates do. The last couple of collision objects are interesting because they break up the shape of the smoke plumes without affecting their width as much. If you compare the first barrel (with no collision) vs. the last barrel, you'll notice how much detail is being added into the leading edge of the plume. This greatly helps in breaking up mushroom shapes. Last but not least, when colliding against smaller objects, it's important to use more substeps in order to ensure collision detection. In these tests, the CFL condition is set to 6. This means that if a value travels more than 0.075m (6*0.0125), the solver will introduce more substeps. More substeps = more simulation time, however, in the case of using collisions to break up shapes, it tends to be well worth it for the quality that you get. For a more intense effect, you can also increase the collision velocity. This will push the smoke away from the collisions more aggressively to introduce more breakup of the shapes.

------------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

RBD

Angular Vel Drag

Velocity Drag

Bounce

Friction

Timescale

Half Life

Glue Strength

# of Glue Constraints

Glue Strength Variation

For the angular velocity drag, the vase is shot upwards in the air using angular velocity (attribute is called "w"). The higher the drag, the faster a spinning object will stop spinning. Note that this does not affect linear velocity. In other words, it does not affect how fast the vase is traveling in general. It just affects how much pieces will spin over time. This angular velocity drag is created by using a pop drag spin node within dops.

Small objects provide a good look at how these parameters behave at a smaller scale. Some parameters are scale dependant (meaning that their values will change depending on how large an object is) and that's why it's good to see what they look like on a smaller object like this vase. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Velocity drag affects the velocity attribute (v) but has no impact on how fast something spins. There are a couple important things to notice here: Firstly, velocity drag makes a huge impact on how quickly something moves across the scene. Air features very little drag, whereas water might cause something to quickly drag, so it’s very important to consider which medium your objects are moving through. Secondly, it’s important to recognize the impact velocity drag has on pieces as they shatter, bounce, and settle on the ground. Too little drag will cause everything to be very jumpy. Too much drag will cause your pieces to be too sluggish.

-------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Bounce plays a major role in how objects feel when they impact something and settle. If you’re looking to exaggerate an impact, consider a value of 1 or greater. If you decide to do this, you might also want to consider reducing the bounce to prevent pieces from jumping as they’re trying to settle. Less bounce is usually nicer for pieces when they’re trying to settle on the ground. However, less bounce can also make an impact feel less explosive.

------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Timescale is one of our favorite tests. When simulating smaller objects, it’s really important to get the timescale correct in order for the object to feel like it is a certain size. By default, Houdini’s RBD solver tends to make most objects feel a bit slower than they should be. For this scene, we found that 1.5 seemed to provide the most natural looking speed. Consider using 2 for a more stylized, chaotic look. Consider using 0.5 if you’re trying to make something feel more cinematic / epic.

--------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

The half life test deserves a bit of an explanation here... As you can see, half life does not make any difference in these tests. The reason for this is because half life requires an object to be hit multiple times in order to have anything happen. In order for half life to be noticeable, you need to weaken the glue constraints over time by hitting them multiple times in a row. To see this effect, visit the wooden cabin half life test instead.

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

The glue test is fairly straightforward. The more intense the glue strength is, the less the vase will shatter.

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

In this test, we try to determine whether or not more constraints will = stronger glue bonds or a change in how the vase is destroyed. In general, what we found is that glue strength has a much larger effect on how strongly an object holds together. At a certain point, adding more glue constraints to each piece will not have much of an impact. So, when setting the number of connections for each packed point, it is often suggested to add as many as you need to keep the object held together. Adding too many connections is unnecessary.

-------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Glue strength variance will generally make your objects more resilient to breaking. However, notice on the third, fourth, and fifth tests that the impact area features more detailed borders. By increasing the glue strength variance, it may allow some interesting, organic shaped edges to occur due to some connections being stronger than others. In practice, it’s nice to have a bit of glue strength variance, but make sure that you’re not losing control over the desired glue strength along the way.

-----------------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

For the friction test, we use a couple of inclined ramps to show how pieces will slide across something which has friction. Friction plays a major role in how pieces settle on the ground after impact. Also notice how pieces will eventually stick to the angled ramp if the friction value is high enough. This may be a desired look, or it may be undesired - depending on your situation. However, it will be important to pay attention to when adjusting your own settings.

----------------------

The small RBD scenario is ideal for exploring a wide variety of RBD settings within a small scene. In general, this allows us to clearly see the impact of many things without the chaos / confusion that more complex scenes typically have.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

For more info on particular terms and what they mean, click the keyword links below:

Anvil Mass

Substeps

Bounce

Glue Strength

Glue Variance

Retime Speed

Half Life

Propigation Rate

The anvil mass demonstrates the way in which mass affects the overall simulation. For the anvil, a higher mass would obviously make the most sense. However, it’s good to notice on the smaller massed anvils how long it takes the anvil to tear through the building. Sometimes having the impact last longer makes it feel more impactful. So, artistically, even though the anvil is very heavy, you may opt for less mass for a more long lasting, cinematic feeling impact.

-------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

There are many interesting things to notice in this test. Firstly, more substeps does not always = a better, more stable simulation. When we increased the substeps to 5, the side of the house exploded / glitched out in odd ways. The same sort of instability can be seen when setting the substeps to 4. Additionally, adding more substeps caused the anvil to do more damage to the buildings. At a substep value of 1, there was practically no damage. However, at a value of 2 and 3, the anvil behaved as you might expect.

The summary for this test is to keep your substeps between 2-3 for most RBD simulations. To little and too many caused issues of their own.

--------------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

In the bounce test, pay attention to a couple of things: 1. Notice the impact locations and how much the pieces flew in the air during initial impact. 2. Notice how the pieces settled on the ground. Low bounce looks great when pieces settle on the ground without bouncing. However, the impact zone is less exciting. High bounce created an interesting impact zone, but caused the ground pieces to jump up in the air. When those ground pieces jump up in the air, it disrupts the perceived scale of the scene and makes the cabin feel smaller. Having the pieces not bounce on the ground makes the cabin feel larger.

In your own scene, try to capture the best of both worlds. During impact, allow those pieces to fly upwards and create more excitement. When the pieces land on the ground, cause the bounce to = 0 so that it maintains a heavier, large feeling.

-----------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

The glue strength variance test is similar to what you find in the vase test. The more variance, the stiffer the glue constraints will be in general. Unfortunately, the user documentation does not mention how this number is mathematically applied to the glue strength value. Our guess is that a value of 2 means that a random number up to 2 will be multiplied against the strength value. This could also be a + or - value, however the default range is 1-5, so our guess is that it’s multiplicative.

Looking at the vex code for this variance calculation, we can see this:

if (value >=0)
value *= fit01(rand(primnum), max(0, 1-variance), 1+variance);

So our best guess is that this value is multiplicative

----------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

As always, the retime speed is a very important thing to set correctly. If the speed is too fast, the scene will feel too small in scale. If the speed is too slow, then it will eventually feel stylized and cinematic. Note that this test is not doing a timescale adjustment within the solver. Instead, it is using a retime node on the cached points to either speed up or slow down the simulation. It’s better to use a retime node rather than rely on the timescale in order to prevent unpredictable behavior when solving.

-----------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

When an object hits glue constraints and does not cause it to break, the constraints will store up an impulse force. This essentially weakens the glue constraint. Over time, this impulse force will decrease, and this causes the constraints to regain their strength. The half life determines how quickly the constraints get stronger over time. A value of 0 means that the glue constraints regain their strength immediately. Then, as the value goes up, the glue constraints regain their strength more slowly.

If you have an object with glue constraints that is being hit multiple times in a row, use the half life in order to control when the glue constraints break.

--------------------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

Higher propagation rates will cause the impact to spread more widely among neighboring areas. In general, if you would like to create a more localized impact zone, then set this to a smaller value between 1-5. If you want the impact to spread to neighboring constraints, consider the higher values. At a value of 50, it can become difficult to control how far the impact zone travels.

Also notice how the propagation rate affects the general amount of destruction. The lower values almost look like they feature a higher glue constraint value. However, that is not the case. This means that you need to be careful when adjusting the propagation rate because it will require a re-balancing of the glue strength values.

Additionally, some artists will opt for manually adjusting the glue constraint values to control impact zones rather than using the propagation rate for a more localized impact. This is entirely up to you, but know that some prefer doing this rather than adjusting the propagation rate due to balancing issues that occur when getting the propagation rate and glue strength balanced with each other.

-------------------------------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

The glue strength test is pretty straightforward. The more glue strength, the more things hold together. For more control, you can establish a lower glue strength value in areas that you would like to break and a higher glue strength in areas that you do not want breaking.

---------------

The wooden building scenario shares many of the same tests that were done on the vase, but applies it to a much larger, complex scene. The stone foundation is a static object, and the walls / roof tiles are all held together by glue constraints. More specifically, each individual tile is fractured + held together by glue constraints. Then, each tile connects to all the other surrounding tiles and walls. Occasionally, you may notice some errors where floating sections exist. This is most likely due to the way in which we established these glue constraints.

The more important thing to focus on is how these tests look at this medium scale.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values will vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, your constraints may play a large role in how things break apart.

Vellum

Pressure

Grains

Substeps

Dampening Ratio

Rest Edge Scale

Stretch Stiffness

Retime Speed

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Substeps

Dampening Ratio

Rest Edge Scale

Retime Speed

Stretch Stiffness

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

FLIP

Viscosity - Low

Viscosity - High

CFL Condition

Substeps

Friction

Bounce

Tangent Scale

Normal Scale

Slip Scale

Surface Tension - Blur

Surface Tension - Low

Surface Tension - High

Droplet Max Particle Density

Droplet Min Particle Density

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The turbulence tests use the turbulence microsolver within dops rather than the turbulence settings found directly on the sop-level pyro solver. The reason for this is because it's easier to control the Threshold Field / Influence threshold by setting the "Influence Threshold" to -1. This allows turbulence to affect all areas equally. The seed for the turbulence is also changed for each simulation.

---------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The viscous fluids / small emitter scenario places a higher emphasis on small scale fluid simulations and how thicker fluids stick onto other objects. We've shaded the fluid white in this case to make it easier to view the small details that are present in the geometry.

When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, many parameters will affect each other. As an example, you may need to have a higher slip scale if your fluid is more viscious.

For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The sourcing variation demonstrates the effect of sourcing breakup. It ranges from very small breakup to the left to heavy breakup on the right. Both density and temperature have their volumes broken up in the same manner.

--------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The viscous fluids / small emitter scenario places a higher emphasis on small scale fluid simulations and how thicker fluids stick onto other objects. We've shaded the fluid white in this case to make it easier to view the small details that are present in the geometry.

When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, many parameters will affect each other. As an example, you may need to have a higher slip scale if your fluid is more viscious.

For more info, click the keyword links below:

Particles Per Voxel

Particle Radius Scale

Force Scale

Divergence

Surface Oversampling

Surface Tension

Velocity Smoothening

Collision Velocity

Particle Separation (Resolution)

Particle Separation (Solver Setting)

CFL Condition

Grid Scale

Source Variation

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The turbulence tests use the turbulence microsolver within dops rather than the turbulence settings found directly on the sop-level pyro solver. The reason for this is because it's easier to control the Threshold Field / Influence threshold by setting the "Influence Threshold" to -1. This allows turbulence to affect all areas equally. The seed for the turbulence is also changed for each simulation.

---------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The viscous fluids / small emitter scenario places a higher emphasis on small scale fluid simulations and how thicker fluids stick onto other objects. We've shaded the fluid white in this case to make it easier to view the small details that are present in the geometry.

When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, many parameters will affect each other. As an example, you may need to have a higher slip scale if your fluid is more viscious.

For more info, click the keyword links below:

Extra Notes:

The sourcing variation demonstrates the effect of sourcing breakup. It ranges from very small breakup to the left to heavy breakup on the right. Both density and temperature have their volumes broken up in the same manner.

--------------
The smoke scenario places a higher emphasis on disturbance parameters. Just about every smoke simulation requires it in order to achieve a detailed look. There are exceptions to this, (if your simulation is heavy in viscosity, for example), but most smoke simulations place a greater emphasis on disturbance.

The goal for each simulation is to isolate the visual impact of each parameter. When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale.

Smoke is particularly good at illustrating the impact of substeps and advection reflection as well, so a greater emphasis has been made on testing those parameters. For more info, click the keyword links below:

The viscous fluids / small emitter scenario places a higher emphasis on small scale fluid simulations and how thicker fluids stick onto other objects. We've shaded the fluid white in this case to make it easier to view the small details that are present in the geometry.

When setting up your own scene, the values may vary - especially if you're simulating at a smaller or larger scale. Also, many parameters will affect each other. As an example, you may need to have a higher slip scale if your fluid is more viscious.

For more info, click the keyword links below:

This Resource Is Currently Under Construction

It will take some time to complete each topic. However, in the meantime, feel free to browse the entries that are already complete. If you encounter any bugs or issues, please let us know at support@cgforge.com. Thank you!

About CG Forge:

CG Forge is an online educational platform that helps professionals and aspiring individuals succeed in their career development and educational goals.

Featured links

Find us Across the Web

Aug 28th, 2024 Changelog

General Changes:

• New, simplified website design is now live!
    ◦ All new particle banner is featured on the home and after login pages
    ◦ The after-login page now features courses that are sorted by ones that you have recently watched. This makes it easier to continue watching whatever you’ve been working on without scrolling through all the courses to find what you’re looking for.
    ◦ There is also a new “resources” section that can be found beneath the “Browse Courses” on the after-login page. This makes it easier to bring up the Node Bible, the “Tips + Tricks,” or Weekly wrangle in a new tab
    ◦ “CG Forge Academy” has been replaced with a “Mentorship Calls” at the top menu (see below for more details)
    ◦ The resources dropdown now features “Tips + Tricks” (see below for details)
    ◦ Certification requirements have been slightly re-written to be easier to understand
    ◦ Subscriptions have been re-designed from the ground up (see below for details)

Subscription Changes:

• Subscriptions have changed to include a "Basic Subscription" and a "Premium Subscription" option. The Basic Subscription renews monthly, and the “Premium Subscription” renews every 4 months. Yearly subscriptions have been removed.
    ◦ These changes only affect new subscribers. Existing subscribers will not see anything change with their auto-renewal amount.
    ◦ 10% off a Redshift yearly subscription is now included with the Premium Subscription. (If you are currently a 4 or 12 month subscriber, then just email support@cgforge.com for this)
    ◦ A new “Study Plan” call has been added to the Premium Subscription. (If you are currently a 4 or 12 month subscriber, then just email support@cgforge.com for this)
    ◦ A Houdini education license is now available for “Premium” subscribers. (If you are currently a 4 or 12 month subscriber, then just email support@cgforge.com for this)
    ◦ For more information, visit the subscriptions page.

• CG Forge Academy has been redesigned to be easier to use.
    ◦ 45 minute calls have been removed. Existing coupons are still valid and can be used towards 90 minute sessions for the amount listed on each coupon.
    ◦ 8 week mentorships have been removed - Instead, you can book as many 90 minute calls as you’d like.
    ◦ Free onboarding calls have been removed - Instead, premium subscribers now receive a complimentary “Study Plan Call” that establishes a personalized curriculum moving forward.
    ◦ The “CG Forge Academy” top menu is now replaced with “Mentorship Calls” and only allows for booking 90 minute calls.

All new “Tips and Tricks” resource page:

• “Tips and Tricks” is now a resource page that holds all quick tips, Houdini update videos, and other miscellaneous videos in one place. If you’re looking for “Quicktips Season One and Two” or "Houdini 19 Updates" they have now migrated over to the “Tips and Tricks” resource section.

Discord changes:

• The CG Forge Discord channel will now be divided into two categories: “Basic Members” and “Premium Members.” The premium member channel will be invite-only to premium subscribers or those who are currently enrolled in a 4 or 12 month subscription. If you eligible to join the premium discord channel, email support@cgforge.com for an invitation.
    ◦ Basic Discord members will no longer receive support for projects that are outside the topic of CG Forge courses.
    ◦ Premium Discord members will receive support for projects outside of CG Forge content
    ◦ Premium members will receive discounts on mentorship calls, and basic members will not.
    ◦ Premium members will have their questions / posts answered before basic members
    ◦ Early access to courses will now be exclusively provided to premium members via the discord channel.

If you have any further questions about these changes, feel free to email support@cgforge.com

Cheers,

- Tyler

ComparaSim

Visually Compare Simulation Settings

Pyro

Smoke Scenarios

Fire Scenarios

RBD

Small Objects

Buildings

Vellum

Softbody Scenarios

Normal heading 3

Normal heading 3

FLIP

Viscous Fluids / Small Splashes

Wave Tank

This Resource Is Currently Under Construction

#Dop Attributes | #Constraints | #Global Attributes | #Instancing

About CG Forge:

Featured links

Find us Across the Web

ComparaSim

Visually Compare Simulation Settings

Pyro

Smoke Scenarios

Fire Scenarios

RBD

Small Objects

Buildings

Vellum

Softbody Scenarios

Normal heading 3

Normal heading 3

FLIP

Viscous Fluids / Small Splashes

Wave Tank

This Resource Is Currently Under Construction

#Dop Attributes | #Constraints | #Global Attributes | #Instancing

About CG Forge:

Featured links

Find us Across the Web

About Mentorship Calls

Study Plan Call

Premium Member Discord

Houdini Education License

Unlock Resources

Redshift Discount

Aug 28th, 2024 Changelog

1:1 Support and Feedback

Unlock ALL Courses

Disturbance