Houdini - Mountain River Simulation + Breakdown

[@ravnOne65]

Insane realistic. Tutorial please

[@nerophesis]

This is one of the exercise from the houdini CGMA course.

[@fraon7222]

@@nerophesis Can you link it ?

[@nerophesis]

@@fraon7222 www.cgmasteracademy.com/courses/16-intro-to-fx-using-houdini i did it 2 years ago and the houdini version was 17 i guess so nowadays there should be new nodes and ways to do it

[@user-sl309jd90]

@@nerophesis Tim did it completely different than how it was done in the course though. I took the course too.

[@marioCazares]

Extremely well done!

[@thealphakid935]

this is the masterpiece

[@jendabekCZ]

Almost realistic. With sound off little less realistic (as with every 3D animation). But still impressive! I can see one problem with all the water simulations - it always looks like the water just skids over a surface and dissappears then... without actually soaking into it, spreading into tiny streams / spray... the friction also seems to be mostly uniform.

[@fidofx2189]

Pretty damn awsome maybe I can do this when steven knippings new fluids lessons are coming out

[@alberto8730]

hermoso trabajo

[@ipanzerschrecku4732]

looks great, but if you're planning on adding that much white water on top of your water then having that much detail in the water is counterproductive. You have essentially 36 hours of simulation and then you're plastering that over with what's essentially just white noise over your mesh. From the comp magic render there's not much visible result left of those 2x18 hours render. You're having an insanely detailed mesh then covering that up with white noise.

[@Ramp10er]

I'm already impressed with houdini since it was the software used in creating big waves in the movie "Day After Tomorrow" What I like about it, is that it is also using Flip Fluids...

[@v1nigra3]

Yes that is what brought me to Houdini, that was magical vfx

[@austinhobbesandjustin]

Damn this shit is even more real than real life itself

[@MESHQuality]

Looks great!

[@karanbhardwaj8793]

this is amazing I want to know that how much space did it took in the disk

[@Helios.vfx.]

I did a similar thing last night and its about 296gb. at 0.0025 if I-m not mistaken

[@galegosantos3156]

Realistic!!!👋👋👋

[@everydayhero3610]

I feel like if you added a little bit of depth of field and slight camera movement, it would be perfect. But don't get me wrong, it still is absolutely insane.

[@pramod405]

Good job.... bro.

[@StephaneSOUBIRAN]

amazing !!

[@zhungbob9906]

realistic！！

[@mohamedelmghrby3624]

hello...icreat that but splash appear in render black can u told me the wrong..plz

[@fidofx2189]

And damn is that a video from an actual river it looks like

[@yusufsemihkocak1959]

how long does it take for baking any information?

[@099-z6z]

its awesome❤❤❤, but still something is not looking very convincing, is it the lighting???cause the right side rocks, its distracting

[@Roozy_Persepolis]

Do you have this in your patreon as a course?

[@pvanapalli]

nice work dude

[@courseknowledgestation8057]

pls make a tutorial for help

[@ประยุทธจงประเสริฐ]

Tutorial please.🙏

[@FuadKerimov]

So nice. What about your computer parameters?

[@edoroemmanuel1618]

Very realistic........

[@davidharned7]

Tim, any interest in creating some water scenes for me to use as backdrops in some other renders of mine? Would of course pay $$. Great stuff! Dave H.

[@SurajKumar-rn7el]

Natural vfx

[@soethuaung9912]

Tutorial please SIR SIR

[@anonyan9832]

how is it possible to work with so many details?? does houdini do everything for you (and how?) or it’s as hard as it looks like?

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

thanks! no obviously houdini doesn't do all of this by itself :p setting up a water sim isn't that hard though but getting the look right just takes time and experience. A highres sim will take many hours (think this one was like 10) so you either need to know exactly how all the settings are going in influence your sim, or just a lot of trial and error. apart from that it's just making it all look nice of course which is mainly a skill in lighting, shading and compositing.

[@anonyan9832]

thanks :) i saw such simulations for the first time today. great program, fantastic work!

[@moonstriker7350]

What were the specs of those two systems doing the fluidsim?

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

One was a 6900k (8c/16t) with 64gb of ram and one was a 3930k (6c/12t) with 28gb of ram. This is a few years old though, you could sim this a lot faster on a modern 16 core ryzen.

[@moonstriker7350]

@@TimvanHelsdingen Thx for the super quick reply! It could use all the cores? If these things can be 'parallelized', why aren't they written to run on GPUs? Would be a 3-5 fold increase in speed.

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

Simulations depend on the previous frame, so they cannot run completely parallel unless you're slicing them (like I did with this river, but it has ovehead generally) some parts of a sim can be run multi threaded though, generally if you have very heavy FLIP sims they will use all your cores quite extensively. You can also run simulations like fluids on your GPU but FLIP isn't the fastest with it, fire sims with pyro benefit from it a lot more. The problem generally is that a heavy sim uses up a lot of memory. A highres flip sim might use 50+ gb of ram, which cannot fit inside GPU memory. So for fluid sims i generally leave it turned off as the speed difference is quite minimal anyways. For fire sims it does actually make a big difference if you run it on openCL (which can run om GPU)so what you'd do there is run the solver on opencl on GPU for your low res sims, and then switch it to openCL CPU when you're going to do your high quality sim. There will be slight changes in how it looks though with cpu/gpu opencl. Hope this clears things up.

[@moonstriker7350]

@@TimvanHelsdingen Thanks, that was the idea I had about this. Since you seem to be deep into this I have 2 more questions if you don't mind: - I used to do some 3D as a graphic artist decades ago, than switched to photography, and now I'm trying ot re-learn 3D. I started with blender, but realized that might be a dead-end if you want actual work later. I started learning maya since it's the industry standard but honestly I'm a bit disappointed, doesn't feel modern or up to date, often very illogical and unreasonably convoluted. After checking out Houdini it seems to be miles ahead of other 3D packages. Which one should somebody focus on to be relevant? Or maybe a maya+houdini dou? - Is that 64 gigs of ram the threshold for a rig being good enough to experiment with houdini?

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

I'm actually working a video series addressing some of these things. First video hopefully out later this week so if you'd like to be notified consider subscribing. But let me get a bit more into depth: I wouldn't call blender a dead-end, actually blender has been gaining a lot of traction the past years. But it depends on what your goal is. You'd probably be wanting to do 3D for motion design if I look at your background right?... Within motion-design Cinema 4D is still the most used too by far, a lot more than maya. especially if we're talking about stylized type of motion-design. Cinema 4D is great for making quick 3d designs so for stuff with fast turnarounds, stuff using logo's, text etc.. it's very great tool. If you're looking into the more higher ends 3d motion-design that's where a lot of users are starting to use houdini as it's a lot more powerful. Learning blender + houdini might also be an interesting option as you would have 'the houdini card' (houdini artists are very employable, it's a much wanted skill) and you'd have blender as your general 3D tool. If it comes to simulation Houdini is definitely king! So if that's something you want to be doing, yes, dump maya, go for houdini. If you're going to do simulation and building a workstation yeah go for 64gb minimum and leave some room for a 128gb upgrade. If you currently have less, just learn on that. For learning you won't need overly powerful machines, just invest when you start making money with it or when you're starting to run into issues with your current machine. Besides, on a lowend system you'll learn how to optimise better :P btw if you're concidering learning houdini, check out Howdini101 on my channel, it's on a playlist. it's meant for complete beginners (even people without a lot of 3d experience)

[@FairMaidenGames]

162.5:1 like:dislike ratio... DAMN!!!!

[@npmmalayalamvfxtutorials1717]

Heavy

[@deviljerome]

Awesome! :) rendered with mantra? How about the render times?

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

Thanks! Yes rendered in mantra. Don't recall the exact rendertimes, but I think it was around 6/7min per frame for the water and 3/4min for the whitewater. Only used very few samples to keep rendertimes down but because the whitewater covers it anyways you don't see the noise. Also of course the background is just a still so noise was no issue there.

[@deviljerome]

woah, awesome work man, it looks real.

[@Jamhade]

If that's a render I don't know what real life is.

[@vornamenachname906]

Hey Tim, for ultimate realistm, just shake something a bit ok

[@marlind4462]

How The fuck did i came here

[@videoslidershowcase9416]

Could be more realistic

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

Feedback on how I could improve it would be more helpful then just saying it could be more realistic

[@Gamess0000]

maybe some fish :D

[@SkottVFX]

Hello! This job is very impressive! If I can offer some feedback is two things: The leaves on the side could use some sub surface scattering and a little bit of lighting. Also the rocks which are closer to the camera suffer from low quality and can be hugely improved if sculpted with zbrush and exported as normals. the left corner rock is probably the most problematic

[@nathancreates]

I think that blurring the rocks a bit in comp might help it.

[@уголвбрс]

Smthg is wrong with rocks shader, dunno what but something is wrong. Nice water btw

[@cholasimmons]

:O

[@andrew_anime]

전유진은 못해요

[@yujinjeon512]

A GA RI