Comments on: Softbody Clothes That Work

By: Formal Dresses

Formal Dresses — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:07:31 +0000

Really these dresses are lovely and beautiful.
I think these dresses are very hot. Thanks a lot
:lol:

By: ATK

ATK — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:45:52 +0000

Wow, that yellow speckled dress looks amazing! It's most real!

Very good!

By: epat

epat — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:38:33 +0000

Ron Fedkiw's stuff and papers are - and will probably continue to be - no less than amazing… I just wish we had some of these things intergrated in blender - I was - once - thinking of coding some fire simulation into blender based on one of his papers - that was before I saw the blender source code (gulp) - that, coupled with the fact that to program anything based on his papers you are automatically directed and referenced back to almost all his other papers on the subject (as well as other peoples) for most of the important stuff to work correctly sort of put me off - maybe when I've finished college lol and I get some more time to work on the subject I'll have another look at it - that's if somebody else hasn't coded it already by then and if I can be bothered to get better at C programming lol!! Besides; there are other, more wanted, features that are still lacking in blender - such as global illumination and decent volumetric rendering that would make such simulations pretty useless anyway seeing as they'd render awfully lol - I got a book on GI recently but I haven't had enough time to read any of it unfortunately - never mind; for now, I'll just leave it up to the blender developers!! They do a very good job on their own lol!!

Getting back to the subject of the post - it's cool that somebody has finally gotten the softbody parameters to work well for clothes - but it leaves me wondering still - what happened about the cloth simulation that was being worked on a while back by zaz and genscher? have they completely stopped with it or are they intending to continue at a later date? - by the time they have finished, softbody code will be up to par with it anyway which will make it redundant (if it's not already) - or so it seems. . . oh well!! :P
-epat. :)

By: Dasaan

Dasaan — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:34:09 +0000

@MonkeysTail: If only! I'd be happy to chip in some money to pay him to add stuff to blender, I wonder how much it'd cost to get him to add some cool new physics stuff…..

By: hevonen

hevonen — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:58:19 +0000

@Eelko

Associate professors of Stanford University make their own programs. At least when they have Ph.D. in Applied Mathematics.

And Fedkiw is busy with ILM.

By: greboide

greboide — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:25:49 +0000

thanks for this i never tried this stuff and feel that i have a deep understanding on it now, really good stuff toloban, small tricks that does the job, cant wait to give this tuto a try.

By: Eelko Gielis

Eelko Gielis — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:25:38 +0000

@MonkeysTail: Great site, I just wonder how they did that, and which program('s) they use for the diverse (de)formations.

Interacting between fluids and ridgid body's is one of my points in the list, as well as smoke physics

By: MathiasPedersen

MathiasPedersen — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 08:25:00 +0000

@SoylentGreen: You're probably right. I'll change it to advanced, even though some of it isn't that advanced at all (like the modeling).

//Mathias

By: SoylentGreen

SoylentGreen — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 06:18:27 +0000

Errr, intermediate level tutorial? So I wonder what would be an advanced one …

What Toloban shows is:

-> You have to model you softbodys properly, so you have to have a good feeling for the "flow".

-> Than you have to rig them properly.

-> And than you have to weight paint them the right way.

Yes, this is the way to go, and Blender can do it all, but I wonder if we will get a system that works for a less experienced user also.

By: MonkeysTail

MonkeysTail — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 05:54:41 +0000

Hooray SoftBodies!

Now if only we could get this guy to give us some more physics. ;) http://graphics.stanford.edu/%7Efedkiw/