I've been watching some videos about Blender here and there over the past few years and I'm using C4D myself. Almost every damn time I think to myself "that's a clever way of doing that". Blender seems to have gotten very intuitive and it seems like a really nice 3D application now. I'm reeeeeally considering switching my workflow to Blender, Mixer and Unreal Engine.
I do not understand a single thing about Blender but for some reason it was super interesting watching you create a 'Mandelbulb'. And I still dont know what that is. great video!
Joke's on you, most children don't care about art class, either (or even less than maths). If you want to convince teenagers, you need to explain to them how this gets them laid or high or helps them hack some online game so they get free items.
I made some fractals a few years ago but never thought about turning their volume into geometry! Then recentley followed 8 hours tutorial making marching cubes in blender, I am glad that marching cubes are not needed now!
One thing that you can do to greatly improve the mesh quality is replace the less than before the density with a clamp((val*-1)+2, 0, 1). The less than creates a binary density with no smooth transition at all. The meshing of the volume greatly relies on there being a gradient to be able to smoothly interpolate between voxels. Less than creates those ugly voxel lines where the math solution preserves the gradient.
@@andreapiuma5920 It should not change much at all, here is a video showing the difference (most visible in smooth areas). I'm gonna share the link in a separate message in case youtube thinks it's spam because there is a link.
@@lapissea1190 thanks! i'm just incredibly stupid and interpreted the equation as a power of instead of a multiply, now it works perfectly thank you so much
Thanks for this video! I'm 56 and my dad brought home a TRS-80 Color Computer when I was 14 in 1980 that ran on 16KB of Microsoft BASIC and because of the limited RAM when you were creating animated graphics you had to decide if you wanted more colors and fewer pages, or more pages and fewer colors. The more pages you had the smoother the transitions you had and the higher the resolution you could get. Everything was like graph paper where if you wanted to draw a circle, square or line you would put in the column and row and then go from there. Circles and ellipses all started at the center and you would put in the radius, the height and width, put in the sin and cos, and you could do full circles or make partial circles, like if you were making a car fender you'd only want the top half of the circle, so you'd add commands to do from 270 - 90. Adding in subroutines to add 8-bit sound or a joystick command was a huge undertaking so when I see something like this I envy how easy kids have it today!
Amazing tutorial!!! Can't believe this is free. Thank you!! The one and only thing that tripped me up was at around 2:51, you cut away then cut back with that new node called "dot product" without explaining what you searched to get it and I spent like 10 mins trying to figure out why it wasn't searchable. This node is called "Add math" for anyone else who gets confused by this!!
I legit jumped off my feet when I saw the video on my feed, i've been trying to do smth like this efficiently (best attempt was a messy osl script lol) for ages. As always, your videos are a godsend
This is the best Mandelbulb tutorial I've seen in a long time. I have a couple questions though: 1. What about animating the phase of the Mandelbulb? This is something I see missing from most Mandelbulb tutorials. Not to be confused with changing the value of the Exponent, which would animate the complexity over time. The complexity stays the same, but there is this constant blooming effect where new geometry flows out of the top and along the object and shrinks back into the bottom, a la Annihilation (or the simpler infinite flower bloom geometry node tutorials). I've tried to figure out where and how to add the phase value in shader-based Mandelbulbs, but it doesn't work the way I think it would. 2. Does the starting mesh matter or is it ignored after adding the Volume Cube and the Volume to Mesh nodes? I ask, because I'm wondering if starting with a metaball might result in a smoother looking Mandelbulb.
I have no idea how I got here, but your first question nerd sniped me, so I ended up spending some time improving someone's raymarching fractal renderer in Python to run fast enough that I could test some different approaches. Just progressively adding values to this video's "wo" variable seems to work as you render each subsequent frame. For some extra rotation you can also add an increasing offset to the "wi" variable. I made a very short video here (ru-vid.comf8ek83Z9SFo?feature=share) with a link to the code in the description if you're interested 🙂
Sorry to revive this, but did you managed to animate it? I'm looking to do exactly that like in Annihilation, but I'm new to geonodes and can't figure it out on my own yet
Cool stuff, As a programmer who loves tinkering with math I’d say: this is all just math, very cool actually you can “code” math in Blender, Hope one day I will take it seriously and learn the software, And the fact that you can actually “code” in the software just makes it more cool and appealing to me. Thanks.
I've been looking for how to do this in 3DS Max, but this makes me want to learn Blender even more now. Thanks for the great tutorial and you've gained a new Sub!!
I gave up 3ds max years ago. I wouldnt go back. The community of blender helps so much because everyone is using it. 3ds max is limited when looking at stuff online.
try this float wo = acos(w.y/wr) + angleParameter., it will animate nicely also wr can be used for simple orbitTrap coloring using a gradient palette. float orbitTrap = 1000.0; then include in iteration loop orbitTrap = min(wr, orbitTrap);; final orbitTrap value assigns point color from palette.
Any tips for getting a seamless loop? I just added a Value as angleParameter, but is there an actual angle node I should be using so like 0 = 360? or does it not work like that?
@@kylekobetitsch988 360 * 0.01745329252 (ie pi/180) should get you all the way back However you got to know interpolation method being used. I do not know enough about blender to advise you how. But you want the frames to be generated between keyframes in a linear manner, ie no cubic types like catmul-rom.. Cubic interpolations are generally used for smooth camera movements
@@carbunclegrim3419 Yep, have interp set to linear. I managed to create an empty, rotate it on Z-axis, and then use Object Info and Separate XYZ to pull that Z axis rotation to feed into angleParam. 0-360 didn't look seamless, but 0-152 looks pretty damn good? Maybe it just looks good since my resolution is down and won't line up when I bump it, I'm not sure. I don't understand the math enough yet to make sense of it, but I'll keep playing with it
again with those awesome intro Also, I can't believe that there a way to make mandelbulb with geonodes, I always wanted to make them but I couldn't do it, yet here it is, blender really has come a long way, and what is even crazier that blender will just keeps getting good and all of that for free.
You're awesome! I initially ended up with something resembling a sexy sea urchin. The mistake was using a sine instead of a cosine... my erroneous equation was w.z = wr * sin(wo) * sin (wi) instead of w.z = wr * sin (wo) * cos (wi)!
The main picture here of the Mandelbulb is very familiar and well known in the science community. It was Daniel White together with Paul Nylander discovered the 3d version of the Mandelbrot several years back and which Daniel named the Mandelbulb . Thanks to their work, that has resulted in a never ending progression of amazing images and applications that people are able to create..Well done guys.
I was 3ds Max hobbyist, looking blender now makes me feel 3ds Max still stuck in ancient times of 3D history. It's simply a same software with new version numbers. Two thumbs up for blender.
haha I was a 3ds Max hobbyist as well back in the day when Cinema4D was a thing, and Bryce 4D :D havent messed with that stuff in a loonnggg time but watching these Blender tuts is definitely creating an itch Im gonna have to scratch :P
I've been using Max for 5 years and have been doing some stuff in Blender. They both have their uses. There's stuff I can do easy in max that I can't in Blender and vise versa. It's all about using the best software for the job.
I know almost nothing about blender (I just played around with it a couple of years ago), but I know a bit more about fractals. This video might push me to download blender again and start working with fractals in it! Thansk alot :)
Some times ago I created a mandelbrot one (not using volume). We really need a "for loop". For 4 iterations it is ok to duplicate the group but if you want more the for loop will come in handy.
Some kind of iteration could be achieved by duplicating the whole geometry nodes modifier carefully crafted, but again, it's a workaround (if I'm not wrong there's a Kammerbuild tutorial on fractal stuff using this approach, let me check)
F*ck, you are basically using Blender as some kind of mathlab... I would have been so happy if I could do stuff like this on my lab work 30 years ago on uni. This shows that Blender can be used for anything. Nice work and thanks!
THANK YOU!!! TNice tutorials is such an amazing tutorial. I just got soft soft today and was playing around on it but had no clue how to really use it.
I've been trying to do this in geo nodes for years (since geo nodes started) I never managed it... Til now! The volume shader that was floating around was very good, but didn't give a solid surface. The volume cube it makes this so much easier! P.S. You can pass through attributes such as W, to shaders using attributes, it's not that bad at all. Using distance from origin, along with AO, and W, in shaders can produce some very psychedelic results!
Jesus, Blender was already confusing to me several years ago, now it's insane. Not a graphics guy to begin with but I always have respect for folks that can do this sort of stuff well
TNice tutorials was a fantastic beginner's guide, straight to the point, very clear. As a long-ti teacher I can tell you are quite apt at teacNice tutorialng!
probably not going to get a response but i'm having some trouble with the model being covered by a cube? *edit* figured it out! make sure that the background variable on the volume cube node is set to 0!
Blender is awsome and easy to learn. I used blender to create 3D objects to do 3D print, and then I took those 3D objects to make 3D animations for fun.
Blender has gotten to the point where it has real potential to be an industry standard, but of course, that'll be an uphill battle. Industry Standards are known to be rather stubborn, especially because there will always be an "old guard."
Awesome! Thanks for uploading and organising your videos into chapters, would you be opposed to using a plugin that shows your key presses? I find it's good for following along when you are in a loud environment or for learning new shortcuts. Thanks again!
