I'll try to use simulation nodes to add physics to my car rig (if it goes forward at 100Kmh, when it stops, the inclination widget acts as supposed) But idk how the key frames and animations may interact with each other
I started using Blender in 2007. I was 13. I've witnessed the growth of this program, I saw features come and go. It took me forever to gain an okay understanding of Material Nodes, and now I have more nodes to comprehend, but this time, there's math involved. I might cry.
There's math involved in material nodes, too. You just gotta embrace it. Most of the math is very simple, and doing your modeling in a procedural way will save you time in the long run. You can iterate extremely quickly because it's non-destructive. That means better art faster.
This is the biggest change to Blender since geometry nodes itself. You gave us the ability to make our own tools, now you've given us the ability to make those tools interact with each other in real time.
One giant leap for blender and one small step for humanity. I think it is time to make this more user and artist friendly, since there are these wonderful bases created, the C4D model I think should be the goal if not better. Wonderful job Jacques!!
I don't think so. Although it should be the goal to make the tool as artist friendly as possible but that shouldn't let the devs dumb down the system's flexibility and feature set of what it can do in future. The vanilla C4D is easy to use and "artist friendly" but it's really limited and you'd hit the ceiling of what's possible very quickly and then you'd have to get bunch of plugins to do complex stuff and for the new Blender system that should never be the case. They should IMO focus on making the new node system as flexible and powerful as possible while keeping it as artist friendly as possible with built in presets and node groups etc. The goal should be closer to Houdini but if not better and easier, not C4D.
@@AdamBelis that's what I said about shipping with node groups and assets but Houdini doesn't hide any complexity either. The DOPs, POPs and those sim nodes, solver nodes etc. are just made with much lower level nodes grouped together and that's what I said. It makes it easier for new users to jump in and create complex effects but it also keeps the system flexible enough for advanced users to tinker and create more complex effects.
The delta time is independent of the frame rate. It is basically just a single value that is constantly increasing over time. So if you set an initial velocity - for instance a z value of -0.5 - and then you scale that value by the delta time, the value will grow exponentially each frame. If you now use that velocity to offset your object, you basically created gravity. 🙂
All the proprietary tools are retreating into particular specialities. Blender is the only one still covering the entire workflow (including compositing). It’s also the only one to seamlessly integrate 2D into 3D working.
@@anonymousd5582the same AAA industry that still uses ancient ass programming languages and other tools due to how hard and expensive it will be to retrain their staff and migrate to newer technologies? Not exactly an industry one should be looking to follow. Blender is extremely popular with indie studios, freelancers and basically anyone who isnt tied to decades of technical debt.
Talking about toys, has Maya acquired a decent Python interface yet? Only the last time I looked, it was a straight transliteration of their clunky MEL language.
Excellent. I could get everything but the colors working. Did you include some additional settings to get this to work? Mine shows grey scale even though the color ramp is set up as instructed.
select the viewer node, then go to Node properties and change the Value socket from float to Color, the node input socket should look yellow now and it should be working!
The future looks bright for Blender. I can imagine this aspect of Blender will create a field of specialization for people with a more technical inclination, possibly creating a new kind of job for tem to get into. Very cool!
Yeah, geometry nodes brought all the math nerds in. Simulations on top of that makes Blender a real contender against the likes of Houdini. We still need more nodes, it's not entirely feature-complete yet, but simulations are a big, big step towards a level of complexity that was very hard to do the old way.
9:08 Do I understand correctly? In the simulation itself, Velocity is stored as a "value per second". When we set the position we convert it to "value per frame". But when we add Gravity to the simulation, we add Velocity's "value per seconds" and Gravity's "value per frame". That is why the values of turbulence and gravity are so large.
how do I get - open that screen ? top menu far right I see nothing , that says geometry ! I JUST DOWNLOADED 3.6 ? Is this a plugin I failed to turn on ? pardon my ignorance but I am new to this ware .
Such a great video! Thanks Simon! Question: Why was the force of gravity scaled to delta time, but the turbulence force and the attractor forces were not?
The geometry node is very great, it makes blender more unique and attractive, I hope it has a better future, can add support for sound in the next version, such as adding geometry nodes of sound frequency, I can set more options about sound.
I was wondering if one day it would be possible to add sound to the simulation. For example: you created a scene of a basketball court, when the ball bounces on the ground it emits the sound of a ball bouncing on the ground. Your comment made me realize that this would be possible with geonodes, just as we added image nodes to load textures, we could load sounds as well. And it would have other nodes like Pitch Bend, Echo, Reverb (to simulate the echo of a court). So many possibilities with geonodes!
Excellent presentation! It took me hours to get through it since there's lots of information here. For others just starting to watch: I think 3.6 is still a little quirky with this tech since, for example, the colors (in the very last example) would intermittently work. It's just buggy, so I would do things like move the View node and it would work. Don't waste your time adding materials or using different render modes like I did. 🙂Still, it does work, if you take your time.
Let's make a comment thread of simulation nodes ideas! I'll start: We can have proper landscape erosion now! And even simulate the development of an ecosystem to get varied vegetation that responds to sun position, water, elevation, and so on.
As someone who has been using these features since the early alpha branches, I think this feature needs much better documentation and text-based, easy to find explanations (of the inner workings, not just the practical examples). The manual is shamefully general and vague. I don't think it's a good idea for the main/primary source of information about this feature to be available mainly across youtube videos. There are things about how this thing works (like the behaviour of switches in a simulation zone) that is just not readily available from Blender's official documentation, one has instead to spend a lot of time randomly searching on youtube hoping for someone to mention what you wanted to learn. For example, the manual says: "The simulation is tied to the animation system, with support for sub-steps." What are substeps? "The result of the simulation can only be accessed via the Simulation Output node. This also allows sub-frame interpolation for motion blur". Why? How? Where can I see a detailed explanation? The manual can be kept overly vague if that's the intention, but at least it should provide links to more detailed information. That lack is what makes the manual almost useless in a lot of occasions.
Thanks for all the information. Advance beginner here and as such there probably is a fundamental thing i don't understand about particles. How can we set the colors/material to render out and not just while watching via the viewer node. Like when I render it all the particles have no color/material? Besides that question, I got everything to work, but when I select the empty to move it, all the color disappears?
please please please look at how cartesian is using geo nodes and building his set-ups they are 1000x easier to follow through and understand the networks. I think this current workflow the devs are pushing is not in the right direction. this is unbelievably messy and hard to follow.
05:08 How come your viewport can play the animation smoothly? When I ran it, it gets slower and slower by frame, and when it reached near the 20th frame, Blender became unresponsive, and eventually crashed. PS: Found the reason. Your random value probability was 0.01, mine was set to 0.3 or something.
Thanks for the tutorial! In the base setup, why is the scaled gravity vector added to an unscaled velocity vector? Shouldn't both be scaled? (@9.40) Thanks EDIT: Never mind, i realise starting velocity is a constant, where gravity is not
Still a couple things missing, and it will help to have a bunch of pre-bundled node tree assets (like hair got recently). But yeah. Blender is coming for Houdini.
Waiting for a Transformer to take a verbal geometry or simulation prompt and build the Node tree/Python automatically. The manual analysis of node logic hurts my brain. Well presented, nonetheless.
perhaps I missed it in the videos, but I could not understand what value delta time has, until I found it in an old blog entry: delta time = 1/FPS just in case anyone else was wondering
Yes, that's pretty cool. Is there any possibility to spawn an amount of X points every Y frames/seconds and start/stop spawning points on a given frame?
I feel like noob, but how does one get that search menu with scale and add modes for math node etc. (I have binded the node search menu with space but that brings up only the math node) EDIT: I got that you can drag + ctrl to get what I meant, I think I can bind that menu to space etc.
I'm trying to have a go of simulation nodes on a laptop from 2020 and I'm getting considerable slow down compared to this video. Is it just down to my hardware (i7-10750 2.6GZ) or is there some setting I'm missing that I need to toggle to allow for multi-threading or GPU support?
I believe they are basically just waiting to see what other people come up with these basic building blocks, and sort of seeing where the interest is. Some of this stuff is also driven by what the Blender Open Movie Project needs, and what assets they develop in-house. Eventually they want to remove the old physics stuff, and replace it with node groups, so you can bet that those sims you mentioned will be created and included.
hey, when i add a simulation node to rotate my objet, it desapear. Do you have an idea about the cause of that problem? My mesh already have a bunch of nodes, but when i try it on a different one (like a basic cube with no other nodes than the simulation one) the problem doesn't occure
Incredibly informative videos! This channel has been a great aid to me throughout my Blender process, I don't know what I would've done without it! The videos have incredible detail, making sure to touch upon each and everyone of the tools necessary to complete general tasks. The fact that the videos are from Blender themselves makes it that much easier to trust them. Huge thanks to the Blender team!
Why does it not do any of the simulation if I try to make the geometry anything other than points? I can't add materials to points and when I make instances on points and pass those into the simulation it only spawns the geometry but nothing moves.
It's really a great feature but it's not artist friendly at all, Houdini is more user friendly because you can have pre-build block and no need of 10 years in math study to dev your particle system. Hope it'll be close in near future of the new hair system. It's great to have it, really great, but when I need to simulate something for a project, I not want to dev a simulation tool first ;) Have the possibility, like in Houdini to let it open is really great but here, it's not good for the productivity at all for the moment. Of course, I done it to learn :)
Node trees are just assets. You can grab them from wherever else you might grab an asset. Plenty of math nerds out there building solvers with this. They put the basics in so the community could get started. Eventually they will include the cream of the crop.
@@doekewartena5729 omg... thank you, wasted so much time with that. Did he mention this in the video? Im almost positive he didnt. Guess its for saving time.
nice videos, i love the concept of Simulation zones, i have tried to build my own particle system but the Noise texture cannot be Colourful, its black and white, can you pls help me out why that could be
How do we make the particles independent after their creation? Like we move the mesh and the particles aren't influenced by the mesh moving after they are emitted?
Geometry nodes is acting on the underlying data structures that make up your objects. 3D art is all just math under the hood. But you can always just grab somebody else's node group and plug it in as an asset and adjust a few values, just like what they did with hair.
I have set up nodes in Blender 3.6.0 LTS just like shown at 2:44 in this video: Group Input > Simulation Input > Simulation Output > Group Output. But the Cube disappears in Object Mode while all these nodes are active. It becomes visible only when Simulation Output is muted. Any idea why this can happen?
After restarting Blender Cube is visible even with all nodes active. But Random Value node Probability setting has no effect on the object. Viewport rendering issues?
