Discussion » Fire and Water CGI

This is a read-only copy. The forum ran on iamcal.com from 2000 until its database was lost in 2016, and this topic was rebuilt from copies saved by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. Some replies may be missing, and its dates are approximate.
Posted by Grim..., around 1st December 2005:
 
Wow. Just... Wow.
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
Pffft. It's only physics innit.

;)
Posted by Brock, 2nd December 2005:
 
I'm not sure I agree with part of the funny shaped room one, but I think that there was a bit of roof that wasn't shown, so I forgive it.

They can carry on, now.
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
The opening ocean shot doesnt look quite right to me.
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
I just spoke to Alfie and he said he could draw fluid motion better than that pile of shit on a book of post-its.
Posted by WarHead, 2nd December 2005:
 
But to yer average punter, it looks pretty good. You have to remember that to some of us, Luxor Junior was leading edge stuff.
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
Sul's kidding. I think it's awesome. Although the render power needed is huge. You either need loads of computers to work on it, or one computer working for a very long time.
Posted by Brock, 2nd December 2005:
 
Looking at the all white room shot (about 30 seconds in) I thought that the way the water goes into what looks like a doorway and then curved back on itself looked a bit weird.

I'm still not completely convinced, it looks as if it isn't water - as if the liquid is more viscous and more like milk or something. The way it turns back on itself so smoothly without breaking up doesn't sit right with me. Having sat for many hours watching waves and the like breaking on various shape rocks (I have no friends, remember) I'm not convinced the flow would stay so laminar in that instance. But there is always the possibility that the "white horses" and splashing effect is added on top of that layer, being as it is such a base level animation on that one.

Anyone else think it looks odd?
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
The white one it does feel like milk or something.
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
The program (realflow) has a demo somewhere with two paint colours mixing. That's nice.
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
Is that man's cock on fire?
Posted by Brock, 2nd December 2005:
 
It's interesting that by far the worst bit of animation is the bloke. Mind you, I'm not sure I could walk normally if my cock was on fire...
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
I think the bloke was motion captured.
Posted by beargod_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
I like it, I think people need to start consentrating on animating humans and animals now, and maybe perfecting lighting then trying to get water to flow nicely though
Posted by Grim..., 2nd December 2005:
 
Bear in mind: They never said it was water, I did.
Posted by Saltation_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
i think people need to start concentrating on getting out more

awesome graphics tho. and yes that milky fluid was noticeably more viscous than water (and than the other water shots)-- i assumed it was a demonstration of their ability to tune the model. that would make it VERY profitable for ads (there's a whole industry dedicated to mocking up stills of various viscosities splashing -- any time you see an ad with a pic of something dropping into yoghurt or somesuch, that's actually a major effort with a variety of chemicals). and the "curve back" seemed to me to be a demo of bouncing off a wall but with the wall invisible so you could see better.

awesome awesome stuff. is it their own code or are they just devoting large chunks of their life to this?
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, 2nd December 2005:
 
i think that is a production company. I though the software was called RealFlow, but this might be another one. Haven't had a chance to look at the site properly.