FORUMS: list search recent posts

Particle Illusion 3d imagery of particles

COW Forums : Particle Illusion

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
randal radabaugh
Particle Illusion 3d imagery of particles
on May 15, 2010 at 4:06:21 am


(noob) I have been searching for something on PI3.
I keep finding stuff about 3d using PI.

But nothing on how to do it.

I am trying to take an existing emitter set and pan into it in vegas.
this doesnt work the way I want it to.I can change track motion to a degree.
Is it possible to pan/rotate or track motion the emitters in Particle illusion? that the emitters seem to be 3d?

Going into a vortex
EX: A vortex is spinning,with a top and bottom.
Can I rotate the stage or emitters to view it from top or bottom? inside of particle illusion?
Without changing all the emitters?

Return to posts index

Alan Lorence
Re: Particle Illusion 3d imagery of particles
on May 15, 2010 at 8:27:40 pm

particleIllusion 3.0 is not 3D, so I don't think what you're trying to do is possible.


Return to posts index

randal radabaugh
Re: Particle Illusion 3d imagery of particles
on May 16, 2010 at 9:05:25 am

that is what I thought- so all the bs I been reading is BS LOL

Thanks for your response.

Return to posts index

Philip Knight
Re: Particle Illusion 3d imagery of particles
on May 28, 2010 at 5:19:25 am

As Alan said, PI is 2D, so no matter what you create in PI, you may be able to manipulate it in space in Vegas (I have v.8) but much like a postcard in space: one can't spin around a particle in 3D space, just spin around its 2D image in 3D space using Track Motion, etc.

That said, with some patience and ingenuity, one can make PI's particles give the illusion of 3D in relation to objects, people, scenes. That's where application of perspective, detail, composition and so on come in. Art is a form of making-illusion-real.

And unlike very expensive 3D programs that have the ability to pull off decent effects, PI is far more affordable overall -- and just as important to the solo artist: far less computer/render intensive. Most 3D work of any decent length requires a render farm set up -- not cheap. I'm slowly venturing into 3D myself (Vue, DAZ, etc.).

It all comes down to creative application. Analogy (from someone who went to design/art college long ago:

--- A charcoal pencil in the hand of one person in front of beautiful model will result in little more than a stick figure. In the hand of someone who understands and knows how to apply light, shadow, nuance and so on, a beautiful and realistic rendition of the model will ensue.

In short, one have have to compromise, get some basics of art down and get creative when one doesn't have the budget or computing firepower of George Lucas or Disney.

And it's like sensuality too: It's not size that matters but what one does with who one is and what one has that counts most :)

Example: I doubt that the wormholes in the Stargate TV series and their spin-offs and those of other shows are actually 3D generated. Yet they look 3D. That's all that matters.

Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2018 All Rights Reserved