Instal, help, what the? Read the readme.txt that comes with the archive.
Supports max 9, 2008, 2009, 2010, 32/64bit. Again tested only briefly on each system and no large scale testing done so its possible that there are still some bugs lurking around.
Small warning, the field functions were changed so old scenes don’t look exactly the same when rendered with this new version. You have to change the Distance Function dropdown to correct. Squared = Power of 2, Cubic = Renderman = Power of 3, Wyvill = Wyvill.
Not sure what I’m doing wrong but I am getting absolutely nothing to render. I have tried new files and a couple I was testing 1.0 with. Radius from .05 to 500 and threshold through the same range. Tried a superspray, a spray, and a pflow all with no joy.
I’ve tried the various distance functions too.
What could I be missing? Running 2009 Design on xp64.
simmsimaging
I disabled the support for simple particle objects because I had some problems with them. So it only works with pflow and meshes. Perhaps I’ll add the support again in 1.11.
It should render just fine even with the default settings as long as you point to some pflow object or mesh. This maxscript should also render a single blob in the center of the scene:
b=BerconMetaball();append b.metaballs [0,0,0];renderers.current=VRay();render();
percydaman:
Texture strength only affects in 0.0 - 1.0 range in multiply mode. In subtract mode its 0.0 - infinity. Now that I think more carefully there isn’t really any reason why I made it like this, perhaps I’ll fix it in 1.11. However you very rarely want to have higher than 1.0 effect on the field anyway in multiply mode.
If you want the field effect be stronger, use darker colors in the texture. Like black and 5% white. You can also turn the clamp on which also makes the texture effect stronger.
The only way you can be getting noise is if the Step length parameter is too large and/or the texture has high fidelity. Just decrease the step length (1/20th or 1/40th of the metaball radius should be fine) and the noise should go away. You might need even smaller step size depending on how high the texture detail is compared to metaball radius.
So, has anybody come up with any other issues, I’ll probably fix the ones mentioned here (simple particle system support and strength >1.0 in multiply mode) during next weekend.
I’d also like to see if anybody has come up with some nice images since I’ll write the manual for these metaballs too and I’d be good to have some pretty examples there too.
I have not yet had a ton of time to try it out, but I tried using maps last night for a few minutes and I could not figure out what it was doing. I was testing a checker map and the results were pretty bizarre. Can you give a brief description of how that texture is supposed to affect the look so I can get my head around the logic of it?
Thanks - I’m still trying to figure out how to predict the results of textures a bit better, but it’s probably just a matter of putting more time in.
Tested the mo-blur and it’s working great now.
Right now I can’t get DR rendering to work, but I haven’t had a chance to run around re-installing BerconMetaBall on the nodes to see if that helps, otherwise no issues cropping up.
Simple particle systems support would be awesome - either that or I need to spend a lot more time learning Pflow. Right now I don’t have any samples but if I get anything decent I’ll be sure to send it your way if you want to use it.
I know this probably isn’t the right place to ask - but anyone know if there is a quick/easy way to have particle Shapes grow/shrink over time with Pflow? I don’t see any obvious operators/settings so I’m guessing it’s going to take some kind of age-test wiring but I was hoping for a simpler solution.
Got DR working okay but now if I render with “use particle size” turned on then the slaves render different sized particles. My workstation renders at (for example) 2, but the nodes seem to default to 1. Rendering with that option turned off and controlling scale from the Metaball end instead works fine.
Somebody else complained about the same thing but I haven’t been able to reproduce that problem myself. All my DR tests have come out perfectly. Did you make sure you updated the the plugin to all the nodes too so they ain’t running the old version?
Right now I don’t have any samples but if I get anything decent I’ll be sure to send it your way if you want to use it.