|
I dont know, unless things seriously
broke, I've done some pretty elaborate simulations (with large
chunks and *tons* of tiny peices) using just the first momentum +
IFX combo, and since then in subsequent MOM versions if anything
suposedly got considerably faster (was already *fast*) and more
directable.
(and quite probably still way faster/easier than Houdini point simulations) But if you want your peices to then be say washed away by fluid particles, then Houdini would probably be best, Houdini for FX you cant go wrong, and it's community hasn't been and is unlikely to be displaced. On 08/26/15 3:26, Cristobal Infante wrote: I agree with what most people have said here, it's just not worth the hussle to go at it with MOM, but if you insist rollback softimage to the exact version MOM3 was released for. At least your demo files should work. Like many I used MOM3, but found it unreliable at least with newer versions of soft. |
- Re: Momentum setup ? Simon Reeves
- Re: Momentum setup ? Olivier Jeannel
- Re: Momentum setup ? Francois Lord
- Re: Momentum setup ? Olivier Jeannel
- Re: Momentum setup ? Simon Reeves
- Re: Momentum setup ? Mario Reitbauer
- Re: Momentum setup ? Olivier Jeannel
- Re: Momentum setup ? Rob Chapman
- Re: Momentum setup ? Olivier Jeannel
- Re: Momentum setup ? Cristobal Infante
- Re: Momentum setup ? Jason S
- Re: OT'ish: Redshift renderfar... Tim Crowson
- Re: OT'ish: Redshift renderfar... Chad Briggs
- Re: OT'ish: Redshift renderfar... Matt Morris
- Re: OT'ish: Redshift renderfar... Tim Crowson
- Re: OT'ish: Redshift renderfarm with Softimage setup? Tim Leydecker
- RE: OT'ish: Redshift renderfarm with Softimage setu... Angus Davidson

