I've installed multiple times and all the files seem in place, but nothing is available in Max 2015.
The Plugin.UserSetting.ini file reads:
---------------------------------------------
[Directories]
Additional MAX plug-ins=C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2015\PlugIns
[Help]
---------------------------------------------

Do I need to manually add something?

Hi there,

While doing our latest job at ingreme - https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=32 ... =2&theater - we used a pipeline based on real flow (low res sim), then krakatoa and stoke to make it high res and then fume fx to simulate "sand dust".
Since it was made on a run, I ran in some ram issues that maybe you can help me understand better, now that the job is delivered.

1 - Is there a way to understand how much a geometry (used in fume to collide) will take in terms of ram usage? I was thinking on number of faces or even scale of the objects?

2 - Is there a way to understand how much a single particle (particle source) will take in terms of ram usage? I had around 20.000.000 particles and sometimes i had to use 10% of it to avoid ram problems. Sometimes I used also particle culling but it would be great to know this values (if possible).

3 - While making multiple grids I found a strange issue. I've copyed the grid to the side and changed the path and the size of it (smaller!). It should take less memory, but it happened the opposite. A sim that would take 24gb ram, crashed the machine while preparing first frame (more than 32gb). The number of particles were about the same and the colliding objects were the exact same. Is this a bug? Like, i can't copy grids and change it's size, or someone ran with this kind of issue?

4 - While computing wavelet, I ran again with memory issues. I thought that if I turned off object colisions and particle source, It would compute wavelet correctly, since the default sim was already done. I thought this was kind of a post effect above the original sim. But then I found that I could not turn off particle source. Is this correct? If so, can i turn off collision objects and simulation will not be affected? In my case I had to turn off while wavelet sim and "pray" that it would not change anything, since it would not compute with enough detail if I used the city we've modelled. I didn't have the time to test it, so that's why i'm asking here.

Thanks in advance,
Rui Romano
http://www.ingreme.com

When applying a perturbation and falloff amount to elevation limits on a given texture, it doesn't seem to actually do anything (I'm assuming it's supposed to provide a transition zone where the material fades into the underlying texture). I still get a hard strata line regardless of the value I put down, and regardless of whether I have "use falloff" checked. The only way I seem to get any variation in transition from an altitude limit to an underlying texture is by using a noise map.

Has anyone else noticed this, or tell me what I'm doing wrong?

Also, I don't quite understand the perturbation/falloff spinner for slopes. It ranges from 0.01 to 10. Anything above 1 though seems to completely remove any trace of the texture even on surfaces that are well within the given slope range.

Thanks for anyone's help.

Hi,

I don't know if this is the way it is supposed to work but it is a bit annoying to me.

I do a sim and set my default path for example to:
bla\bla\test\v001\test_v001_.fxd

I sim a couple of frames lets say to 50.
Now i got my cache files from test_v001_0001.fxd to test_v001_0050.fxd and the corresponding test_v001_.fdc.

Now i changed some settings and but still want to keep my old cached files so I set
a new default path:
bla\bla\test\v002\test_v002_.fxd

I sim up to frame 25.
The cache files test_v002_0001.fxd to test_v002_0025.fxd and also the test_v002_.fdc
get written but when I hit the continue sim button the dialogue box tells me it wants
to start from frame 50. But I did not sim to frame 50 in my v002 and there is no test_v002_0050.fxd.

So I guess it takes the voxel info from test_v001_0050.fxd and continues to sims from
there writing out test_v002_0051.fxd.

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Am I missing something or is this a bug?

To me it would be very helpful if there would be an option like 'continue FROM FRAME'.

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Rico

This is an oldy-for me. I used to work in studio's with Max (windows) and i first saw this there with the scanline renderer. (I've done a lot of smoke in my time. )
But I had the same issue last week in maya/mr/linux/render batch and the circumstances are the same. I believe it suggests a memory issue with multiscattering.

Common cirsumstances.
1) multiscattering is 'on'
2) there is a certain quantity of smoke in the fumefx grid-its disspating and at the point were its nearly completely gone-but *not quite*- on that given frame - the software will crash the render with a memory error.
The frame cannot be completed (128 bytes it should be 7.0MB)
3) uncheck multiscattering and that same frame renders normally. The entire sequence is fine. Thats my workaround.

Here is a test scene - repro:
1) different resolutions mean the 'bad frame' shows up at different frames.
At this resolution (2) if you cache it locally the bad frame should be on -or very close to-frame 62.
2) Do a render batch of just frame 62-if it renders correctly (other than 128 bytes) try the entire 68 frame sequence. A higher resolution (0.5) had the circumstances happening at frame 50.
3) If you can repro then simply uncheck the multiscattering and you should be ok.

If you find a cure-I bet it accounts for a few reported render crash issues.

Hi,

I just have a slight issue and I'm hoping there is a way to get around this via maxscript or something.

I send my simulations to our render farm to simulate overnight (in backburner mode) however halfway through it seems to crash, then it loads up again and starts from the beginning again then crashes around the same spot. This becomes an infinite loop. I have tested these files on my PC, it still crashes but I can just use the continue simulation and then it finishes.

Is there a way to tell Fumefx to skip frames it has already simulated while in the backburner mode? This would really be helpful and save me loads of time of having to simulate on my own pc.

Thanks
Hayden

Hi,

I currently use Afterburn with Max 2014 with no problems, however when I used the Max 2015 installer to add Afterburn to Max 2015 it does not seem to load. All the files in the Afterburn directory appear to be in the Max 2015/plugins directory, but Afterburn does not load and is not available in the Max Effects pull downs.
I tried deinstalling and reinstalling Afterburn for 2015 but with no success. Could you tell me how to install it. thanks Mateen

I've seen precious few rendered (Maya or Max) examples of FumeFX zdepth sequences on the web. Followed by an influx of "oh my gawds how did you do thats?!" in th comments section.
But no answer.

I gone over and over the UI I can't see any thing i can use in 3.5.3 to get this working.
How do I do it???!!!!

[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]Hi all.
Did any of you experienced grid like pattern when uprezing via wavelet?
In the default sim everything looks great. But when i sim with wavelet
i get these patterns in the render.
I'm emiting from realflow generated particles and loading them via PRTLoader.
rendering with Vray.

image in attach.

Thanks Ric

Very similar issues to that of the particle follow logged earlier this week:

1) Caches - 'ffxParticle1' seems to be a regular particle system. So I do a Solvers>Create Particle Disk Cache
I get a 'sorta result' which is not correct compared to what the original playback is. I get different results depending on where in the timeline I start the cache from. So maya render batch aka rendering a sequence-is an issue.

2) Refresh if Fume Grid hidden. Playback of particles turns 'dead' if you simply hide the dependent Fume grid.

Which has me asking-if i wanted to render the result (independently of the FumeFX) i wonder if i could as it stands (in 3.5.2).
-I cannot cache it (properly).
-i cannot isolate it (for rendering) from the dependent fume grid.

Could FumeFX Particle Emitter generate an *nparticle* result instead? I think the cacheing might work better. Easier to manage in a scene too (Maya's legacy particle cacheing is a bit *idiotic* as soon as you have need of multiple particle FX in a given scene).