Ah. I thought you meant the other way around. Connect an AtomRender to
MulletSolver.


Ron Ganbar
email: [email protected]
tel: +44 (0)7968 007 309 [UK]
     +972 (0)54 255 9765 [Israel]
url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/



On 15 August 2012 16:54, ArnoB <[email protected]> wrote:

> is it?
> I don't seem to be able to connect an atomkraft-geometry
> to a mulletbody...
>
>
>
>
> On 15 aug 2012, at 15:47, Ron Ganbar wrote:
>
> Isn't just a regular 3D setup? Can't you just plug the solver in?
>
>
> Ron Ganbar
> email: [email protected]
> tel: +44 (0)7968 007 309 [UK]
>      +972 (0)54 255 9765 [Israel]
> url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/
>
>
>
> On 15 August 2012 16:41, ArnoB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> now the magic question...
>>
>> how do I connect it to Atomkraft?
>> :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14 aug 2012, at 20:05, Jack Binks wrote:
>>
>> > Neat; like the use of the particletogeo to allow the objects to be
>> > used as bodies in the physics world! Does feel a bit sluggish on my
>> > shonky laptop so I bet it'll be resimming the particle scene as well
>> > as the physics scene - probably fine for better hardware, but just in
>> > case it gets noticeable :)
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> > Jack
>> >
>> > On 14 August 2012 09:14, Frank Rueter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Cool, thanks. Great to have the overlay!
>> >> Attached is a lazy version which utilises the particle system to
>> create a
>> >> collision proxy.
>> >> Doesn't exactly make it faster but works and takes little time to set
>> up.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 14/08/12 7:46 PM, Jack Binks wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hey Frank,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks man! Yeah, this'll be the convex hull thing - they can't model
>> >> concave shapes. Currently you have to split concave's up into roughly
>> >> convex parts and then, in the case of dynamics shapes, set them up as
>> >> compound so they stick together as one. If you switch on the solver
>> >> troubleshooting overlays you should see a rough approximation to the
>> >> physics world proxy shape. In the future there are avenues I can look
>> >> into with respect to making this convex decomposition happen
>> >> programmatically (although currently there's some hardcoded
>> >> assumptions about 1-1 Nuke geo object to physics shape which have to
>> >> be completely torn out to allow for this or fracture type bodies).
>> >>
>> >> In the case where you're using Nuke shapes, then obviously its
>> >> slightly less easily to split up into sub sections, so instead I've
>> >> taken your cylinder and, from the point of view of the physics scene,
>> >> replaced it with a series of box collision shapes, forming the sides
>> >> of a cube (except the top). These are set to not render (so they just
>> >> offer a place for the sphere to drop into). The cylinder I've then
>> >> merged in after the solver node, so it appears in your render wrapped
>> >> around where the sphere lands.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >> Jack
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 13 August 2012 23:34, Frank Rueter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Indeed. I just  had a quick play and it seems pretty awesome.
>> >> Attached is the script I just threw together to get my feet wet (just a
>> >> sphere bouncing off two cards and onto a cylinder).
>> >> I'm actually trying to get the sphere drop into the cylinder in the
>> end. Is
>> >> this possible Jack? Currently it bounces off it when it shouldn't.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Awesome work man, I'm very impressed!!!
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> frank
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 14/08/12 9:23 AM, Jose Fernandez de Castro wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Great stuff, really amazed at how well the dynamic simulation works,
>> really
>> >> nice performance! Thanks!
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Jack Binks <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thanks guys! Looking forward to checking out what people create with
>> >> the tools :)
>> >> J
>> >>
>> >> On 12 August 2012 15:11, Ron Ganbar <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Fantastic stuff, Jack.
>> >> Thanks for sharing all your hard work!
>> >>
>> >> Ron Ganbar
>> >> email: [email protected]
>> >> tel: +44 (0)7968 007 309 [UK]
>> >>     +972 (0)54 255 9765 [Israel]
>> >> url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 12 August 2012 16:46, ArnoB <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> very nice work! thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 10 aug 2012, at 09:55, Jack Binks wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hey All,
>> >>
>> >> Just to let you know I've popped a 2.0 build of J_Ops for Nuke 6.3 up
>> >> on Nukepedia, adding a rigid body physics toolkit for Nuke's 3D
>> >> system, as well as a range of tweaks, improvements and fixes to the
>> >> existing tools.
>> >>
>> >> Check out the dev blog for more info: http://major-kong.blogspot.com/
>> >>
>> >> Enjoy!
>> >> Jack
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Jose Fernandez de Castro
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Nuke-users mailing list
>> > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nuke-users mailing list
>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing list
> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing list
> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to