Thu, Oct 31, 6:25 PM CDT

Renderosity Forums / Vue



Welcome to the Vue Forum

Forum Moderators: wheatpenny, TheBryster

Vue F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Oct 26 8:50 am)



Subject: Painting eco rocks in Vue 11 - Won't go below surface


MNArtist ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 3:24 PM · edited Thu, 31 October 2024 at 6:20 PM

I'm sure I'm missing something very simple here.

I'm trying to paint rocks into a streambed, and want them to be embedded in the ground. When setting up the eco, I set them to be 55 - 65% below the surface relative to object size. But when I paint, they still "float" on the surface. I've tried changing the % below surface, but no difference. I have the "use ecosystem rules" box checked in the paintbrush dialogue, and I've clicked the limit to selected object icon. I make sure the "populate" brush is checked. I did this in Vue 10.5 with no problem, but now with the new brushes, I can't get it to work. What am I missing?? Appreciate any guidance.


Mazak ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 4:50 PM

Did you turn off fast population mode?

 

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 


Mazak ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 4:59 PM

file_491584.jpg

Here the rocks are painted and nice embedded.

 

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 


MNArtist ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:17 PM

Quote - Did you turn off fast population mode?

 

Mazak

 

Thanks for the responses, Mazak.

Where is "fast population mode?" I looked in the manual and can't find a listing for it. 

The rest of my settings look the same as yours.


MNArtist ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:27 PM

Never mind, found it. Yes, it's off.


bruno021 ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:32 PM

Fast population doesn't act on the EcoPainter. Rocks are always painted/populated half buried, so using rocks isn't relevant, I'm afraid... Are you sure this offset  setting is part of population rules, MNArtist? And how about using the Lower brush with the Population  brush? Should work.



MNArtist ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:41 PM

Okay, so this is interesting.

I originally had a number of faceted and rough rocks in the mix I was painting. I deleted those and switched to the lo res ones Mazak used in his example, and a mix of smooth and stones, and now they're showing up where I'd expect them to.

Wondering if one of you can try on your system with the rough and faceted and see what results you get.


bruno021 ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:41 PM

Made some tests, and offset from surface doesn't seem to be part of the population rules, as I thought. So use your Populate area brush in conjuction with the Lower effector, or use the Lower brush after you're done with the Populate brush.



bruno021 ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:48 PM

I'll check it tomorrow, off to bed now!



Mazak ( ) posted Tue, 12 February 2013 at 5:55 PM

Faceted rocks and rough rocks make no difference. But they are heavy resource hungry, maybe that cause a difference?

 Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 


bruno021 ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 8:07 AM

Same as Mazak here, low rez are easier to use and manipulate, but otherwise, it's the same.



MNArtist ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 8:42 AM

Hey Guys -

Thanks for the guidance and the time you took. I'm rendering now, but am going to do some experiments after this finishes and will post the results. Using the lower brush helped, though it still seems there are some strange things happening.


bruno021 ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 10:37 AM

Why didn't you just populate the object that is underneath the stream?



MNArtist ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 10:42 AM

I wanted the rocks to appear on the slope of the shore as well as under the stream, if that makes sense. Frequently, if I have a flat surface, I'll just create a transparent plane, populate that with rocks, and then position it, but this time I wanted the sloped surface to be populated as well.


bruno021 ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 11:44 AM

Ok, I see, I would've carved the stream in a terrain, and populated the terrain material, according to altitude.



MNArtist ( ) posted Wed, 13 February 2013 at 9:03 PM · edited Wed, 13 February 2013 at 9:06 PM

I figured out what the issue is. 

If you change the scale of the rocks in the brush palette, it appears to 'override" the offset. I had scaled my rocks up to about 2.5 in the scene. If I leave the scale in the brush palette at 1, they go below the surface, but if increased, they float on top.

 

Interestingly, if you change the scale in the material editor under overall scaling, it impacts the position as well, though seems to be to a lesser degree


bruno021 ( ) posted Thu, 14 February 2013 at 3:48 AM

Maybe it's a bug? Might be useful to let e-on know.



Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.