Cineversity

Hey!

I’m currently following this tutorial https://vimeo.com/98676205 - but would like to take it one step further.
What I’m trying to create is more randomness in the width of the splines, but still would like them to be next to each other with no gaps.

I’ve tried a few different setups, but none without overlapping or intersecting geometry. Is there a way to have a randomized distance between the splines, and have the width of the rectangle that is sweeping along those splines match the randomized width.

Guessing there is some Xpresso involved here… and I’m happy to conquer this – just need some guidance!

Thanks a ton!

Hi Joeycamacho,

Have a look to this sketch. I tried to keep it as simple as possible.

It should be doable in a few minutes. The Splines are driven bi the Random Effector, set to Deform and Point.

The size changes, which I considered should be only in width, not in hight, are done with a Shader Effector (Deform>Point as well) and a Gradient.

(I used a plane with selected edges [Edge to Spline] to get the Splines, there are more options possible of course. I left for the purpose of this sketch the umbers of points low. Just adjust the “Interpolation” and the “Inter-medieta Points”...)

Let me know if there is any question

All the best

Sassi,

Thank you for the quick response here. This is really great.
I’m wondering if there is a way to replicate this procedurally without having to make the plane editable? For instance if the client would like to see all strips wider or a different pattern?

EDIT*** I just took a closer look to see how the parameters of the shader effector is working. Should be good to go!

Here is the [more or less] parametric version. Have a look into the “User_Data Object”>Attribute Manager>User Data. (Image below)

Besides that, if you change, the Material [while the Texture tag is selected] needs: Object Manager> Tags>Fit to Object—so the Gradient covers it to avoid repetition.

The Falloff might be in need for adjustment (Random Effector)

The “Points” refer to the amount of intermediate points.

The Cloth Object is set to parallel!

Note that the Profiles need to have NO gap, so the points of the SWEEP receives for different “tubes” the same data, to keep it gap-less. The Shader Effector works as a “move points to create variation” option. Hence the projection “Flat”. If will not work in any other way. The Gradient is set up with a simple three point [white-black white] gardient, with a right mouse click to get “double points, and again, and again. Then move the color “indicators/sliders”. That should give you a lot of control.

The Shader Effector should have no larger X value than the profile is wide, better a bit smaller. IMPORTANT: Transform Space - Object!

If you like to move the object freely, the “Points” need a different solution, perhaps delete it and do it in the structure manager.

All the best

Sassi,

This is working well. Thank you. Now I am at a point where I need to stick a texture to the “strips”. Is this possible in this current set up? I’ve tried to camera map the texture, which gives the effect, however the texture will slip as there are no UVW coordinates for it to attach to on the sweep object. Any suggestions?

Hi Joeycamacho,

The Camera Projection works as it should, and the “Projection Camera” is stable, of course if you look from a different point, then it seems to slip, but it is like a projector, absolute expected in that way.

https://help.maxon.net/#OSWEEP-ID_OBJECTPROPERTIES

The SWEEP has an UVW information. However, since we have practically many strips from one Spline (with many segments), it has some limitations. The link you shared from the 3rd party tutorial was monochrome.

My suggestion, use a Flat Projection from the top. See example. Other than that, it might become difficult.

If you have more obstacles, please tell—perhaps via a detailed sketch of the final target, eventually share some scene files with the “stoppers” you have encountered.
I ‘m happy to put a tutorial list for you together, so you can move through that project.

All the best

https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/pPbB31NSUZGmdDRYY8raYKFBWYF7yxpUbwyoVi8ErSN?ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy

Hey Sassi,

I figured out was the issue was – I had rotated the setup to work on a different axis so I needed to rotate the flat projection to match that. So there’s progress.
However, I am trying to get the flat projected texture to match a UV projected texture on a plane – so when the strips come to life they push through the plane and the textures match.
This is mainly because this is an extension of a previous scene that I have been requested to match. So I’m hoping there’s a way the XPresso / Sweep rig can do this.

Hope that makes sense. I can pack up a scene file you if needed!

Thanks for the offer, Joeycamacho.

As I mentioned there is only the flat projection, and that’s it. Anything else would be a strip by strip texturing.

When we talk about a project, and we go only step by step, we might waste a lot of time, hence my request for a scene file always from the start, with ALL the targets defined.

Let me know if that is now all you need, and I will have a look into something else. With SWEEP there is a limit in texturing, and I had hoped the Manual was informative. There is no UV option in XPresso either. (There might be a chance with the RE:Map, but I haven’t tested it for this case
http://revisionfx.com/products/remap/

What you need is a complete set up in polygons, to have full control over UV, if the “flat project” as in my example is not working. Currently I have not “ready to use” solution for that. An adjustable solution as wanted above, I doubt this at this point, that a rig can be set up in a reasonable time compared to an eventual change vs a re-create.

Keep in mind that the points of the object move straight up and down, which means, even if you had everything in UV, the squeeze and stretch of the texture would be the same as in a Flat Projection. If you like to have a non stretched and none squeezed surfaces, then that would result in a lot of movement of the visuals. In the moment the element is more flat, then it must be longer of course. So, the decision must be made, if they are pined in the middle or at one side. Which would create an even more complex set up perhaps.
Have a look here in this “mock-up”. With a non-streetched surface and UV, the texture falls apart:
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/GtOqwCU7MLM4mMN6lSzN5Aw3S2FdhpRi0ynLceUBRfX?ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy

The clearer the idea of the final target, the faster a solution [if possible] can be found. To search for a rig that leaves all options open until the very last would be a complex undertaking.Not my ideal, and not what I would suggest: prep-time vs usefulness must be in a good balance. The clearer the idea, the less extras need to be integrated.

However, each question will push things further, and I’m typically happy to look in such things. But I will wait until to get more and complete data. If you need an upload link for such a project information, including reduced scenes, let me know.

Let me know.