Flowline looks like dense liquid and blender looks like a bunch of small particles or less dense liquid. I like flowline better, but it's very subjective.
My father works with fluid calculation is noise analysis. They have single computers with 25 individual quad core processors crunching numbers for weeks to finalize calculations, pretty neat stuff
ur right... i've looked up flowline a little bit ago and it blew me away... it even calculates the way air moves under water and it has benn used in countless movies such as ironman and the 2012 movie. I had no idea back then. Oh well, too bad I can't get a hold of it.
You can get great effects with BOTH software. It's really how YOU set it up and tweak it that will make it more realistic. Adding splash particles for foam in krakatoa will also add more realism.
Blender did pretty good for the first simulation. I don't really have the computer power to dabble with good fluid simulations, but I know two guys that have done some really good ones.
Blender held up pretty good in the first. The second one for blender looked like it was less fluid being used, which, if the amount of fluid was actually the same, shows the limits of blender's capabilities. All in all, Blender is an amazing opensource entry to the genre.
I agree with the (possibly) general consensus that Blender might have a tiny advantage in the first and a significant disadvantage in the second... But since Blender is developed by the community, hopefully someone will watch this and figure out how to improve Blender... Get on it!
its called Ambient Occlusion (AO) and its a raytracing lighting option where you take the sky as a uniform lightsource (aka global illumination), i cant tell but i think its the old raytracing AO method, not the new Aproximate Ambient Occlusion (AAO now exclusively to Blender 2.46) which is way faster on complex high poly scenes. none the less its raytraced, as the rendering time after baking doesnt make any difference. what you mean is that it misses textures.
Also, if you look closely, you will see a similar "splash" at the end of the Blender example, when it is fading out. This proves that blender only has minor details missing, which stand out more in the second example.
Flowline looks more like yoghurt, because of the water density. Blender has the possibility to do so, but when rendering water it looks most realistic. And its free.
yea, in the first fluid simulation, i thought the crashing of water was more realistic in the blender version, but in the second fluid simulation, flowline was more realistic
Yeah, every dazzling demo is sidestepping something important. I thought I read that Blender does not allow for moblur with liquids as it uses an object sequence like RealFlow. Although RF has a solution for moblur.
I think the only problem with the first one was that flowline's simulation was set to be too thick. Imagine if the liquid being simulated was say, slightly runny wet concrete. Then it'd be fine. I personally believe they are both pretty equal.
Does flowline do fluid control to stop water in time with the shape of a charater like the demonstration from nils or other kind of matrix effect and how much cost flowline and 3dsmax compare to that freeware, for me it's not comparable.
I think flowline's looks the best, especially in the second part. In blender, the water sort of 'balls up' rather than looking like a smooth sheet. I say this as a dedicated Blender user though, and not that Blender doesn't look good and all, I just think it needs a bit more work.
OK i need to get this straight. Does Blender Use Frame by Frame Animation? Or does it actually uses a physics engine? Cuz i could make some cool waterfall things but i SUCK at animation. if it uses physics i will be so glad.
well i would say for freeware blender is a decent contender for a fluid simulation, however i think flowline produces better distortion i guess when it goes over an object, like theres more detail to the surface instead of all the detail going to where the water is breaking apart. Who knows though maybe it just is all in the settings
the first 1 is blender and to me its better bcuz the water holds together better then the next anamation and number 2 looks kool but the water its not rlly holding together.
Scanline Flowline se ve mejor. La viscocidad y la metaballs se comportan mucho mejor en la 2da scena, se nota en la tension superficial, si es que en algun momento uno quisiera simular una escena de inundacion
In first part i prefered blender, it looked more like a water less like a paint. In second one prefered flowline (blender's water simply stopped at the very beggining)
btw, blender is no freeware: Blender is the free open source 3D content creation suite, available for all major operating systems under the GNU General Public License... xD
Watch what Flowline did with the River God in Prince Caspian. Blender does not stand a chance. :p But great packages both of them, especially considering Blender being a freeware software.
@UBERxL33T From what I can see, he mistyped his comment. He was sayin that "to me Blender looks better than flowline which is probably 15- 50 000 bucks"
good job!! its noobs like this that are too ashamed to admit they are completely incapable of doing something this amazing so they cover it up by insulting people. Then a few years later us successful animators and graphics designers making hundreds and thousands a year will find these guys working at the video store.
![Intro to FLIP Fluids - Part 1: Getting Started [Blender Add-on Tutorial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Iu_YxibkUn8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Intro to FLIP Fluids - Part 1: Getting Started [Blender Add-on Tutorial]](/img/tr.png)
i just LOVE the ambient occlusion!!
Flowline looks like dense liquid and blender looks like a bunch of small particles or less dense liquid. I like flowline better, but it's very subjective.
i really think this is the best video i've ever seen on youtube... i'm not kidding!
That is incredible!
why is youtube recommending me this 😀, also it’s really cool to see how much we’ve advanced
Both are mind blowing o_O
My father works with fluid calculation is noise analysis. They have single computers with 25 individual quad core processors crunching numbers for weeks to finalize calculations, pretty neat stuff
Thats sick! It looks photo realistic
ur right... i've looked up flowline a little bit ago and it blew me away... it even calculates the way air moves under water and it has benn used in countless movies such as ironman and the 2012 movie. I had no idea back then. Oh well, too bad I can't get a hold of it.
You can get great effects with BOTH software. It's really how YOU set it up and tweak it that will make it more realistic. Adding splash particles for foam in krakatoa will also add more realism.
Awesome dude!!
that was pretty good what version did you use??
I am a blender user, but I think I like the "stringiness" of the Flowline simulation better, especially in the second test.
That looked Insanly Real. Be even cooler if some of the liquid stuff to surfaces though.
Where'd you learn to do this?
I think the second one looks slightly better because the first one covered it like cream, while blender's was more realistic cream.
Yeah. Scanline's Flowline is amazing for liquid simulation, Unbeatable.
first test I thought the second one was the best, but the second test I thought the first one was definitively the best.
@b1tTutorials its proprietary of scanline studios. It isnt commercially available, only the studio uses it.
Really god job!
Definatly. Blender is probably one of the best freeware programs around.
Blender did pretty good for the first simulation. I don't really have the computer power to dabble with good fluid simulations, but I know two guys that have done some really good ones.
Notice the end of the second blender simulation, how the fluid jumps back up. You cut it off just when it was getting good!
Blender held up pretty good in the first. The second one for blender looked like it was less fluid being used, which, if the amount of fluid was actually the same, shows the limits of blender's capabilities. All in all, Blender is an amazing opensource entry to the genre.
I agree with the (possibly) general consensus that Blender might have a tiny advantage in the first and a significant disadvantage in the second...
But since Blender is developed by the community, hopefully someone will watch this and figure out how to improve Blender... Get on it!
its called Ambient Occlusion (AO) and its a raytracing lighting option where you take the sky as a uniform lightsource (aka global illumination), i cant tell but i think its the old raytracing AO method, not the new Aproximate Ambient Occlusion (AAO now exclusively to Blender 2.46) which is way faster on complex high poly scenes.
none the less its raytraced, as the rendering time after baking doesnt make any difference.
what you mean is that it misses textures.
It all looked like paint to me, but it certainly looked pretty damn good.
Also, if you look closely, you will see a similar "splash" at the end of the Blender example, when it is fading out. This proves that blender only has minor details missing, which stand out more in the second example.
Flowline looks more like yoghurt, because of the water density.
Blender has the possibility to do so, but when rendering water it looks most realistic.
And its free.
love it
Can you imagine guys, one day the games will have that kind of physics.
Where exactly does one go to get Flowline? The Scanline site has very little information on it...
Which of the last two was of Blender?
Feel the last one needed more water like the 1st.
yea, in the first fluid simulation, i thought the crashing of water was more realistic in the blender version, but in the second fluid simulation, flowline was more realistic
@rzb82 Calculating the fluid motion. Usually using the navier stokes equations.
Yeah, every dazzling demo is sidestepping something important. I thought I read that Blender does not allow for moblur with liquids as it uses an object sequence like RealFlow. Although RF has a solution for moblur.
flowline is better on both of these, especially the second. the way the water tears apart when it hits the wall is amazing.
Blender has more turbulence when it shouldn't, and less when it should... I liked the visible strands in the second sim. Still, you can't beat free!
@MrFrooost im looking forward to that :P
I think the only problem with the first one was that flowline's simulation was set to be too thick. Imagine if the liquid being simulated was say, slightly runny wet concrete. Then it'd be fine. I personally believe they are both pretty equal.
@vd853 Plus with Blender you don't exactly need to blow your money away to get it.
which one is better?
Does flowline do fluid control to stop water in time with the shape of a charater like the demonstration from nils or other kind of matrix effect and how much cost flowline and 3dsmax compare to that freeware, for me it's not comparable.
I think Blender looks better on the first one, but I agree with ivionday that Flowline looks amazing on the second trial.
Is Flowline available for purchase? Seems like it's always been an in-house thing.
muito Loko! Gostei.
I think flowline's looks the best, especially in the second part. In blender, the water sort of 'balls up' rather than looking like a smooth sheet.
I say this as a dedicated Blender user though, and not that Blender doesn't look good and all, I just think it needs a bit more work.
@staphinfection YEAH YOU ARE RIGHT SIR
the first one imo
cuz u have to take into account transparency
it wont look as bulky
@randosity42
your right!
I love the scene at 0:14, how is this made possible?
I think Blender was a little better in the first one, but Flowline in the second. It could've just been the properties of the liquid, though.
OK i need to get this straight. Does Blender Use Frame by Frame Animation? Or does it actually uses a physics engine? Cuz i could make some cool waterfall things but i SUCK at animation. if it uses physics i will be so glad.
better than reality
well i would say for freeware blender is a decent contender for a fluid simulation, however i think flowline produces better distortion i guess when it goes over an object, like theres more detail to the surface instead of all the detail going to where the water is breaking apart. Who knows though maybe it just is all in the settings
holy crap that took 30h to render and bake? Please tell me you have a wooden pc
wasnt-the first was actually 2 seperate simulations from both software
Dat flowline physics.
blender still kicks but even compared to other share ware and now it has smoke physics built in!
i love blender but after seeing this i can see flowline is a bit smoother and it looks really cool at 0:14. still blender kicks but for a freeware.
How did u get flowline
Looks like the resolution was biggerib the Flowline ones, and the parameters of the liquid weren't tweaked to behave the same
Why is the first one different a different color? I like the second one's movement but not the grey color.
@ConnorsworldAU It does in Blender!
Flowline looks a lot better in the 2nd one!
It's all in the settings if you ask me
the first 1 is blender and to me its better bcuz the water holds together better then the next anamation and number 2 looks kool but the water its not rlly holding together.
Scanline Flowline se ve mejor. La viscocidad y la metaballs se comportan mucho mejor en la 2da scena, se nota en la tension superficial, si es que en algun momento uno quisiera simular una escena de inundacion
First test, Blender
second test, they both werent great.....but i like the second one more becasue it didnt look like spiderman was skeeting :P
0:05 - 0:13 second one (blender) is better i think...
and 0:14 - 0:21 first one is much better ^^ btw awesome vid! i
blender did pretty good in the first sim. not bad for freeware.
In first part i prefered blender, it looked more like a water less like a paint. In second one prefered flowline (blender's water simply stopped at the very beggining)
Flowline looks awesome and blender looks grainy either way THERE AWESOME ;D
30 hours?! Whats your specs?
I would think that Flowline would take a LOT longer than blender (or at least on several of their other simulations)
Would be cool to have this in minecraft§!
look at the right bottom , u can see the logos
1st test is flowline
For the first "demo" it is the one that says BLENDER in the lower right corner. For the second demo, it is the kind of sucky version.
30 h rendering and baking for 360p?
The second one was much better!
yeah but you have to consider that flowline is ONLY for fluids and in blender fluids are only a little part (and for that they are awesome!!)
I'll bet if you hadn't cut it off, the blender number 2 would have looked great. I have a feeling that was planned.
Go Blender!
The first one Blender owns it but the second one I think FL takes it but some tweaking in Blender I it will look a lot better.
btw, blender is no freeware:
Blender is the free open source 3D content creation suite, available for all major operating systems under the GNU General Public License...
xD
I like flowline
Flowline seems to have the apperance of chocolate milk o_o
It's untextured. Believe me that would look fantastic with specular mapping and sm 3.0 refracting shaders.
@strgzr53 yeah but whats that at 0:17???
@ConnorsworldAU it have already been blended... Several times...
Watch what Flowline did with the River God in Prince Caspian. Blender does not stand a chance. :p But great packages both of them, especially considering Blender being a freeware software.
huh the second one hitting the house didn't seem to have enough water to show much as the first wave did.
nice, I think blender is more realistic on the first, but not one the second.. flowline is best for large scale fluid sims. thats my opinion though
why only 240p?
Flowline all the way!
i'm a quite noob so for me they are both good, but i wont buy flowline and i am using blender so for me it kicks ass
@UBERxL33T From what I can see, he mistyped his comment. He was sayin that "to me Blender looks better than flowline which is probably 15- 50 000 bucks"
Heres what I meant to say: On the first test flowline doesn't look that much better then BLENDER but on the second flowline look way better.
ok thats awesome but i really want milk now
good job!! its noobs like this that are too ashamed to admit they are completely incapable of doing something this amazing so they cover it up by insulting people. Then a few years later us successful animators and graphics designers making hundreds and thousands a year will find these guys working at the video store.
@oIndee But have you /been/ baked for 30 hours straight? :3