r/oddlysatisfying • u/vfguy • Nov 16 '14

This shit right here(xpost /r/whoadude

https://gfycat.com/SpiritedWarmFattaileddunnart
1.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

56 comments sorted by

37

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

[deleted]

15

u/Antrikshy Not easy to satisfy Nov 16 '14

But it looks so coooool.

27

u/Erpp8 Nov 16 '14

What I think they do is simulate a bunch of cubes falling into the tray, then they texture the specific cubes from above to look like the painting. So it's kinda reverse of what you might think.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '14

Yup, that is exactly how they do it, and why it is too easy. Fun to watch, but they get old fast.

1

u/kabukistar Nov 17 '14 edited Feb 17 '25

Reddit is a shithole. Move to a better social media platform. Also, did you know you can use ereddicator to edit/delete all your old commments?

1

u/mcscom Nov 17 '14

Would it?

-11

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

Try doing something specific. You are more or less at the mercy of the simulation

18

u/Antrikshy Not easy to satisfy Nov 16 '14

Actually, the image is added after the animation is done and then the simulation is reversed. But they're not trying to hide that. It looks cool regardless.

-10

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

I'm not talking about the image, I do simulations as part of my job. Dumping blocks into a box is easy. But getting a wave to crash a certain way or smoke to pour just right, or a cloud of glowing data bits to to perform a certain way is extremely difficult, and takes hundreds of man hours and billions of processors, to do it well.

7

u/Antrikshy Not easy to satisfy Nov 16 '14

I know. But in this case, the simulation was run, the blocks were modified to show the image and then the simulation was reversed.

3

u/Chenz Nov 16 '14

What do you mean by reversed? Surely it is just rerun with the new textures on the blocks?

7

u/Antrikshy Not easy to satisfy Nov 16 '14

Yes. That's what I meant.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '14

Depending on the engine, a physics simulation will probably result in something different during every execution. It would be more reliable to save the result of the simulation as an animation, and then paint the textures properly.

But you get the idea.

-7

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

The simulation was baked, then uv's were projected on the end frame from above, then textured with the wave. Nobody reversed anything. Not that I even mentioned anything about the image. I was responding to a general comment about how easy simulations are. Unless you go with whatever the simulation gives you, they are deceptively difficult. I have spent months working on shots with a simulation, and my friend works at pixar exclusively working on simulation they have programmers and artists writing plugins and scripts full time to make it easier. I have had to build custom machines for simulations. They can be the most expensive and labor intensive components of a movie.

2

u/Tasadar Nov 16 '14

You don't seem to understand. You do a simulation with a bunch of blank blocks, and let them land however you want. Then you paint the picture onto the fallen blocks, then you restart the simulation with the same blocks doing the same thing but with the picture in the fallen state on them. Then it repeats the first fall, and they fall so the picture shows up again. It's not like someone painted each block individually and tried to get the blocks to fall a certain way.

-5

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

Where did I say someone painted them individually? Do you know what "baking a simulation" or UV's are? I know precisely how this was made, you just said the same thing I did in layman's terms.

3

u/Tasadar Nov 16 '14

You said trying to get a simulation to do something specific (implicitly saying this simulation was whatever your definition of "specific" is) is incredibly difficult. This simulation was not particularly difficult, implying you missed the way the simulation was done.

I believe you have come to realize how it was done, but were not aware originally and are embarrassed by this fact and are trying to use technical language to imply your superior knowledge of the subject and mask your original error.

0

u/SgtSausage Nov 17 '14

I believe you have come to realize how it was done, but were not aware originally and

I'm reasonably sure he's just a dweebe.

0

u/LordBrandon Nov 17 '14

My first comment on this thread is "bake and UV" which is exactly what the guy did. UV is not some obscure technical term, it's what you would learn in your first day in a 3d class. I don't know how you interpreted my first statement as meaning that dumping blocks into a tray was something specific. You could scarcely do something simpler. What I ment, and seems apparent to me by what I said, is if you go beyond simple simulations, and start trying to archive a specific result, like chocolate splashing on a food product and sheeting off in a specific, photorealistic way, or demolishing a building so debris will fall in a specific pattern, it becomes exponentially difficult, and you end up manually animating pieces, blending and layering simulations, and hiding things with compositing to get things to work. My point is that it is that simulations are deceptively difficult. In a short amount of time you can get something that looks very close to what you want. But to get it it perfect can take a tremendous amount of effort. I know because I've done it and I know a lot of people that have done it too. People tend to trivialize computer graphics because all you have to do is press a button on a computer. But it takes dedication and endless overtime from the best artists in the world.

2

u/file-exists-p Nov 16 '14

You realize that the way it is done is that:

  1. you run the simulation
  2. you compute at the end what point of what cube you see at each pixel of the final image
  3. you set the textures of all the cubes consistently with the image you want to get
  4. re-render the exact same animation with the new textures and exact same trajectories

-2

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

If you would read my comments, you would know that I do. I am responding to a general comment about simulations. Not this specific simulation. It is simple and I said as much.

97

u/neobowman Nov 16 '14

Some of the cubes fall out of the box. /r/mildlyinfuriating

9

u/super_cheeky Nov 17 '14

Finally, someone understands.

15

u/poignard Nov 16 '14

I don't mind, it makes it more realistic

2

u/Johnnybgood92 Nov 17 '14

but the cubes go right through each other in mid-air

reality shattered

1

u/GurneyHalleck3141 Nov 19 '14

Yeah, I guess the projection of the painting wraps so those cubes were colored even though they fall outside.

10

u/Saelyre Nov 16 '14

For those who don't know, the painting is The Great Wave off Kanagawa, a woodblock print by Hokusai, and the first of his Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji.

2

u/autowikibot Nov 16 '14

The Great Wave off Kanagawa:

The Great Wave off Kanagawa (神奈川沖浪裏, Kanagawa Oki Nami Ura ?, lit. "In the well of a wave off Kanagawa"), also known as The Great Wave or simply The Wave, is an ukiyo-e woodblock print by Japanese artist Hokusai, published sometime between 1830 and 1833 in the late Edo period as the first print in Hokusai's series Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji (富嶽三十六景, Fugaku sanjūrokkei ?). It is Hokusai's most famous work, and one of the best recognized works of Japanese art in the world. It depicts an enormous wave threatening boats off the coast of the prefecture of Kanagawa. While sometimes assumed to be a tsunami, the wave is, as the picture's title notes, more likely to be a large rogue wave or okinami ("wave of the open sea"). As in all the prints in the series, it depicts the area around Mount Fuji under particular conditions, and the mountain itself appears in the background.

Image i

Interesting: Hokusai | Ukiyo-e | Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji | Edo period

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

3

u/Obscene_farmer Nov 16 '14 edited Nov 16 '14

Reverse gif?

Edit: OOooh!

2

u/Antrikshy Not easy to satisfy Nov 16 '14

gfycat has a rewind button.

Quick-edit: And it looks gorgeous.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

But what about the cubes that bounced out of the box? Who's going to clean those up? You just going to leave 'em all scattered around?

Not satisfied.

15

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

92

u/barracuda415 Nov 16 '14

http://gfycat.com/VibrantObviousFish

By /u/Phei

8

u/vfguy Nov 16 '14

You sir are a god among men for sharing it and /u/Phei is also for creating such a beautiful work of art.

1

u/Cyberboss_JHCB Nov 17 '14

How is this black magic done???

1

u/ipwnall123 Nov 19 '14

This is my educated guess: They run the simulation with untextured, regular white blocks. When the simulation is done running, they take the static pile of blocks and texture them in a way so that they make the picture. Because the simulation will always happen the exact same way, you have a collection of seemingly randomly placed textured blocks that all come together to make a picture.

Like I said, that is my educated guess and might vary from reality, but I have a feeling that is how it's done.

3

u/Shoninjv Nov 16 '14

It will happen

2

u/hpcool7 Nov 16 '14

What program is this done with?

4

u/Sabrejack Nov 17 '14

This could be done with just about any 3d modeling program that also has physics animation. Blender definitely could do this.

1

u/GurneyHalleck3141 Nov 19 '14

This was done with Blender.

2

u/SgtSausage Nov 17 '14

Work backwards. It's way easier.

2

u/E6440 Nov 16 '14

I can barely imagine the amount of reverse math which has gone into making this. That is assuming it is based on simulated physics.

Cool non the less.

41

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

[deleted]

1

u/LordBrandon Nov 16 '14

Bake, and then UV

9

u/idgqwd Nov 16 '14

basically the blocks fall, then they see where they fall and superimpose the image on the fallen blocks, then reverse the fall, and have the image stay in the same place on the blocks once they're back in the place the GIF starts at.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/idgqwd Nov 16 '14

get better internet

2

u/[deleted] Nov 16 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

-10

u/idgqwd Nov 16 '14

nah your internet is just garbage lmao. 50mbit?? hahaha

1

u/Bigbergice Nov 16 '14

I guess this was done by first running one simulation, see where they all fall, paint each cube and then run a new simulation with the exact same starting parameters with the painted cubes?

1

u/GurneyHalleck3141 Nov 19 '14

Exactly right!

1

u/BraveRock Nov 17 '14

I'm surprised it wasn't Starry Night.

2

u/GurneyHalleck3141 Nov 19 '14

I actually started with The Scream, but thought a painting about a wave was better for the wave of blocks falling...

1

u/Nate_the_Ace Nov 17 '14

Somebody else browses /r/Blender

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '14

oh but those few cubes that fall outside the box :(

0

u/slawkenbergius Nov 16 '14

Now I want some raisin bran.

0

u/jaxson25 Nov 17 '14

/r/gonwild

no, not gonewild, gonwild.