I'm about half way through and really enjoying this. I don't understand why we Set Position twice though (I haven't gotten to colliding with the cube bounds yet, I'm just before it). Can you detail why you're setting the position twice in one step? I get that the leftmost Set Position is for the velocity. But I'm confused why we offset it with its velocity, and then move it again based on the collision.
Hi, So before the collisions with the bounds, there are 2 set positions: one for the collisions and one for the velocity. So essentially, if we had ONLY the collision set position, the points would not move, if they're not colliding with a particle. Resulting in everything just moving far enough to stop touching anything else and then remain stagnant just like that. By adding in the set position for the velocity, the particles continue to move with whatever velocity it gets from the collision with other particles. If we had JUST the set position for the velocity, we would not be taking the collisions into account, so there would be no motion at all. That's why the best way is to have a set position for the collisions, calculate the new velocity after collision and then have a set position that maintains that velocity. I really hope this helps solve your question And I'm also sorry for the late response...
In Blender 4.1 is the mesh to volume not the same as in Blender 3.6 it has no exterior band width so the particles falling out. Someone made a a tutorial about it. It's called broken mesh to volume.
Odd decision to start off with a cube when you wanted a spherical volume of points. Why not start off with a sphere and skip all the extra steps? Not to mention that is faster than creating extra points and deleting them
Very true. You could definitely use a sphere and distribute points in that directly. Truthfully, I went with that process because the official blender open examples does something similar on a 2D plane... In their version, they choose to distribute points on the plane and then delete the points outside a radius to create a circle of points... So I wanted to try recreating the entire thing in 3D and so the first thought that entered my mind was to create a 3D cube and delete the points... I did realise that you could simply use a sphere (I believe I mentioned it in the tutorial itself, that you can use a sphere and distribute points directly), however, I thought that actually learning that you could technically create your own shapes with math and how you can do that was also a valuable piece of information that could be taught.
your content is good i guess you are not getting good views because of your thumbnail are too dark try to post some thumbnail sample in your youtube community as ask your subscriber which one they like (sorry if my comment hurt or offend you in any but i genuienly want you to grow and create more better content)
Thank you so much for the suggestion! I definitely won't get offended or hurt because I genuinely appreciate constructive criticism. I'm in no way a "professional youtuber" yet, so I'm also learning. I'll try to make brighter thumbnails and cycle through different thumbnails as well. Hopefully that will help. I'll try adding in polls to the community posts as well. Thank you, once again :)
Keep up the good work !!! love to see your work.
Thank you so much!
I really appreciate it :)
Thank you bro!
Thanks! I'm glad you liked it!
I'm about half way through and really enjoying this. I don't understand why we Set Position twice though (I haven't gotten to colliding with the cube bounds yet, I'm just before it). Can you detail why you're setting the position twice in one step? I get that the leftmost Set Position is for the velocity. But I'm confused why we offset it with its velocity, and then move it again based on the collision.
Hi,
So before the collisions with the bounds, there are 2 set positions: one for the collisions and one for the velocity.
So essentially, if we had ONLY the collision set position, the points would not move, if they're not colliding with a particle. Resulting in everything just moving far enough to stop touching anything else and then remain stagnant just like that.
By adding in the set position for the velocity, the particles continue to move with whatever velocity it gets from the collision with other particles.
If we had JUST the set position for the velocity, we would not be taking the collisions into account, so there would be no motion at all.
That's why the best way is to have a set position for the collisions, calculate the new velocity after collision and then have a set position that maintains that velocity.
I really hope this helps solve your question
And I'm also sorry for the late response...
Great Tutorial, thank you!
Thank you so much!
I'm happy to know that you enjoyed the tutorial :)
Really good tutorial man!
Thank you so much! I genuinely appreciate it! :)
beautifull, thank you
Thank you so much!
In Blender 4.1 is the mesh to volume not the same as in Blender 3.6 it has no exterior band width so the particles falling out. Someone made a a tutorial about it. It's called broken mesh to volume.
Thank you so much for letting us know. I still haven't explored that area in the latest version of blender, but I'll be sure to do it someday soon!
Odd decision to start off with a cube when you wanted a spherical volume of points. Why not start off with a sphere and skip all the extra steps? Not to mention that is faster than creating extra points and deleting them
Very true.
You could definitely use a sphere and distribute points in that directly.
Truthfully, I went with that process because the official blender open examples does something similar on a 2D plane... In their version, they choose to distribute points on the plane and then delete the points outside a radius to create a circle of points...
So I wanted to try recreating the entire thing in 3D and so the first thought that entered my mind was to create a 3D cube and delete the points...
I did realise that you could simply use a sphere (I believe I mentioned it in the tutorial itself, that you can use a sphere and distribute points directly), however, I thought that actually learning that you could technically create your own shapes with math and how you can do that was also a valuable piece of information that could be taught.
@@deayanstudios I paused the video before you showed how to make a sphere out of the cube and enjoyed the challenge. Thanks for taking that approach.
your content is good i guess you are not getting good views because of your thumbnail are too dark try to post some thumbnail sample in your youtube community as ask your subscriber which one they like (sorry if my comment hurt or offend you in any but i genuienly want you to grow and create more better content)
Thank you so much for the suggestion!
I definitely won't get offended or hurt because I genuinely appreciate constructive criticism. I'm in no way a "professional youtuber" yet, so I'm also learning.
I'll try to make brighter thumbnails and cycle through different thumbnails as well. Hopefully that will help. I'll try adding in polls to the community posts as well.
Thank you, once again :)
@@deayanstudios glad you like it