Search Results

Search found 138 results on 6 pages for 'particles'.

Page 1/6 | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >

• How to offset particles from point of origin

  - by Sun

  Hi I'm having troubles off setting particles from a point of origin. I want my particles to spread out after a certain radius from a the point of origin. For example, this is what I have right now: All particles emitted from a point of origin. What I want is this: Particles are offset from the point of origin by some amount, i.e after the circle. What is the best way to achieve this? At the moment, I have the point of origin, the position of each particle and its rotation angle. Sorry for the poor illustrations. Edit: I was mistaken, when a particle is created, I have only the point of origin. When the particle is created I am able to calculate the rotation of the particle in the update method after it has moved to a new location using atan2() method. This is how I create/manage particles: Created new particle at enemy ship death location, for every new particle which is added to the list, call Update and Draw to update its position, calculate new angle and draw it.

  Read the article

• Drawing particles as a smooth blob

  - by Nömmik

  I'm new to game/graphics development and I'm playing around with particles (in 2D). I want to draw particles close to each other as a blob, just as liquid/water. I do not want to draw big circles overlapping as the blob won't be smooth (and too big). I don't really know physics but I assume what I want is something looking similar to surface tension. I haven't been able to find anything on stackexchange or on Google (maybe I do not know the correct keywords?). So far I have found two possible solutions, but I am unable to find any concrete information about algorithms. One of them is to calculate the concave hull of particles I consider being a blob. I can calculate the blob by creating an equivalence class (on the relation "close to each other"). Strangely enough I haven't been able to find any algorithm explaining how to calculate the concave hull. Many posts (and among stackexchange) links to libraries or commercial products that do this (I need libraries to work in C#), but never any algorithm. Also this solution might have a problem with a circle of particles, which would not detect the empty space in the middle. While researching concave hull I stumbled upon something called alpha shapes. Which seems to be exactly what I want to do, however just as with concave hull I haven't found any source explaining how they actually work. I have found some presentation materials but not enough to go on. It's like a big secret everyone knows except me :-/ After calculating the concave hull or alpha shape I want to make it a Bézier curve to make it smooth and nice. Although I do find my approach a bit too complex, maybe I am trying to solve this the wrong way? If you can either suggest any other solution to my problem, or explain the pieces I am missing I would be very happy and grateful :-) Thanks.

  Read the article

• Generating and rendering not point-like particles on GPU

  - by TravisG

  Specifically I'm talking about particles as seen (for example) in the UE4 dev video here. They're not just points and seem to have a nice shape to them that seems to follow their movement. Is it possible to create these kinds of particles (efficiently) completely on the GPU (perhaps through something like motion? Or is the only (or most efficient) way to just create a small particle texture and render small quads for each particle?

  Read the article

• How to render 2D particles as fluid?

  - by luke

  Suppose you have a nice way to move your 2D particles in order to simulate a fluid (like water). Any ideas on how to render it? This is for a 2D game, where the perspective is from the side, like this. The water will be contained in boxes that can be broken in order to let it fall down and interact with other objects. The simplest way that comes to my mind is to use a small image for each particle. I am interested in hearing more ways of rendering water.

  Read the article

• How to implement soft edge areas with particles

  - by OpherV

  My game is created using Phaser, but the question itself is engine-agnostic. In my game I have several environments, essentially polygonal areas that player characters can move into and be affected by. For example ice, fire, poison etc' The graphic element of these areas is the color filled polygon area itself, and particles of the suitable type (in this example ice shards). This is how I'm currently implementing this - with a polygon mask covering a tilesprite with the particle pattern: The hard edge looks bad. I'd like to improve by doing two things: 1. Making the polygon fill area to have a soft edge, and blend into the background. 2. Have some of the shards go out of the polygon area, so that they are not cut in the middle and the area doesn't have a straight line for example (mockup): I think 1 can be achieved with blurring the polygon, but I'm not sure how to go about with 2. How would you go about implementing this?

  Read the article

• Drawing particles with CPU instead of GPU (XNA)

  - by Helix

  I'm trying out modifications to the following particle system. http://create.msdn.com/en-US/education/catalog/sample/particle_3d I have a function such that when I press Space, all the particles have their positions and velocities set to 0. for (int i = 0; i < particles.GetLength(0); i++) { particles[i].Position = Vector3.Zero; particles[i].Velocity = Vector3.Zero; } However, when I press space, the particles are still moving. If I go to FireParticleSystem.cs I can turn settings.Gravity to 0 and the particles stop moving, but the particles are still not being shifted to (0,0,0). As I understand it, the problem lies in the fact that the GPU is processing all the particle positions, and it's calculating where the particles should be based on their initial position, their initial velocity and multiplying by their age. Therefore, all I've been able to do is change the initial position and velocity of particles, but I'm unable to do it on the fly since the GPU is handling everything. I want the CPU to calculate the positions of the particles individually. This is because I will be later implementing some sort of wind to push the particles around. How do I stop the GPU from taking over? I think it's something to do with VertexBuffers and the draw function, but I don't know how to modify it to make it work.

  Read the article

• How can I keep straight alpha during rendering particles?

  - by April

  Rencently,I was trying to save textures of 3D particles so that I can reuse the in 2D rendering.Now I had some problem with alpha channel.Some artist told me I that my textures should have unpremultiplied alpha channel.When I try to get the rgb value back,I got strange result.Some area went lighter and even totally white.I mainly focus on additive and blend mode,that is: ADDITIVE: srcAlpha VS 1 BLEND: srcAlpha VS 1-srcAlpha I tried a technique called premultiplied alpha.This technique just got you the right rgb value,its all you need on screen.As for alpha value,it worked well with BLEND mode,but not ADDITIVE mode.As you can see in parameters,BLEND mode always controlled its value within 1.While ADDITIVE mode cannot guarantee. I want proper alpha,but it just got too big or too small consider to rgb.Now what can I do?Any help will be great thankful. PS:If you don't understand what I am trying to do,there is a commercial software called "Particle Illusion".You can create various particles and then save the scene to texture,where you can choose to remove background of particles. Now,I changed the title.For some software like maya or AE,what I want is called [straight alpha].

  Read the article

• How can I keep the correct alpha during rendering particles?

  - by April

  Rencently,I was trying to save textures of 3D particles so that I can reuse the in 2D rendering.Now I had some problem with alpha channel.Some artist told me I that my textures should have unpremultiplied alpha channel.When I try to get the rgb value back,I got strange result.Some area went lighter and even totally white.I mainly focus on additive and blend mode,that is: ADDITIVE: srcAlpha VS 1 BLEND: srcAlpha VS 1-srcAlpha I tried a technique called premultiplied alpha.This technique just got you the right rgb value,its all you need on screen.As for alpha value,it worked well with BLEND mode,but not ADDITIVE mode.As you can see in parameters,BLEND mode always controlled its value within 1.While ADDITIVE mode cannot guarantee. I want proper alpha,but it just got too big or too small consider to rgb.Now what can I do?Any help will be great thankful. PS:If you don't understand what I am trying to do,there is a commercial software called "Particle Illusion".You can create various particles and then save the scene to texture,where you can choose to remove background of particles.

  Read the article

• best method of turning millions of x,y,z positions of particles into visualisation

  - by Griff

  I'm interested in different algorithms people use to visualise millions of particles in a box. I know you can use Cloud-In-Cell, adaptive mesh, Kernel smoothing, nearest grid point methods etc to reduce the load in memory but there is very little documentation on how to do these things online. i.e. I have array with: x,y,z 1,2,3 4,5,6 6,7,8 xi,yi,zi for i = 100 million for example. I don't want a package like Mayavi/Paraview to do it, I want to code this myself then load the decomposed matrix into Mayavi (rather than on-the-fly rendering) My poor 8Gb Macbook explodes if I try and use the particle positions. Any tutorials would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• How to do the Geometry Wars gravity well effect

  - by Mykel Stone

  I'm not talking about the background grid here, I'm talking about the swirly particles going around the Gravity Wells! I've always liked the effect and decided it'd be a fun experiment to replicate it, I know GW uses Hooke's law all over the place, but I don't think the Particle-to-Well effect is done using springs, it looks like a distance-squared function. Here is a video demonstrating the effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgJe0YI18Fg I can implement a spring or gravity effect on some particles just fine, that's easy. But I can't seem to get the effect to look similar to GWs effect. When I watch the effect in game it seems that the particles are emitted in bunches from the Well itself, they spiral outward around the center of the well, and eventually get flung outward, fall back towards the well, and repeat. How does he make the particles spiral outward when spawned? How does he keep the particle bunches together when near the Well but spread away from each other when they're flung outward? How does he keep the particles so strongly attached to the Well?

  Read the article

• How to create a Raining Effect(Particles) on Android?

  - by user19495

  I am developing a 2d android strategy game, it runs on SurfaceView, so I can't(or can I?) use LibGdx's particle system. And I would like to make a raining effect, I am aiming for something like this( http://ridingwiththeriver.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/rain-fall-animation.gif ), I don't need the splash effect in the end (although that would be superb, but probably would take up a lot of system resources). How could I achieve that raining effect? Any ideas? Thank You a lot in advance!

  Read the article

• Fastest Strategy for Drawing Flash Particles

  - by user146543

  I am wondering what the fastest approach might be for using Flash/AS3 to render a 2D point plot (sonar lofargram) ; basically screens full of tiny 2D dots using Flash as fast as possible. Any suggestions on where to start? Is Flash capable of displaying 10's of thousands of 2D points (or more) with an acceptable fps?

  Read the article

• how to create a particle system on iphone and retain the created particles?

  - by lukya

  Hi all, I need to create a particle system and retain the created particles. I need to shake / move the created particles with the iphone accelerometer. Also, the number of particles needs to be very high (I need to show sand!). I do not have any OpenGLES programming experience. After initial search, I found Cocos2D can be used for particle generation. But there is no way of retaining the particles in the CCParticle system. As a work around, I tried creating many sprites at the end of particle generation and shown them as particles. But moving few number of sprites with accelerometer drops the frame rate considerably. Please suggest how this can be achieved and whether I should look for some other framework or if some kind of similar demo code is available. Thanks, Swapnil

  Read the article

• How to simulate pressure with particles?

  - by BeachRunnerJoe

  I'm trying to simulate pressure with a collection of spherical particles in a Unity game I'm building. A couple notes about the problem: The goal is to fill a constantly changing 2d space/void with small, frictionless spheres. The game is trying to simulate the ever-growing pressure of more objects being shoved into this space. The level itself is constantly scrolling from left to right, meaning if the space's dimensions are not changed by the user it will automatically get smaller (the leftmost part of the space will continually scroll off-screen). I'm wondering what some approaches are that I can take to tackling these problems... Knowing when to detect when there is space to fill and then add spheres to the space. Removing spheres from the space when it is shrinking. Strategies to simulate pressure on the spheres such that they "explode outwards" when more space is created. The current approach I am contemplating is using a constantly moving wall, that is off screen and moves with the screen, as this image illustrates: . This moving wall will push and trap the spheres into the space. As for adding new spheres, I was going to have either (1) spheres replicate themselves upon detecting free space, OR (2) spawn them at the left side of the space (where the wall is) - pushing the rest of the spheres to fill the space. I foresee problems with idea #1 because this likely wouldn't really create/simulate pressure; idea #2 seems more promising, but raises the question of how to provide a location for these new sphere particles to spawn (and the ramifications of spawning them when there IS no space). Thanks so much in advance for your wisdom!

  Read the article

• Drawing flaming letters in 3D with OpenGL ES 2.0

  - by Chiquis

  I am a bit confused about how to achieve this. What I want is to "draw with flames". I have achieved this with textures successfully, but now my concern is about doing this with particles to achieve the flaming effect. Am I supposed to create a path along which I should add many particle emitters that will be emitting flame particles? I understand the concept for 2D, but for 3D are the particles always supposed to be facing the user? Something else I'm worried about is the performance hit that will occur by having that many particle emitters, because there can be many letters and drawings at the same time, and each of these elements will have many particle emitters. More detailed explanation: I have a path of points, which is my model. Imagine a dotted letter "S" for example. I want make the "S" be on fire. The "S" is just an example it can be a circle, triangle, a line, pretty much any path described by my set of points. For achieving this fire effect I thought about using particles. So I am using a program called "Particle Designer" to create a fire style particle emitter. This emitter looks perfect on 2D on the iphone screen dimensions. So then I thought that I could probably draw an S or any other figure if i place many particle emitters next to each other following the path described. To move from the 2D version to the 3D version I thought about, scaling the emitter (with a scale matrix multiplication in its model matrix) and then moving it to a point in my 3D world. I did this and it works. So now I have 1 particle emitter in the 3D world. My question is, is this how you would achieve a flaming letter? Is this too inefficient if i expect to have many flaming paths on my world? Am i supposed to rotate the particle's quad so that its always looking at the user? (the last one is because i noticed that if u look at it from the side the particles start to flatten out)

  Read the article

• OpenGL sprites and point size limitation

  - by Srdan

  I'm developing a simple particle system that should be able to perform on mobile devices (iOS, Andorid). My plan was to use GL_POINT_SPRITE/GL_PROGRAM_POINT_SIZE method because of it's efficiency (GL_POINTS are enough), but after some experimenting, I found myself in a trouble. Sprite size is limited (to usually 64 pixels). I'm calculating size using this formula gl_PointSize = in_point_size * some_factor / distance_to_camera to make particle sizes proportional to distance to camera. But at some point, when camera is close enough, problem with size limitation emerges and whole system starts looking unrealistic. Is there a way to avoid this problem? If no, what's alternative? I was thinking of manually generating billboard quad for each particle. Now, I have some questions about that approach. I guess minimum geometry data would be four vertices per particle and index array to make quads from these vertices (with GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP). Additionally, for each vertex I need a color and texture coordinate. I would put all that in an interleaved vertex array. But as you can see, there is much redundancy. All vertices of same particle share same color value, and four texture coordinates are same for all particles. Because of how glDrawArrays/Elements works, I see no way to optimise this. Do you know of a better approach on how to organise per-particle data? Should I use buffers or vertex arrays, or there is no difference because each time I have to update all particles' data. About particles simulation... Where to do it? On CPU or on a vertex processors? Something tells me that mobile's CPU would do it faster than it's vertex unit (at least today in 2012 :). So, any advice on how to make a simple and efficient particle system without particle size limitation, for mobile device, would be appreciated. (animation of camera passing through particles should be realistic)

  Read the article

• Order independent transparency in particle system

  - by Stepan Zastupov

  I'm writing a particle system and would like to find a trick to achieve proper alpha blending without sorting particles because: Each particle is a point sprite in a single mesh and I can't use scene graph ability to sort transparent nodes. The system node should be properly sorted, though. Particle position is computed on shader from initial velocity, acceleration and time. In order to sort the system I would have to perform all this computations on CPU, which is something I want to avoid. Sorting hundreds of particles against camera position and uploading it on GPU each frame seams to be quiet heavy operation. Alpha testing seems to be fast enough on GLES 2.0 and works fine for non-transparent but "masked" textures. Still, it's not enough for semi-transparent particles. How would you handle this?

  Read the article

• UDK ParticleSystem Problem

  - by EmAdpres

  I use below code to create my particles ( in fact, I don't know any other way.) spawnedParticleComponents = WorldInfo.MyEmitterPool.SpawnEmitter(ParticleSystem'ParticleName', Location, Rotator ); spawnedParticleComponents.setTranslation(newLocation); ... And unfortunately, I spawn many particles in game. When I play my game, after some time, I see Exceeded max active pooled emitters! Warning in console . To solve the problem, first, I tried spawnedParticleComponents.DeactivateSystem();, But it doesn't help. Then I try WorldInfo.MyEmitterPool.ClearPoolComponents(false);, But it doesn't either . :( How can I destroy many spawned particles and avoid this warning ?

  Read the article

• Artifacts when draw particles with some alpha

  - by piotrek

  I want to draw in my game some particles. But when I draw one particle above another particle, alpha channel from this above "clear" previous drawed particle. I set in OpenGL blend in this way: glBlendFunc( GL_SRC_ALPHA, GL_ONE_MINUS_SRC_ALPHA ); My fragment shader for particle is very simple: precision highp float; precision highp int; uniform sampler2D u_maps[2]; varying vec2 v_texture; uniform float opaque; uniform vec3 colorize; void main() { vec4 texColor = texture2D(u_maps[0], v_texture); gl_FragColor.rgb = texColor.rgb * colorize.rgb; gl_FragColor.a = texColor.a * opaque; } I attach screenshot from this: Do you know what I made wrong ? I use OpenGL ES 2.0.

  Read the article

• Particles are not moving correctly [closed]

  - by cr33p

  I want to make a particle explosion, after something gets destroyed, but somehow only one line of mixed colors show up on the screen. Here's the header: http://pastebin.com/JW5bPLj2 Here's the source: http://pastebin.com/KHmFqytD I don't get what's wrong, as it's nearly the same as in "Programming Linux Games" Can somebody help me fix that? PS: "Uint32 delta" is needed to update the pixels based on time. PSS: Maybe I should add that it's programmed in C and includes SDL. EDIT: Found the problem. It was the "drawParticles" function. The problem was, that I passed a double to "offset" (as particles[i].x, etc are all doubles). So I ended up with values like ~MAX_INT because I didn't cast the doubles properly to ints.

  Read the article

• How are these bullets done?

  - by Mike

  I really want to know how the bullets in Radiangames Inferno are done. The bullets seem like they are just billboard particles but I am curious about how their tails are implemented. They can curve so this means they are not just a billboard. Also, they appear continuous which implies that the tails are not made of a bunch of smaller particles (I think). Can anyone shead some light on this for me?

  Read the article

• How are these bullets done?

  - by Mike

  I really want to know how the bullets in Radiangames Inferno are done. The bullets seem like they are just billboard particles but I am curious about how their tails are implemented. They can curve so this means they are not just a billboard. Also, they appear continuous which implies that the tails are not made of a bunch of smaller particles (I think). Can anyone shead some light on this for me?

  Read the article

• How to create Particles structure from text in AS3?

  - by Ole Jak

  I want to take any Text sting and form from it text formed by particles in actionscript 3 (In flash \ flex) I see I need some lib for this. but all libs Ive seen do not have such functionalyty by default... So I want to get something like this So Is there any sych lib? or way of doing it with some lib?

  Read the article

• Alternatives to multiple sprite batches for achieving 2D particle system depth

  - by Ergwun

  In my 2D XNA game, I render all my sprites with a single sprite batch using SpriteSortMode.BackToFront and BlendState.AlphaBlend. I'm adding a particle system based on the App Hub particles sample. Since this uses SpriteSortMode.Deferred and BlendState.Additive, I will need to have two SpriteBatch.Begin / SpriteBatch.End pairs: one for 'regular' sprites, and one for particles. In my top-down shooter, If I want to have explosions appear under planes, but above the ground, then I believe I will have to have three Begin/End pairs, first to draw everything under the explosions, then to draw the explosions, then to draw everything above the explosions. If I want to have particle effects at multiple different depths, then I'm going to need even more Begin/Endpairs. This is all easy to code, but I'm wondering if there is an alternative way to handle this?

  Read the article

• Drawing flaming letters in 3d on OpenGL ES 2.0

  - by Chiquis

  I am a bit confused about how to achieve this. What i want is to "draw with flames". I have achieved this with textures successfully, but now my concern is about doing this with particles to achieve the flaming effect. Am I supposed to have a Path in where i should add many particle emitters along the path that will "be emitting flames"? I understand the concept for 2d, but for 3d are the particles (that are quads) always supposed to be facing the user? Edit: Something else im worried about is the performance hit that will occur by having that many particle emitters, because there can be many letters and drawings at the same time. And each of these elements will have many particle emitters.

  Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >