CGPress uses technology like cookies to analyse the number of visitors to our site and how it is navigated. We DO NOT sell or profit from your data beyond displaying inconspicuous adverts relevant to CG artists. It'd really help us out if you could accept the cookies, but of course we appreciate your choice not to share data.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Looking at the documentation of Scatter 5, I would like to know the opinion of Forest Pack Pro experts on what do they think this addon miss in comparison, it could be an interesting opinion 🙂
and why would their opinion matter? forestpack is not made for blender
Maybe because it would be interesting nonetheless?
Scatter and Forest Pack Pro work in the same realm. Hearing from a Forest Pack Pro user if there might be something missing, or that could be improved in Scatter, could be an interesting feedback for the Scatter development.
Or perhaps there’s something that Scatter does better, and Forest Pack could introduce to its workflow… who knows.
Are there any 3ds max users left?……….echo….echooooo……..(sorry couldn’t resist)
Here is your echo, are there any 3ds max users left, lol, yea, lots of out there, except we are all busy working on real world projects making money and don’t have time to engage in meaningless conversation.
but u are ))
My humour is post-modern, I am just joking around – also a 3ds max user busy with real-world projects too.
“… except we are all busy working on real world projects making money and don’t have time to engage in meaningless conversation.” …and that is what you can call irony. lol.
and sure you need to make lots of money so you can pay all that software even when you don’t need it and you are having summer vacation so i understand 🙂
And yes this was humor – just joking or maybe not 🙂
I prefer perpetual licensing – tyflow had great licensing btw. and it is only thing that makes 3ds max stronger at the moment. it was necessary “artificial respiration” because autodesk is doing nothing – mudbox is dying, 3ds dev is dying, maya? bifrost.. nothing special in their updates :/ But luckily there is houdini. their dev. speed is like Christmas gift every year – so much new things in each release and best thing: many licensing options. Wonderful combination with blender. But i would really like to hear is there something important that scatter is missing. Feedback is always important when trying to make products more competitive but that is thing what autodesk doesn’t care so i understand why it doesn’t seem to be important for some specific product users.
If you like to ecourage positive feedback, perhaps dont engage in negative feedback yourself. 3ds Max is a powerfull piece of software, Blender is too. 3ds max user do care about updates and improvements. If you think otherwise, why do you even bother having a discussion here?
Then, just use Houdini and find a peace if you can. Houdini cult seems worse than Blender gevans.
Marco gave a very good explanation.
Forest Pack is not made for Blender, and I’ve had some long conversations with his creator in person some years ago, a very very nice guy, I really like his software, and his company is one of the best companies out there.
I told him that Scatter was coming, and that supporting Blender would be an interesting idea, if it was not done at that time Scatter was going to improve up to a point where it would be the first, not to say Forest Pack could not sell anything on Blender, because max users coming to Blender would prefer to use Forest Pack because they know it, but it’s not the same as being the first and number one in the ecosystem.
With that said, Forest Pack is a magnificent piece of software, and seasoned users of Forest Pack could give a great point of view about the fact of they missing some features for example.
And that could be Max users coming to Blender, or Max users not coming to Blender, it does not matter, improvement comes from many places, and the most important one is users, no matter the software.
BTW it could be added that it is not only what do they miss in comparison as I say in my first message, it would also be what do they miss from Forest Pack itself too.
Not seeing distibution by a particle system, where orientation and scale of particles is inherited, even when animated. Currently only working with one emitter is a huge limitation. As is 30 million instances (CycleX limitation only?). But if one were just doing architectural renders, it would be a handy tool as you probably wouldn’t hit that limit that easily. Camera ray mask looks handy. Looks easy to use as well.
Mmm I missed the 30 million instance limit you mention, I’ll ask the dev about it.
regarding the particles, that’s basically because the blender particle system is the old one yet, once it comes to the GN system Scatter will probably take advantage of it.
The one emmiter only is a good one, I mean, good catch, you are right that could be better to be able to work with several objects at once, basically with a collection.
thanks for this feedback, I’ll discuss it with the dev 🙂
Not sure if the 30 million is a a hard limit, or if it suffers greatly at that point. It sounds like it is render engine related.
As far as I know, the Scatter 5 already uses GN.
As for being able to work with collections, is not what it does already?
Yes, Scatter 5 makes extensive use of GN, what I meant is the “particles” thing, right now points can move and other things, but there is a particle simulation toolset, and that’s what I meant.
Regarding collections, I have not tested 5 myself, but I’m not sure you can pick a collection to apply the scatter instead of an object like before, and that’s what I meant 🙂
Oh, I see what you mean. Thanks for the clarification.
You’re right, collections are not supported.
I spoke with the dev about the 30 million limit.
It’s not a hard limit, the thing is that when you reach 30 million instances (with his GPU) the pre-process time is quite large, he is talking about 8 minutes of pre-processing and 8 Gb of ram.
But there is no actual limit, it’s just that the process time increases quite a lot, that’s it.
Yeah, this limit its almost everywhere, 3dsmax with Frost using instances its sitting around this values as well. You can go higher if you want, but preprocess times of al the matrix starts to get ridiculous. For what I see looks pretty complete. I will say that forestpack has the advantage of working with vray/arnold for example, but this is not relevant for Blender. I like that you can instance over particles, and not only geometry (lights, volumegrids,), for what I see scatter so far its only geometry?
I’ve downloaded Scatter 5.2 for Blender3.1 and followed the instruction of downloading and scattering biomes. However when creating a scatter system, it doesn’t generate any particle system in Blender thus nothing shows up.
Anyone know the reason for this?