Page 1 of 1

Filter Deamon issues with mulitple emitters

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 4:29 pm
by ben.fox@framestore.com
My issue can be seen very easily, and I am wondering if this is just the way things are supposed to work or something that could be fixed.
Create two emitters, a container and a filter. Filter the two emitters into the container based on speed. Works great, unless one of the emitters turns off...then the filter stops working.
It gets even more troublesome if you have more than one fill object emitter getting filtered, once one of the fill objects has been completely filtered out, then the filter stops working as well, even if there are other emitter particles around.
I have posted an example file, which will hopefully illustrate this issue.
We are running 2013.7.1.3.0152 and it would be great to get this working.
Thanks so much for any help.
~Ben

Re: Filter Deamon issues with mulitple emitters

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 4:45 pm
by Alex
Hi Ben,

well spotted bug. When the filter is iterating through the source emitters it should skip those without particles. However, it is stopping the whole process instead of skipping just that emitter. :(

There can be some workarounds for it. The first two I can think of are:
The "easiest" one is using a separate filter for every source emitter.
The order of the source emitters matter. So, for example, in this case this would work:

Code: Select all

Filter01.setParameter( "Source Emitters", "endEmit constantEmit" )
Sorry for the inconvenience

Re: Filter Deamon issues with mulitple emitters

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 5:12 pm
by ben.fox@framestore.com
Alex,
Thanks for the speedy reply.
I think I will go the 'change the order of the emitters' route on the filter instead of multiple filters.
That is a workable solution until this gets fixed.
Thanks for looking into the issue, it made me pull out my hair for a little while the few times I have run into the error.
I guess since the order actually matters it can be a very random one to run into...but no less bug-y-some.
Again, thanks so much!
~Ben