Hopefully at some point, but for the time being Nvidia and Epic keeping it separate, same as how Substance Designer’s plugin is a separate build. Hopefully when the market supports C++ plugins, it’ll become an option. A lot of the stuff on the Gameworks branch is WIP as well.
For reference, https://www.dropbox/s/c38j8uspzxw02hk/1.png?dl=0 and https://www.dropbox/s/u508fkbvtlwrq9e/2.png?dl=0 are what it’s supposed to look like. I’ve been struggling to get the VXGI build to look comparable to it. The first picture I will admit probably looks much darker than it’s meant to, I’ve been working on a monitor with horrible calibration and it makes everything way too bright. I did try to compensate, but until I get the in a few days to bring it in to where there are properly calibrated monitors, it’s just guesswork.
@, any reason that a tool couldn’t be built for generating the HairWorks splines in-engine? It seems to me it’s mostly a case of just setting up 1 spline with N knots per vertex along the surface normal, and then letting the user bend them around and save it into the APEX format.
I am planning on working on one myself if NVIDIA choose not to, doing exactly as you stated, and having options to brush, scale, cut, etc. It doesn’t even need to be saved in APX format, as the library allow you to create hair from just data, of course it should allow for exporting to APX format, but I believe is also supported by the library
I don’t know of any technical reason why couldn’t work, or why technically it shouldn’t be done, but as I recall, whenever I bring up the subject of a complete in-engine toolchain, some of our lead technical artists on the HairWorks project push back vigorously. Toochain and workflow are largely a matter of preference, but our artists believe that much of the work should be done in the DCC plugins together with a dedicated tool like the HairWorks viewer. Not being a production artist myself (or any kind of artist really), I like the idea of having a complete toolchain in-engine, at least one that would let you do, say, 90% of the operations that the full toolchain provides. makes it much easier to introduce the to new people, demonstrate it, roll out new versions, etc.
Hey ,
Are there any plans for a FlameWorks integration to UE4?
regards
Yes, but the name FlameWorks won’t really appear. We have merged the functionality of FlameWorks into the latest Turbulence module…namely, temperature, fuel and a combustion divergence rate…and we are working on a UE4-Turbulence integration. Right now we’re trying to get over the rendering hurdles, because it requires a volumetric render technique, which of course will have to play nicely with shadows, other particles, transparency, etc., and is not trivial.
Okay that solved it, but now I’m getting right after I start compiling 
Somehow that lib was blown away. Did you look for it in Source/ThirdParty/GameWorks/VXGI/lib/x64?
I tend to be on both sides of the fence really, I can see the benefits of a in-engine toolchain, but also can also see the side of the technical artists, same argument applies to in-engine modelling tools. I think would be a great project for the community to work on, while the HairWorks team can continue on making HairWorks for UE4, and continue to maintain the plugins and standalone viewer. The in-engine hair modeller could be released as an optional plugin that users could choose to install if they would like the features.
I totally approve that. It would be good to have both: one in-engien and one for DCC that can be used in anything even in movies. Epic should also add an in-engine modeler: may be very helpful too.
Edit : 4.8 Preview 4 is up.
For some reason the x64 folder doesnt exist
I did it exactly the same way I always set up new builds…
Edit: Okay so it wasn’t in the zip file I downloaded from github either… that’s weird :S I’m dling it again right now
Will NVidia WaveWorks branch get updated and get better sample? I compiled and opened the sample, the water is still there and doesn’t move. Nothing like Boat sample shown at the NVidia’s site where waves change according to weather.
I understand their position and think it makes sense in terms of what NVIDIA should support for the general industry - it’s likely most developers using HairWorks will be larger teams, and that makes sense you’d want your artists to stay in the art package as much as possible, since they aren’t usually going into the engine like on a small team or sole dev.
I’m not an artist either, so that’s exactly my thinking as well. Trying to use art packages is a nightmare for me, and the first thing the HairWorks pipeline tells you to do is use an art package + third party plugin.
Staying in engine is always faster for me generally, and Epic already took approach somewhat with the destructible mesh tools etc. I think it makes a lot of sense to have part of the pipeline inside UE4.
Even better, to start with. Though I mentioned exporting to .apx because of all the parameters and stuff the viewer tool has (setting the textures and all that), which would take longer to recreate in UE4 than just the Maya/ part of it.
I’m going to begin toying with it in the next couple of days , I’ll fork your repo for it.
I know. It makes me sad to think of how WaveWorks hasn’t made any progress. Believe me, it’s on the TODO list.
Edit…wait…are you saying the waves don’t move when you run the level in PIE? That should work just fine. If not, you’re missing a DLL, or a shader or something.
Yes, I wisehd the sample to be like your spectacular and boat demo which changes according to weather conditions that I really appreciated from you and I thank you for it. I can wait for such results one day for UE4. Don’t rush yourself for it. Take your time. 
Well I got :
And nothing moves when I hit Play. Is that normal? Is it missing anything?
Keep us updated, maybe we can combine efforts at some point. Right now I am just toying with the idea myself, I’ve done plenty of editor integration, but nothing of caliber.
So I’ve looked through some of the editor customization stuff and I have an idea of what to do, but there are some options for how we want to go about it, and I could use everyone’s feedback:
-
Static Mesh Editor, basically a panel/tab like the collision generation tab, with a button for making a new set of splines, and brushes.
-
A totally separate editor like the static mesh editor but specific to doing hairworks splines.
My thought right now is that we don’t really need its own viewport editor, as there’s just not that much going on in part of the process - select a mesh, gen splines, brush 'em around a bit, send it over to the HairWorks component or a .apx for finishing in the standalone HairWorks tool.
That said for a tighter integration that would do the rest of the stuff you might want like the HairWorks viewer thingy does, selecting all the textures, setting all the various LOD distances and whatnot, it might be better to have in its own viewport editor. That said, a panel is about my speed right now - I could do a viewport editor, but it seems like a lot of boilerplate setup, and I’d rather have a panel that works now than a viewport editor standalone that works later. Longer term I will definitely see about getting its own viewport editor and trying to get some sort of parity with the HairWorks tool.
Let me know what you guys think.
Add me on Steam and UE4 launcher chat (I’m not on the latter much, but I’m always on Steam) and we can discuss it more in depth. My nickname is the same as . Same for anyone else interested in the integration. I also don’t mind helping people out with UE4 questions.
Nothing moves? That shouldn’t be the case. The waves do move, last time I looked at it. I’ll download a fresh clone and see if it is still working, although I don’t know any reason why it should have broken.
Yes, last time I downloaded few months ago, everything worked fine. I really don’t know why it doesn’t work now. BTW, whenever I clone using github, ayn sample folder of any repository doesn’t get downloaded, so I always use the zip now. Would you please check usethe zip file to check if it was missing sth? Thank you very much.