I extremely doubt that it’s “for efficiency causes”.
Extra doubtless is that the vertices are merely being addressed by their indices within the triangle checklist.
So if totally different triangles reuse the identical vertices, a number of particles find yourself at these vertices.
Not less than that may be my guess.
1 Like
Thanks Niels,
Does reusing the identical vertices not occur to all of the triangles of a mesh? If a polygon mesh encompass a number of triangulated polygons which have three vertices shared by different triangulated polygons, ought to it occur to all of the triangles of a mesh?
For some purpose, it appears to be solely taking place to a curved mesh.
Hello! I used to be questioning if there’s a manner for Niagara sprite render, to lock an particular axis for the digicam going through. I believe this may very well be simply completed in Cascade however is there a manner to do that in Niagara?
Thanks prematurely 
You possibly can set a customized going through vector to construct customized going through conduct of sprites.
Though, if I keep in mind appropriately, to get the identical factor as cascade, you retain the going through vector the identical, and set the orientation vector to the axis you wish to lock.
How would I am going about studying coloration data from a cloth in Niagara?
I wish to spawn particles from the sides of a dissolving mesh.
I acquired it to work by studying the fabric coloration utilizing UV and mesh sampling. In my materials, I’m dissolving a texture after which masking it out utilizing particle coloration earlier than including the sting coloration on prime. This fashion I can let solely the particle spawned from the sting be seen once I set the particle coloration to (0, 0, 0, 0).
However doing it this fashion I can’t customise the particles exterior of their coloration base on the sting coloration.
I tried to emit particles from these particles however the invisible particles would nonetheless emit particles, and I’ve had a tough time attempting to kill them off.
Any recommendation? Perhaps there are another methods of reaching this?
Hello all,
have fairly bizarre stuff taking place with DynamicParameter curve. I’m attempting to manage panner velocity from particle emitter by Dynamic Parameter.
fsr, can’t connect screenshot right here, however I’m simply multiplying dynamic parameter1 to appended vector, which then goes to Panner Pace.
Drawback is, once I use float or float vary, it really works fantastic. Nevertheless it once I’m attempting to make use of curve it goes loopy velocity, like greater than 10 a minimum of.
Additionally, it really works fantastic with single key curve and if keys have worth distinction not more than 0.01 (it’s in all probability simply ignoring it).
That’s not a niagara problem, however slightly a limitation of how the panner node works within the materials.
What the panner is doing is multiplying the time by your enter and including that to the UVs, in order time goes in your UVs are being displaced. So with a velocity of 0.1 for instance, at t=1s your UVs are going to be (0.1,0.1), at t=5s they’ll be (0.5,0.5), and at t=10s (1,1)…
The factor is, because the materials isn’t storing any present offset, it doesn’t reply appropriately to altering values in actual time. In the event you change that panner worth in the midst of the sport, let’s say at t=10s you modify that worth from 0.1 velocity to 0.2 velocity… the UVs will all of the sudden go from (1,1) to (2,2), since 10s*0.2speed = 2. It’s not going to begin going quicker, it’s going to calculate the outcome as if it had been going that quick from the start.
If you need one thing like a panner node that you would be able to change in actual time what you are able to do is have a cloth parameter whose worth is added to the UVs, like an offset. You possibly can then have a niagara parameter that begins at 0 (or any worth actually) and that’s elevated by a set quantity (let’s say X) each body, you are able to do this within the particle replace stage in your niagara emitter.
As an alternative of establishing the specified curve within the dynamic parameter such as you’re doing proper now, you’d simply ship this niagara parameter there, and as a substitute have the curve wherever you’re including that X worth to your niagara parameter, so the quantity added to this offset parameter adjustments alongside the particle’s lifetime.
Not less than that’s the answer I’ve all the time used, if there’s a better manner I’d wish to know…
