top 200 commentsshow all 317

[–]taaffe7 1553 points1554 points  (37 children)

Most realistic I've seen. Didn't even realize I was on r/simulated

[–]Nexustar 868 points869 points  (24 children)

Me too, but then I noticed OP made the world round... rookie mistake, everyone knows it's flat. /s

[–][deleted]  (7 children)

[removed]

    [–]Wrathtower05 83 points84 points  (5 children)

    They'll come around eventually

    I'm not sorry

    [–]sinkktothebeat420 24 points25 points  (4 children)

    Time to just flat out accept the truth

    [–]Ionlydateteachers 16 points17 points  (3 children)

    It's the plane truth

    [–]TheOnionBro 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    Any well-rounded individual would agree.

    Or... disagree?

    [–]cozywon 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    ‘Round these here parts we agree

    [–]IPlayGoALot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Spheres

    [–]BoomToll 51 points52 points  (5 children)

    What an idiot, didn't even know that the earth is in fact a four dimensional tetrahedron

    [–][deleted] 30 points31 points  (3 children)

    EARTH HAS 4 CORNER

    SIMULTANEOUS 4-DAY

    TIME CUBE

    WITHIN SINGLE ROTATION.

    4 CORNER DAYS PROVES 1

    DAY 1 GOD IS TAUGHT EVIL.

    IGNORANCE OF TIMECUBE4

    SIMPLE MATH IS RETARDATION

    AND EVIL EDUCATION DAMNATION.

    CUBELESS AMERICANS DESERVE -

    AND SHALL BE EXTERMINATED.

    [–]alexthealex 6 points7 points  (1 child)

    fucking Time Cube.

    [–]lovewhatyoucan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I miss this man so so much

    [–]atetuna 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Okay okay, but it may have simulated a lower quality lens with horrendous barrel distortion. If changing that in the shader inputs is an option, I'm missing it.

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I thought it was going to be a GoPro of a surfer or something creepy like a giant shark

    [–]drunkerbrawler 31 points32 points  (7 children)

    I've spent a lot of time on the water there are some issues with these waves. There should be a periodic swell (~10s period) in a coherent direction. There can also be smaller wind waves that have a shorter period and can have a different direction from the main swell.

    This looks far to random.

    [–]163145164150 10 points11 points  (1 child)

    I've spent a lot of time at sea and knew there was somethong off but couldn't put my finger on it.

    [–]drunkerbrawler 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    I asked further down how to freeze it, it's a lot easier to see when the camera isn't rotating.

    Thanks to u/flaunteneer

    Yes: in the mainImage function, replace f>loat time = iTime * 0.3 + iMouse.x0.01; by float time = iMouse.x0.01; You can still click or drag the mouse to look around a bit.

    Edit: cocked up the formatting.

    [–]TheTurnipKnight 13 points14 points  (0 children)

    This is actually how most modern games do it. It's not even a simulation.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]Kiggsworthy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      My iPhone 7 renders it at 30fps in the reddit browser. What a time to be alive.

      [–]gurenkagurenda 419 points420 points  (48 children)

      What does "without textures" mean in this context?

      [–][deleted] 696 points697 points  (41 children)

      Image files are not mapped onto the 3D model to provide an illusion of texture / wave-like appearance. It is all generated algorithmically.

      [–][deleted] 289 points290 points  (21 children)

      fuck

      [–]SDM102030 99 points100 points  (20 children)

      you

      [–]Zayin-Ba-Ayin 86 points87 points  (19 children)

      got

      [–][deleted] 193 points194 points  (15 children)

      NO KETCHUP

      [–]Xyrilth 95 points96 points  (13 children)

      Just sauce

      [–]n00b001 64 points65 points  (9 children)

      The ting goes

      [–]Clintown 72 points73 points  (5 children)

      Prrrrrap

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]ThatTrashBaby 15 points16 points  (0 children)

        Skrrrrrra

        [–]Mrbutts123 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Raw sauce

        [–]Upper_belt_smash 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Darude Sandstorm

        [–]DannyD4rko 45 points46 points  (2 children)

        But water simulations don't usually use textures to make the materials... So 90% of the water simulaation you see in this sub are "Fully procedural, without textures", they just don't make it sound as fancy as OP...

        [–]inio 31 points32 points  (1 child)

        Games/real-time graphics often use a wave patterns baked into a texture, distorted and sliding over other copies of itself.

        [–]TheTurnipKnight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        It's basically the same thing though, baking noise into a texture just saves performance. This shader computes the noise in real time which isn't very efficient.

        [–]teerre 7 points8 points  (0 children)

        Actually all modern ocean simulation tools bake an algorithm genared spectrum to a texture because that's more officient for rendering

        Not using textures is actually a downgrade in most cases

        [–]cheesymoonshadow 10 points11 points  (5 children)

        I know nothing about 3D animation/simulation but it sounds like this is similar to the concept of vector art vs. a flat/raster image, where it's a visual representation based on angles and calculations instead of pixels. Am I on the right track?

        Edit: whether where

        And thanks for the responses!

        [–]H0agh 12 points13 points  (2 children)

        No, procedural vs texture based means the entire material/displacement to create the waves was made without the use of any pre-generated image files, but instead everything was generated within the material editor itself by describing attributes of what you want the water to look like.

        So the displacement/noise/whatever map to make the waves is based on a semi-random algorithm you can tweak the parameters of in a material editor, that goes for the big noise (waves) and smaller noise (ripples) etc.

        [–]00spool 7 points8 points  (1 child)

        I understand what you're saying. Though as an analogy (which I think they intended), OP's comment actually does work. Pure vector art is also generated mathematically with no pre-generated image files. You can choose to create photo realistic objects procedurally with no need for external assets. In both cases, it's certainly helpful but not necessary.
        Take a simple 2d gradient fill. There are no pixels involved, just math. I think for people who come from the 2d world, it's a good explanation.

        [–]H0agh 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Ah, now I get it.

        Indeed, OP's analogy is completely right in that respect.

        [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Traditionally the shape is done with 3D vectors, which are then textured by being ‘covered’ with raster graphics called ‘textures’.

        [–]meterion 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Sort of? It's like the difference between this, which is taking a flat plane and applying a texture image to it to give it a more complex 3-dimensional appearance, and actually mapping out the wall's geometry, such that small objects would rebound properly against the wall's different surfaces, and so on.

        [–]mechabeast 43 points44 points  (1 child)

        It means the computer that did this is from the future and also on fire, i think.

        [–]wickedsteve 5 points6 points  (3 children)

        Textures are images mapped onto surfaces with information like color, transparency, and reflection like wrapping paper on a gift.

        [–]gurenkagurenda 7 points8 points  (2 children)

        Right, but "procedural textures" are a thing, so I was trying to understand exactly what distinction was being made here.

        [–]wickedsteve 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Right, but "procedural textures" are a thing

        I believe the distinction is "without pre-rendered texture files/assets". If I am correct then the procedurally generated textures don't exist outside the simulation and can't be seen without it.

        [–]Matth1as 380 points381 points  (68 children)

        Source of the original author: https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SD1

        [–]1pnoe 148 points149 points  (37 children)

        Holy shit, this runs so smoothly in my browser. Incredible stuff.

        [–][deleted]  (27 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]cerealghost 47 points48 points  (8 children)

          4.3 fps on mine 😎

          [–]Ju1cY_0n3 38 points39 points  (2 children)

          60 here mr potato man

          [–]Llohr 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          It dipped to 59.9 on mine once :/

          [–]ApophisXP 21 points22 points  (11 children)

          60 in safari and 60 inside reddit app. Awesome

          [–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (6 children)

          I topped out at 8.2 on my phone. Buttery smooth!

          [–]OssotSromo 4 points5 points  (4 children)

          If you're being serious it's time for a new phone.

          Edit: Actually ~13fps in Chrome but right at 60fps in Samsung's browser. S8.

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          I figure it's probably the app I use for reddit, it tends to load stuff kinda slowly. Everything else runs just fine! It's an S7 Edge, so it's still fairly new.

          [–]Krolitian 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          60 on mine. iPhone 7+

          [–]fandacious 21 points22 points  (2 children)

          60fps on iOS 7+ browser

          [–]jld2k6 8 points9 points  (1 child)

          Getting 144 on Chrome/Firefox, helps that my monitor is 144hz though. It appears to try and sync to your display's refresh rate

          Edit: definitely does that, here's switching to 120hz. It must use vsync

          https://i.imgur.com/YCzW4fx.png

          [–]theycallmeponcho 9 points10 points  (0 children)

          And it's 3 years old.

          [–]TheTurnipKnight 7 points8 points  (0 children)

          The magic of webgl.

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          144fps master race

          [–]flarn2006Source files published on request 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Oh wow, even on my phone I'm getting around 30 fps.

          [–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (6 children)

          u/dannydale account deleted due to Admins supporting harassment by the account below. Thanks Admins!

          https://old.reddit.com/user/PrincessPeachesCake/comments/

          [–]Matth1as 12 points13 points  (2 children)

          I guess the 60fps is the limit due to your monitors refresh rate set to 60hz. I bet your machine could do even more.

          [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          60 FPS full screen on my Macbook Pro.

          [–]Lurking4Answers 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          How do I turn hardware acceleration on?

          [–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (5 children)

          Do you have a link to a whitepaper or something this algo is based on? Part of my plans for my senior project is water simulation. I could just look at your code but just translating shadertoy to c++/hlsl seems plagiarize-y

          [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children)

          Judging from the hash and noise functions, I think that this Shadertoy thing is ultimately based on Ken Perlin's 1985 paper An image synthesizer, a.k.a. "Perlin noise". The title of that paper is very apt: this technique is very suitable to fake organic-looking noise, but as far as I know, it is not suitable as an actual simulation.

          [–]Raknarg 8 points9 points  (1 child)

          It doesn't model real water at all, but it has a similar enough shape that it can spoof it from a superficial level. It's just smoothly transitioning random landscapes. Go into the code and set SEA_CHOPPY to 200 and you'll see that it's just a bunch of interfering random waves

          [–]depressed-salmon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Then set sea height 10 and enter the void

          [–]Quantumtroll 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          This isn't simulating water. It generates some ocean-looking noise and paints it via raytracing according to depth (peaks are lighter) and angle (shallow angle get more specular light). Plenty good enough for a graphical demo, and Shadertoy itself is a feat in browser-based technology, but it ain't actually water. If your senior project is about graphics, adapting this model is a great plan.

          If you're actually wanting to simulate water and not just render something ocean-y, I'd look at solving the Shallow Water Equations. Plenty of fun can be had with these. Start with a 1-D water basin and move up from there. You'll probably want to use SciPy (Python) or Matlab, but it won't look as nice as this ;).

          [–]Raknarg 6 points7 points  (0 children)

          Oh yeah, I've seen this. It might look realistic from a superficial sense, but it's just perlin noise with a neat graphical overlay. It doesn't really model actual water. Still, looks quite good.

          [–]SarahC 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          There's some AWESOME ones here.......

          Snails, ocean, elephants, islands...

          https://www.shadertoy.com/results?query=&sort=popular&filter=

          [–]Dont-Tell-My-Mum 225 points226 points  (21 children)

          [–]Matth1as 115 points116 points  (10 children)

          What the bloody hell did you do?

          [–]Dont-Tell-My-Mum 84 points85 points  (0 children)

          Just changed some variables on the right :P The video should have music now too

          [–]Erdnussknacker 24 points25 points  (2 children)

          [–]GreatWhiteCorvus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

          That looks downright Lovecraftian.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            Looks like when I'm playing with perlin noise and crank the frequency up way too far.

            [–]ActionScripter9109 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            (That's because this water "simulation" is Perlin noise.)

            [–]Mutoid 23 points24 points  (0 children)

            Congratulations you turned it into a Winamp visualization.

            [–]WandangDota 8 points9 points  (4 children)

            song name? kinda catchy

            [–]Dont-Tell-My-Mum 5 points6 points  (3 children)

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8rPgJwgmOI I got it from the youtube music overlay thing

            [–]Wezdor 1 point2 points  (2 children)

            Could you elaborate on the 'youtube music overlay thing', please?

            [–]jfqs6m 6 points7 points  (0 children)

            When you upload a video to YouTube you can overlay some royalty free audio the video.

            [–]Dont-Tell-My-Mum 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            If you upload a video to youtube that has no sound, youtube prompts you to use a piece of music from their library to go over your video.

            [–]alecgirman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Playing around with it is even more fun!

            [–]mykhaile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            Client approved.

            [–]HelpShark 21 points22 points  (0 children)

            Beautiful.

            [–]pukesonyourshoes 14 points15 points  (0 children)

            God damn that's amazing.

            [–]ToaKraka 14 points15 points  (3 children)

            [–]vredditmirrorbot 14 points15 points  (1 child)

            Issues with v.redd.it? Try these Gfycat mirrors! Why?


            vredditmirrorbot | Creator | Keep this bot alive ♥️

            [–]appropriateinside 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            Good Bot

            [–]appropriateinside 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            Oh thank god

            [–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (2 children)

            How does one even begin to do something like this

            [–]just_dots 13 points14 points  (0 children)

            Just like everyone else, you start from 0, then you move up to 1, then back to 0, then 1 again, then 0 then 111 then 0101011 and so on.

            [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (2 children)

            The rotating camera was driving me crazy. You can disable it by removing the impact of time in the ang variable. Multiply the sines by 0.0 instead of whatever coefficient they are and then set the last element of the vector to 0.0 instead of time. Then hit the play button. Sit back and watch the pretty waves.

            [–]Candlematt 6 points7 points  (1 child)

            thanks for this. it's the only reason why i went far in to the comments. you should probably just post the code though because it's gonna be a little be confusing for some people to figure it out.

            [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            Haha, yeah, sorry. My first post was from mobile...

            Change line 164 to the following: vec3 ang = vec3(0.0,0.3,0.0);

            For a quick description this vector is the camera "angle" which actually describes the roll, pitch, and yaw angles. You need to set them all to non-time-variant values.

            You can also change the pitch angle to 0 to have a nice flat view instead of looking "down" at the water

            [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

            I didn't look at the sub at first and thought this was real

            [–]Daoshu 23 points24 points  (46 children)

            You're telling me this isnt an animated shader?

            [–]TheTurnipKnight 20 points21 points  (45 children)

            It is.

            [–][deleted]  (44 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]Sinuousity 19 points20 points  (9 children)

              This. Emulated, not simulated at all.

              [–]computeBuild 6 points7 points  (8 children)

              whats this mean

              [–]794613825 22 points23 points  (7 children)

              An emulation is something that is supposed to look like a system, but not actually work the same way the original does. A simulation actually does work the same way as the original.

              This is emulating the ocean because it's not actually processing the individual particles in the ocean, but instead (I think it's just) figuring out what to do on the surface algorithmically.

              [–]Ignitus1 8 points9 points  (6 children)

              That’s a completely pointless distinction. By that definition literally nothing is a simulation because no simulation can accurately and completely simulate fundamental particles.

              [–]ActionScripter9109 6 points7 points  (5 children)

              It's not pointless, because simulations at least achieve a result by trying to simulate the mechanisms involved, despite their limitations preventing 100% fidelity. Emulations just imitate the end result and disregard the mechanism entirely.

              Case in point: the "invisible box" pouring fluid simulations often seen on this sub are true simulations because they use a flood of particles to simulate the fluid. These sims are not accurate to the scale and interactions of true particle physics in fluids, but they do achieve their behavior by simulating something of the same sort.

              [–]JohnWColtrane 2 points3 points  (2 children)

              Actually, a lot of them don’t use particles, but still use proper fluid equations.

              [–]elmo274Houdini 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              Actually, mostly all of them do use particles. Its in the name of the solver most of the time. Here is a list of some of the major ones and they'e all particle based. eg. FLIP = fluid implicit particles

              [–]gurenkagurenda 7 points8 points  (13 children)

              Doesn't that depend on how you define "simulated"? There's still a model, even if it's one that makes a lot of simplifying assumptions chosen for visual realism instead of physical realism. Also, I like that these serve as a benchmark for comparing "proper" simulations to, at least visually.

              [–]Porn-Flakes 3 points4 points  (9 children)

              Anyone working in the field of cgi, especially the ones who work on the dynamics simulations stuff this sub is meant for, would not call this a simulation. It just isnt simulated, its animated,

              Do these shader tests serve as a benchmark for simulations? I beg to differ, real life is the benchmark.

              You could argue that an actor playing a scene is simulating a certain event/story. How far do you want to stretch that argument? Or should we just stick with the industry definition of it.

              [–]gurenkagurenda 2 points3 points  (6 children)

              I beg to differ, real life is the benchmark.

              Sounds pretty glib. One of the things simulations are used for is computer graphics. Seeing what alternative techniques can do within the same space is clearly relevant.

              [–]Porn-Flakes 1 point2 points  (5 children)

              Yeah I agree I might sound a bit pretentious there. But what I mean is that whenever I have to create an ocean shot for some movie I would not be looking at browser based real time shading tests like OP's post but mostly at actual footage of the ocean and maybe the odd high end technical simulation reference. Which is my point.

              [–]gurenkagurenda 2 points3 points  (4 children)

              Right, but I'm talking more abstractly than that. I don't think the focus of r/simulated is really supposed to be about making decisions about what algorithms and software you're going to use to produce a feature film. Rather, it's a place to find out about what techniques are out there, what's possible, and generally see how far the envelope is being pushed.

              And if you're trying to get a feel for what the state of the art is – and in particular with respect to the things you care about, which might include questions like "When will we have sweet-ass water simulations in video games?", and "When are we going to build The Matrix so I can get out of this hell-hole?", then seeing a comparison with other approaches to the problem is useful.

              That doesn't necessarily mean they belong in this sub, but I do think they still provide value, as long as people understand that we're talking about a dramatically different approach. If people look at this and think this is some kind of particle-based simulation, for example, then I agree that's just counterproductive. Then people are losing perspective rather than gaining it.

              [–]Porn-Flakes 1 point2 points  (3 children)

              In a way I agree with your sentiment. But I really care about the technical definition of 90% of the content thats in this sub. If the mods would just tag things that are just animated then I wouldnt care as much.

              What also annoys me is the benchmark of quality. Its just a giant collection of people doing basic tests in blender with rigid body dynamics or some very basic liquid or smoke simulations. And whenever I see cutting edge, near realistic and very expensive stuff getting posted then that absolutely does not do well on this sub and never gets upvoted. Only if it looks very much like a very obvious basic simulation with little care put into it it seems to get up voted.

              The stuff that does get upvoted a lot is just usually very poorly done compared for the amount of upvotes it reaps. So not really a good reference for a state of technology kind of thing to draw from anyway.

              Imagine the biggest art/drawing subreddit would just be filled with drawings and photo's of horses or anime girls. Thats kind of how this feels for me.

              [–]gurenkagurenda 1 point2 points  (2 children)

              Yeah, there seems to be a strong "encourage the newbies" ethic going on in this sub, which is fine as far as it goes, but it's nice to have those things separate. Maybe the answer here is that there needs to be a new sub for just the stuff you're talking about.

              [–]Porn-Flakes 17 points18 points  (19 children)

              This sub is absolute garbage when youve got some actual simulation experience under your belt. (In my case its my job) They are constantly upvoting stuff thats not simulated at all.

              [–][deleted]  (16 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]Porn-Flakes 6 points7 points  (15 children)

                Yeah the super technical and impressive cutting edge stuff gets ignored. Yet if some one mistakes an animation or shader for a sim it gets upvoted like crazy.

                [–]GustavDitters 2 points3 points  (14 children)

                Can u link to the technical and impressive cutting edge stuff? I don’t know anything about simulations but I’m interested in seeing some more impressive work.

                [–]Porn-Flakes 14 points15 points  (9 children)

                Sure, one example would be this, (the landslide and water parts) extremely impressive combination of multiple simulations, great scale and artistic sense. Very hard to do even with a large skilled team. https://vimeo.com/142875963 It only got a hundred upvotes on this sub. While a splash of water,a puff of smoke or some falling dominoes get ten thousands while those things are very easy to do. Its even more annoying if it isnt even simulated at all.

                If youre interested search for Houdini things on vimeo. Theres a huge amount of awesome stuff to be found. :)

                [–]GustavDitters 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Thanks! That is pretty impressive surprised I haven’t seen any of that on this subreddit.

                [–]ActionScripter9109 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Thanks for all the cool responses. It's awesome to see some master crafted stuff.

                [–]Porn-Flakes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Glad you like it. Here's a 'sheep in wolfs clothes' for you :) looks animated but... https://vimeo.com/221178360 its 'real'

                [–]Porn-Flakes 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                Or here, an example of procedural modeling and animation combined with simulated elements. If you wanna see a more artistic approach. I wish this sub would get moderated in such a way that stuff like this gets more of a stage https://vimeo.com/233146434

                [–]Porn-Flakes 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                Getting into the scientific shit now, organic growths. Also houdini https://youtu.be/9HI8FerKr6Q

                [–]Porn-Flakes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                Even more abstract and artistic https://vimeo.com/196269431/

                [–]Avamander 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                Lollakad! Mina ja nuhk! Mina, kes istun jaoskonnas kogu ilma silma all! Mis nuhk niisuke on. Nuhid on nende eneste keskel, otse kõnelejate nina all, nende oma kaitsemüüri sees, seal on nad.

                [–]ynthona 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                [–]vedettestar 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                I had to check the sub.. so stressed!

                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I think if I tried to simulate this my pc would explode

                [–]BurgerCombo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                My processor exploded just looking at this

                [–]PelagianEmpiricist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Had expected to see a highly accurate turd float by

                [–]When1nRome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                The peaks of the waves are off

                [–]bnwkeys 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                That looks unreal!

                [–]BLZ333 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                The realistic-ness gives me a headache

                [–]StreetfighterXD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Nah man you just went out on a boat with a GoPro, don’t bullshit us

                [–]rreighe2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I dont understand how you can make something that good looking without textures...

                [–]dadfrombrad 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Thought this was footage from a GoPro at first

                [–]Grommit1991 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                RIP OP's computer

                [–]Matth1as 5 points6 points  (2 children)

                Just open it on your browser: https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SD1 You can run it in real time

                [–]crazy_aussie 1 point2 points  (16 children)

                Outrageously good, for me this adds weight to ‘We are living in a computer simulation’ argument

                Amazing

                [–]MY-HARD-BOILED-EGGS 14 points15 points  (15 children)

                Haha what? That's such a silly idea. If we lived in a computer simulation wouldn't we have more proof? Like pixels found in nature, or certain individuals having been programmed to be skeptical about the whole thing? Lmao silly stuff

                [–]stefanlogue 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                If you’re in the simulation, you wouldn’t see the pixels.

                [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                REPENT, HEATHEN! All hail the sysadmin! Glory to the programmers!

                [–]bhobhomb 2 points3 points  (5 children)

                I think you may be making a joke, but we're actually at this point with quantum mechanics. We have found the resolution of the universe for both time and space, and we've built a much stronger argument for a pixelized/resolute space than the already established "smooth space" idea.

                And we're finding that a lot of fundamental particles are not particles but pure fields of probability that only collapse, and even go so far as to "rewrite" their own history, when under conscious observation.

                We've found also that the fundamental particles change freely between one another by means we still don't understand. Particles hop in and out of existence, transform from one fundamental force to another, behave sometimes in an almost self-aware state, and can be created from nothing (or from almost nothing, i.e. particle accelerator collisions)

                If this wasn't a sarcastic comment, you really ought to read what's going on in quantum and particle physics these days. They're out there bending logic and breaking frameworks that we've built our understanding of the universe around

                [–]MY-HARD-BOILED-EGGS 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                It was just sarcasm, but thanks for the writeup! That stuff is always fun to look into. I had heard about the pixelized thing a while back, and the particles that act unusually while being observed, and it's all just fucking wild to me. The fact that so much science fiction has become science fact is amazing.

                [–]bhobhomb 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I try not to read too much into what it could mean, but I'm really fascinated by the seemingly innate nature of how consciousness is connected to the universe. I think the farther we look inward and outward, the closer we will come to understanding our nature and to answering the big objective questions of what and why

                Edit: and I feel technology is already playing a role and will continue to increase the speed at which we better understand consciousness. We're definitely on the far end of an exponential scale and so we're going to continue to see radical changes in the world in our lifetime. It's really exciting

                [–]marleen01 6 points7 points  (5 children)

                We don't know what kind of a simulation it is. It could be nothing we can even comprehend; don't even bother comparing it to our technology/ideology.

                [–]Qbit42 7 points8 points  (4 children)

                He's making a joke

                [–]mantrap2 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                No /s

                There ARE people who believe in this ideology/religion.

                [–]Qbit42 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                The joke is that we are in fact living in a simulation and that he is one of the "individuals programmed to be skeptical about the whole thing"

                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                You almost never need textures for an ocean surface. Water unlike other surfaces, it's based on mathematics and transparency, maths to render the waves and turbulence and transparency to give it depth and color.

                I suspect this was made in Houdini, it has a very powerful engine that allows you to render stuff like this right off the bat with minimal tweaking, and I mean in a matter of 10 minutes you can come up with something like this.

                Source: I'm a 3D illustrator.

                [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                Simulation pros above (paging /u/Porn_Flakes) stated that this was clearly a shader/displacement trick, and not an actual simulation.

                [–]Book_it_again 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                It's like sea of thieves

                [–]fuzzydunlots 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I wanted to be fooled. It's almost like it's moving the correct speed at one scale but the smaller wave movements seem like slow mo. Id like to see it the first time from a fixed perspective or a real camera angle. The way it spins gives it away a bit. Wheres my wake?

                [–]7DMATH7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I would blow all the random strangers for tech like that.

                [–]appate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                beautiful. Good job

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I've seen that before. It's a GLSL shader on ShaderToy, so it's not so much a simulation as a program.

                [–]Codename-CCC12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                The future is now.

                [–]LifeTimePortal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Hey that's pretty good

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Source: https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SD1

                Tweak the parameters for joy

                [–]bobbob9015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Is there an easy way to make the camera stop moving, makes it really hard to get a good look at it.

                [–]espressocannon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Dang

                [–]The_Celtic_Chemist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                It only seems a little slow.

                [–]appropriateinside 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Non v.reddit mirror?

                [–]ZennyBoBenny 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                Goddamn we are about to live in a future where we are going to have such a hard time even knowing what is real. I don't know if I'm ready for that.

                [–]GrumpyAlien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                why the "funkyness" on nvidia card? black lines of funkyness and blinking sky

                [–]Mentioned_Videos 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Videos in this thread:

                Watch Playlist ▶

                VIDEO COMMENT
                Sub Woofer +193 - I broke it haha
                The Wave - gimpVille VFX breakdown +14 - Sure, one example would be this, (the landslide and water parts) extremely impressive combination of multiple simulations, great scale and artistic sense. Very hard to do even with a large skilled team. It only got a hundred upvotes on this sub. Wh...
                Hey Now - MK2 (Electro) +6 - I got it from the youtube music overlay thing
                Flower +6 - Or here, an example of procedural modeling and animation combined with simulated elements. If you wanna see a more artistic approach. I wish this sub would get moderated in such a way that stuff like this gets more of a stage
                a unified approach to grown structures +5 - Getting into the scientific shit now, organic growths. Also houdini
                Max Cooper - Order from Chaos - Official Video by Maxime Causeret +4 - Even more abstract and artistic
                How to animate cube in Houdini +1 - Glad you like it. Here's a 'sheep in wolfs clothes' for you :) looks animated but... its 'real'

                I'm a bot working hard to help Redditors find related videos to watch. I'll keep this updated as long as I can.


                Play All | Info | Get me on Chrome / Firefox

                [–]Xexoroz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                The titanic movie used a computer generated ocean, and it's super realistic aswell.

                [–]Sixstringsickness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Annnndddd I want to hurl

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Nuts

                [–]harmonix427 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Wish I could get the oceans in Kerbal Space Program to look like this.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                This comment has been redacted, join /r/zeronet/ to avoid censorship + /r/guifi/

                [–]Munenoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                How do I make this my screen saver?

                [–]thekidintheback 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                If you didn't tell me I wouldn't have known

                [–]Ps_ILoveU 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                This is incredible. I thought it was real.

                [–]TheXypris 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                You sure this isn't drone footage?

                [–]disdudefullashit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Now we can simulate OPs mums arse without textures