Jump to content


Guest

How Does Autodesk Cinema 4D Sound?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Cutman said:

 

spamming now, eh? I'm pretty sure your page impressions spike when I post something, the natives can't resist clicking.

 

Somebody is quite full of himself :lol: Ah well I guess I gave you another click. Enjoy the good feelings it gave you. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Cutman said:

 

 Insydium have their own Mograph system which will get its own nodal system in the future and they have their own renderer so it's not beyond the realms of possibility they could develop a highly focused standalone Mograph application and not be reliant on MAXON.

 

I bet if Insydium crowd funded this they'd be financed up to the eyeballs for the rest of their working lives. In the hundreds of #dailyRenders posted to Twitter I see XParticles everywhere, later this week it'll be #XP4 all over Twitter and C4D is just the host.

 

 

But why would they develop their own standalone mograph app when they can sell their plugins to the huge, already existing userbase of MAXON instead? Would people, who already use C4D (or Houdini or whatever), want to buy a seperate app just for mograph (particles/dynamics etc) if they can get the same as a plugin? If they would make a seperate app it would have to be a full featured competitor to C4D/Houdini etc, not just a seperate "mograph" app. Yes they would not be "reliant on MAXON", but they would be relying on their own ability to create and support a full featured 3D software to rival C4D, and have to compete directly with Nemetschek/Autodesk/The Foundry/SideFX. It may not be beyond the realms of possibility (the Insydium people certainly are very capable) but it doesn't seem particularly likely or logical either.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
  • Topic Author
  • 54 minutes ago, King of Snake said:

     

    Somebody is quite full of himself :lol: Ah well I guess I gave you another click. Enjoy the good feelings it gave you. :)

    You proved my point while not understanding it at the same time. Your click was for Hrvojie.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    HSrdelic    655

    :confused:

     

    I think that I will kindly excuse myself from this thread. Obviously I should close down the Cafe, apply for a job at sideFX or AD since I am in total denial of events that will happen. Or already happened according to the article.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest   
    Guest
  • Topic Author
  • 36 minutes ago, King of Snake said:

     

    But why would they develop their own standalone mograph app when they can sell their plugins to the huge, already existing userbase of MAXON instead? Would people, who already use C4D (or Houdini or whatever), want to buy a seperate app just for mograph (particles/dynamics etc) if they can get the same as a plugin? If they would make a seperate app it would have to be a full featured competitor to C4D/Houdini etc, not just a seperate "mograph" app. Yes they would not be "reliant on MAXON", but they would be relying on their own ability to create and support a full featured 3D software to rival C4D, and have to compete directly with Nemetschek/Autodesk/The Foundry/SideFX. It may not be beyond the realms of possibility (the Insydium people certainly are very capable) but it doesn't seem particularly likely or logical either.
     

    You clearly have never run a business. With MAXON's track record of plagiarising plugin developers work would you be content to base your whole company future on MAXON not coding its own version of XParticles and see your business wiped out in a couple of release cycles? You'd be effing mad.

     

    Of course it's logical for Insydium to expand into a fully fledged 3d application free from the whims and limitations of the host developer. They would not have to compete directly with the MAXON/Autodesk hegemony they would offer a unique and tightly Mograph focused app that played extremely well with others and over time became a fleshed out 3d application.

     

    They licensed Cycles one could see the possibility of them licensing Eevee for the viewport and GL Renderer, bullet, write their own timeline and object management. Jobs a good 'un. Keep it tightly focussed for Mograph and extremely high performance. Have the Object Manager parent /child approach but have deep nodal access to data. We're living at a time of Alembic and USD and importing and exporting of assets from one app to another is absolutely standard practice.

     

    Crowd fund it.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    31 minutes ago, Cutman said:

    You proved my point while not understanding it at the same time. Your click was for Hrvojie.

     

    Haha, I think I understand your point just fine. It's just that what you say and what you mean are two different things. It is quite clear you enjoy the clicks (=attention) very much.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest   
    Guest
  • Topic Author
  • 4 hours ago, luchifer said:

     

    Insydium does not have its own render, they have a bridge to Cycles, but they dont develop it.

    Also, while nodal xparticles is a must buy for me, it is a long way from low level access that Houdini have. I dont even know if MAXON / insydium want or can provide us with the same level of control. Not sure if even Maya can (its seven years after autodesk adquired ICE and they still cant implement it)

    XParticles particles carry a lot of data so within the XP context they can expose all of that to the user if they are so minded, the big problem is interfacing with the native C4D environment and transferring these data onto C4D objects. Other than copious numbers of vertex maps I don't know how that would work.

     

    It would've been easier to fit the good bits of Maya into XSI than shoehorn ICE underneath the spaghetti code of Maya.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest   
    Guest
  • Topic Author
  • 7 minutes ago, King of Snake said:

     

    Haha, I think I understand your point just fine. It's just that what you say and what you mean are two different things. It is quite clear you enjoy the clicks (=attention) very much.

    I actually couldn't give a tinker's toss.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    HSrdelic    655

     @Cutman

     

    Judging by your posts I can say that you clearly have no clue about:

     

    A. Software development.

    B. Size and scope of companies and products you are referring too in your post

    C. Resources needed to write a fully fledged DCC

     

    The only thing you seem to be good about is insulting other members and endless spamming. Didn't you jump ship to Houdini?I now received way more messages which ask me to ban you than I would like, so please, act maturely if you are able to otherwise we will have no options since you violated Cafe rules too many times.

    • Like 1

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Isleofgough    7

    Some good advice from Cutman, quoting from 11/12/2017:

     

    "Right, that's it from me, I don't want to be THAT person who has moved to a different application and spends the next few years brow beating people who use the previous application. It gets old quickly.

     

    So cheers everyone and see you around maybe over on the sidefx forums if you happen to be in the area. "

    • Like 1

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    luchifer    34
    2 hours ago, Cutman said:

    XParticles particles carry a lot of data so within the XP context they can expose all of that to the user if they are so minded, the big problem is interfacing with the native C4D environment and transferring these data onto C4D objects. Other than copious numbers of vertex maps I don't know how that would work.

     

    It would've been easier to fit the good bits of Maya into XSI than shoehorn ICE underneath the spaghetti code of Maya.

    As far as I know, Houdini have the Attribute Delete node because -among other reasons- exposing too much parameters slows down the network, so maybe they could create a tag to expose the data, but at the same time they have to implement tools so we can use the data exposed, and without compromising 1) ease of use 2) performance. Is just like creating an asset with Houdini, there is a point when you have to decide "are there too much parameters for the end-user?" XSI had a get data / set data node, but XP isnt nodal based.

    Fitting Maya into XSI never gonna happened, too many people use Maya and too few XSI.. if they did that, people wouldn't start using XSI just because of that, it would have been a tremendous effort and a huge waste of resources. While XSI has many of the controls Houdini have (and at some point they were equally comparable), most people never seemed to be interested in learning / using ICE, while lots of folks here are going crazy tomorrow with the new update from Insydium.  I dont know how the userbase moves, people hate Maya because the UI is a mess, although most use it everyday, they love Houdini even is hard but powerful, they also love C4D because its ease of use but limited power, yet XSI, even when it was easy to use, had a clean interface and was very, very powerful, with low level control, never got the big crowd of artists Maya or C4D has.

    Tomorrow, I can already predict an influx of random daily stuff with Xparticles, and that is great for advertising MAXON C4D. Maybe more people will buy R19 and if R20 is a hit, we could hit Maya really hard. Or maybe not.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×