Jump to content

Maxon Announces Cinema 4D R23 | Overview | Discussion


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, srek said:

I use Cinema 4D for technical modelling for 3D printing for 10 years now. Currently i use mostly volumes but Poly by Poly is a close second. I have created complete 3D printer designs that are printable (RepRap) and implemented them, as well as many smaller projects. For me Cinema is pretty much perfect for 3D printing.

I've done some bits & pieces myself (in fact, I did a little bit of moulding patterns for Disney's Beauty & the Beast & some sculpting for a few adverts). But my involvement was mostly the sculpt, then making sure it was a water-tight surface, sometimes with a bit of cutting out internal mass. But I pretty much passed a correctly-formated file on & my involvement ended at that stage of the process.

Link to post

  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Only commenting on the things I used. Scene nodes look promising (haven't tested), but more importantly again show a strong vision for the future. I also comment on the general outlook, MyMa

I had a surface level look at scene nodes but then digged into the past material nodes again and want to share some thoughts,  not so much about the functionality but the implications of the prio

Grateful I jumped off...and stuck w/plan for blender/R20. Will have soon saved nearly $2,000. Never had to fuss with broken plugins, bugs, hassles and modest upgrades. Already had Octane and Rizom UV.

Posted Images

Cool, i did quite a few molds for silicon casting in Cinema 4D, 3D printing is pretty much ideal for creating complex molds. I am waiting for my new large format SLA printer currently (Elegoo Saturn) and i expect it to be very good for molds.

Link to post

13 hours ago, bobbystokes said:

I'm surprised to see you rated the remesher so highly, I had an opportunity today to test run R23 on a workmates windows laptop and found the remesher to be very poor..to the point where it couldn't hold the shape of a simple cube despite any setting I played with.  Perhaps I'm missed something fundamental. 

 

I probably rated it too quickly. We tested it on some ideal remesher cases and there it did perform well.

 

 

Remesher comparison:

Input mesh: Worst case scenario: - sharp hard surface with many thin elements and stuff pointing outwards (thrown in volume builder)

 

image.thumb.png.0cdb27c227fd2f8ea5083a0c92e336c2.png

 

 

2000 Polygons:

C4D (Blue) - 5 seconds +

Exoside (Red) - 3 minutes +- (thought it froze the first 3 times but it actually is just very slow -

Edit: its not that slow on other models, must have an issue with the mesh geo in some way)

 

 

image.thumb.png.b0895404adb392b6f60382bad37c21e9.png

 

The exoside does not break the mesh and has noticeably better flow but is an extreme amount slower and 

does not work automatically and is not non-destructive. Changing settings and observing results is almost impossible at minutes of waiting time.

Changing settings in the C4D version had little effect in this test. Exoside also supports mirroring features.

 

image.thumb.png.1fc64d6b15df3598b41f133477e779c8.png

 

The C4D remesher supports Flow splines, which the other dosn't have. This is a good idea and improves results a lot.

It starts to retain elements and flow the other could not, although the main issue, the exploding of thin surfaces  retains.

Calculation time with such simples increased drasically, from 5 seconds to around 1.5 minutes. Some of these flows

actually look good but overall this still would need a total retopo pass. That makes you think however how a flow spline

could be abused to create a base for retopo meshes though this workflow.

 

Changing the polygon count does not retain the spline calculation that was done prior. This could probably be cached.

 

It also appears that the remesh somehow is calculating even when turned off? changing a spline after turning it off froze my PC

and I got the feeling prior as well.

 

 

10000 Polygons:

 

image.thumb.png.da0acc3d8f717700520ff1d00239faca.png

 

Times stayed similar. Support splines are still used, I generated them by phong angle selection around 40° and deleted some

 

Exoside (Red) 

Cinema 4D (Blue)

 

Notably cinema 4D still does explode and break the meshes, however you notice that both work rather differently and have different advantages.

With the splines, cinema did retain some shapes better, especially some outlines and sharper elements. Cinema also did not delete some of the spikes on the side bars.

The top of the weapon is also much more straight (hard to see in this image)

 

The exoside made things a lot softer, which works better in some areas but strange in others but does not require any work with splines.

I would also wish for a "freeze remesh" function so I would not have to disable the remesh and recalculate it when I want to not

have any calculating done. Right now I would have to merge down the mesh. The exoside spits out a merged mesh while the C4D one works with any input.

 

Overall I would say that Cinema should aim to fix this exploding polygon issue and then it would be on a similar level to the exoside version with some advantages
and some disadvantages.

 

Cinema:

+ Can be much faster, depends on spline complexity, may also be longer on very complex splines I assume

+ Works automatically on anything you work on

+ nondestructive workflow possible

+ Retains hard edges better with splines

+ Allows the change of flow

+ Triangle mode

+ Can have better results when flow splines are used

+ Can retain hard edges and smaller objects better when flow splines are used

- Big Issue: Explodes thin objects, making some meshes unusable without retopo

- Much worse results on some hard surface meshes on low polygon count without flow splines

- Flow splines require work and are hard to make non destructive

- Keep 100% in quads will increase polygon count noticeably and offers no control over this

 

Exoside Quad remesher:

+ Noticeably better results out of the box

+ Works much better on low polygon count models

+ Uses adaptive sizes for better usage of the budget and increases density in important areas

+ Remeshed the pipes noticeably better

+ Allows Symmetry

+ split by normals and materials possible (not tested)

+ allows painting of dynamic resolution (per example leave more resolution on the face)

+ Does everything 100% in Quads which makes loop selections much better

- Takes much longer baseline

- Creates more smoothed shapes which do not really retain the silhouette and original shape as much

- Removes more smaller elements totally but without leaving a mess behind

- Requires manual remeshing, no automatic updating, leaves a 'destructive workflow' final editable mesh

 

Verdict: If Cinema can fix the exploding issue then these would be worthy rivals, but maybe this is not an issue for your type of meshes.

See for yourself at best. In general both have strong advantages and disadvantages. I would really suggest you do have both + the volume mesher if you do work that requires a lot of remeshing, it is clearly much better owning both and testing on model basis. For our rocks we actually used the volume mesher adaptive in the end as it gave the best quality where it mattered for the vertice count. 

 

Link to post

image.thumb.png.e0cfe0e23ebd0ce6fa2e75b8ff00a621.png

 

Here are both control panels.

 

And I forgot; Here is an image of 10000 Poly mesh from cinema without Support Splines:

Notably does C4D trade blows much better at this resolution even without the support spline.

 

image.thumb.png.ca89c5bf1dfecccd13499c34d375b9f3.png+

 

Results on an armored character I put into volume builder strongly mirror the vehicle test conclusions.

I also noticed that adding a shrink wrap to the final mesh pointing towards the original can make results slightly better.

 

image.thumb.png.9f4b65bfd1bb26fd467bad660db21f12.pngExt

 

 

 

Link to post

Shrike

 

Thanks for the effort, that is very detailed feedback!

 

Here are some setups with Nodes that are quite difficult to achieve without them in current MoGraph or other context. Sure, the setup is more complex due to it being nodes, however I haven't took the effort to pack the functionality in single asset with simple front end controls, so what you are looking at can in fact be a single node with inputs and outputs

 

Clone Blending

 

 

Radius Aware cloning

 

 

Recursion

 

 

 

Road building

 

 

 

Poly Unfold effect

 

 

 

I already have built a library of roughly 100 Nodes scenes and in fact have 3 more volumes of training recorded (intermediate, advanced, master - have to find time to edit them) where I will show some really nice stuff with them.  As extreme example, with nodes you can build very complex things like ray collision node:

 

 

 

So yes, it is early days but system is incredibly capable at this point and I am very excited about the future since it will only get better. Much better 🙂

 

 

Link to post

  • Silver Contributor
26 minutes ago, Hrvoje said:

Shrike

 

Thanks for the effort, that is very detailed feedback!

 

Here are some setups with Nodes that are quite difficult to achieve without them in current MoGraph or other context. Sure, the setup is more complex due to it being nodes, however I haven't took the effort to pack the functionality in single asset with simple front end controls, so what you are looking at can in fact be a single node with inputs and outputs

 

Clone Blending

 

 

Radius Aware cloning

 

 

Recursion

 

 

 

Road building

 

 

 

Poly Unfold effect

 

 

 

I already have built a library of roughly 100 Nodes scenes and in fact have 3 more volumes of training recorded (intermediate, advanced, master - have to find time to edit them) where I will show some really nice stuff with them.  As extreme example, with nodes you can build very complex things like ray collision node:

 

 

 

So yes, it is early days but system is incredibly capable at this point and I am very excited about the future since it will only get better. Much better 🙂

 

 

 

😲 

 

In the future do you think there'll be a bottleneck with rendering huge object scenes with ambient occlusion etc. Is that something you'd work closely with Redshift team to optimise render capabilities for such large scenes? I guess that's also where the Red Giant capabilities can come in with sort of 'faking it' with post FX. I'm loving the possibilities of what C4D will be able to do, but also love what it can do currently of course. I'm very keen to learn this from its early phase, just need to decide on what path to take.

Link to post

13 hours ago, Shrike said:

 

 

Verdict: If Cinema can fix the exploding issue then these would be worthy rivals, but maybe this is not an issue for your type of meshes.

See for yourself at best. In general both have strong advantages and disadvantages. I would really suggest you do have both + the volume mesher if you do work that requires a lot of remeshing, it is clearly much better owning both and testing on model basis. For our rocks we actually used the volume mesher adaptive in the end as it gave the best quality where it mattered for the vertice count. 

 

excellent post, cheers

Link to post

Ref the Ray Collision node, I've been searching for a Ray Casting node. Should have known the MAXON team had renamed the generalised CG naming convention to something new! 🙂

 

Bad jokes aside. I'm finding the documentation to be a very fast learning resource as it contains over 70 simple examples for 'lynch-pin' nodes. The following is a great example of their usefulness:

 

lsXdx7

 

Most CG procedural/generative systems are based on the manipulation of 'arrays' and Scene Nodes are no different. The tricky part for me when learning a new procedural system is learning the 'node syntax'. By that I mean the way specifics of node tree patterns that drives common workflows. I especially like example scenes like the one above as it's not overly complicated nor is it overly simplistic (it utilises the documented node is a simple real world scenario involving a typical selection of complimentary nodes).

 

Much like Xpresso, most nodal systems use a 'get data' > do interesting stuff > 'set data' workflow and this is one of the areas where Scene Nodes differs. The generalised Get/Set workflow doesn't provide the ability to access the full range of geometry attributes. So Scene Nodes requires pairs such as Geometry Property Get/Set, Line Topology Get/Set, Polygon Topology Get/Set. It's an interesting differentiation from ICE/Fabric Engine/Bifrost et al, but I wonder if this adds an extra layer of unnecessary complexity. Maybe this is just because the standardised GET/SET workflow is baked in my bones, but I do like the simplicity of that approach as the critical knowledge for the artist, is that they query a geometry's attributes with 'Get Data', and then after modulating said attributes they re-set them to their new values with the 'Set Data' node. And as I mentioned above, this workflow follows the Xpresso paradigm, and it seems worthwhile to build upon previously learnt conventions wherever possible. Interestingly in the example above there's no 'Geometry Property Set' node as a pair to it's Geometry Property Get'. The 'Transfer Selection' node is it's closest parallel.

 

As I say, I'm not suggesting that there's a right way to do these things but I thought it was an interesting workflow insight to raise.

Link to post

I was really pleased to see the the technology preview version of Scene Nodes contains a smattering of Noise function nodes. And one of the first Noise nodes I dabbled with was the Noise Selection node, very useful as the base for noise based modelling workflows as it simplifies the node tree significantly. However I do have a feature request. I know this isn't strictly the place for feature requests, but seeing as I'm here. 🙂

 

C4D's noise functions are peerless amongst DCC's, so it's a pity the animate parameter isn't included in all four of the noise function based nodes included in the current iteration of Scene Nodes (I believe it's only included with the Basic Noise node). The Noise Selection node in particular would benefit from an animation parameter as it provides great procedural power but with simplicity and immediacy too.

 

BOs8vL

 

And whilst I'm on the subject of noise function driven modelling, something else I cant find amongst the available nodes is some kind of smoothing/blurring operator. The example below smooths a weight map driven extrusion but the Laplacian Smooth (the algorithm used by the Blur Vertex Data node) is just as relevant to procedural textures or any kind of 0-1 image data for that matter. This is really useful when you want to remove raw jagged edges from procedural extrusions.

 

m1NmYw

Link to post

Thought I'd post this here as it relates to R23. I'm doing a stream tonight (8:00pm UK time), so it would be great to get your thoughts in the chat regarding R23 and other topics we'll be covering 🙂

 

EDIT: Cortana went off without being asked at the 21:30 mark and decided to adjust my mic levels! (sigh), so you'll have to crank the volume up. Cortana has now been shot and buried. 

Check out my C4D tutorials at Digitalmeat.uk

Link to post

Just a thought on prices for people to consider; I don't know what the future plans are, but currently you can upgrade from R20 to R23 for a single regular upgrade price. Back in the day many people would skip 1-2 versions of photoshop and just upgrade every 2-3 years for the same price. *IF* MAXON's current pricing sticks around then this could be a viable option for many people, just skip every other upgrade, effectively bringing the upgrade price to less than the MSA; so long as you don't mind skipping the odd version.

Link to post

  • Igor changed the title to Maxon Announces Cinema 4D R23 | Overview | Discussion
  • Igor pinned this topic
  • Igor unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

ABOUT US

We are dedicated Cinema 4D Community of friendly and passionate artists, hobbyists and developers. Feel free to join us and share your knowledge, your art and anything that might help Community to grow. We are providing guidance, free plugins and files, feedback, sponsorships and various discounts for our Contributors. :cowboypistol:

SUPPORT

Tickets

Purchases

×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright C4D Cafe © 2020 Powered by Invision Community