Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

kosmikal

What Features You Are Waiting For C4D (Wishlist)

Recommended Posts

Is it that what you mean? If yes, the plugin is the way to go ....

No. Here's a short video of me using modelling falloffs in modo. Just a taste of how powerful they are.

3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post

<-here's quite interesting video from that how much "contact, self-collision and softbody" makes for character animation. The finalresult is quite realistic. I think C4D really needs these things for next big update (for character animation, but sure there should be also modelling tools etc.)

Share this post


Link to post

I have finally tested Modo (again, after few years), and i must say that i love the modelling tools which Modo has. Those tools should be in C4D also. And i love the way how Modo handles the weightmap of vertexs, edges and faces, and i guess that is because of Pixar's Subdivision feature.

So i would like to add feature wish for C4D (i guess this would be my final list, these features i really would like to see in near future):

Luxology Modo's (in order of importance):

-Sculpting tools (mesh and image map) "damn i love these tools in Modo"

-Pixar Subdivision

-Modelling tools (polygon, edge, Boolean)

-Topology tools

And i think that those (mentioned above) features should be on top list.

After that there should be animation features such as (in order of importance):

1. Physical Render features, like Motion Blur:

-support for 3rd part developers (i would like to see Physical Motion Blur in DPit effex's water simulations), so atleast we need point velocity information/support for plugins.

2. Skin or MSkin need:

-Self-collision

-Contact (but i guess that collision deformer already can do this?)

-(simulated) Softbody features for rigged object/character

3. other features:

-Muscles collision and sliding on Bone (this is not as important as features mentioned above)

Share this post


Link to post

And i love the way how Modo handles the weightmap of vertexs, edges and faces, and i guess that is because of Pixar's Subdivision feature.

I don't think that's the case. You get the same system regardless of whether you are using Pixar Sub-D's or not.

If you're not doing character animation, motion graphics or anything that requires particles then modo is the way to go.

3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post

For me, I would like to see the modeling tools overhauled. I started using C4D when R9 was released, and the modeling tools still have not seen any major overhaul. The current tool set works, but it sure would be nice to see it upgraded.

Symmetry object is another thing I would like to see overhauled. I model a lot of symmetrical devices, so im always using the symmetry object, and it becomes tedious when I have to continually go back and delete polygons that are created along the mirrored plane. There use to be a plugin (SymmetryClamp) that prevented this, but it only worked in R10. I would love to see that type of symmetry object.

Another thing I would like to see is more commands being echoed in the script log. In Maya, everything is echoed in the script log, but in C4D a lot of things do not show up, which means you have to go dig through the SDK to find the command/code. As nice as this would be, im sure it would require a lot of work on Maon's part to implement something like that.

With the latest release (R13) we've seen character tools, viewport navigation, physical renderer, and motion graphics (mograph) upgrades and overhauls. Theres TFD and DPIT for smoke/fire, and X-Particles for anyone who wants to go beyond Thinking Particles, so im hoping we'll see the modeling aspect addressed next.

Share this post


Link to post

Modo's modeling tools...

I took a model into Cinema from Modo, then decided I needed to add a bit of geometry.

OOPS!! No "maintain curve" when adding a loop in Cinema.

Back to Modo where the added loop is handled without futzing up the established contour on the model.

Share this post


Link to post

Faster, faster and lastly, faster. ;)

Yes!Yes and yes! :)

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post

No. Here's a short video of me using modelling falloffs in modo. Just a taste of how powerful they are.

3DKiwi

As much as I struggled with modo 401, that falloff tool makes me want to give it another try.

.....wait....just did. Struggled with it again. But it is a very neat feature that I would love to see in C4D.

I think it is pretty apparent in this thread that C4D's modeling tools are woefully antiquated and the user community has them as feature #1 in desperate need of some focused attention.

...and we know pause for a short FLAME to MAXON......

C'mon MAXON.....get on with it!!!! After 4 years our patience is running out and Luxology is quickly eating your lunch! When do survival instincts kick in because Luxology is not going to stop developing Modo and the gap is closing between 601 and R13 and their development pace quickens with each release. So if your strategy is to allow customers to use Modo as their "modeling plugin" to C4D, then you might as well just save some money and stop developing C4D now because you're giving your business away with that strategy. Why, you might as well put your nice offices in Germany up for sale now because you probably only have about 3 years left before you go under and it will take you that long to unload the building given the current real estate market.

Can I be any more blunt about it? GGGGEEEZZEEEE!!!! How frustrating!!!!!

....FLAME off....and in case anyone was wondering, I do feel better.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post

Great post Dave. I think you would find if you put some serious time in working with modo's modelling tools you would find stuff like their actions centres and falloffs a breeze to work with. Initially like many people I found some things very weird but eventually it all made sense.

I'm sure MAXON will be around in 3 years. I think it's good to see some heat coming on from modo. One thing I like about modo is they aren't tied into releasing a new version every 12 months as MAXON appears to be. I reckon the development cycle for C4D is too short. An 18 month time frame between versions would see better upgrades and new things more polished.

Nigel / 3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post

Second that. Having new full release every year is quite a challenge...

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...