Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/07/2018 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    You can try exporting your 3d models in .fbx or .obj and use the trapcode suite in after effects.
  2. 1 point
    Ever Wondered what the rail spline field is all over the place? well this will hopefully clear that up for you View the full article
  3. 1 point
    This is fun to play with! I switched all the connectors to Wheel Suspension, and that adds a nice spring like you'd get from tramp springs (also doubled the size of the ball to have more mass to play with).
  4. 1 point
  5. 1 point
    Dynamic Connector / hinge - 1 for each flap. All connected objects need to be dynamic. CBR
  6. 1 point
    Finally found some time to get back to this WIP and make some progress. As C4D is a hobby, I do bounce around a lot with my projects -- trying, experimenting, learning, but never completing. I wanted one big project for this summer because all that jumping around was not giving a sense of satisfaction of accomplishing something. Here is some of the mesh details: The model is huge because it will be seen with Star Trek ship models as well. The works of Robert Wilde is the inspiration for this and I have over 66 reference images found from searching the web. I finally got the shape/dimensions/proportions correct because rarely are there any orthogonal views to work with for every element of this model. Now that the basic shape is done, next is to insure that I have the just the right texture with the appropriate specular highlights. Here is an example of what I hope to achieve (for me it is a lot harder than it looks): Any ideas on how to get this affect? Thanks, Dave
  7. 1 point
    Voronoi Fracture. Although now I look again, I see I am wrong, and you actually used just a regular fracture on those planes. Either way, they don't have any real world thickness, so dynamics won't know what to do with them ! ;) Each Fracture should be a cloth SDS object with a suitable thickness value. I'm mainly referring to the slightly slap-dash arrangement / rotations of connectors. Dynamics setups that work and are 'stable' tend to be built very precisely and with a lot of care, so this looks messy in comparison to that. So that, combined with the low poly complex pole trampoline object that errors as soon as you throw anything at it, I would call that an unstable system. I'm also not convinced you want hinge connectors. Have you tried fixed ? It is possible that the dynamics are slightly evolved in 19.053 - there may be a subtle difference in the way they behave here vs in R17, so that may explain it. I literally didn't change anything else about your file other than what we mentioned... Just a thing to try - get in the scene where it fails, copy the trampoline group out to a new file, see if it explodes, then drop a ball on it, and see if it can hold. That will eliminate any unique scene weirdness going on in just that file. If it does turn out to be a file problem, then copying the whole OM hierarchy to a new scene can sometimes help. CBR
  8. 1 point
    Back on the Hard surface work, this time up it's robocop, here's a couple of shots of the very early early stages, building the head. still playing with proportions, mainly the face. updates to come :D
  9. 1 point
    Along with the long over-due update to C4D's UV capabilities and nodal materials, then Cerbera's wish list for modeling tools, Briankoko's wishes for VFX tools and Rectro's well thought-out and comprehensive list pretty much sum-up my hopes for not just R20 but probably for a few more releases after that. Many would think that R18 and R19 put a good dent in the gap between C4D and the competition, but after reading this thread you realize just how much farther they have to go! But if I could take this in a different direction here is my ultimate and obviously unrealistic set of wishes: 1) MAXON gives us everything we have mentioned in this thread prior to 2020. Revamping the core has been the bottleneck to any progress in a number of aging areas (BP in particular) and it has been the long held belief that MAXON will not invest in improving any code wrapped around the old core. So as a community, C4D users have patiently waited as the industry has moved forward. Remember that MAXON has assuaged our impatience with statements about how this great new architecture will set us up for big changes in the future. There have also been insinuations that improvements will come faster than anything we have seen in the past. These promises have kept the truly faithful camped on the MAXON doorstep. So if the new core is finally here in its entirety (having taken 3 to 4 versions to fully release), then if you don't want to break that faith, you better deliver -- especially if you are raising MSA prices. I don't care how many releases it takes - but I do care how long it takes. The expectation you have established around the new core is that catch-up the competition will happen and it will happen fast -- how you program manage new feature releases needs to strongly respect how patient we have been. That is why my expectations are not for R20, but for 2020 and I don't care if takes you 8 releases to get there...but I do care how long it takes because I fear our patience is coming to an end. 2) Either MAXON meets our expectations or Blender makes its program easier to use. Honestly, there are some really neat areas of development within the Blender community and at a fraction of the cost of C4D. The total cost of ownership (Blender and plugins) is still far less than C4D Prime but you get so much more. MAXON needs to respect Blender and realize that Blender sets the floor for what users want in terms of features. We all hate the UI and the instability, but amazing things are still being done with that program. 3) MAXON stops relying on plugin or 3rd party developers to round out their tool set. Focusing on built-in pipelines to other programs like Houdini, Allegorithmic, etc is nice, but it is not a winning strategy for staying competitive. In fact, it is almost and admission that they can't stay competitive on features. We are not going to give you nodal materials, but you can use Substance Design and import the .sbsar file. We are not going to give you fluids or OpenVDB support, so please use Houdini and import the file. Now, it is okay to not compete on features but you have to compete on something and the only thing left is to compete on price. Sorry, but in a highly technical market with a strong development pace, competing on stability and ease of use will only get you so far. People will always want what your competitors have and will take stability for granted when they jump ship to another program to get it (and its not like Maya, Modo or Houdini are bad options----they are great options). They may regret it in the end, but what does that matter to you when you have lost the sale. So my wish is that MAXON commits to changing what C4D can NOT do rather than what C4D and its plugins can do. If they don't make this commitment, then they should lower their price. In summary, my hope is that everyone at MAXON is extremely nervous about over-promising and under-delivering with R20. Since R16, they have set the expectations that the new core will bring great change and while they never said that R20 will be the "big" one, the general consensus of the community is that R20 is when the big changes will yield BIG NEW FEATURES. Right, wrong or indifferent, it is MAXON's time to deliver on those promises. Dave



C4D Cafe is the largest CINEMA 4D community. We provide facilities for discussion, showcasing and learning our favorite software :) Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and much more. If you need to find solution to your problem or otherwise ask for help, Cafe is the right place.
  • Create New...