Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/14/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Got a little farther along. I had a day of voice recording with my voice actor, Mike Luce this week. We did 2 scripts so I'll have stuff to work with for a while now. One thing I can't seem to remember is that when you scale the characters, the hair and fur don't scale with them! It took some time to get them looking right again!
  2. 1 point
    So I have been inspired @Cerbera being inspired by @anglereserve to post some color test I did recently. Pretty happy with how it looks like, just wasn't sure if it was worth sharing. https://imgur.com/a/wzXV1mN
  3. 1 point
    Thanks @Cerbera -- I appreciate the clarification!
  4. 1 point
    Yes, same place as regular HUD, but it might not have been obvious what to click there if you didn't know what that block was called... CBR
  5. 1 point
    Don't you click those on and off under the HUD tab though? Or is there another way to do it?
  6. 1 point
    No, the regular HUD is not what he's illustrating there - that's the Open GL statistics, but I don't know why OP wants those - they are almost universally unhelpful to modelling ! CBR
  7. 1 point
    Is it the HUD you want to turn on? That's in the Attributes Window then Mode in the attributes menu and then View Settings and finally the HUD tab. If, that's what you are looking for....
  8. 1 point
    You can do it with Mograph Selections used by colored Shader Effectors. Your example was so cute I may have to do that one myself. Shape Shader Dynamic 2.c4d.zip
  9. 1 point
    Hi, providing you get the simulation the way you want it. You can then bake the simulation without the colours, and when the balls filled the box again apply the pattern colours where you want them.
  10. 1 point
    I wouldn't say dumb - it's more than reasonable to be wondering about both those questions ! :) S focuses a selection, which can be components or objects, whereas O focuses just a selected object or objects (in the case of single objects centering on its axis ). You can test this by making any object editable, selecting a single polygon on the back of it, then do S and O to see the difference... I also get the problem where camera pivot goes screwy sometimes, but usually fix it myself my just deselecting / re-selecting the current object, which seems to work 99% of the time for me... CBR
  11. 1 point
    I do like these self-fixing problems :) But while I would expect a boole to give you problems with anything that uses its volume if that volume isn't closed I can't explain why your scratch build worked if that remained the case... CBR
  12. 1 point
    Its down to the usage. how low you go is down to what you expect it to do, how close you get at render time and what its being made for. I would not go that low unless I was asked to make it for a low end phone app/game. As I mentioned before SDS tag will simply smooth the mesh, but its the cage mesh that the weighting get applied to and does not take into account how smooth it looks from the SDS tag. If I was to make a bird, even for personal stuff I would add enough loops to allow a dynamic set of wings using dynamic joints, maybe use a Random effector on it to flap them. I would make the beak separate as its of a different material surface to the body. I would not push the beak into the head but make the beak flush with where the face finishes as if the beak is more of a mask over the muzzle. You can rig that but it will have limited movement, and maybe if you need 100s of them all walking about at distance then yea stay that low. Dan
  13. 1 point
    if you're using GI you don't need AO, GI does the occlusion by itself. your render looks like a render because the lighting isn't very good and the materials lack realism. your metal is a bit too shiny, you could introduce a little roughness and also break it up with tiny scratches and slight variation in reflectivity and roughness with a grunge map.. even the newest product has been touched (somebody has unpacked it, right?), has dust on it, this all results in variation of the surface. touch a chrome button with your finger, even when your hands are freakishly clean, your fingers will leave a print on the surface, making it slightly more dull in that area. slide a product like that out of it's box and the tiny specs of dust between the products surface and the packagings surface will result in microscopic scratches. details like these you don't really notice consciously (if applied subtile enough), but it makes a huge difference. i also do a lot product renders of audio products, and i never apply a perfectly clean material to anything. everything has variation in real life, there's no such thing as a perfectly even surface. and btw, the keyshot render also looks like a render, because it lacks those details. keyshot is made that everything looks quite good out of the box, making renders in a full package like c4d is a bit more complicated and requires some deeper knowledge.
  14. 1 point
    Keyshot is without doubt a superb renderer and sits in its own place at the top when it comes to product shots. Its sheer simplicity and speed makes life easy, but comes at a huge cost. I cant see why you wouldn't get close results in C4D physical render, its just times with be significantly longer. As Fastbee said show us a render in C4D physical using same HDR map and scene set up. It you use a PBR material set up it should yield good results. If you own Keyshot already then stay with it, its a rather expensive render engine so why settle with C4D own engine after shedding that kind of money out? I have keyshot for Zbrush at much cheaper option and can run my work from C4D through Zbrush to Keyshot, its not too much hassle to get the results I want but as it happens Vray, or Redshift can do them kind of shots with ease too. Dan
  15. 1 point
    I like both techniques and wonder why they couldn't be combined. While the Lester Banks video was easy to follow (as well as just brilliant) the first one minute tutorial required you to be super quick with the pause button to unpack all the steps. To help, here is what I as able to discern from multiple views in the first video: Tree Deformation (first video): 1) Set up a spline that matches the main trunk and subdivide it appropriately. 2) Set up a hair object converted from that spline 3) Link that hair object to some planar object (a disk in this video) placed at the base of the tree. 4) Set the hair object to generate squares --- I would imagine that this step somehow allows the geometry of the tree to be linked to the hair object performed in steps 6 and 7. Not sure. 5) Select the hair object and go to the simulate tab in the C4D main menu and select "Set roots". Now because the planar object was linked to the hair object in Step 3, that planar object now becomes the "root" of the hair object. Again, not sure. 6) Bring in a mesh deformer and make it a child of the parent tree object. 7) Drag the hair object into the object window of the mesh deformer. Set the external mode to "surface" and press initialize. 8) Go to the hair object's Dynamic's tab and set Rest Hold to 50% 9) You now have the tree model to be impacted by hair dynamics. Grab the planar object created in Step 3 and the tree will react appropriately. Add wind and the tree bends (but the leaves do not move -- for this go to the second tutorial. At this point, you can do some pretty neat things with the tree that even plugins like Forester cannot do. While Forester can simulate wind blowing the leaves and branches around, physically moving the tree around has no dynamic impact on the tree. This technique allows you to simulate a tree being cut or knocked down. Or something big (like a truck) crashing into the tree. For those who are truly gifted with X-particles (which means "not me"), imagine using the multi-physics capabilities of X-Particles to impact the tree dynamics. Could particle Advection be used to the drive the base hair spline on those trees? Couple that with the X-Particles grain solver and could it be possible to have an avalanche tear through a forest pretty realistically? Or have the leaves on the tree generate static particles which are then advected by the fluid simulation of an explosion while the tree reacts dynamically. The effect I am thinking of would match those 1950 videos of nuclear bomb shock wave ripping through a winter forest in slow motion (as seen here at 18 seconds in) I feel that this can be done because X-particles is so well integrated with C4D --- but not sure. I would hope Mario Tran Phuc reads this thread and is challenged by the concept. If anyone could do it, it would be him. That guy never ceases to inspire. I also hope that full dynamic capability is added in Forester 2, but they are too busy with Rock Engine - a pretty cool landscape generator for C4D - so don't hold your breath. Dave
  16. 1 point
    That's a yes. I believe these are the leaves you are looking for... hair and Ion Oprea (via Lester Banks) to the rescue ! Probably mute audio on that one, nobody likes the sound of clipping :) CBR
  17. 1 point
    not exactly what I think you are looking for but maybe ti will work for you I have seen another that makes just the leaves move but I cna't remember where
  18. 1 point
    Please check your gamma settings in the workflow. Somewhere in the project configuration. I'm not near my computer. Search in the manual if lost. ... Cheers. ... João Marco
  • Create New...


Dear members, we are aware of few more bugs that are still present withing the theme.We just wanted to let you know that we are working to fix them as soon as possible.


Please be aware that we are manually approving all new registrations, due to spam prevention. Please be patient in case you cannot login right away, we will approve you within 12h or less if we decide you are not potential spammer. 


Thanks for understanding! :cowboypistol: