Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/28/2020 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    Hi guys! My 2 cents on the topic: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EMfgEuGXkAIr0tj?format=jpg&name=900x900 Besides the jokes, I think Cinema 4D is one of the greatest software that I have used and now is affordable even for my location. When I open Blender, all the navigation and stuff make me feel I got into LADA car (it is old soviet cars)it can drive you in every place but in the most uncomfortable way, when I use Maya, I feel like I am driving Alpha Romeo - beautiful but it breaks every 10 km., when I use 3Ds Max (my first 3d app) I am feeling I am in a tank - I have 2 handles for everything, when I use Houdini...well like I am in CERN, I am accelerating particles to make a cube, and I accidentally make a hypertorus packed with monkeys, which are consumed by the black hole that also accidentally appeared...I end up making the cube with real paper from the garbage in the post apocalypse world that I have created. when I use Nuke - I am using BMW, cool but too expensive and in the winter you don't go out with it... and when I use Cinema 4D - I am in a AUDI! Feels good and takes you where you want to go! The grass is not always greener on the other side!
  2. 6 points
    For the hobbyist who has never made a dime off of the software, annual maintenance costs do add up but the beauty of maintenance over subscription is that you are actually "owning" something at the end. With subscriptions, what I was once paying for maintenance now just gets me a right-to-use for a limited time (1 year). As you don't own it, once you stop paying it goes away. I would imagine that most digital enthusiasts like myself probably have X-Particles or some other 3rd party renderer or any other plugin that has maintenance programs (DEM earth, etc). So when C4D was pre-subscription, you were paying $720 for C4D, around $300 for the Insydium maintenance programs, probably another $300 for your favorite 3rd Party Renderer, and you could easily set aside another $100 to $200 to support any new releases or updates from your favorite plugin developers. Plus, you probably are going to want to keep your hardware up-to-date and plunk down close to $3000 every 5 to 6 years for a new computer/monitor, etc. Therefore, for a hobbyist your annual costs to keep your software and hardware current come to easily ($720+300+300+200+$600) to over $2000. Do that for 10 years and it is like owning another car (we do keep our cars for 10 years). But with software under maintenance, every year it gets up-dated. Under a maintenance program, should you want to stop paying for maintenance, you leave the program with the latest and greatest of everything because everything still works. If you did 10 years on subscriptions and decided to leave, you have to go back and hope your last perpetual license from 10 years ago still works on your current OS or GPU. For any new plugins purchased over that 10 year period, there is no guarantee that they will work with your last perpetual license. In short, you are still paying the same amount as with maintenance plans, but should you leave a subscription program after an extended period of time you may not even have an old car to go back to...you could have nothing. So going on subscriptions in year 1 does not bother me....but I think long term. What if 10 years from now and thousands of dollars later I decide I can no longer afford this hobby. I then have nothing. That is what really scares me and that is what makes me think about leaving it all now and going to Blender. Yeah I lose all that time with training, etc. but why invest long term in something I feel financially locked in to. "Stop paying and it all goes away" - that's not a good feeling to have with something that is supposed to give you enjoyment. This is a hobby to me after all. I do love C4D. It is an awesome program in more ways than one and it is on a good trajectory. But so isn't Blender and Blender does not make me feel trapped. If there is any plan in the works that says "stay on subscriptions long enough and you won't leave empty handed", I would be all in as that is a win-win situation. But I don't think MAXON is thinking as long term as I am. Dave
  3. 5 points
    just uploaded a compilation of all the toon FX setups i've done to vimeo
  4. 4 points
    Cinema 4d has good tools for rigging. Besides 3ds max and a bit of maya i dont know much about other packages but i feel very confortable rigging in this one. Obvisously i would like some improvements in the skinning system, maybe a multi layer system for the weight painting and a better constraint system that wasn't much of a drag with priorities. Unfortunately i'm mainly a generalist and i only rig occasionally, so there are a lot of skills (including learning python) that i miss. However it's good to work in a system that have such potencial and it helps a lot professionals like me that are not fully dedicated to rigging. For example i watched some rigging maya tuts and i find that if your are not a python user, you don't go very far... Perhaphs blender is better, but like i said it before, don't know it very well. Another thing that i really like is that we can mix mograph tools with rigging tools and provide some cool effects, and i dont see this kind of interaction in other packages. Here's a an example of some of those rigs i've worked, and to show that c4d is a good tool to use. A lot of xpresso but no python at all. enjoy:
  5. 4 points
    I feel the need to explain my Avatar then -- "Blender Gives us Options". I am not a Blender evangelist but changed my previous Avatar (I think it was a picture of me and John Knoll) when MAXON announced their subscription plan and hiked prices again. I have nothing but admiration for the developers, project managers and the software quality team (the unsung heroes of the MAXON corporation). But as a hobbyist, I fear that MAXON's subscription program and higher cost of perpetual licenses over the previous MSA program is hurting the hobbyist. This did not sit well with me as a loyal Studio user for the past 10 years. The hobbyist wants to own the software whereas the commercial user wants to lease it and their pricing programs favor the commercial user. Therefore, MAXON has forgotten us and/or taken us for granted. So the point of the Avatar is to serve a reminder that MAXON should NOT take any customer for granted because Blender is becoming a force in the industry. For me, C4D is on a tremendous trajectory and I am excited about its future. I just hope I can afford to be part of it. Dave
  6. 4 points
    i‘m using complex facial rigs in production, it works perfectly, also for rendering on farms. a lot of xpresso involved. i‘m not experiencing that mess you‘re talking about at all. xpresso is a good thing, it allows you to create complex dependencies you just can‘t get with constraints alone.
  7. 4 points
    We don't have a price for an upgrade that doesn't exist yet. We will make the price list for the next release as we get closer to that release. However, I have posted multiple times and place that it will be inline with this years non MSA price point which is 850 Euros (different price in different currencies). There really honestly is no confusion here. A reseller can't offer you a price for a product that isn't for sale. Cheers Dave
  8. 4 points
    *headdesk* I swear, threads about justified criticism always get derailed and mutilated and twisted until the original complaint is no longer even recognizeable. Marxism, now? Really?
  9. 4 points
  10. 4 points
    I honestly want to believe Srek....I seriously hope that MAXON is trying to repair the trust that was lost in their confusing roll-out of subscriptions. Unfortunately, after 8 months with nothing done to rectify the situation, you can only conclude the following: MAXON's goal is subscriptions for all. MAXON only wants to discourage perpetual licenses. Withholding Cineversity from perpetual license holders is one indication. Calling S22 a "different" piece of software to get around the agreements in everyone's R21 MSA agreement is another. Sorry...it is the license server that makes S22 different than a perpetual upgrade from R21 to R22 - not the software itself. How far MAXON wants to discourage perpetual licenses remains to be seen. That can be the only reason why there is so little communication on perpetual upgrade pricing. I don't buy that they are working through the complexities of licenses management....it has been 8 months after all. If they can release a new version of the software in that time, they can work through a license issue. Now, if you agree with these conclusions then you also have to ask how many perpetual license holders will this impact? What makes up a perpetual license holder? Would multi-seat DCC firms continue with the higher costs of maintaining a perpetual license or switch to the lower cost subscription model? Probably not. I think tax laws also favor subscriptions as they can be expensed in the current year whereas perpetual licenses, as a fixed asset to the company, need to be depreciated. Not sure but the point is that DCC companies are probably in favor of subscriptions. We have already heard the sentiments of single user perpetual license holders who use C4D to make money. Hey....to them it is just a higher expense that they can pass off to the client and that higher cost is NOT that significant. So who gets hurt? The hobbyist. Especially the hobbyist who has invested a lot in the C4D ecosystem of plugins, tutorials, texture sets and models over the years. We don't like subscriptions because we have paid dearly over the years (especially Studio owners) and should we fall on hard times, we don't want to lose everything that took us years of our time and our hard earned money to accumulate if we can't make a subscription payment. And honestly, I think MAXON knows this. But I also think that we are not that significant a portion of their user-base for MAXON to worry about. Our business does not mean that much to them. We are probably the last barrier to their long term goal of subscriptions for all anyway. If they can't get us to subscriptions, then no tears would be shed in the MAXON offices should we move to Blender. Is this all "supposition"? Absolutely! But it is based on evidence and actions taken to date. If anyone has any other rational to explain MAXON's actions, then please speak up -- provided that you have hard evidence to counter my conclusions that there are hard times ahead for the C4D hobbyist. But all is not lost for the C4D hobbyist. There is Blender. The Blender development group moves at light speed. While the UI is a bit quirky, they do have a budding object manager that is starting look very C4D-ish in its design. For me, what keeps my from deep diving into Blender is the UI. What keeps me using C4D is Insydium. I believe that over time Blender's UI will only continue to improve and probably faster than we anticipate now that the ground work has been laid down with R2.8. Now, as Insydium already has one foot in the Blender world with Cycles-4D, my deepest wish is that they are looking at the huge ground swell of support for Blender in the DCC marketplace and thinking about moving X-Particles to that platform as well. That would be a huge market for them and free's them from tying their future to the actions of MAXON. As Nigel is fond of saying: "fun times ahead". Dave
  11. 4 points
    I think the biggest issue is that many long time customers just feel betrayed and undervalued. Some people spent thousands upon thousands of dollars over the years on their software (which is fair enough). Then subscriptions come around, just as suspected, and everybody that has been a long time customers gets a measly 20% off their subscription for two years, and they lose their R21 perpetual in the process. Doesn't matter if you've been customer for ten years or two. You have R21? You get 20% off for two years. It does not affect me personally since all I ever use are licenses that are provided by my workplace but I can see how people are disappointed by that. While I ultimately think having the choice (important) between subscriptions and perpetuals is a good thing, the way the transition was done was just not great at all. To add to that, apart from being a student you have no way to get cheap access to C4D. As much as I'd like to say yeah, subscriptions make it easier to get into the software, it is still ~700€ a year (if you take the yearly subscription upfront that is). Otherwise, if you take the real monthly subscription, you end up with 1200€. That is almost double of what they ask for if you pay "monthly". For a hobbyist that is a lot of money. I think many companies, like MAXON, severely underestimate the threat that is Blender. They might make more money in the short term, but many many up and coming 3D artists will just grow up with Blender and never switch to anything else unless they absolutely have to due to company requirements or something similiar. MAXON is gimping themselves hard by not offering a more affordable option for people to learn and bind themselves to C4D. I'm not a businessman, but I have a hard time wrapping my head around how this is supposed to be worth it.
  12. 3 points
    Hi all, Some of you may know the aaOcean plugin - for ocean / sea surface creation. It's been available for a while, but broke with the R21 update. I'm pleased to say that, due to the voluntary work of Kent Barber, it's been updated for R21 / S22 on both Windows and MacOS. I've also expanded the minimal documentation that was available. Sorry for the slightly convoluted links - but if you visit: http://vantagegraphics.co.uk/aaocean you'll find links to the plugin itself - and for the updated documentation file. Hope you enjoy it.
  13. 3 points
    Yea to be honest I wouldn't use either of the techniques you provided examples of above flat surface or not, mainly because they're ugly:) one would prefer a nice quad patch like the example @Cerbera provided:D
  14. 3 points
    Hey! Actually my technical references are pretty basic. i've watched some tutorials for maya, mostly about multiple joint chains in character limbs and such. From there i learned to replicate that in c4d but those were technical concepts since i've no intereset to work with maya. i've also checked some tutorials from cineversity but i found those a bit superficial. Cinema 4d has some interesting rigged human models you can find in the content browser, plus they added some cartoon models from Ace5 Studios that have a different type of rig, much simpler, and also a facial rig that is very cool to learn. I usually break that into components and do some revearse engineering. That's my way to work. For the bird i used this video from The Mill just for inspiration. It's just a breakdown so they cut out all tech parts. i also found something about the mechanics of wing feathers, but never related to rigging and absolutly nothing in c4d. The guys at the Mill made an incredible work and we tried to do our best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkagLUbs95Q In the end our bird was like this: http://glimpsevfx.com/portfolio/leroy-merlin-robin/
  15. 3 points
    you mean those glitches?
  16. 3 points
    Hello, For a modular terrain generation plugin I work on in my spare time, need a couple of beta testers. In short, the deal would be: You test the plugin, report bugs, create example scenes & renderings, request features. I develop the plugin, fix bugs, and give you the latest builds. Of course, everything that is shown or discussed during the beta test, is totally confidential. When the beta test ends, you get perpetual licenses for the plugin The plugin is actually still in Alpha stage, but I wanted to get some feedback as early as possible. Since I have a job, a relationship, a child, and other interests, too, don't expect this beta test to get stressful If you're interested, please drop me a private message. Best greetings, Frank
  17. 3 points
    I used to come to this site all the time back in the day. The people here helped me a lot and I have in turn hoped to have helped lots of people. I guess it is that, plus nostalgia that brings me back, and hope that the next version of C4D will finally be the big one. With every release though still no big one. The reason I'm pushing it here is to help others find the wealth down a different path. One day they will realize they were starving for scraps when they could have been feasting like kings. All the road blocks that C4D put up for me are gone with Blender. I'm having more fun with 3D now than I've probably ever had in my life. I wish others can also find their 3D joy no matter what programs they use.
  18. 3 points
    I start off with a hexahedron sphere with 8 segments, I then cut it in half so you're left with a hemisphere shape. You could also use a cylinder for this. I then extrude it to the desired length. I then duplicate that 4 times, Rotating them slightly until they're in the desired position, Then change the length, Thickness etc accordingly. I then drop in an 8 sided disk, Make it all quads by removing the 4 diagonal cuts, Do an inner extrude and delete the centre then extrude 2 edges ether side of the disk around to make the outside of the hand. You now have the basic hand shape. Just a matter of connecting all the pieces together and filling in the top and bottom with polys, And extending the disk into a wrist. If you align everything carefully you should have the correct amount of segments to connect most of it without having to create loads of additional cuts, Although you will have to make a few. Then just add some additional cuts for the joints and the finished product should look something like this, Although i'm sure you can do a better job than my rushed attempt.
  19. 3 points
    Hey there, there is a bunch of questions! Not sure I can answer them all but I will do my best according to my personal experience. What's a good rule of thumb for when to model the clothing into the character and when to simulate cloth dynamics? This depends a lot on what are you going to use your character for. I avoid as much as I can cloth dynamics since you cant predict exactly where things are going to go, how it will bend, etc... requires so many tests and interations, and the result, can vary. For me personally, if it is not a long dress, that needs to 100% behave like a cloth around the legs, etc... I keep it as normal polygons, under the influence of the main rig. if there are specific folds or parts of the cloth that needs a bit of bouncing, like a cape, etc.. I solve it with extra bones and make their IK dynamic, so you can predict a lot better how it will behave. In the case of cloth dynamics, are any of you using Marvelous Designer? It's pretty expensive for me at the moment. Can Cinema 4D's Dress-O-Matic & Cloth Dynamics get similar results? I'm not experience with marveleous designer to be honest But it is one of the top industry choices for cloth designing for a reason. But I am a firmly believer, that even though the process might take longer, it can be done inside C4D too, with more experience, etc. If you want to create folds in a surface, like a piece of cloth shrinked together, it can be done smoothing modifier and magnet tool with some specific settings, given you have lots of polygons to work on the cloth surface. In the case of modeling the clothing into the character, how do you typically handle the body geometry? i.e. if the body is covered by clothing do you keep the underlying geometry and weight both the body & clothing or delete the covered geometry? If it will be used in animation, and you want to be free with any movement, for sure, hide the geometry that will be covered by the cloth, so you avoid the geometry underneath to pop out when you bend the elbow for example. If you use the hide polygons command in C4D, it will hide it on your viewport, but will still render it out. The trick I use is to create a transparent material, with zero refraction, and create polygon selections of the parts of the model you wish to hide... and apply these materials for those parts. Never delete geometry from a character since you want to have freedom to do whatever with it afterwards (maybe one day he/she decides to skinny diving one evening ) In the case of modeling the clothing into the character, How would you mimic the bunching of the fabric in the elbows and knees? Pose Morphs? Displacement maps? Pose morphs can for sure help to define how it will behave, once you bend the knee or elbos, etc... This wlll depend a lot on the effect you want to achieve. For a lot of things I do, I paint the folds and wrinkles on my clothes inside the texture painting software, and export a normal map from those, so I can still keep my low poly flexibility inside C4D, but when I render it out, it has nicer details. If you want physical changes, folds, etc.. you will need to increase the number of polygons, and use a trick I saw the other day, with the smoothing deformer and paint the folds, by pushing polygons using the magnet tool brush. I will try to find the tutorial and post it here (I only discovered this 2 weeks ago!) How do you typically handle ornamental geometry like buttons, patches, badges? So far I have tried Skin Deformers (copying the weights tags with VAMP), the Surface Deformer, and Constraints. I would like to hear others' approaches to this. This can vary a lot, and it depends on a series of factors: how big is the object you want to attach, how it will behave, etc. For me, generally, I always try to skin things together, so I dont have to worry about forgetting one thing, etc... if it is a patch that will go alongside of a shoulder, it needs to be under the same influence of the rig. You want it to fold it following the arm movement and the distance it has to the elbow, etc.. so the skin deformer is usually the best solution. If it is something that the character has on its hair, but it is sticking out.. or the chracter is holding, like a gun or a lollypop, the constraints is your best friend. Just make sure to place it properly on the hierarchy, and give it the right priority for calculations, so you dont get weird delays, when the character moves its hand, the gun will need to calculate some extra time... So yeah, in summary, when I rig my characters, I like to think I am working more like a game developer. I want to have control of thing things my character will do and where it will interact, so I can easily loop and pick appart animations. Dynamic bones for me all the way Hope that helped!
  20. 3 points
    I played around a bit Moneythrower.mp4 Moneythrower.c4d
  21. 3 points
    Another adventurous Blender user here! Been playing with it for a few weeks now. And now I'm even using it for a paid project, using Eevee to render an animation that would otherwise take ages even with Octane... You know, it's really really tough to learn a new 3D sofware after 25(!) years with Cinema 4D! But for some strange reason I actually enjoy it... It's so different from Cinema that it's like starting from scratch (all the background knowledge helps of course, I learn much faster than a true beginner). Brings me back to how it all started for me. The noob fase! Constantly hitting brick walls but not giving up and googling and youtubing (well not back in those days haha, I actually had to read the manual) until you find the solution (or a workaround) and you just keep going. I kinda stagnated as an artist for years but now I'm forced to learn how to use nodes properly and make nice materials, it's about time. I relied on Cinema's "easy mode" for too long. And making pretty stuff with Eevee effortlessly is tons of fun. Well I hope I'll still be able to afford Cinema in the future when I need it but since I don't want to be that dependent on whatever silly pricing MAXON comes up with next I'll put my bets on something that'll always be free, including 2 awesome free render engines, fluid sim, particles, smoke etc etc (and don't forget the very active community)... For me it's worth it.
  22. 3 points
    Blender is a good software but we have 2 blender users in the team and we will likely all swap to cinema mostly. blender is still free and you can always do something you cant do in cinema if you need. The biggest drawback in cinema for us is the lack of Multi UV editing and relying on a script for face weighted normals and such things (and bad booleans) Working with a modeller on Blender who has always used it, I noticed that it also has a lot of downsides like cinema or any software. Some things you think are given in cinema seem like a godsend in blender. If you want to use a cylinder in blender, then change the amount of sides - you do that once, then its editable when you move it once. You cant stay with primitives and just change their size later without making them editable. Things like arrays are not easily done. These are things where I think "***" - but it also has a lot of upsides clearly. It does feel as if some things are just not possible to do in cinema, but in the last years the gap has closed noticeably and cinema has really gained its own big advantages. So is the other side of the grass greener? Id say definitely no. Its up and downs. Volume builder and fields are a game changer on cinema for us. Cinema has a great hierarchy and makes it easy to change things down the road. Non destructive workflows are really second only to Houdini I would say. Also the cinema UI is the best, making it very easy for me to make a easy to use workspace for the team getting everyone on track fast, while Blender has the worst usability of all 3D apps still, which is the mayor drawback of it. If only cinema had a little more care for realtime. Realtime clearly is the future, and game dev is a big market. If anyone from C4D is reading this, give us multi UV, split phong by UV islands, face weighted normals workflow options and cinema could be amazing for gamedev and any realtime art.
  23. 3 points
    To all MAXON people, I have a simple request: let me upgrade my perpetual R21 license to R2X at the former MSA cost. Just do that, keep pushing your subscription model if you want to, and I think 90% of customers’ complaints will be gone. I no longer care about cineversity (which has been pretty idle for the last 6 months). Oh and watch out for Maya/3Ds max indie licenses at 250$/year. If AD extends its pilot and makes these offers permanent and global, I will switch immediately to Maya. cheers Adrien
  24. 3 points
    Hi srek, thanks for being here to clarefy things. I find it unfortunate, that MAXON is forcing its customers into a position where clarifications like this are necesarry, because firstly it is easy to loose perpetual by just updating and secondly by the existence of different update paths, which are not properly published on the website. So it seems to be possible with an R20 to start a subscription at a reduced price without losing the perpetual license, while there is no such possibility for owners of an R21 perpetual license (without losing the perpetual license). Please correct me if I am wrong. So it is not only because of the unwillingness and lack of understanding of the customers, but also because of MAXON's unnecessarily strict policy that these misunderstandings arise and that the corresponding discussions never end. best regards Jops
  25. 3 points
    When the ball rolls, the table tilts. There's no hidden rim to keep the sphere from falling off - just math scene file https://www.dropbox.com/s/5bmrfpg19q058oq/balance.c4d?dl=1
  26. 3 points
    Only problem is you´re in edit axis mode. Turn off this icon, then you can in component mode work with model...
  27. 2 points
    I think it's pretty easy to do this yourself without any plug-ins, although you get a pattern different from the one Cerbera showed. I use a technique that works when the number of Rotation Segments of the cylinder is a power of 2 (i.e., 8, 16, 64, 128, etc...): 1) Create a cylinder making sure that the number of Rotation segments is a power of 2 and Caps turned on with 1 segment. Convert it to an editable object and Optimize if you have an old C4D version to make sure that the caps are attached to the rest of the cylinder (!). For a 16 segment cylinder, you now have something that looks like this from the top, which by now you are quite used to seeing (I selected all of the points in point mode for better visibility): 2) Now, we want to get rid of all but four of the radial edges but keep that central point, as illustrated in the following image: The quick way I go about doing this, which is especially helpful for cylinders with very many Rotation Segments is to go into Edges Mode and simply use Live Selection with a reasonably sized brush to select all of the edges stemming from the center, by clicking on the point at the center of the cap. You can also just select any radial edge and do a ring select (U~B) on any other radial edge, to select them all, if this way is easier for you. Then, I just Ctrl-Click the four segments, in Live Select, that form the cross shape I don't want selected (the edges going in the up, down, left, and right directions from the center) which are always constant in number (i.e., exactly four). Finally, the the edges that remain highlighted (as shown in the above image) should now be dissolved (i.e., M~N, Ctrl-BS/Del, Right-Click menu, or however you like to do dissolves). 2b) OK, if your cylinder only had 8 Rotation Segments, you're done (congrats!) and you can skip the rest of the steps. 3) For cylinders with Power-of-two Rotational Segment counts >=16, we're left with a cap Full-O-NGons at this point, as indicated by the reddish NGon lines in the image below. I've gone ahead and selected the central point in Point Mode for the following step which does most of the remaining work of creating the quad topology: 4) In Points Mode, with the central point (and only the central point!) selected we want to do a Bevel operation (M~S) with the settings shown below: Tool Option Offset Mode: Proportional Offset: 100 % Subdivision: 3 {See Note} Note: Type a value that is the following function of N, the number of Rotation Segments you started with: Subdivision=N/4-1. Since I used 16 segments for this example, 16/4-1=3 for the Subdivision count. (For 32 starting segments, it would be 7, for 64, 15, and for 128, 31) - just divide the starting number by four and subtract one. Depth: -100 % Limit: Unchecked (but doesn't matter, int his case) Shaping Shape: Round Tension: 100% Topology You can leave all of the Topology options unchecked... 5) We now have the following almost complete topology and I've gone ahead and once again selected all of the points to improve their visibility in the demo image below: 6) Unfortunately, NGon lines remain. This is because the Bevel tool slightly "missed" the existing points by a tiny offset, so we are left with doubled points along the cap's circumference that are very close to the points they should be right on top of. It is important to note for the next step that the bad, misaligned points, are the ones that have at least one edge stemming from them and going into the cap and connecting with another point in the interior of the cap. The good original points, are the ones along the circumference of the cap with both edges coming off of them forming said circumference. 7) To fix things up, you can go one of several ways here. These include the fast, easy, but not very accurate optimize operation to help merge all of the duplicate points, all the way to welding each pair of points by hand using the Weld Tool, Stich-n-sew, the Polygon Pen tool, or whatever floats your boat. Personally, I prefer the "by-hand" methods for smaller numbers of rotational segments in order to make sure that the Bevel created points get repositioned and merged to the correctly positioned pre-existing points. For larger Rotation Segment counts, Optimize is you more prudent and pragmatic pal. Going the Optimize route will tend to merge points at the midpoint between the original, correctly positioned circumference points and their Bevel Tool created pairings. This will slightly shift the original points in the process. On the positive side, the result of this is that the NGons will be gone in a single broad stroke, but the points in the top cap may not line up perfectly with the points in the bottom cap, which may or may not be OK, depending on how this object is used/modeled going forward. I will describe more specifically my welding approach when precise point positioning is desired, which is often the case for low Rotational Segment counts and/or scenes that require very accurate placement. I start by switching to Polygons Mode, select all of the polygons in the cap being worked on and then do a "Hide Unselected" command to hide all other polygon geometry of the cylinder and to in effect solo just the polygons of the cap whose points I will be manually optimizing. Then, in Points Mode, I weld all of the misplaced duplicate points using the Polygon Pen tool (don't forget to check Auto Weld from the Poly Pen options in the Attributes Manager!) to their properly positioned points along the cap's circumference. As previously mentioned, the misplaced points are the ones with edges going into the cap, either towards the center or towards a point int the cap's interior. It would be a good idea to zoom in for precision. Whichever of the above methods you choose for cleanup, the result is a relatively nice Quad based cap topology, as shown in the image below: I will now include additional images that demonstrate the resulting topology for 32 and 64 Rotational segments, just to give you an idea of what you will get: 32: 64: It is important to bear in mind that the above images represent flat cap surfaces (and not spherical ones). If there are any negatives to this topological quad-based layout it is the fact that the resulting quads tend to get slightly larger towards the center and smaller towards the original points that made up the initial "cross shaped" edges (i.e., the quads get progressively smaller towards the top, right, bottom, and left edges along the circumference of the cap). You can resize from the center with soft selection turned on to equalize things a bit, but I won't go into that here, since it is a process that would require an article of its own. I hope the above steps help you out, at least until MAXON adds some quality Quad Cap options to cylinders.
  28. 2 points
    Hi. Here is one way to do it. 1: Make plane primitive then place it to top of bottle cap. 2-3-4: Select and Extrude the edges twice down to fit close to bottle. 5: Use Loop Path Cut to add polygons for even distribution (square polygons. 6: Make a selection set at ends to use with shrink wrap. 7: Add shrink Wrap deformer and drag n drop selection set into falloff. This will only then effect polygon selection area. 8: Add cloth surface tag (if you cant find it press shift + c to bring up command and type in cloth) Add thickness and turn on bulge if required. bottle with safety lid tab.c4d
  29. 2 points
    Not surprised you are struggling - this looks like quite a simple modelling proposition, but actually isn't. In fact to model this as a single mesh would require a relatively wide range and knowledge of assorted modelling techniques, but as the spikes are separate objects in the real world, that is how we should model them as well, which certainly makes things easier. So, with that said there are 2 main parts to this - modelling the hatch in the main shell, which you should do based on one of the polar sections of a standard sphere. And the spikes, which you can clone on to the surface of a helper sphere object if you can find one with the right distribution of points, and then adjust the Z position of those to better match your mine. As for how to achieve the curvature on the bases, that is best done right at the start of their creation (which should begin with a disc object) using subdivision and deformers, either double bend objects at 90 degree offsets from each other, or maybe an FFD or even something like the wrap deformer with suitable settings... or you could even project your disc onto the sphere. CBR
  30. 2 points
    Hello all, I had a plugin to create studio backdrops that ceased to work, so I made my own. You can get it for free here : https://www.dropbox.com/s/m12a5u23b6x67l0/BazStudioScenes.c4d?dl=0 Might not be perfect but it works, enjoy !
  31. 2 points
    No no you misunderstand me - it was you saying you were a beginner that made me think you wouldn't be on the beta team ! Anyway, thank you for checking out the posting advice, and changing your profile. As @DasFrodo says, if you can attach a scene file that is the best and fastest way to show us your problems, because our answers depend on understanding your whole setup, so we need to see it... CBR
  32. 2 points
    I... am... speechless, at such awesome work! Big congrats JBatista! I gotta say, seeing how much talent is displayed within this forum, it kinda gives this extra injection of inspiration about C4D, and it proves that someone, that knows what they are doing, can really push the capabilities of the software really far! I love the idea of reverse engineering. I've done a very long time ago.. with Flabo, our good friend Flabo from C4D. And by some weird distraction, I havent downloaded the presets on C4D on this last version, and you are right, there are amazing rigs over there There is even a t-rex!! Thanks for sharing this with me JBatista, I appreciate it! Obrigado
  33. 2 points
  34. 2 points
  35. 2 points
    While I can in a way sympathize with the aversion to non-C4D software promotion, after all this is a C4D hub, creating a C4D-only bubble seems a bad idea to me. Knowledge about new trends and techniques in 3d opens up new possibilities, stimulates growth. Important ingredients if you run a company, big or small. And demand for a certain solution promotes the development in C4D. You could argue I should visit other dedicated sites for that. But I would like C4Dcafe to be an inspiring open place. So a post about the awesome poly crunching and ligthing capabilities of the Unreal Engine 5 by Epic should be possible. And yes post about the ubiquitous Blender too. As suggested a new subject heading would be a good compromise. Something like Third party or Industry news. Philip
  36. 2 points
    When it comes to taking things up a level from here, to something more realistic this guy's workflow is excellent... CBR
  37. 2 points
    Hi To model from a reference your going to need to find a much better one than that, although I could get the idea from that as its simple, but for your own reference find some decent ones above, side e.c.t. I just did this basic quick hand it into timelapse with narration. Take the principle from it that you dont need many tools. Dan
  38. 2 points
    Blender is interesting, and the discussion how blender might help c4d users is too, but this is no Blender forum and therefor we dont have to open a new thread for every blender news that is around. best regards Jops
  39. 2 points
    You sure that this is GI flicker? I would say this could also be just overlapping polygons. As far as I can tell the ENTIRE surface flickers, doesn't look like GI blotches.
  40. 2 points
    Has anyone checked on the Dolphins ?
  41. 2 points
    I admit, for me it's a purely principled question, not one about absolute numbers. I believe in cooperation and less in a take it or leave it mentality. I have a strong understanding of fairness, but I have the feeling that many users don't think it is appropriate in this place. The reason for my emotional approach is probably also based on the fact that I've been around since version 6. Back then, many people said to me: "learn 3D Studio, nobody uses Cinema 4D". There weren't many jobs for c4d, but I grew up together with MAXON I learned in forums and taught other people. I provided some setups and scripts for free. my pictures were used by MAXON for advertising (that was a long time ago ) Right now I am teching c4d at a university . Today the market is penetrated by cinema 4D. This is due to the forward-looking architecture of MAXON's technology and UIs, but also to users like me who have a whole cabinet full of c4d versions. Those who have been waiting for a faster Object manager for almost 10 years and have supported MAXON in good faith. Now, it feels like other users are more important to MAXON than we are, namely the users who have never paid to MAXON before, who have never shared any knowledge or created beautiful images with C4D. Among other things, I make my money with C4d.So it's not a financial question, it's an emotional one. maybe it's stupid or naive, but this software and I share a long history (almost half my life) and it just became dear to my heart. best regards Jops
  42. 2 points
    Spend some time working out to visualize a preview of the copied polygons to be injected into the mesh. More changes to come ...
  43. 2 points
    Hi, while i agree that some things could have made clearer by MAXON, the biggest problems i percieved came from people interpreting what was said in a much more negative way than we ever expected and spreading that opinion as truth. That is the biggest reason why i try to clarify things. I see what information you see missing and to be honest i think we just never gave the situation much thought and missed it, since the initial introduction of subscription was a so much larger hurdle. In cases like that i can only hope customers give sales a ring and double check until we come around fixing things. The very little extra money we would make from people ordering incorrectly due to missing or wrongly interpreted information is not worth any kind of trouble to our users, there simply is no intention by us behind this. The other side of the problem is that due to the many different ways licenses were handled before it is not at all simple to cover every situation without spreading even more insecurity. Again i hope that everyone who does not think his or her case matches the available options gets in contact with sales. From what i see people here and on other forums often simply underestimate the amount of work and the complexity of changing everything so we can offer subscription and multiple versions per year. It is just a huge pile of work and mistakes are easy to make. If in doubt about what we are doing, please keep one thing in mind, yes, we want your money (after all we are a business and personaly i like my paycheck to be on time), but we are in the business of creating tools and to stay in business we want you to use these tools to make money for as long and as good as possible. Cheers Björn
  44. 2 points
    Okay....to be clear, the point in question in my previous post was the following: If you switch from a perpetual license to a subscription AT A DISCOUNTED PRICE, then the perpetual license is deactivated. The proof I have is this letter from MAXON USA received on January 27th (note the highlighted sections): Therefore, by conversion to subscription implies perpetual goes away. Honestly, why would I take this offer? I already paid for R21 perpetual and you are going to take that away from me by giving me two years of subscriptions. The $624 savings you are giving me doesn't even come close to the $720 for the R21 perpetual license I paid you just 3 months earlier for the last MSA program being offered. So that offer from MAXON in January is a losing offer. I was born at night....but it wasn't last night. Now, I can anticipate that your argument for S22 will be that this is an upgrade and not a "license conversion". Fair point. But honestly, all the messaging from MAXON to date (even in a fairly long thread starting last September around subscriptions) around moving from perpetual to subscription has been that this is a license conversion. Add to that the bone-headed offer you gave me in January shows that the agenda is to entice people into subscriptions at a discount in order to cancel their R21 perpetual licenses. I mean, there was nothing that made that offer enticing as S22 was not even released yet. So if you think people were going to accept a perpetual to subscription conversion in the absence of any upgrade, what makes me think you would behave any differently now when you actually do have an upgrade to offer? Finally, I think it is fair to say that pricing information on subscriptions is very straight forward and easy to find. Pricing information on perpetual license upgrades or switching from perpetual to subscription ALWAYS comes with the caveat "Please call MAXON for details" or "Pricing is not yet defined". You need to go no further than the MAXON web-site (scroll to the notes at the bottom of the pricing page) or MAXON's own FAQ page to find this evidence. In the absence of all other information, the safest way to proceed with my money is look at MAXON's past behavior and plan accordingly. Now Srek....why the challenge to my statement? Do you know something that we don't? And do you have evidence to support it? Have a nice day. Dave
  45. 2 points
    Yes, but if you decide to stop paying subscription you don't have any access to C4D anymore, and I think that was the point made above
  46. 2 points
    I have been active on Cinema 4D forums for 20 years now and while i hope for feedback and thank you i stopped expecting it a long time ago. That said, i refuse to answer questions in PMs, if the question and answer can not be made public then ask MAXON support or any other paid service. I answer questions not because of the person but because of the community. This is effectively the same reason why i usually refrain from large individual efforts if the outcome is not to the advantage of the community. I do it though if it helps someone i know to be helpful themself A pet grievance of mine is OPs to post an "i got it working" answer without even a hint as to what they did to make it work. To me the main reason for forums like C4D Cafe to exist is to share knowledge and help each other. Selfishness should not be rewarded.
  47. 2 points
    the subtract tool does work, i'm using it all the time. it can cause issues in rare cases with normalisation, but usually it doesn't. but you can fix your weights also by just using the weight brush in add mode. select your arm geometry, use a loops selection at the shoulder/bicep area and then do a fill selection to select the whole rest of the arm, then hide those polygons. now select the chest joint and paint weights for those vertices of the chest that move with the bicep.
  48. 2 points
    Complacency and over-confidence kill more companies than a competitors plugin and/or new feature. A companies downfall starts when you take your customers for granted and just assume that their loyalty and/or size of their investment in both time and money in your program will hold them captive forever. MAXON's recent silence on this whole MSA question could indicate that they are either complacent and/or over-confident and that would be a mistake if that is how they treated their ENTIRE user base. But MAXON is not that stupid when it comes to managing their business. Unfortunately, I fear that the single user and/or hobbyist is NOT a major portion of their user base. Larger multi-license customers have probably all opted in to the subscription model to save cost. Only the single user, in particular the hobbyist, would favor the higher cost of a permanent license and we are just not a significant portion of their business. The hard truth is also a simple truth: our departure just does NOT represent a significant risk to their business. With this understanding, my hope was that MAXON would instead follow the path of other companies in these difficult times: reaching out to the individual user who has been impacted financially by COVID-19 by honoring the MSA agreements. A kind gesture to such a small portion of their business could generate a huge amount of goodwill among ALL their customers. Clearly, honoring the written agreement of the MSA is the legal thing to do per the contract --- but honoring it for the under-served MSA user who has paid a premium for a Studio license over the years is also the RIGHT thing to do - especially during these economically difficult times. While their silence on the whole MSA issue is disappointing, I still remain hopeful that ultimately MAXON will do the right thing. Dave Side point: So why do hobbyists favor permanent licenses while production houses favor subscriptions? Easy. Hobbyists probably have more of an emotional connection with the software. We want to own it. We want to always have it. We don't want it all to go away if we miss a payment. Production houses have a business relationship with the software. Does it help generate revenue at the lowest possible overall cost. If something better or cheaper comes along that they can switch over to using without putting the business at risk (due to incurring a loss of productivity, quality, time or increased cost) then they will do probably do it. For businesses, subscriptions work. So those who love the software pay more and get heard less. Those that have a purely transactional business relationship with the software pay less and get heard more. Funny how life works.
  49. 2 points
    Yes, drag and drop should work or right-click on the pose name and select "Add to HUD" from menu. If you want to get all fancy you can even use the interaction tag do map mouse interaction to pose morphs. That is basically turning your object into its own interface.
  50. 2 points
    here you go CBR, I split it up so I could enlarge it more. Thanks for the compliment. when I first started Houdini modeling tutorials many use boolean node as a quick and down n dirty method of getting quick result and they don't worry about geometry so much. I didn't model this as efficiently as I could and should have but the exercise was in using Houdini's polydraw node.
×
×
  • Create New...