Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/14/2020 in Posts

  1. 3 points
    Here is an example with joints/bones as you suggested. I re-modeled a slice of the shape, rigged it and cloned the result. The subdivision generators are just there to create a bit of smoothing. But there are other ways of doing that (e.g. weighting on high res and using deformers with a restriction tag). The animation is on the joints and could probably use a bit of love to look more plausible. package_002.c4d
  2. 3 points
    @rasputin I just used the general log spiral equation where angle is in radians, e is the natural log base (aka Euler's number 2.71828) and tweaked the constants a + k until it looked right. I tried using a helix and radial bias but the gears were jumping. I guess it's the properties of logs that makes it work. Also, when I added the struts, with a helix I had to use a spline on the step effector to make things fit, but with the log curve the struts fitted without a spline. I usually animate gears with XPresso, but with the varying radii that would be beyond my math skills. Dynamics to the rescue ! The video above is version 2 - I didn't like how dynamics had introduced a small collision gap, so after baking for TR I increased the teeth size. The dynamics is Compound Collision Shape, but with all the geometry it was too slow in the viewport. I added some switched off rigid body tags to parts that don't contribute to the dynamics calculation. Here's the video I got the design from. The guy has some good stuff eg non-circular gears I'm still trying to figure out square gears...
  3. 3 points
    Not all camera types are supported by S&T, Gentleman is one of them I think. I do have a workaround: Use a Front camera. Put your model (or whole scene) in a FFD deformer and morf it so it matches the Gentleman's camera deformation. I attached a scene with the setup. gentleman S&T.c4d
  4. 2 points
    In the end I solved it by NOT using the camera mapping for those planes and sidewalks but using only a shadow catcher material (thus those planes would only catch the shadow and would be invisible - so the footage below would show up - and would look like part of the scene). I also looked at that video you gave me, Igor, especially from minute 6.25 and that could be another way I can try. Thank you for your help! @noseman thank you to you too!
  5. 2 points
    You have to keep your camera level to make the verticals straight, at which point it will no doubt cut the top off, then you can use the Y offset in the camera to move the film plane up to frame your shot. this is the same principle as a shift lens or a view camera. Deck
  6. 1 point
    I updated my tests. I dont have Rizom I have Unfold3D which only imports OBJ. As in my test your Platonic file contained the issue in OBJ files as well as FBX when viewed in MODO. When I produce a Platonic from scratch and Unfold in C4D all is fine. When I use your file as a OBJ within Unfold3D and use your same seams but perform a unwrap guess what, it fixes your file. I Used Wizard on your file and Uvs tested good. I ran a manual seam unfold on your file and seams showed good. I will ponder on this some more and have another look tomorrow. Dan
  7. 1 point
    Do you use AE? Some update of AE revert latest c4d update to base version, more here: https://forums.cgsociety.org/t/updates-are-gone-solved-adobe-ae-update-reset-c4d-to-21-022/2056048
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    Thank you Igor, I was just too lazy to start Cinema again yesterday .. I will send a scene file with full explanation of workflow soon.
  10. 1 point
    This one didn't exist, I made it for you, for this topic. Dan
  11. 1 point
    THANK YOU! I was told that a tutorial existed, but I must have been using the incorrect parameters...because I couldn't find it! VERY much appreciated!!!
  12. 1 point
    That is very odd. Please do a support ticket about this, including the scene file. We could also do with a look at that, which might give us a better understanding of what is going wrong, or what can be done to circumvent it... CBR
  13. 1 point
    Fusion 360 is good if you use a sketch based approach to modelling. If you modify the sketch the model will update. I like this way of modelling (parametric/history based). It is not as robust as Inventor or Solidworks and similar CAD programs that require a company sized budget, but is as close as you will find with a freelance sized budget. FormZ, MOI, Rhino and similar CAD are Direct CAD (to me almost CAD as their approach is closer to 3D applications not having a parametric/history based workflow). These tend to fit freelance budgets too. You haven't mentioned producing your designs, so I'm guessing your use is for visualisation. CAD will almost certainly complicate your work. You will need to correct topology, generate UVs and manage complexity and instancing. Assembly constraints (dof) will be lost, only rigid constraints will be preserved. Keyshot is more suitable for CAD visualisation than Cinema 4D. C4D can do a good job but it will be a lot more work even with it's supurb CAD import. If you are just looking at F360 to augment C4D's modelling tools, I recommend sticking with C4D, eventually you will master what is hard now and avoid the complications that will be sure to follow. If you are editing CAD data sent from clients then F360 is a great option and better than recreating designs from scratch.
  14. 1 point
  15. 1 point
    maybe it will be useful for somebody I have decided to make model of braided cable because even use PBR textures - reflections is not so good. I have searched for a simple way to make model of braided rope / cord but failed. there is only one video in YouTUBE for 3dsMax, which not useful for C4D, what more - "reeper" plugin limited by 5 wires, but using my way you can easily make as much wires as you need. Project attached and also here is simple video how to do it: https://youtu.be/GFF-dGs3uBM Braided Cable.c4d
  16. 1 point
    I don't think we can do that, but not 100% sure.... CBR
  17. 1 point
    i will remember this! i couldn't reply to another one of your answers (MODIFY ANCHOR POINT OF A JOINT). i noticed that my mixamo rig hips is off center and it was driving me nuts. your solution and steps did the trick and got me unstuck, so thank you!
  18. 1 point
    Thanks for the responses! Here is a file for you to look at. @Noseman, I tried your approach and it helped but the kink remained, just moved closer to the end so I feel like I'm still missing something. I also found a cheat by reducing the end growth to 99%. That seems to do the trick but just curious if that's the best solution. Thanks again! Helix_Sweep_Issue.c4d
  19. 1 point
    As Ras says, a lot of design sensibility is intrinsic and personal, but there are things to be learned, like the history of art, and general design helpers like the Golden Ratio, concepts like negative space, the Rule of 3rds etc etc. But just as there are Youtube and Vimeo videos that cover nearly all technical and practical uses of Cinema, there are also videos on the basic 'rules' of design, and there are a lot of them ! Here's an interesting one to get you going... But while you are learning all this stuff, it remains more important that you dive in there, and start making what looks good to you and beginning to define the things you like, and the things make your work and style unique to you. Do short, achievable projects, and lots of them, and share your works in progress - other people can be very helpful in letting you know what you could do better, or where to focus your learnings next... CBR
  20. 1 point
    It sounds like you just need to jump in to making imagery with 3D... Hopefully MAXON Cinema4D. We like to say that artistic ability is an inborn gift, but that's not altogether true: there are many, many artistic ideas that you can grasp just from reading and studying about them. So I say: go dive in to studying both art theory while you learn the technical aspects of doing 3D... They go hand-in-hand. There's that saying by L'ao-Tsu: "The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." I suggest that, every day, you make a 3D render, however simple and humble it may be, in which you try to learn one or more artistic principles. You are lucky in that the Internet now provides you will loads and loads of instructional material, in the form of free instructional videos. Bear in mind that learning a software as deep and complex as Cinema4D will take some time. As in: years. So the only task left is to jump into the swimming pool and get wet.
  21. 1 point
    Yes. It's not that hard to achieve, but those sort of looks are created by a number of different elements. 1. The Models... ...are always very clean and precise, and tend to use very visually pleasing and regular forms, often based on simple primitives. 2. The Lighting can be done several different ways. Sometimes a standard photo studio setup works fine - 3 omni lights with soft or area shadows. Some people prefer to do it with sky object (use a swept gradient rather than an HDR in the material applied here) and Global Illumination. Ambient occlusion with soft, subtle settings can be used as an alternative to GI for when that is too slow. 3. The materials component channels will be different depending on how you are doing lighting. In both cases you need colour and (subtle levels of) luminance channel, and reflectance, which you would use mainly for specular content with standard lights, or with diffuse reflections if you are using GI. The Phong model here with roughness values of around 60% is good for this sort of thing. Your luminance channel can either contain a more vibrant version of the color channel's colour (at low levels), or it can contain Subsurface Scattering for more subtle 'inner light' and backlit effects at the expense of longer render times. There is no 1 set of settings or rules that will work for everything, and each scene you make will need something different, but those suggestions above might make for a good general place to start before you get into the hours of tweaking that produce a result you are finally happy with. Or you can not do that, get it generally right, then fix it in post ! And indeed, lastly, don't underestimate the value of post production. You'd be surprised how much of a final look is arrived at in AfterFX or similar, which can utterly transform or enhance the look of any 3D footage that emerges from Cinema. Nearly every still shot should go through Photoshop as the final stage, and the same is true of animation and AFX. Often that extra final sheen and level of classiness comes from subtle grading choices in post. So there's some stuff to think about... hope it helps. CBR
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    Thanks so much. I never even thought to try that.
  24. 1 point
    I used to think square cogwheels were just another fake YouTube thing, but I've almost got it sorted. Still WIP
  25. 1 point
    import c4d from c4d import gui, utils def main(): settings = c4d.BaseContainer() settings[c4d.MDATA_CONVERTSELECTION_LEFT] = 2 # poly settings[c4d.MDATA_CONVERTSELECTION_RIGHT] = 0 # point settings[c4d.MDATA_CONVERTSELECTION_TOLERANT] = False res = utils.SendModelingCommand(command = c4d.MCOMMAND_CONVERTSELECTION, list = [op], mode = c4d.MODELINGCOMMANDMODE_POLYGONSELECTION, bc = settings, doc = doc) c4d.EventAdd() if res is False: print "Something went wrong." elif res is True: print "Command successful." else: print "Unsupported response." if __name__=='__main__': main() Can be more or less taken from the documentation of SendModelingCommand... Change the values for MDATA_CONVERTSELECTION_LEFT and _RIGHT if you want another direction. Note that this script does not switch the mode from poly to point, it just calls the internal selection transfer functionality. Mode change could be added if needed. Get more C4D Python from my Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cairyn
  26. 1 point
    Hi, For example, when I get 3d models from client in some CAD file format, like .stp/.step, .3dm, .stl, .iges, and similar, I import them into MoI3D, setup/choose desirable polygon count with slider, and then export model to .obj or .fbx, which has nice quad mesh topology when imported to C4D. Dane
  27. 1 point
    Hi, Are you using sleep/hibernation mode? I suggest that you don't use that, it can make problems like yours. Every pc setup these days has ssd/nvme disks, boot time is 10-20sec, so no need for sleep modes and similar. Dane
  28. 1 point
    you should be able to just select that and drag it straight out using the command key on mac, with regular select and no extrude. or extrude to zero and then drag it out, same thing really Deck
  29. 1 point
    I think the other important thing to not is that the relatively new CAd import options into C4D are excellent. Get STEP file and you can mesh that to the level of detail required on import.
  30. 1 point
    Thanks noseman, I will give it a try
  31. 1 point
    CAD is a complex world. There are lots of different types of CAD application to handle everything from infrastructure to fidget spinners. Normally it is better to start with what you want to do, rather than what software you might need. However everytime I have asked this question I never manage to get the answer. I think much harder to choose what to do than it is to choose what software. Anyway C4D works really well with CAD files. Note that Keyshot has a plugin connection with Cinema 4D too, as well as all the main CAD applications and ZBrush. If you receive a lot of different CAD files from clients then Okino Polytrans is still good and https://www.cyborg3d.com/ have some good tools for generating quad meshes from CAD data. As mentioned earlier Quadremesher is good for CAD data too.
  32. 1 point
    Frequently. I sometimes use Fusion, Rhino, FormZ... Another good tool to check out is MOI 3D. It's a simple NURBS based spline modeller created by the guy that originally created Rhino. It sits somewhere between a full blown CAD tool and something like C4D. It also offers 'decent' mesh output - for a CAD type tool. It's a good 'halfway house' for some technical modeling tasks.
  33. 1 point
    You have to increase the Noise Strength under the Noise Settings. But beware, too much and the edges may fold on themselves.
  34. 1 point
    Not me. A lot of my job is repairing the awful topology generated by these programs when clients find they actually need them made properly for later animation etc. There are hard surface workflows in Cinema that are just as fast as in CAD programs, and i have a lot of helpers like Quad Remesher and HB modelling bundle, so for me it's easiest do everything there and not generate the rubbish topology in the first place ! CBR
  35. 1 point
  36. 1 point
    Thanks for your help Cerbera ! Sorry, I forgot to include a pic of the spline (as you guessed it, it's a curve) : Your solution is clever but I need the "dashes" to be curved. Now, if there isnt any way to use curves to cut other curves, then I guess the only way to do that is to manually split the curve ..Thanks again for your help !
  37. 1 point
    Collision deformer, with restore shape off ? That'll make a dent where the head was, but it won't deform in the same way a pillow does, with all the radial creases coming out from the indent. Not sure what we have that can do that TBH... Marvelous Designer is where people usually go if they want realistic interactive cloth type deformation. It might be worth trying something with our own cloth systems, but generally they run very slow at the sort of epic resolutions you need to get those counter-flow creases and tend to have intersection problems. But softbodies might be the way to go. Did you see today's Rocket Lasso, in which Chris Schmidt's first question of the day was something similar, and he was getting amazing folds and creases !? Head over twitch.com/rocketlasso to watch Episode 2 of this season to explore that further and to see if it could apply to you here... CBR
  38. 1 point
    Not a stupid question, but not entirely sure in which direction you mean; they were necessary to support the curvy inner shape (XZ) and slight bulging (also XZ) in the outer ones, rather than to support the gentle Y bulge along the depth of the object. That's not to say that couldn't have been done with less polys, but there is no harm in using more if it helps achieve better, more precise rounding. The middle section of the rounded bit could indeed have had less of the loops inside it, but knowing as I do that SDS prefers even geometry I added those in for general poly size consistency and with a half a mind that they could also support the sensors in the middle if they had to be made out of a single mesh... so given that these loops also provide additional XY curvature definition, this is an example of using the same loops for 3 different purposes, which is a reasonable example of how good modellers think. Here's what the front side would look like based on the same border topology (but separate mesh made by splitting off a row of polys from the frame) but now distributed differently because we don't need to match an inner circular bit... But this raises your question again. As there is no Y depth curvature at all on the screen side of the device, then technically we could use as few loops as we need to merely match the gently bulging sides on XZ, which is about half that density, but its an overall neater job to just make them match, and there is nothing about this project that suggests we need to prioritise polygon economy... Note the additional loops along the depth of the frame necessary for later cutting in the strap holes... CBR
  39. 1 point
    Unfortunately this is a known issue, and although there's a way to make the problem less visible, you may not be able to totally eliminate it. Make a cut to isolate the part of the road that clips under the Camera View, and then go and subdivide that polygon a few several times. THEN go and Generate the UVW Coordinates. Another method, which will work for the original geometry but won't help you if you're going to fracture it, is to make a Copy of the Solved Camera on frame 0, remove all keyframes and use that one as the projecting camera. You may need to crop the final render to remove any gaps in both methods. Here's the Road Polygon Object with "correct" UVs. Just copy and paste it to your document and apply the material using UVW https://www.dropbox.com/s/lubkzxki7k2i0hx/Road.c4d?dl=0 Cheers Noseman
  40. 1 point
    If you use OpenSubDiv SDS boundaries in Edge + corner mode, you can have SDS AND your straight corners If you put the wind deformer in a Null with the SDS then you can put that under a cloth surface to add a small amount of thickness. The hierarchy would look like this... CBR
  41. 1 point
    Over Xmas, Santa and the gods of 3D told me it was time for a PC upgrade, and me , only knowing vaguely what I am doing in that area, thought I should run my planned new system by you guys for some basic C&C before I go buy stuff and get building... My main focus is modelling, but I do need a bit of a render boost too, and plan to be entering the world of GPU rendering with Redshift, so I figure I need a machine with pretty decent graphics power, but not necessarily top-end as I am also on a low-medium budget for this - wanna spend around £2.5K including OS and a new 27 inch screen if I can. But also want some decent general C4D single thread improvements if I can get them without going too mental budget-wise for in-app performance, and a reasonable amount of CPU cores for when I want to test the native renderers. In addition to Cinema this will also be an Audio / Video Workstation running DaVinci Resolve and Steinberg's Cubase 10 and a sh*tload of (mainly orchestral) virtual instruments and plugins. Currently I am planning this Win 10 system, which seems to give me most of what I want for not too many of the $$$... CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12 core (3.8GHz standard, 4.7GHz Boost) Cooler: Wraith Prism Fan cooling (shipped with processor, to be upgraded in Summer if needed) MB: Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro AMD AM4 X570 Chipset ATX PSU: Gigabyte GP-G750H 750W 80 plus (free with MB!) Case: Phanteks Enthoo Pro Black Full Tower RAM: 64GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB (2x16GB) DDR4 3200MHz Dual Channel Memory (RAM) Kit (x 2) GPU: Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 2070 8GB Audio-MIDI I/O: Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 (external USB), Genelec, KRK. Storage: Samsung 860 QVO 1TB Solid State Drive/SSD (system drive) + WD Blue 2TB 3.5" So, if those of you that know would be kind enough to cast a critical eye over that and let me know about any awaiting traps, or anything that might not work with something else, or what else I could consider, I would very much appreciate your input. Muchly thankings CBR
  42. 1 point
    Another point to make, if you're looking into putting the VSTs on a different SSD from the operating system, then remember that the writing isn't that important, but the reading is. You'll probably only write once, read many in terms of sample library usage. As such, it might be worthwhile to have a cheaper Samsung 4TB QVO for your sample libraries. I didn't want to go that route since I only have a single drive in the laptop, and operating system then need to share the same disk as the sample libraries, so I also need to pay attention for the writing speed. Looking at the vi-control.net forums (that's where I get my mustard) 64GB seems to be quite "low" amount of RAM these days, when it comes to large templates in DAW. Just make sure to allow room for expansion, if you go 64GB. Don't use up all your memory banks.
  43. 1 point
    Oh, so simple! Thank you again :)!
  44. 1 point
    No worries, its a photography thing that just happens to be repeatable in Cinema. In a proper view camera you can spin around and offset all the axis to some extent, helping with focus as well as changing the geometry and crop of the image. Deck
  45. 1 point
    I'd recommend using the Alpha Channel in the material instead of the visibility tag. I've tried numerous times using that thing and it never worked as expected.
  46. 1 point
    If you have a sh*tload of virtual instruments (sampled based I assume) you might consider a larger SSD, Or an extra 2TB SSD to replace the HDD, and put your samples on there. I have just replaced my 500GB SSD in the laptop with a Crucial 2TB to hold all sample libraries, which I "less than occasionally" use to create video backgrounds ... have about 1.2 TB of VIs. I know, in my case it's a waste of the space, since I maybe use the VIs once a year ... if not less (figure of speech).
  47. 1 point
    Have fun guys. So glad I don't have to do this behind the scenes work anymore
  48. 1 point
    @dijklarg I opened up your scene and noticed your Plane is nested inside two Nulls - the top one being the Object that has your keyframes applied. My thinking is that C4D's Motion Vector pass is not registering any motion because technically the Null is the thing that is moving, not the Plane. I removed your Plane from the Null hierarchy, applied the keyframes directly to it, then rendered out the sequence and started seeing much better results. Additionally, you should also form a habit of tweaking your Motion Scale setting (under the Option Render Settings tab) for every render utilizing the Motion Vector pass. I lowered your Motion Scale to 10 and got a better Vector Pass to work with. This basically gives C4D a better idea of how large or small the moving objects in your scene are. Think about it like adjusting min/max threshold. Lastly, when you bring everything into AE and start applying RSMB Pro Vectors, you can lower the Max Displace setting if the motion blur looks a bit wonky. It's worth noting that you also have Scale settings in RSMB that you can use to tweak your Motion Scale even further if you find you didn't get great results right out of C4D. Hopefully this helps - Good luck!
  49. 1 point
    I hate to say it, but if C4D becomes part of Adobe's Creative Cloud that is actually a better deal than what MAXON is giving us today. Creative Cloud has more software options, cheaper price, true monthly billing plus cloud storage. It is truly a sad day when you start to prefer Adobe over MAXON. What has become of this world? Dave
  50. 1 point
    If that happens these 62 pages containing some fairly robust discussion will seem fairly tame to what's coming.

Latest Topics

Latest Comments

  • Create New...