Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 06/17/2018 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    While working on a plugin I got the idea of making this small utility: Wheel Of Tools. It allows the user to set up a list of most used tools, which are presented as a circular palette to select from. Available directly within the viewport. Current state of the plugin is only a concept, and I am mostly focusing on the actual tool selection. The part where user does set up the tools still needs to be worked out. For those familiar with PolyGnome, you probably already understand where I will be heading to ... Wheel Of Tools, once fully implemented, will be the base for a new way of interacting for the main part of the PolyGnome plugin.
  2. 3 points
    If you are a modelling purist it is never acceptable, and technically all ngons in final models are modelling mistakes*. Of course clients couldn't care less on the whole, so if it's all about the time, and there are no artefacts in render it is difficult to object, though I still would :) What few people seem to realise is that if you train yourself with a solid grasp of poly modelling and practice for years, then you are often able to model stuff properly in the same time as it takes everyone else to bodge it together any old how. And then the argument for tolerating them rather falls apart... Models without ngons are always better than those that have them because the files are more flexible because they will subdivide predictably in every program the mesh could be loaded into, and you leave that to random chance if you allow the sub-d algorithm to solve them for you - they all do it differently. It's true, booleans don't always break the mesh, and sometimes they definitely are the quickest way of doing stuff. But if you can clear up after them, why wouldn't you ? If you did, you'd be able to use a booled mesh with subdivision and in a whole load of cases where the ngon version would fall apart. But if you don't need SDS or any of the other things that would affect it then there's the argument for leaving it just as it is... Of course ngons while you work are another thing altogether, and can be very helpful while you plan your topology - you just won't catch me leaving them there. I sell my services as a modeller - you can imagine how unprofessional of me it would be to be handing out meshes that contained mistakes, that's all I'll say ;) I am aware that people like me and @VECTOR are the exception rather than the rule, but that doesn't make us less correct ;) CBR *Ok, perhaps twice in a lifetime you might come across a modeller SO good and so uber-aware of how his software translates ngons into quads and tris that he is able to plan and use ngons to achieve specific surface qualities that would be impossible, or significantly detrimental to achieve any other way. In THAT case, ngons are fine :)
  3. 3 points
    Hey Cafe Having enjoyed modelling the last synth so much, I thought I'd do a bigger one for my own amusement. The Sh-09 was an analogue micro Monosynth released in 1980. By 10 years later the digital age had arrived, screaming synth leads got displaced by twinkly dreamy electric pianos, and everything went FM and later PWM synthesis. In 1990 Roland were answering the call for a return to the searing analogue leads and basslines, so released this, the JD-800, a veritable juggernaut of a synthstation, utilising hybrid synthesis so we had the best of both worlds - all the analogue goodness, but combined with digital clarity, and DSP. 24 note polyphony and 16 part multitimbrality made this a powerful pads machine with unprecedented levels of practical slider control over virtually every parameter. To put you in the mood, here's the top patches from that... Rendering-wise, there's been some challenges to this one - getting the anisotropy right took a while, and I had to make all the panel graphics, which took rather longer :) But whereas my little monosynth had been sitting in a studio gathering dust, or getting bashed about on the road, this one is new out of the box and on display in a synth museum... Physical, Adaptive, Automatic, 5%, 3, 3.5, 3, AO. No GI. 21 mins (wide shot), 32 mins (close shot). SDS throughout, 100% quads CBR
  4. 3 points
    No....not nerds. Given that that they are both 3D artists and musicians is pretty interesting. Both require a mathematics (music is very mathematical), a sense for order, etc. Those are left brain characteristics. To create what they do obviously comes from the right side of the brain. They are not nerds but whole brain thinkers. A real nerd reaction is the one I had: I looked at the mesh, saw the logic of it, and then honestly thought it reminded me of an empty Excel spreadsheet! Now that is nerdy. But I will agree it is another beautiful model. Dave
  5. 2 points
    This is a lazy man solution, far from perfect, works ok from a distance, just move the BEND deformer on the green (Z) handle. If you want to create something that follows the tip, it requires some xpresso involving the radius of the actual bend. FakeDirtyChain2.c4d
  6. 2 points
    It's here, but no, didn't get asked as far as I remember. CBR
  7. 2 points
    yeah, my guess would be that there is a slight morph involved to alter the shapes a little as they twist. i wouldn't know any solution though on how to do it without masking stuff in post. as for the slight bulging effect on the seams that could also be done in post. the texturing part puzzles me a bit, looks pretty accurate. those things are very hard to figure out without actually trying it.
  8. 2 points
    There you go. Come on Bob, you know this :) Problem here was that you did inner extrudes to get the border, rather than the box corners you need to keep things sharp under SDS. Here's what it needs to look like for this result... note the center edges I added too, close at the pointy and, and fanned out to match the curve at the other... but you could also done that point without adding these edge loops by just sliding the points either side of it in toward the point. Here's the scene... AT-PT_mesh cbr.c4d CBR
  9. 2 points
    If you couldn't use instance object for whatever reason (for example circles are different size) : Create Master Circle and by XPresso pass only those parameters that you want. Use LinkList node and drop your objects there. Iteration node to go through all elements and set proper amount of iterations Adding HUD elements as mentioned above.
  10. 1 point
    Tangent Animation's newest feature animation, "Next Gen", is the studio's second animated film. Rendered 100% using Blender Cycles, according to a source at the studio (it seems this film was also produced using Blender). https://www.weibo.com/tv/v/e843ea96a612b86d41927e3cf3aab574?fid=1034:e843ea96a612b86d41927e3cf3aab574 Interestingly enough Netflix paid 30 million to pick it up for Western audiences: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film/why-did-netflix-pay-30-million-at-cannes-for-the-chinese-animated-film-next-gen-158348.html Tangent Animation's first animated feature (also done in Blender) was "Ozzy": https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5770430/ "Next Gen" looks and feels much more advanced than their first film.
  11. 1 point
    Did you test this by rendering a few different frames? Image sequences on textures could be not visible in the viewport, which can work annoying.
  12. 1 point
    "the sheer joy of the solve" I could not have said it any better. I don't model for speed or profit, but rather for fun as a hobbyist. I can understand how professionals need to balance/manage their time effectively and may need to resort to something ugly like Booleans that get the job done. But, true professionals with an eye towards creating a model that will serve its client in the best possible way over time and in any pipeline will strive for quads. Quads loop better, texture better, less prone to phong breaks if only because they quickly call out non-planar surfaces and sub-divide better. They are just more robust and if I was paying good money for a model, I would be a little disappointed to see it filled with ngons. If I have to use Booleans, I only do it to get a rough shape then delete the ngons and replace them with quads...and do so for the "sheer zen-like experience" where time melts away. Am I 100% polygon free in all cases? Unfortunately no as a few triangles will creep in from time to time especially with curved surfaces. Even the sphere and cylinder primitives have triangles...but it is a goal. Cerbera, Any way of getting a large screen shot of that mesh....or at least what it looks like before sub-division? There is a wealth of leaning to be had in that image. Dave
  13. 1 point
    That certainly looks like what has happened here. You'd have to think so. If someone is making a lot of models for something like a content library they probably have to go monster fast, and that is probably the reason for the 'booles will do' approach here. It's really not a headache to cut a few simple rectangular and circular details into a flat panel like this, in fact it is a supremely zen-inducing and enjoyable experience if you do enough of it, but yeah - if you don't absolutely have to, the lazier or more time-strapped of us will choose not to ;) Other people, like me, will model panels they don't have to, and do it properly just for the sheer joy of the solve :) CBR
  14. 1 point
    Since you are using TeamRender, it's probably your best bet to contact Maxxon about this issue.
  15. 1 point
    Using booleans on flat surfaces gives me pretty much no hassle. Especially when you need to carv in complex shapes into a flat surface (such as back of TV screen or even more complex). You have to use "break phong shading" in order not to get ugly artifacts on your mesh and/or hide new edges. So when is it acceptable? For efficient complex modeling in my case.
  16. 1 point
    Ah, yes. The viewport can be quite deceiving when it comes to the Color and Multi Shaders. Glad you got it figured out!
  17. 1 point
    Indeed not your screenshot :) The person we'll be ejecting certainly isn't you, my friend :) CBR
  18. 1 point
    Not my screenshot... that was Kanadahoo's screenshot.. Thanks for not kicking me.. just felt i had to react here.. namaste.. Kind regards
  19. 1 point
    This is how I did it, with partial success. I'm sure there's a way of doing it without any poles, but I kept running into a choice between a pole and a triangle. My new motto is What Would Cerbera Do? I'm thinking about printing T shirts. finished ramp.c4d
  20. 1 point
    Indeed. Like the ones you have on the outside corners... Having a 45 degree meeting of edges (as you get when inner extruding) directs the SDS flow around the corner, whereas box corners with crossing edges tell SDS that corner needs to be sharp. CBR
  21. 1 point
    You just forgot the inner loops my friend :) Add the highlighted ones below and it'll all be fine... Because you made the cutout bit by inner extruding you have the wrong topology there - ideally you would want box corners there, but I have done the next best thing which is to add the inner loops anyway, which now become 'effect enclosure loops', which restrict the corner rounding to a tiny area, and save it that way... CBR
  22. 1 point
    To be more exact 1, create object, create new material (with picker select color as some primitive object/or any color you want), apply to object, set render setings to 600*600 (for rendering icon), select object, press "O" (frame object to viewport for nice icon) 2, select object in OM, then File/Save Object Preset, set nice name... 3,Delete object in OM 4, open Script Log 5, in OM File/Load Object Preset/User/Objects/***MySuperCoolObject*** 6, when loaded your preset object, you can see in script log line like this ///// c4d.CallCommand(300000111, 1121) # Load Object Preset ///// This is command for calling your object presset, select and copy this line for later use 7, Close script log and delete object from OM (to be clear only, but not needed) 8, open Script Manager, then File/New (Python script ofcourse, you can see this script ///////// import c4d from c4d import gui #Welcome to the world of Python def main(): gui.MessageDialog('Hello World!') if __name__=='__main__': main() ///////// 9, select and remove/rewrite line " gui.MessageDialog('Hello World!') " with copied text from script log window 10, your script now looks like ///// import c4d from c4d import gui #Welcome to the world of Python def main(): c4d.CallCommand(300000111, 1121) # Load Object Preset if __name__=='__main__': main() ////// 11, when you press "Execute", new object will be loaded 12, Now it´s time for creating nice icon. If object is framed/rotated as you wish for icon, in Script Manager File/Render Icon. (You can see icon created for this script, if it´s too small, adjust in viewport and use this command again until satisfied. 13, Script Manager/File/Save all and save script under name you wish 14, When close everything and clear OM, when you go to Scripts and run your script, object appear in OM... 15, Adding script to layout is just few clicks - right click on any pallete/Customize palettes - in name filter enter name of script - drag object to palette where you want, save layout... btw, if you store object preset together with material, everytime when called script also new mat will be created (if not needed, remove mat before storing object as preset
  23. 1 point
  24. 1 point
    I have both a 2013 and an old 2009 (firmware upgraded to a 2010). I render on an Nvidia 1080ti with redshift and it works great. The only reason I have kept the 2009 is for Redshift. However, I just recently saw this: https://barefeats.com/egpu_nmp_titan_vega.html It turns out that MacVidCards, who flash Nvidia cards to work without some strange Mac related issues, came out with a flashed 1080ti that works on the 2013 in an eGPU configuration: http://www.macvidcards.com/store/p110/World's_First_EFI_eGPU_card_for_Mac_Pro_6%2C1.html I know as of 10.13.4 Apple removed TB2 support for eGPUs. But apparently, this company was able to flash the 1080ti to get around this some how. It's not cheap because the card is $1,200 and you need an eGPU enclosure for about $300. But is may be a solution if you want to render with CUDA based renderers. Mark
  25. 1 point
    Ok, so you have the numbers on the plane with an alpha channel cutting them out? All you need to do is create a Layer shader and put your Color shader above your alpha image layer. Then set the Color Shader to "Multiply" so that, when it's black it will make the whole alpha channel black (invisible), and when it's white it will not affect your alpha image.
  26. 1 point
    Hi all. Below I have two models: The top is a new model I've recently acquired. The bottom is an old model I've previously been using. It's difficult to see from the image, but the new model looks a lot worse than the old model when you render it. The new model has a lot more points and IMO should appear smooth when it's rendered. Is this something that could be considered a simple fix? If not, I can discuss this with the individual who supplied me this model and ask for a different one. I've supplied the file below. Thanks guys! BLSmith_Crankshaft_Render_Quality_Comparison.c4d
  27. 1 point
    You will have to make the loft editable to do this. So select it (or a copy of it if you want to keep the original), hit C to make it editable. Then just select the outside polys and drag your material directly to that selection before changing the mapping type to cylindrical in the texture tag and using Texture Mode and Axis Modes to place the graphics exactly where you need them. CBR
  28. 1 point
    You're welcome my friend :) CBR
  29. 1 point
    It's Ask GSG tonight. Be interested to hear what Chris would say if you asked him there... CBR
  30. 1 point
    You can't find it because idiot cerbera has just woken up and was calling it the wrong thing :) I mean clipping of course !!! CBR
  31. 1 point
    I´m not sure if texture manager support also external render engines. If you want render in corona and have only vray materials, check folder with source vray scene (hope all textures are there) and create new corona materials using those textures. Since all renderers has different channels where are textures placed, there´s no way to use it directly. (because one renderer not support materials from other renderer) So, create new corona materials, use/grab textures from source vray materials and apply on objects. Ofcourse, native vray shaders etc. cann´t be converted (if used), need to be recreated in other renderer (if needed)
  32. 1 point
    If you look better on both "better" results, only difference between them are vertex normals alignment. While "highest" quality has aligned vertex normals correctly, "high" version doesn´t... https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfcqc3az29v09f7/vertex_normals.png?dl=0
  33. 1 point
    @everfresh, if it's not Pose Morph (which I believe you, but I'm not sure I see the drifting), do you have any ideas for how it was actually done? I agree that using Pose Morph for this would be very difficult, but I'm stumped as to how else you'd do it. Maybe it was a pretty rough pose morph that got it close enough and then they did something in compositing to bring them together?
  34. 1 point
    i highly doubt both models have the same poly count and that the shape actually morphs into each other for real. it's very well done, but there are some minor inaccuracies visible... for instance look at the second one around 4-5 sec, where the transition is almost finished. you can clearly see that the shapes drift a bit apart from each other. clear indicator it wasn't done with a pose morph.
  35. 1 point
    Oh yeah, you don't have to do them 1 by one... Just open the texture manager, which lets you relink all the missing textures. My worry though is that Vray materials do not equal corona materials, so even if you get the maps in OK you may still have some work ahead of you, and that will have to be done 1 at a time... CBR
  36. 1 point
    re priority - make sure there is an actual priority problem before you start fixing it. Things that appear to lag are often OK when rendered (or baked). I usually adjust priority by moving stuff around in the OM (top down order), or priority values lowest = 1st. There's also a shift priority tag. I'm sure you know all this. I haven't seen much info on baking. For purely dynamic stuff I use doc settings, dynamics, cache, bake. For my more complex scenes (eg using randomness), I drag everything into the dope sheet and go functions, bake objects. Then I disable dynamics, xpresso, python, and anything that moves things. I use this method for team render, so all the nodes have identical data.
  37. 1 point
    Hello, isn't this what you are looking for? https://greyscalegorilla.com/tutorials/how-to-make-a-hydraulic-arm-in-cinema-4d-part-revisited/
  38. 1 point
    For Fathers day I was left alone with C4D. Best present ever! So I continued working on the interior. Honestly, the whole process is trial and error...try something simple and see if it works...usually it doesn't. Scrap that and go for something more complex. Scrap that. Finally bite the bullet and go for something detailed. This was the process for the internal docking bays inside the station. Once again, the port hole luminance maps need tons of tweaking and I am NOT happy with them at all. I may have to model each window individually as textures that worked on the outside just don't seem to work on the inside. Here is the interior tower (I really goofed on the glow....so forgive me for that): And a close up showing the interior sections of that tower a bit better: Still not happy with it....but way much better than the initial attempts (they were horrible). Dave
  39. 1 point
    After double clicking on the Redshift material click on the Edit Shader Graph at the top. This will take you to the Redshift graph which has a ton of nodes with different ways to do this. Import whatever animation or image sequence is to be used for the alpha transition into the RS Texture node. After that this video should give some ideas. https://youtu.be/X1DCumk_Q7s
  40. 1 point
    I'm using vray DR not TR. it's actually useful in my workflow to leave frames local machines until needed
  41. 1 point
    I'm confused what's going on here. Team Render Server is designed to run on a separate machine (i.e. not one that is running C4D or the render client), and it solely operates to serve render jobs to a whole bunch of render nodes. If you've only got two machines, there's no point in running Team Render Server because you'd only be rendering on one. You should just be running regular C4D on your workstation, and Team Render Client on the second computer.
  42. 1 point
    Press Shift+V and in View tab check Axis Scale parameter (default is 100) (or is hidden, solution in previous post)
  43. 1 point
  44. 1 point
    As Fastbee mentioned, MAXON is slowly making the viewport like that.
  45. 1 point
    With the reaction MAXON got with everyone loving the new DOF and other realtime things in R19 I'd be surprised if they didn't continue to make the realtime better in R20.
  46. 1 point
    I'm assuming that's the idea with ProRender, it's just not a fully developed product yet.
  47. 1 point
    Lols :) Ditto over here. I used to spend every Saturday in the local music shop when that first came out. If you are a synth man you might enjoy what I'm doing next - the new and properly space-age successor to this one, the JD-XA ! CBR
  48. 1 point
    Think C4D default render is CPU based, so external graphics will not do much. Unless you go GPU based rendering, R19 ProRender or Octane, Redshift, Cycles or something.
  49. 1 point
    Check out the current state of Eevee in the upcoming v2.8 version (this Summer / Autum) Amazing. The hardware specs are nothing out of the ordinary: D18-0105 - i7-8700K / 16GB / 500GB SSD + 1TB HDD / gtx1080 / Win 10 Remember, this is real-time viewport stuff! Check out 2:56 where real-time refraction is demonstrated.
  50. 1 point
    Subdivision Surface Excercise 06: One more sphere... (Time Lapse Version) In subdivision surface excercise number 6 we will model another sphere. This one has four big holes evenly distributed across its surface, plus a number of small ones to add some interesting detail. There currently only is this time lapse version of the tutorial. I don't know yet if I'll do a full tutorial with narration on this one. In the meantime, if you have any questions, feel free to ask! I hope you like the video. Thank you very much for watching! Cheers, contrafibbularities