Jump to content

Cerbera

Cafe Crew
  • Content Count

    12,978
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    454

Everything posted by Cerbera

  1. Please take care to only post in the correct section which is never General 3D discussion if it is a question like this. Moved to Fracture / VF. CBR
  2. Pls complete your profile to show at minimum what version you are using. Boolean animation is notoriously flaky, and not really a robust solution for client animations. You can usually do a lot better with the Volume Builder. CBR
  3. Yep, that works in R22 also... You might get more attractive pieces to fracture if you do delaunay caps instead though... CBR
  4. Always upload the scene file with a question like this so we don't have to try and recreate a similar setup from scratch... CBR
  5. I'm afraid it is going to continue to drive you mad because there are no easy answers that are guaranteed to work. You are correct that you cannot expect displacement to work properly on imported CAD meshes and their shameful topology. The solutions are: 1. Use something like Quad remesher (paid) or Instant meshes (free, but less helpful) to auto retopo the model into even quads. Often doesn't work because you can't direct edge flow specifically enough. Some people try it in Z-brush too, which does have superior remeshing tools. 2. You can try throwing it all under a volume builder and remeshing that way (also often doesn't work with hard surface as it is designed for more organic forms) 3. Rebuild the model out of regular polygons ( a colossal amount of manual work) using tools like HB Modelling bundle's re-topo setup. CBR
  6. Just an additional note to point out that geometry made from splines is extrudes is rarely ideal for sculpting, which requires evenly distributed all quad polygons for best results. CBR
  7. No. These programs are all originally made by separate vendors, some copied each other, some did entirely their own thing both in terms of default character direction, and even whole axis systems. They all had their reasons no doubt, but very rare that they sit down and tell anyone what those might have been... CBR
  8. Please update your profile to show the correct version. I have worked in R21 extensively (and often used display tag) in R21+ with no major issues that I have noticed. Could you upload a scene file that exhibits the problem ? CBR
  9. Welcome to the cafe Please read our guide how to post on the cafe so we don't do post titles that are useless in later searches... You need to activate Point Level Animation for this sort of thing, but there are limits to what that can do. You might think this is a simple thing, but actually is anything but - if you think about it, you record a keyframe when there are only say 4 points, and then in the next one there are suddenly double the amount after your extrude, and that may well cause you issues when things get more complex - in general Cinema doesn't like point counts that change during animation. There are plugins that do this task specifically, and in some cases much better than Cinema alone can do it, for example Nitro mesh, here... CBR
  10. I think it's right to say that everything in Cinema that might use a vector in its animation is always facing down Z by default, but I think which way it is facing down Z is less important. I don't know why CO default character is facing Z-, unless its just a default preference that assumes it would be most useful if a character walked toward the (default) camera rather than away from it... CBR
  11. There are parametric ways to make that with a formula spline. Here's what happens for example, if you take the default formula spline, extend its forward periods to the amount of points you want, and then spline wrap around a circle (you'll need a second smaller one of those as a rail) like this... Once you have the number of points set you can change the radius of the circle until the start and end points of the formula meet up... CBR
  12. There is nothing wrong with snapping in Cinema, particularly later versions, and it can help with this to some degree. However, by far the best method of avoiding light leaks is to use contiguous geometry, so don't build walls out of separate objects unless you absolutely have to - instead make a whole room out of a cube (for example), where you have reversed the normals so that its inner surfaces become the 'outside' of the object so to speak and you make all the walls, the floor and the ceiling out of 1 cube (or rather I should say 1 object). That containing geo can also have thickness if you want to double insure against light leaks, but it's the contiguousness of surfaces that is the biggest factor... Here's a quick example room with 2 windows and some extruded thickness I knocked up from a single cube, that will only let light in through the windows or the missing front wall... Of course you can still build anything inside the room out of separate objects - skirting boards, windows frames, coving etc because all that remains nicely contained within your leak-proof outer shell of a building... CBR
  13. You will need to show us how you made what you have so far. A scene file would be most useful. Have you played with field forces much ? CBR
  14. You fixed that problem, but fell into several more There are rules to modelling well. Try and avoid any ngons in your meshes. They are not good modelling practice. Generally speaking the best modes of the bevel tools don't create anything but quads. For example, here is the same short of shape with the bevel deformer deployed in a topologically good way., and the settings I used to make it so... So metering mode should be Uniform, and Subdivision set to an odd number which always gives a proper all-quads result, which will also look best in render. CBR
  15. Well that only happens if there are not enough polys in our base form, which is why we usually subdivide a base model to at least 1 or 2 levels and then apply our sculpting displacement maps to that.... but even with a very low poly base mesh, if we know about SDS shrinkage in advance we can just move polys out along their normals a bit during the retopo process to account for it... Well I'd model them into the hand, primarily because they are connected to it in the real world. And because I want to UV and weight them together with the hand because it's quicker / easier / less hassle than doing them separately, for no real disadvantage. That only matters at the lowest res base mesh level; when something is subdivided nearly all polygons are non planar, but to a very minor degree. ...and that is why anatomically supporting edge flow is important even in the base model, so that when things subdivide that polyflow is enhanced, not interrupted. Yes. If you look at some of your reference models (most notably this one)... ...you should see that actually polygon size does not vary that much between the sections. Polys in the palm are roughly the same size as polys in the fingers by the time we are ready to add sculpt displacement maps... and that is what we want to work best with those maps. There might not be much movement detail in those areas, but it is not that we are addressing here - we want displacement maps to look right, and they need to displace by the same detail level everywhere on the model. We shouldn't be using any SDS weighting at all in base models that we know will be later used with disp maps, as it produces unpredictable / artefacted results with displacement. Or do you mean with weighting the mesh to the joints ? CBR
  16. Won't ever happen, in this software or any other. Edges cannot exist without polygons, and that is the end of that. CBR
  17. Please just save the c4d file, and upload that. CBR
  18. You would at least need to show us the topology of the objects in question before we can suggest viable solutions... Even better would be to upload the scene file so we can see all your settings. CBR
  19. That is a particularly hideous mesh, even by CAD standards. Eurgh. I suspect even Quad remesher would struggle here, but Chris's tip has a very high chance of working for you... CBR
  20. According to the video you don't appear have any editable objects in the scene, so of course you can't adjust any component points under SDS until they are made editable. Moved out of bugs category, because this almost certainly isn't one. CBR
  21. Did you try scaling in Object Mode as opposed to Model mode ? CBR
  22. Are you trying to write to an existing file that is already open elsewhere ? CBR
  23. Although there were clues, you didn't mention this as being a low poly scene, so I assumed this was merely a starting point for something more realistic. But if you are trying to get the rough, low poly look, then it'll all be horrible triangles anyway, and so modelling rules in general, and the stuff I was saying don't really matter here, as you can mash anything into anything for this sort of scene, and it'll probably be fine. However, if it was me I would still start this whole thing from a single triangulated plane and the first thing I would do on this plane was make a poly selection for the river. Then I could just invert that (U,I) to get the inverse, which is all the other polys. CBR
×
×
  • Create New...