Jump to content

Isleofgough

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    323
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Isleofgough last won the day on April 5

Isleofgough had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

73 Noble Beginner

About Isleofgough

  • Rank
    Cafe Ronin

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Philo
  • Last Name
    Calhoun
  • Location
    Seattle

Cinema 4D Information

  • C4D Version
    R20 Studio

Recent Profile Visitors

2,378 profile views
  1. Cameras in Houdini can easily be constrained to a path/curve and the object of interest can be specified or just keyframed. I find them easier than in C4D, but I don't really understand camera mapping of a 2d image, if that is what you mean. Blender is the most awkward for camera positioning for me. C4D excels in being easy to use and logically designed. I don't think there is a better program in that respect. Blender is a quicker modeler, but you have to learn a lot of keystrokes and the only support is through the forums (unlike C4D). Houdini is undoubtedly the most powerful, but it is not a fast non procedural modeler and often you have to think about how you would define what you want to do and then use nodes or code to accomplish that. For some, that seems harder than clicking some button.
  2. Those look like all red giant or Zaxwerks effects for AE. (pseudo 3d)
  3. Nothing wrong with using edit nodes. They aren't really procedural, but the bevel and extrude nodes still can be procedural and changed at will. The clock was modeled well. It would be a mistake to think every node in a model creation needs to be completely procedural. Even things like an edge loop will depend on the point numbers, which will be changed by altering the edge count in a node up the chain from the edge loop. I have the modeler 2020 plugin but rarely use it. It does help with Boolean type modeling.
  4. The features added into Illustrator after version 8 would not really be applicable for 3D import. Rather than write code to not interpret useless information for gradients, mesh objects, bitmap placed images, etc - MAXON decided the way a lot of DCC companies did to require illustrator 8 files. IF you are wanting to import illustrator files rather than use a bitmap export from them as a template, ArtSmart is the way to go in C4D. However, files generated from a bezier curve software application like Illustrator can cause a lot of problems in any 3D application - including C4D. They interpret the bezier curves as multiple short line segments - giving an unnecessarily number of points on the curves. That is no problem if one wants to just extrude a logo, but it will come back to bite you if you want to bevel the extruded polygons. NOTE: this issue is not unique to C4D but is a problem with every 3D application I know. You can import illustrator files but be aware of the inherent limitations. (it is not unlike the issues bring a nurbs based file into a SDS polygon editing program). The old zaxwerks software proanimator and invigorator for AE did probably the best job with illustrator imports, but you had to be careful with the settings that caused bevels to generate ugly spikes.
  5. spiralstair: since you have used Houdini, in that program you can add a resample and then a scatter node after the open nurbs curve. You should be able to export this into C4D to work with.
  6. Regarding 1: mograph tracer will create a line between two or more nulls
  7. CBR: I'm not sure what Houdini models you have seen with bad topology, but that software is like any other - you can create good or bad topology and it totally depends on the user's skill and interest. One advantage to the better procedural features of Houdini is that one can scatter objects over a surface and add some randomness to the procedural nodes, creating a more realistic look. (such as in trees scattered on a landscape). In the example that bobC4D gave, the ability to tweak the nodes might not be offset by the extra time modeling in Houdini would take over C4D or Blender. The model of the clock is very good but mostly non procedural, as you can see from the number of edit nodes. If you changed the first node (a circle), it would mess up all the edits downstream. But if you altered some of the extrude or bevel nodes, everything would propagate nicely. Addendum: What spiralstair said is very important. For instance, you can take an object and add a transform node to move it to the side. You can merge the object and the transform (making a triangle of nodes) and then bridge between the object and transformed copy. That sort of modeling saves a lot of time over making everything linear.
  8. None of the 3D programs handle illustrator files particularly well, as you usually work with bezier curves in Illustrator and straight edged polygons in a polygon modeler. A very simple extrude will work, but bevels usually fall apart. You would do better making a black and white image in Illustrator and using that as a template in C4D for a proper model. The examples you show would not be difficult, and you can add nurbs smoothing and bevels with much more realistic effects in C4D. probably what you didn't want to hear..... Here are the steps in Houdini, but they would be equivalent in C4D: polypen>extrude>bevel>nurb.
  9. Pretty much impossible in C4D but that is the sort of thing that would not be that hard in Houdini. You would create an attribute that would change if the object was in a certain proximity to another object and that attribute could control color. It would start with one color and change to another when the attribute changed.
  10. Some things that are simple in C4D are not so in Houdini. A classic example is the sweep nurb equivalent. As I remember, if you create this and make it editable in C4D, it gives you a reasonable UV map. In Houdini you have to either add some nonintuitive nodes to do this procedurally or cut the seams after the fact to create your own map. (That is partially mitigated by Houdini having very good UV unwrap methods). Blender is worse than either for this sort of work, but one can forget how intuitive and stable C4D is, when comparing it to other programs. The example I gave above for distorting objects with hair is another case where what is very easy in C4D is hard to set up in Houdini. I would agree somewhat with Midphase that some Houdini users don't want Houdini to be made easy for the average user. The SideFX and odforce forums tend to give fairly cursory answers, expecting you will figure out most of the steps yourself. C4D cafe, on the other hand, generally provides a lot more detailed instructions to help users.
  11. You could probably do this in Xpresso, but these are the sort of things that would be much easier in Houdini (https://www.sidefx.com/forum/topic/73604/). The toilet paper is basically a spiral and what you want to do is to extend a line the length equal to the spiral wrap as it unrolls. Then do the various extrudes to give depth and thickness. So to be realistic, you would need to do the calculus for arc length of the spiral and match it to the length of the line as you reduce the total rotation of the spiral. You would also need a transform on the line to match the shrinking of the spiral, so that the line and spiral join at all rotation angles. Then animate as your angle goes from some large number of rotations to zero (or some small number where the cardboard roll extends. https://www.britannica.com/science/spiral-mathematics Or you could be artistic and just fake it, as in the tutorials recommended above.
  12. I would mostly agree with Midphase. People often think you need a mathematics major to learn Houdini and it is only useful for fracturing/explosions, fire, smoke and fluids. While most of this type of work is indeed done in Houdini in Hollywood movies, the program has a lot more usefullness, and that view would show lack of experience with the program. Environmental modeling is often done best in Houdini. The Lake House tutorial above is a good example, but city modeling and rural landscapes are also frequently done in Houdini. The OP introduced me to the work of the talented and apparently self taught artist, Esteban Diacono. He uses a pinch of C4D, a dash of Houdini, and a teaspoon of Octane. I don't know the proportions. In C4D, one might get 90% of the way using modeling, rigging, posemorph, deformers, mograph, hair, and soft body dynamics. But the last 10% would be a bear. Conversely, since all of what he does could be done in Houdini, it brings up the question of why he still uses C4D. Without doubt, there are inefficiencies in Houdini that would be easier to do in another program. For his work, see: https://www.instagram.com/_estebandiacono/?utm_source=ig_embed You can see some of how he might have done some of this in C4D in this tutorial: (I'm not even sure how to do this in Houdini)
  13. Yes, Exoside's quad remesher.
  14. C4D with x-particles can be a lot slower than Houdini on an average computer, depending on the scene. Part of the reason for my transition to Houdini was trying to use tracers and a rigged model with constraints in C4D, where minor changes had significant lags between the change and the screen redraw. That said, Mantra's rendering engine, while better, is a lot slower than C4D's built in options and really is built for quality and speed in fluid and particle systems. For rendering speed, many purchase Redshift. But you do have a valid point. For modeling, if you want to add several precisely positioned edge loops, a few extrudes, etc. and then create a perfect UV map - Houdini will be a lot slower than C4D, Blender, or Modo. The modeling features are there with Houdini, but as I mentioned earlier, you will probably have to add a few lines of code and write commands that C4D would do automatically. Sculpting and painting are way behind both C4D and Blender. Where modeling in Houdini is powerful is when it is used for procedural modeling of complex structures as in the "Lake House Tutorial". This tutorial shows how complicated such a set up can be, though: Note: that tutorial uses a fair amount of programming and is not for the faint of heart. Modeling in Houdini often involves techniques which would not pass the moderator's standards on this forum. For instance, there is a tutorial on creating swiss cheese that starts with a cube, scatters points on that cube, copies spheres to those points and then uses a boolean to subtract the spheres from the cube. Then the resulting model has points scattered on its surface, spheres are again copied to the points and subtracted from the model. This is repeated ten times with a looping node. The cheese looks good, but the topology is awful, so one might convert the result to a volume and back to a polygon mesh to retopologize (or use quad remesher). If one recommended this in C4D, there would be quite the outcry. But as you know you do similar things in Zbrush all the time with good results. Zbrush just hides the engine more than Houdini.
×
×
  • Create New...