Jump to content


Regular Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MickD

  1. Hopefully, it is something they can fix soon. I know a lot of people use and rely on displacement maps.
  2. Sounds like an annoying problem. Maybe it's something the RS are looking or need to look into?! Surely though using the min/max values, if you went for example old min 0, max 1, to new min -.5, max .5 or something like that it would then act like you need, essentially making the "grey" or midtones 0? Ooooh, yeh maybe for an animated character keeping polys low is a must. Not sure. I just keep playing with setting so they look right. Is there any way to add a little more detail to the base mesh in the trouble parts so the displacement maps works as needed? eg adding in the folded areas?
  3. Not sure about the actual length of the rays but I tried just a few days ago on a scene I had learning the C4D lighting and one technique was adding a disc in front of the light with fractal alpha map applied which then broke up the overall beam. Maybe like everfresh mentioned, maybe adding some sort of object to intersect with the rays/beam and then turning its render visibility off?
  4. Have you tried this with Zbrush displacement maps at all? I know I used to have problems with Zbrush and Softimage and never got it to work. Displacement maps can be quite finicky. Maybe the base mesh might need more polys for it to displace properly in Redshift? Have you got the tesselation on also in the RS tag object? This adds a lot of the finer detail.
  5. I also thought about buying the starter pack and decided not to. I enjoy making materials, even though there is a lot of brain work required sometimes, I am finding the node editor enjoyable and the learning process making different types of materials. If you want some free materials check out Raphael Rau's free Cycles4D materials. I;ve not used yet, but they look pretty nice. https://www.behance.net/gallery/45235117/FREEBIE-SMALL-CYCLES-4D-MATERIAL-LIBRARY http://www.silverwing-vfx.de/free_stuff.html
  6. I have recently had this happening to me. Quite unresponsive and quite laggy. I mentioned this on a post on FB and one of the guys said to turn off material preview under the material settings in the attribute tab. This I think has helped quite a lot, though when you are building materials it is helpful to see the material preview update, which I turn on and off now when required. Also, under the IPR setting, to make sure you don't have your display card as a renderer and only to use the other GPUs not running the display, as this will also slow down. Due to this little drama, and sometimes being a little unusable for this, I am looking at the Redshift sale at the moment. But otherwise I am really liking Cycles4D.a
  7. We would all indeed be out of jobs without them, sadly. Oh right. I didn't realise you were using 3.5 for this one. I never really tested fluids in 3.5 but they seem pretty awesome so far in V4. Just make sure to play with the filters in the VDB mesh options for better smoothing. I would expect nothing at the moment can compare to Realflow or Houdini with really any particle or fluid sim, generally, but XP will definitely catch up at some point if it keeps moving like it is. Jealous that you are learning Houdini. I still need to learn C4D and the plugins it has. I use to jump in between lots of apps to learn but now trying to focus on just the one.
  8. Those damn clients. Haha. Who do they think they are... :/ I was thinking what you have said would be the case. It is always fun though to be able to learn different techniques and workarounds to get the results required. That is often one thing you can take away from even the worst jobs. It would have been great if you had the opportunity to play with Realflow or Houdini (if you know how to use them at all). I see the clients point in keeping the text legible. Do you not think the new XP4 liquids could achieve greater results, more on par with the other two apps for this type of thing?
  9. Great work Nerv. The only real thought is the interaction of the liquid on the text on the cylinder. For example, the watermelon slices bounce off but the liquid runs behind the text. Just wondering if this was down to times of simulation? or the result wasn't very good etc?
  10. Hi Djfilms, I was doing a bit of sand clumping type tests before Christmas and had a look at what was needed for this. It sounds like all you need is the "Friction" property selected (for memory, don't have XP/C4D open to check). Also under one of the new settings in particle type, think this is under emitter, change liquid to granular (I am sure this also helped as I didn't test with the standard default liquid option). I don't remember using any p/p collisions (also tested and is very slow to process) as when I was looking into this it wasn't needed, though when I originally tested before researching was that was my line of thought to use as well, but in the end wasn't required as the friction options that include bounce and friction etc is what worked. Also, would just have the hourglass object set as with the collision tag set to inside.
  • Create New...