Jump to content

filipstamate

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Noble Beginner

About filipstamate

  • Rank
    Cafe Ronin

Profile Information

  • First Name
    -
  • Last Name
    -
  • C4D Version
    19.024 Studio

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, really, it's slower than any alternative. OK, technically it's "free", but surely if you make money with C4D then the time savings Redshift provides (not only for the final renders, but for lookdev as well) are worth more than the initial $500 and the $250 per year it costs. I'd say the cost is almost insignificant. If you don't make money with C4D then OK, but I don't really get it how you can afford C4D then. Unless you've got so much money to afford spending thousands on a hobby. In which case, well... the price of Redshift shouldn't mean much.
  2. Ah. My main thing right now is animations, which I can't really do without Redshift. So I was quite happy when I heard MAXON got it. :) I hope it means deeper integration soon, like maybe getting it to use the new nodes from R20.
  3. Fair enough I guess. If you have the resources to do it. I guess I'm biased since I have no interest in it and would prefer to see other things getting attention. Cheers!
  4. Because it seems to me like it doesn't have enough users to be worth it. Which I assume it's also what happened to Bodypaint. Of course, you probably have actual usage statistics, I'm just saying how it looks to me by just seeing that people use in tutorials and on Youtube. Looks like people would even rather use the Physical Renderer. And from the, admittedly little tests I did, I get it since ProRender seems slower that that. And now you have Redshift. You'd probably be better off making that work with AMD cards. If I'm not mistaken there's something in the Redshift FAQ about eventually supporting AMD.
  5. I hope this is one of those corporate speak things. Like you would say "Bodypaint development didn't stop" *winkwinknudgenudge*. Because ProRender really looks like a waste of time and development would definitely be better put somewhere else.
  6. Technically, yes. In practice, if you upgrade every year, then not. And if you want to stay up-to-date then you will update. If not every year, then you'll get penalized anyway for skipping years. So, while I dislike subscription only licenses, in the end there might not be much a difference in terms of how much you pay. This in case you don't intend to just buy it once and then never upgrade. In which case... well... I don't think this discussion applies to you. But that's not the whole point. I'm saying it's expensive for the features it has and the need to complete it with 3rd party plugins in areas that are covered by other programs, no matter if you own the license or not. But hey, I see people here saying that MAXON's profits are actually increasing so I'm probably very wrong and it's not considered expensive by most users.
  7. Would be awesome, indeed. And actually make the tools that have the "Preserve Curvature" option actually do it based on the surrounding geometry because my guess is that what it's doing is just pushing the the edges away, with no calculation involved. A comparison between C4D and Maya in this feature shows a big discrepancy in the results. They don't really have to do it better than XP. They need to be it better than it is. Or better than nothing in the case of fluid simulations. Would be happy with SOMETHING, not necessarily something that beats RealFlow and Turbulence FD. They really need to add transformation axis to the UV editor first of all. Non-uniform scaling in the UV editor is just... ***.
  8. Wouldn't it work to just press "W" to switch to world orientation? That way you don't change the actual axis of the object, and it's something you can use on any object. Just press "W" again to disable it.
  9. I also believe C4D is way too expensive. As someone already said, arguably the most expensive. Even insanely expensive if you take into account the plugins needed to get the same features present in other applications. Yes, C4D has a couple of somewhat unique features too (MoGraph being the most obvious one) but I don't think those make up for the missing and outdated features. And for new users when comparing features, it really does not look good. I mean, even if they don't need , dunno, fluid simulations, why wouldn't they just go into an application that has them? It just looks like better value, and it probably is. It's different for old users who are somewhat tied to the C4D workflow and hoped or keep hoping that it will catch up in the weak areas, but it turns out that also gets more and more irrelevant as instead it's the other applications that start to catch up with C4D's unique features.
  10. Awesome, it worked. I actually did try the spline, but was too dumb to figure how out how to set it up properly. Thank you!
  11. Hi, I'm trying to set up some XPresso where I have an user data going from 0 to 100%. I want that to drive the strength of a Bend deformer. I can of course set it up easily with a Range Mapper, but I actually want the strength to go up and down during that 0 to 100%. For example, say: - User data goes from 0 to 60% -> strength goes from 0 to -100 - User data goes from 60 to 90% -> nothing happens, strength stays at -100 - User data goes from 90 to 100% -> strength goes from -100 to -90 How can I set up something like this? Thank you.
  12. Excuse for poor/missing features, since the person I quoted posted that as if people shouldn't complain about features because C4D is so stable. Honestly I'd rather take the 2 crashes per day (or whatever is the industry standard) than the C4D stability, if that's really what it takes to have more and better features. The issues with crashing in the Maya or Max (don't know about Modo) are very overblown anyway. It's really pretty much like someone saying today that they use Macs because Windows crashes all the time. It's just not true. Also, I always save very often, even in C4D so crashes are a minor annoyance at most.
  13. Does this really matter more than the features? I'm sorry, but this is not an excuse. And in fact, stability seems to have taken a hit as years went by too. C4D was the program that "never" crashed... well, you can't really say that about it anymore. It's still very solid, of course, but just something to think about. It would be great. The Xpresso UI is... old. Of course, Redshift could also do their own UI like Octane did.
  14. Yeah, I did not mention it because it's not really something I have much need of, but particles certainly is another very outdated part.
  15. Thank you, will do! Although, shouldn't the MAXON employees be aware of what is out there already? Like know your competition and such? For a small example, compare the proportional editing in Blender for example to what is available in C4D. Not a missing feature per se, just an outdated feature. And just a note, despite being negative about this release, I actually love C4D and in fact it can do many of the things I need. But it's because I love it that I want to see it get better and not be trampled by other programs.
×
×
  • Create New...