Jump to content

filipstamate

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Noble Beginner

About filipstamate

  • Rank
    Cafe Junior

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Filip
  • Last Name
    Stamate

Hardware | Software Information

  • C4D
    R21
  • OS
    Windows 10
  • GPU
    3900x/2070 Super

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Another one in R23 with the symmetrical loop cut. Sometimes it just crosses the cuts like that. Here I was just trying to reproduce the bug. Nothing special about this model, I just did some symmetrical cuts all around a cube then deleted some faces. I found another thread which seemed to be about a different symmetrical cut bug which I can't reproduce, but maybe it's related and the first cuts somehow messed up the order of the points or something and that's why the crossing happens. symmetrical.c4d
  2. Thanks, that's good to hear! By the way, I just noticed something else, not sure how far back this goes or if maybe I'm not understanding something correctly, but when you move, rotate or scale something you get a number near the cursor telling you the amount. There's also a number in the bottom left corner of the UI (status bar I guess it's called?) that at least seems that it should mirror that number but it's always off by some amount. For example showing 25 degrees instead of 30 when you rotated by 30 degrees.
  3. 1. Chamfering a curve point. If I drag in the viewport to chamfer, the chamfer stops before reaching 10 cm. At 9.59 to be exact. If I use the numeric field in the attribute manager I can go past that. This does not happen in R21. I can drag as much as I want in the viewport. 2. You know how when you zoom a lot on an object you might not see the axis anymore but you want to move on a specific axis so you turn off the other two and just drag the in the viewport to move the object? Well, see attached scene. If you try to drag the cube on the X is just snaps to "-39.774 cm" and th
  4. Hmm, how can I set the Tracer spline to work with spline dynamics? I tried the various spline types, but couldn't get it to work. Also, no matter what I use, if I click on "Make editable" the resulting spline will only have 2 points. Only if I right-click and choose "Current State To Object" will the resulting spline be as it was set on the tracer.
  5. Thanks, no problem if it requires Xpresso. I can use Xpresso, but I can't think of how to do it by myself. Of course, if there are other ways to connect the elements like I said without the Tracer, that would also work. Maybe even better since the splines generated by the Tracer don't seem to work with dynamics. Unless you convert them to editable objects. So yeah, a system that's somewhat procedural and generates curves that can use dynamics would be even better. Thanks!
  6. Hi, Can anyone suggest a way to connect a random element from a cloner to a random element from another cloner through a Tracer? Imagine two cloners, both just cloning nulls, set some distance apart. I just want to have random elements from one cloner to have splines traced to random elements from the other cloner.
  7. Nobody has any idea? As I understand it's the same with S22. In fact, that one might be worse since it seems that the viewport quality setting for Xpresso-based Redshift materials doesn't work anymore (changing the viewport texture resolution) and it seems they have issues updating in the viewport. So in S22 I'd be essentially stuck with node-based materials which I can't make show up in the animation preview. I would have thought that since they bought Redshift the integration will be better, but so far I see it's getting worse.
  8. This is probably not Redshift specific, but I stumbled upon this problem when using Redshift. Sorry if it's in the wrong place. So, If I render an OpenGL animation preview using the new Redshift node materials in R21 all show up black. In the viewport they’re fine. Old Xpresso based materials are also fine in the OpenGL animation preview. Is there any way to make the node materials work too in the animation preview? Basically it looks like the animation preview is using the standard/physical node space because when I switch to that all materials are bla
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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!
  12. 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 abou
  13. 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.
  14. 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 com
  15. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...