Jump to content

Michael Goldshteyn

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Noble Beginner

About Michael Goldshteyn

  • Rank
    Cafe Junior

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Michael
  • Last Name
    Goldshteyn
  • Location
    Chicago

Hardware | Software Information

  • C4D
    R20.026 Studio
  • OS
    Windows
  • GPU
    Intel

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I guess I understand what you mean, but even something as generic as: - Fixed modeling issues related to making cuts using the Line Cut tool. ..., would be far more helpful than: - Fixed several modeling issues ..., by being at least somewhat specific about the tool, tools, or modeling actions that are affected by the fix. That's all I'm saying...
  2. Would it be possible to know which issues those are, particularly in modeling. I'd like to know if they are in commonly used tools or something obscure that I'll probably never come across. For example: Fixed issue when modeling splines causing the end point of the spline to erroneously connect to the view center rather than the first point of the spline when "Close Spline" is turned on in the Spline object settings. (And that's an actual S22 bug, btw). or Fixed issue where, sometimes, points randomly get added to unrelated edges when cuts are ma
  3. I get that, my question was one of, stability issues in what?? Option 1: All of the modeling tools and in addition to that, XRef? Option 2: Just the modeling tools related to XRef
  4. Great thanks! I wonder what they mean by: Fixed stability issues with modeling and XRefs Does that imply that: - They fixed modeling issues and they also fixed XRefs issues or - They fixed modeling issues having to do with XRefs There are still quite a few general modeling bugs and if they fixed any of these, this update is a no-brainer - useful to everyone! If it's just issues around XRefs, well, not as useful or important to most people.
  5. Right, but it would be nice to know whether it's worth updating to (i.e., how minor are the fixes and what are they?).
  6. It is available for install at MAXON's site, but I can't seem to find any release notes on how it differs from the prior release.
  7. To make the question I am going to ask clear, consider the following scenario: Before carefully phrasing my question, let me describe what you see in detail in the image above. We have two primitive cube objects, respectively called Red Cube and Blue Cube (left side of above picture with the Object Manager representation shown top of center) The two cubes share the same shiny white material called Generic Material. The settings of the Color layer portion of the material's definition are shown in the Material Editor (center of above picture). A bright yellow arrow points to
  8. All good ideas, currently working on another (far more complex) Plugin Idea, but plan to come back to this one.
  9. So, here is the same idea re-implemented (presumably) using the same technique and mechanisms that XS Yann employed for his (purchasable) xsPolyinstance plugin, the difference being that I have the source code since I wrote it, fields work just fine to allow parametric (more complex and topology independent) selections to be made, and I can add to and extend the feature set as fresh ideas pour in. Also, I am willing to share the resulting python source code which is well commented, explaining what it does and why it does it. The way this mechanism works is by using a Python tag on the Ma
  10. Unfortunately, best I can tell, the xs* series of tools is pretty much dead in the water support and update wise, since their author, xs yann (and his web site) are long gone. With regard to the ToPoly plugin, I could not find it, but maybe I was searching for the wrong keywords, so if you can reply with a link to it, I'd appreciate it. I want to look over the purchasable options and compare them to what I have written so far.
  11. But wait there's more! Why have "fixed" polygon selections that break as soon as the topology of the objects to be textured changes, when you can use primitives and parametric shapes to volume select? Now things are getting really interesting from a procedural perspective:
  12. Well, I got it to work via a fairly complex Python Generator script that took several hours to write consisting of about 170 lines of commented code. I'll post it later after I clean it up and test it further. Here are the results: Gouraud Shaded: ..., with lines to show polygons: Object Hierarchy The Python Generator creates a single polygonal object out of the sibling Null that follows it (named Parametric Group in the image below). Then, the Correction Deformer can be employed to create Polygon Selection tags from that single generated polygonal object, whic
  13. If that is in fact the case, that you cannot partially texture (only some of the) polygons of a generated object - one that goes through one of Cinema's generators, whether SubD or any of the others including Loft, Lathe, Extrude, and Sweep). And, you can't even do this by throwing the whole lot into a Connect generator, whose sole purpose is to "polygonalize" (i.e., materialize into a Polygonal Object) its child nodes, then that is a very large shortcoming of C4D in terms of supporting a procedural non-destructive workflow. It is also very surprising, because it is clear that under the covers
  14. Two different solutions appear above you. It would be very helpful if you pointed out which of the two you are referring to. Michael
×
×
  • Create New...