Jump to content

legmog

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Noble Beginner

About legmog

  • Rank
    Cafe Ronin

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Tom
  • Last Name
    Gasson
  • C4D Version
    19.024 Studio
  • Website URL
    http://

Recent Profile Visitors

794 profile views
  1. Hi peeps! So I've just began my journey into trying to figure out 'Motion Clips' and I've ran into quite a big point of contention. My question is.... ONCE I have created a NEW Motion Source, HOW can I go back in and modify it. More specifically, how can I add in NEW keyframes? I am aware I can right click on Motion Clip in the timeline and view the dope sheet / F-Curve windows, and this gives me the ability to edit the key frames that are CURRENTLY there. But I really need to add in NEW keyframes and this is proving VERY difficult. Essentially what happened is..... I spent hours doing a walk cycle. I got it just right, however I never set a keyframe on the leg Pole IK's. This was because the Pole IK's never needed to move. However.... I turned my walk animation into a 'Motion Clip' and obviously it has not recorded PSR data of the leg poles (because they were not keyframed). As such, this has caused problems where OTHER motion clips cause the pole IK's to move elsewhere in the 3D world, but they do not snap to where they need to be once the walking starts. Thus the whole animation looks strange. Obviously with hindsight, I now know to set keyframes on things which NEED to be held in place (even if they are not animated) for Motion Clips. However, for my walk cycle... I just need a way to like, go back INTO the motion source and simply place keyframes on the leg poles. But I cannot for the life of me figure out how. I was really excited when I first discovered Motion Clips. But if you are unable to effectively edit and alter a clip once you have created it (beyond the ability to tweak the dope / f-curve sheet), that seems SO incredibly restrictive. What if you spend all day on an animation, convert it to a motion clip only to realise you forgot to keyframe something vital. I suppose I could save a corresponding .c4d file for EVERY motion clip I create, and use said .c4d file to override the motion source file if ever need to rework the animation.... But that seems a bit of a crappy solution.
  2. Sorry to revive this dead thread.... But wouldn't the ultimate solution to this, simply be to animate a NULL object (with the ball within it). Get the 'bouncing ball' effect by animating the Null, rather than the Ball..... That way you have your 'bouncing ball' animation, and can place any 3D object inside the Null and rotate it however you want.
  3. Thanks for the kind words peeps! Yeah I was really happy that by sheer coincidence, the music sort of times up quite nicely with the visuals :D Kind of annoying though... It was purchased off Pond5 (a massive royalty free asset website if you've never heard of it), but the video has since been 'copyright claimed' for using the music! As to render details... It was taking about 45 minutes per frame (and this is with a 16 core processor!). I used the Physical Render engine. I set the quality to a mid-point between 'low' and 'medium' (that was enough to mostly reduce the small details from flickering as they got further away from the camera). The grand total for the render time was..... 360 hours!!! And nope, that wasn't distributed over a render farm... I literally waited over a fortnight for my PC to churn through it :D . That is absolutely the LONGEST time I've ever waited for a render. But yeah! I really want to try and do a big social media push with this. If any of you know any people / companies / websites which I could try showcasing this off to, I'd love to hear it! Maybe I SHOULD try contacting MAXON about it :D . Also, if y'all feel like giving it a 'share', don't let me stop you :D Otherwise, if any of you would like to see more. All my social media deets are in the video description of the Youtube video :)
  4. Hey peeps! This is an environment I've made for a short film / pilot episode I'm working on. It was made entirely in Cinema 4D (using the Physical render engine, alongside some simple After Effects compositing and colour correction). Take a look here! This has taken me 17 months to make! Admittedly I was also doing freelance jobs in that time. The total render time clocked in at 360 hours (and no, that wasn't distributed on a farm, it LITERALLY was all rendered on my one PC !... That was a long wait lol) I've NEVER made a 3D scene so immense in my entire time as a 3D artist before :D. But if you're interested in what this is about. I'm working on a BIG passion project in the form of a pilot episode. Fully 3D animated in Cinema 4D. The dream is to make a sincere push towards getting this thing picked up for syndication on some sort of TV network once I've finished the pilot. All my social media deets are in the vid description if you're interested in more about that. Otherwise, let me know your thoughts!
  5. Oooh, I've just made a discovery concerning this..... I actually made another video showcasing it here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnu2hFja3lg&feature=youtu.be Conclusion: The fault definitely seems to lie in C4D for this one. However earlier versions of C4D work fine rendering out object buffer mask PNG's and having them work in After Effects! Maybe anyone else who has C4D r19 might try doing a render test and see if they can get 'Object Buffer' PNGs working on their end?
  6. Hi people. Firstly, this issue is in equal parts an After Effects . Cinema 4D issue, so I'll post this thread there too. Otherwise, for the sake of brevity, I've actually made a video explaining my problem! Here's the link... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNwuL8T0QfI&feature=youtu.be Ultimately... It seems that when C4D's Multipass feature renders out an 'object buffer' mask as PNG, After Effects (CS6 at least) does NOT like this in the slightest. It fails to import the PNG files and gives two error messages... After Effects error: internal verification failure, sorry! {You can only assign RGB profiles.} ( 39 :: 0 ) And... After Effects: AEGP Plugin PNGIO Support: Unable to decode PNG file ( 5027 :: 12 ) The solution SEEMS to be... That when Multipass renders out an 'object buffer' mask, it gives it a 'grayscale colour profile. AE seemingly doesn't like this colour profile. You can however put the Mask image into Photoshop and CHANGE its profile from 'grayscale' to 'RGB colour'. THEN After Effects will allow it to import. The only snag with this is.... While it may be a solution for still images, this is in no way a practical solution for animations. I have a 600+ frame animation render coming up in which I need to render out 11 individual Masks. That's more than 6600 individual frames that would need to be manually changed in Photoshop. And while other formats (such as .jpg) DO work just fine in AE for the object buffer masks... This is not great either, as my scene file I need to render all my passes (such as diffuse, AO, reflection etc) as PNG, and all of that is lumped in WITH the 'object buffers'. Surely there must be a solution to just make PNG 'Object Buffer' passes just WORK right out the box? I can't believe a hugely used and adopted format like PNG does not work correctly when rendered out as an Object Buffer pass.
  7. Ok! I THINK I've solved the issue! I've made the following changes as you can see in this image file. I saw someone do ths in a Youtube video, so I gave it a go myself. After inputting these new parameters in After Effects, nothing happened for like, 5 seconds or so... The boom! It like, re-calibrated how it saw colours, and it all changed to how it SHOULD have looked! I'm still a bit miffed as to why this ONLY has to be done with images rendered by Cinema 4D's MultiPass feature (whereas all other images import into AE just fine)... Is there some special thing that's done to the passes in the render which ISN'T done to normal renders?
  8. Aha! Well I did some research myself on non Linear Workflow and found this link. https://helloluxx.com/tutorials/cinema4d-2/cinema4d-rendering/linear-workflow-in-cinema4d-and-after-effects/ In it, it has this picture, showing where it can be toggled on or off in C4D. I can confirm that in my project file, Linear Workflow IS turned on :)
  9. Thanks for the reply Cerbera! This is where I show my ignorance.... I have NO idea what 'Linear Workflow' means! >.< I'm literally just activating Multipass in render settings, then hitting render.... I'm using the standard render engine, and my whole C4D workflow is vanilla 'out the box'... No plugins or anything fancy.
  10. Ok, upon more testing... I see that Photoshop CAN open these MultiPass image files CORRECTLY! This is leading me to believe that there's something about how After Effects is choosing to interpret these image files upon import o.O Which is so strange, as I've tried placing other random image files (I have kicking around on my PC) into AE, and it displays them perfectly fine. It's clearly something to do with ONLY images that were created as 'MultiPass' files from Cinema 4D o.O
  11. Hi Peeps So I'm wanting to render THIS image here. This is part of a SUPER big scene file, so I'm not going to do one single render, but rather compile it all together in After Effects (CS6) from various Multipass Renders. This will be layered as follows... 5 - Lens Effects 4 - Glow Effects 3 - Atmosphere 2 - Reflection 1 - A 'Blend Channel' with everything BUT the things listed above turned on. This blend channel will be the 'base' layer. (PS - I'm using C4D R19 with the Standard Render) So obviously I need to perfectly replicate the image above (or as near as damndest) by layering together all those passes in After Effects. THIS is where I am running into problems. Look at the results of the following formats... (PPS - I should also note I've checked the 'save' for 'Compositing Project File' in C4D render settings and have set 'target application' to After Effects. Just so it all automatically (ish) sets it all up) FORMAT - .Tiff DEPTH - 16 Bit / Channel FORMAT - .Tiff DEPTH - 32 Bit / Channel FORMAT - .Tiff DEPTH - 8 Bit / Channel FORMAT - .PNG DEPTH - 8 Bit / Channel Now before I show the AE results for this.... With .PNG Multipass results, I get a TON of error messages when importing into After Effects. I get... 1 - After Effects error: internal verification failure, sorry! {You can only assign RGB profiles.} ( 39 :: 0 ) 2 - After Effects: AEGP Plugin PNGIO Support: Unable to decode PNG file ( 5027 :: 12 ) 3 - After Effects: AEGP Plugin BodyPaint 3D: Unable to create composition. ( 5027 :: 12) I NEVER usually have issues like this when trying to import .PNG's into AE. After these sleuth of errors, the scene file opens up (seemingly fine) in AE. Here it is. Again I must re-iterate that I normally have NO problems with importing 8bit PNG's into After Effects. In fact the 'regular image' was rendered out as an 8bit PNG and it works in After Effects just fine! Yet the 8bit PNG MultiPass renders do this!? So strange... Anyway, continuing on..... FORMAT - .PNG DEPTH - 16 Bit / Channel (Again, as with the 8bit PNG render, After Effects gives the same error messages when trying to open this scene file) ....CONCLUSION.... So.... When viewing the layered render passes in the C4D Picture Viewer, they ALL seem to look correct! (Except the 8 bit renders, which look noticable 'grainy').... HOWEVER, when I view the SAME render passes in After Effects, the whole lot just goes to hell.... Either way too dark, or way too bright / contrasted. I must say I am not an expert at Multipass rendering. This is the most in-depth I've ever gone with it, so the whole lot is kinda uncharted waters for me. But can you guys see what's going wrong here? I can even see glaring errors in how AE is interpreting the footage... Take the 16bit PNG renders for example... Here's what the 'reflection pass' looks like in C4D's Picture Viewer. Here's what the same reflection pass looks like when I open it in a standard picture viewer. Yet here's what the VERY SAME image looks like when it's imported into an AE comp!!! Like... WHAAAAT!??? There is a big different in EVERY multipass image, between how it looks in C4D / Picture Viewers and After Effects. AE just seems to throw an absolute hissy fit when importing in these images. Yet I don't ever have problems with importing in ANY other images to After Effects! It seems to ONLY be an issue with importing in images which have been created by Cinema 4D's 'MultiPass' feature. ANY help on what is happening here / what the solution to achieve functioning Multipass renders would be fantastic! Thanks :)
  12. Well G's Think I might have partaken in a 'flub' of colossal face-palm proportions here... I was unexpectadly out of the country last week. As such, nearly everything on my 'to do list' for last week, didn't get done. My MSA (which expires in the month of December) is up for renewal this year. Only it's common in the UK for all businesses to shut up shop from here until Jan 2nd. I've contacted MAXON support, though I have a sinking feeling that my email won't be seen until Jan 2nd now, and thus I'll be booted off the MSA >.< I looked to see if I could renew my MSA online, but it seems this cannot be done. Anyone here have any suggestions? Or have I plonked this one up good and proper >.< Thanks!
  13. But look at THIS... When I move the 'right UV block' OFF of the canvas area, it looks like this... https://www.dropbox.com/s/cc3z9ys9z5hyb42/Luna_Leaf_3_6Reflection.png?dl=0 When I move the 'right' block further to the right (to the point it goes OFF the canvas)... The deep 'purple/red' area on the LEFT block moves further to the LEFT! NOW THEN.... Before I say what the solution is... I must explain a VERY important thing about my leaf. And that is... ORIGINALLY, the UV layout for the leaf had the TOP and BOTTOM parts, overlayed on TOP of one another... So the UV map looked like one grid block of UV's. So obviously, when making my ORIGINAL base procedural material within C4D for the leaf, this wasn;t an issue (as I was happy for the base colour of the leaf to be the same on both the top and the bottom). HOWEVER.... Once I applied the light objects... I obviously wanted to end up with a texture file that ONLY coloured in the light spill for the TOP of the leaf, and not the bottom..... HENCE why I had to essentially SEPERATE the top and bottom UV's into their own blocks side by side (as seen in my UV layout picture above)... I then obviously had to MINIMIZE both UV blocks by 50%, so they could both fit into the canvas area. The problem now was..... My base procedural colour material I made, no longer applied itself to the UV's of the mesh correctly (as I'd seperated out the top / bottom and scaled the whole lot down by 50%). SO! (And this is the key part)... I needed to TRANSFORM the scale parameters of my material ALSO by a factor of 50%, so it once again applied itself correctly. To do this... I applied the 'Transform' effect in the material layer settings. THIS is where things go wrong.... Basically, I half assed the process of PRECISELY scaling my procedural material by 50%... I just half heartedly 'eyeballed it'. Lets look AGAIN at the 'colour' bake... https://www.dropbox.com/s/btg0momicgdc9qb/Prob 3.jpg?dl=0 This colour bake is an accurate bake of the procedural material I made.... See how it really ISN'T perfectly symetrical? This is because I didn;t precisely scale the material with the 'transform' layer effect. Turns out THIS 'transform' layer effect was causing the error in my 'reflection' bake.... By going BACK into the transform layer effect, and PRECISELY scaling it by 50%, I get this result.... https://www.dropbox.com/s/oxzxnnlmtd4es1t/Luna_Leaf_3_Reflection.png?dl=0 BINGO! Ultimately, I figured the UV layout, would have NO correlation with the 'transform' layer effect in the material manager in so far as baking textures are concerned. But supposedly it does. So... TL:DR Conclusion: When baking texture maps from a material.... The 'transform' layer effect DOES effect how some 'bake channels' are effected and can ultimately causes colours being not where they should be.
  14. I figured it out!!! Good lord... How do I even BEGIN to explain this one.... Remember how my UV mesh was divided into 2 blocks? With the left block of UV's for the 'top' of the leaf.... And the right block of UV's for the bottom. Here's a pic of my UV unwrap again so you can see this... With THIS layout, this is what the 'reflection' map was looking like... Problem being... The 'deep purple to red' area should have been aligned to the middle. Whereas in this image, it's offset to the right... SO.... I randomly decided to MOVE the location of the right block of UV's (which represented the bottom of the leaf) to elsewhere on the canvas.... And check these images out! Look at THAT!!! Somehow, the LOCATION of the left block of UV's, EFFECTED the colour of the right block!?!?!?
  15. Here's a top down screen cap I took of the leaf mesh. I highlighted the areas where the light objects are... As you can see, the whole setup is pretty cleanly symetrical The central lights run in a straight line across the middle of the leafs central axis. I just cannot figure out WHY the 'reflection' bake makes the colours go off skew!!

Latest Topics

Latest Comments

×
×
  • Create New...