All Activity

Well I am not too familiar with game engines other than Unity and Unreal which I have only dabbled with. Indeed I have recently animated/modelled some game characters but they needed to be exported as GLB files to work. I always thought the the norm was to rig characters using joint/bones and create walk/run/jump/punch etc sequences and then import them into the game engine. Which is what I did using the motion sequence features in C4D and the take system.

Lucasfilm's vision for AI in Stars Wars is making me cringe Article from CreativeBloq. https://www.creativebloq.com/entertainment/vfx/lucasfilms-vision-for-ai-in-stars-wars-is-making-me-cringe

As a typically staunch promoter / defender of Cinema's modelling toolset I still can't argue with your criticisms of those 2 aspects of it. There is certainly much to be done by way of improving both Line Cut and Poly Pen, particularly relating to their behaviour around ngons. But me and a fair few other modelling-focused testers have good coms with Maxon and ensure they are fully aware of our frustrations, and we do constantly push for improvements and fixes to the modelling tool set. And Maxon do listen to those concerns, fix what they can as they go along, and bank up ideas and retooling plans for the next time modelling is in 'dev-focus' so to speak... At the moment, unsurprisingly, it's Particles and Liquids that are getting a lot of focus, but it'll be modelling's turn again soon enough I imagine... CBR

RANT Is there ever going to be a time when C4D just makes a cut without having us guess whether or not we should use the knife or polygon pen tool, REGARDLESS of how imperfect the geo is? It's 2025. We shouldn't have to babysit C4D as it determines if it can perform a function or not. We shouldn't have to perform multiple steps with multiple cuts, when the tool should be able to perform one cut.. one time. If the answer is "use this tool when the geo is imperfect this way, and that tool if it's that way..." then how about make one tool work both ways under the hood? Even Connect Points/Edges would be more brilliant if it intelligently knew "ok to connect this point to that point, I have to cross this edge that doesn't have a point so I'll create one and continue doing what I need to do to get to the other selected point" just a made up sample.

It works fine for me. Can you post screenshots of your setup and the red tint ? I've never seen anything getting red in that list.

Until then, D5 or U-Render... Depending the scene, a Viewport Render can also be adequate.

I have several attractors in one scene. I want to assign a specific attractor to a specific softbody (not bullet). As soon as I have two attractors in my scene, the second one, when assigned to a softbody tags include/exclude field gets a red tinted backdrop. Is this a known limitation? Only one attractor per scene is allowed, when assigned specifically?

As a heavy Vectorworks users, I'm watching this closely. Thanks for posting.

Leaving that here. Guess it is a iteration of RS RT https://www.maxon.net/en/article/maxon-introduces-new-real-time-rendering-and-cinematic-previews-solution-for-architects?srsltid=AfmBOor4hyBzua_1Vy5wp7JNAvYGcN1IPLN5wCfadfMw7xUPnV01nN0p

Public sharing (e.g. on ArtStation, Behance, or an open YouTube link) is not recommended. This is where most legal trouble happens. Your right to work (Berufsfreiheit) is a fundamental constitutional right in Germany under Art. 12 GG (Grundgesetz – Basic Law).You can privately show work (including company projects) to potential employers if it is for the sole purpose of applying for a job, and it is not made public. A company cannot blanketly prohibit you from showing your own contribution just because a project is unpublished if you respect confidentiality. Even NDA clauses are not automatically enforceable if they disproportionately restrict your right to seek employment. Just because you're legally allowed to show something in private doesn't mean an employer won’t threaten legal action anyway — even if they'd lose. So professional discretion matters and that's where asking for permission takes its stage.

The OSL ones have been available on GitHub for quite some time, but when I last checked them out it wasn't a Maxon-specific page of them. I didn't know about the Python one. Definitely some very useful shaders and extensions there. CBR

I'll have to dig into this when I have more time and patience... I was hopping for an easy and straightforward solution but it seems it's something so fundamental of something too big that makes my question difficult to answer... I also have to find a way to ask "What game engine is most easy to learn and suitable for Spyro's mechanics for me to understand ?", I have no idea what kind of forum would be appropriate to unsewr to that. AI is defenerly not a good place to ask because I have a list of things I need for the game engine to be able to address and that make the question too specific to be answerd by AI.

and this live ai avatar https://ravatar.com/3d-ai-avatar/ , loool !

Oh wow these Redshift OSL Shaders are going to be REALLY handy, especially that Blur one. Thanks for posting.

Why did I hear about this just now ? And why aren't these part of the main app ? Anyway, for anyone who's been living under a rock like me here are the links https://github.com/Maxon-Computer/Cinema-4D-Python-API-Examples https://github.com/Maxon-Computer/Redshift-OSL-Shaders

I would recommend that you have a look at some of the motion system tutorials on Cineversity to get you head around NLA (non-linear animation). Basically you can create clips of animation and move them around in the timeline and blend them together and then export them as animations. Not sure if you can export as PLA (vertex) animation but I am sure there is a file format that supports this…

Made it! Also I just noticed...

You're absolutely right, I hate it 😄 Imagine just for once just doing something and not having to work destructively because of running into tool limitations... couldn't happen to me. But that definitely solves my problem still. Thanks a lot! The only bright side is that technically I wasn't even doing it wrong, I just happened to find another edge case. So I wasn't too dumb 🙂

Thanks. I still use Cinema 4D for making some renders and illustration for a computer magazine. Not much work but more like a hobby anymore.

Ahhh... correct...

Well that's why the phong doesn't work ! Mesh checker reveals that no polys are actually connected to each other ! CBR

I have managed to extract my favorite dragon but I'm completely ignorant on the character animation field of C4D. There were two ways of export, either export the model with chosen animation cycles one after the other in a single timeline or export the model with separate animation cycles each time. I think the first choice is more convenient. I read somewhere that PS1 animations were vertex animations which I don't know if it's a different name for PLA or a different thing... There were two supported formats. DAE and SFX. For some reason DAE doesn't contain any animation, but the rigs are there as points. My problems are these: Is there a way to separate the animation cycles and put them in some kind of sequencer (like putting sound samples in a music editor) ? Is that Motion System tag for this type of thing ? Can I use any kind of input device to make those animation cycles play as I press specific keys (controller) ? Why doesn't the Phong tag work on this model ? Dragon.zip

I used a very simple setup The Surfase Attract did the trick for me. Just use these aattributes: As you can see the particles keep following the surface dispite the deformation taking place. Just don't forget the Collision Tag on your object as it's absolutely necessary for the Attractor to work.

There's a file with it pretty much done, if that's any help... shading_error CBR Fix.c4d

Oh DF, you are so very good at finding the Achilles heels in fundamental tools 🙂 Alas, merely flattening that row of polys will not give you the droids you are looking for... The reason is that with that topology, as theoretically ideal as it may seem, we are asking way too much of SDS here - it needs considerably more help than that to solve the shading issue. Let's simplify in order to better explain. Here is the side of one section of your tubing before it is curved, but even more perfectly even than your original, and for now without any control edges... Now, if we add an experimental bend to that, (occupying the top half of it, and in unlimited mode so it does both ends at once) then already the SDS shading is disturbed, but because of the polygon evenness and lack of control edges we can't really notice it. However it is there, as we can see by the breakup that arc into a dot and a line... Let's add some control edges to our base mesh that so our groove isn't floppy, which will make the problem much much worse ! So now if we try and bend this... Then we will get this... in which the horrible shading is fully restored and visible... So, what can we do about this ? Well, we can move the bend deformer for a start ! Let's bend the SDS result rather than the base mesh... ...and there we go, shading problems disappearo ! Now let's have a look at the sort of topology density we have had to bend to get that... So the answer here, which I know you will hate is to generate these curved surfaces first, CStO the SDS result, and Extrude your flat bits across the top / bottom from there, at that polygon density... So what is happening there is that the shading problem (which is still there) is rendered virtually invisible by being averaged across so many tiny polys. And so if we do put this under Level 1 SDS (that's all it might need now given the already applied subdivision), our shading problem remains (visibly) absent. So, TLDR version would be: Weakness of SDS - needs a shitload more polygon density to circumvent ! Hope that helps... CBR