Leaderboard

I've made a short reminder for myself because I apparantly like to forget the same things before sending my projectfiles to Rebus Renderfarm. Thought I'd share them here perhaps even learn about your routines with other farms? The first time I should optimize the connection type and speed in the rebus drop settings, do the test and adjust the port accordingly Then for every project I tend to forget one or all of these steps: Check my assets via Window > Project Asset Inspector Check my RS textures via Redshift > RS Asset Manager Rename and resave the file with the name Rebus in it via File > Save project with assets Remove all audio from the scene Convert all fonts to poly via Filter > select fonts > C Convert mograph text to alembic and replace only the necessary frames via File > Export > Alembic Cache remaining mographs with their appropriate range Convert projectors via Connect objects and delete Just to be sure Davinci Resolve and Fusion do not understand cryptomatte objects you need to name them to select

The more I learn about CUDA, how to exploit its potential and what its limits are in the Python C4D context, the more the number of particles I can involve in the simulation grows. This scenario describes a simulation of interactions between particles subject to the law of universal gravitation (doped) in a 3D (or 2D) grid in which each particle interacts only with its neighbors, bringing the computational complexity from O(N²) to O(N) → (N*k) where k is the number of particles contained in the 26 adjacent cells + one (the one containing the particle under examination) in the case of a 3D grid and 8 cells + one in the case of a 2D grid. In this video you can't see realtime performance in viewport but you can understand what can be achieved from the code I'm working on. Let yourself be enchanted by the "physics" of particles when there are so many of them...

Some thoughts that I have after my yearly Cinema 4D subscription was over 11 days ago. When I have some free time from 3D works I get Maxon One 14-day trial subscription to check it. And I was very positive surprised ! I used Redshift 4-5 years ago when it was at early stage and went to Octane. But I see that after years they did insane work to make it one of the best renderer which I used and tested. I get some of my raw scenes included product viz, interior and exterior with insane amount of plants with simple materials but included the same bump, normal and displacement maps. After tests I can say that Redshift have the same quality in the terms of light distribution and shadowing detail that unbiased Octane. It is little noisy in dark areas by default but it can be easy improved by changing settings. Octane is much faster to create the same image quality without noise using small scene like product visualization but Redshift is 2-4 times faster if scene is growing especially using many of vegetation with alpha masks. Octane is dying here compared to RS. I know how to speeds up Octane very well but Redshift as biased renderer has many settings to avoid it without loosing quality. Redshift is very well integrated with Cinema 4D. Octane has ( or had because month of absence ) great C4D developer like Ahmet who did great improvements but RS has no problem with using the new scene nodes like distribution which works as multi-instances. I think that RS material nodes are much easier to use and I can get better results within less time than in Octane. For example in Octane everybody use gradient node to manipulate images - in RS Ramp node is way better constructed without the way to manipulate gradient because it has included ranges, exposure and even noise. Many of nodes here are very well thought out even if Octane has it much more. Additional nodes reserved only for One users are great too like Ivy generator but it is like joke that they are priced... Anyway I'm going to stay with Maxon and going to Redshift from Octane. Many materials to rebuild from scratch. I don't have free time like year to learn Blender 😝

I'm optimistic with 2025 but I don't think any of Maxon's updates now or in the future will match how big and chunky the Houdini ones are. Check the Houdini forums and there are threads bemoaning how strange and clunky the Houdini UI is, when will they fix it, it's been like this for years, etc Check the Youtube page for the Maya 2025 announcement whenever it was, and there are comments like, such a weak update, did you guys start development two weeks before release? I don't want to think about the assorted unhappy topics and dramas on the Blender forums. What a world.

Maxon One doesn't strike me as the greatest deal. You get tons of stuff with it, but I won't be using most of it, and I only want to sub to C4D and Redshift. Making capsules a Maxon One exclusive could in some quarters be described as a 'dick move', but I would never bring that phrase into the conversation. EDIT - I wrote the below in responser to the final comment on the first page of this thread (the guy who seemed downbeat about development), and then after posting it I see the past half day's posts have all finally appeared on my screen. Maybe they didn't load before. So feel free to read the outstanding writing below but it probably has bugger all to do with the last five or six posts here, sorry. ........................................... I get where you're coming from generally, but in this instance Maxon just finished (mostly, sort of) doing all that core rewrite stuff. (I understand there's more happening but they only just seemed to get there last year). They evidently had to sort out that groundwork. It just took more than several years longer than anyone here probably thought or hoped it would. Now that they've made it most of the way there, cooler stuff is starting to appear in Cinema 4D, hence redoing soft and rigid dynamics, pyro, the new particles and probably something else I've forgotten. The laundry list of stuff Maxon really needs to tackle and fix is very long obviously but it now feels like they've actually started doing this, whereas a handful of years back you really just wondered. But we'll know in the coming weeks with C4D 2025 how things are looking (I guess sometime next month). A chunky release would be very encouraging, a meh release will be a bit of a downer. I don't feel like placing any bets.

That is not entirely accurate. 3ds max is the worst example you can bring for the 3d app table to discuss, and i know that for a fact, since i used to work with it and my company still uses it to render unfortunatelly. In short, 3ds max is one of the most overpriced apps in the world for studios (big or small) that cannot use indie licenses such as mine. its around 2.5 k almost per year and that is only the software. Then you must start filling it with other plugins to make it usefull, starting with its most popular renderer vray or corona wich is paid separately. Almost no one uses arnold in 3ds max wich is the actuall inbuilt renderer (although its a good one). But it doesnt end here. In studios like mine we also pay for Forest tools (plugin), Tyflow (plugin) and a bunch of other plugins to solve basic stuff like take system and such. In the end the money you spend in 3ds max is a small fortune and c4d is still better for charater animation, motion, and a lot of other stuff. I believe 3ds max is still popular because of its legacy, a large user base and the connection with the arch viz business. But i agree with you when it comes to Maxon policies of making us pay for stuff we dont use. I really dont need nothing else but the c4d app. Heck, i eaven dont need RS altought i like to use it. So the best they can do is to give users the power of choice. In studios like mine c4d is used to as part of a pipeline along with houdini and 3ds max. I dont need an extremely expensive software with things i'll never use. cheers