Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. Cerbera

    Cerbera

    Community Staff


    • Points

      11

    • Posts

      17,792


  2. VECTOR

    VECTOR

    Registered Member


    • Points

      4

    • Posts

      2,984


  3. bezo

    bezo

    Registered Member


    • Points

      3

    • Posts

      4,975


  4. 3D-Pangel

    3D-Pangel

    Contributors Tier 2


    • Points

      2

    • Posts

      2,843


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/02/2021 in all areas

  1. If you´re using booleans, always try to make "cuts" on single polygon if posible. Sometimes cutting source polygons to restrict boole solve many issues with booleans...
    2 points
  2. All, We should be thankful that Adrien pointed out the issue. Regardless of your position or circumstances regarding financial support, his points are valid in that having ads get in the way of the Cafe experience is NOT good for the Cafe in any way. Let's not misinterpret bringing up a valid complaint against site performance with a negative opinion on how the Cafe funds its activities. Thankfully, our valiant owner is on the case and working to a solution. BTW: Regardless of the new name, this place will ALWAYS be "The Cafe" in my mind. Regardless of whether or not the site embraces other software programs (which would be great), it will always be "The C4D Cafe" to me. In fact, I feel compelled to shout that out that fact right now: Core4D really is THE CINEMA 4D CAFE There, that should annoy a few people....and they know who they are. Dave
    2 points
  3. Building independently from market leaders DJI and their own 3D photo-scanning solutions, the Skydio 2, which has its main focus on fully automated flight, can analyse the data it gets, in real time, and then tells itself exactly where to fly to capture data it is still missing ! That's a big leap forward, and possibly only something as sophisticated as Skydio's immaculate collision avoidance can permit this level of control, precision and thoroughness.... It's not cheap, but hell is it good ! CBR
    1 point
  4. Thank you so much CERBERA. I really appreciate it. I was very helpful. Soryy I should have search the old posts first. I will try to create from the simple cube. Thank you again AKETO
    1 point
  5. No, boxcutter is exclusive to Blender, and is better boolean functionality than almost anything else. We don't have an equivalent in Cinema, but we do have the volume builder, which whilst working totlaly differently, can produce comparative results... Of course there is no substitute for actual poly modelling skills, which don't rely on any cheats, splines, generators or helpers, and can model any object you have the time and patience to make, but these skills take years to develop, and I wouldn't call them quick or easy - however they remain the best, which is why it's worth making the effort to learn. If you can only model using splines and generators then you're gonna find the limitations of that fairly quickly. CBR
    1 point
  6. 1 point
  7. simply weld 2 pairs of points and enable boole again... how to do it...
    1 point
  8. I didn't stack them - you did. That is to say you made one boole editable, with all the disgraceful ngon and triangle geometry that would generate, and then compounded it by using that as the source object in another boole, hence the 'stacking'. So geometry error on top of geometry error does not for successful models make ! However, just by loading your file in R23 the boole there happens to deal with it OK. That's why I said if none of the options change anything for you, then you have to find another way, change the underlying geo in some way until it does work, (or update to R23), because you'll have done everything you could to make it work in that version. CBR
    1 point
  9. Nope, there is nothing better you could be doing with the boole options to make it work better. In R23 it does work, but I suspect we have a slightly improved boolean object than the one back in version 20, so perhaps that is understandable. But if it doesn't work in your version, it'll be because you are stacking boole on top of (editable) boole, and the edge flow / point distribution on your source splines is very much sub-optimal. Try changing any / all of the options in the boole and in spline interpolation. If that doesn't work, and you can't use the Volume Builder instead (which produces much nicer transitions with boolean operations anyway) then you'll have to model it properly via the poly pen and regular modelling tool set. CBR
    1 point
  10. Yes, that'll be fully expected of the intrinsically rubbish nature of boolean operations with complex curvature ! 🙂 Some of the time that sort of thing will work as a kind of lazy cheat, but in some situations it won't, and this might be one of them, although I just can't tell for sure without you uploading the scene file. This sort of thing is far better handled with actual modelling, ie polys, rather than splines in generators, although they can serve as starting points. CBR
    1 point
  11. Yes. Octane will get confused if that is wrong, because nothing in the real world (which it is imitating the physical properties of) is ever a single layer surface. However the best way to do this, or at least the most controllable, is with Create Outline in the r-click spline points menu on the spline driving your lathe object. Also important to mesh integrity with lathes is that the centremost points are EXACTLY on the centreline, and are not bridged between them. CBR
    1 point
  12. So, in this case we want to start with a 1 x 1 x 1 cube, aligned to the most obviously near-planar bit on the loop, which is at the bottom. We should immediately make that editable, and working within the front orthographic and perspective viewports at the same time, you should ctrl-drag out both ends of the cube and start to rotate those polys so that it aligns in both views. Here you can see my central cube, which starts mostly planar, and the 2 sections I have extruded from either end, which now begin to match the rotation shown in the reference. You don't have to be too exact as you do this because there will be a lot of tweaking later, but try and match the twist angles as accurately as you can. And then it's just a question of continuing that around the loop until the ends are proximal, at which point you delete the 2 end polys, and stitch the 2 ends together. Also, note Xray mode (basic tab) is very helpful in this mission... CBR
    1 point
  13. Ah yes, there it is... CBR
    1 point
  14. Ah the old moebius loop modelling thing again 🙂 People do try and use spline wrap and twisted sweeps for this, which can work, but really the best and most infinitely controllable results come from just modelling it by hand as low poly as you can possibly get away with (which is surprisingly low) and then using control loops and SDS to get your nice sharp corners... Did you search the site before posting ? I'll try and the find you the post where I last answered this where I demoed the method. CBR
    1 point
  15. 1 point
  16. No, I am not even sure that can be done 100% procedurally at the moment ! Mainly because I can't think of what sort of formula would allow loopback of the thread like happens in your reference... that was the bit I was hoping you'd have figured out already ! 🙂 When I tackled the wickerwork for an air balloon basket a few years back I used simple sinusoidal formula splines to get my initial shapes for the weaving threads, but then made them all editable and manually joined the various sections which diverted from the formula I had. I didn't need that to be parametric, and remember being quite grateful for that at the time ! In other sections I actually modelled the wicker work in a sectional pattern I needed, and then multiple-cloned it into the complete surface - again not parametric at all at the base level. This might be a good question to throw Chris Schmidt's way at the next Rocket Lasso live stream. His brain is very much optimised for this sort of thing... CBR
    1 point
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright Core 4D © 2023 Powered by Invision Community