Leaderboard

Kent´s plugin know it... https://www.plugins4d.com/DrawObjects

Would be nice if all functions in every 3D software worked the same, huh? Adjusting and learning new methods is Just the nature of using different software. Chalk it up as growing pains! 😉 Check the preferences to be able to set object creation location. Use 'at view center' for what you want. Check the Navigation and other prefs. This helped me a lot when coming from Max to at least have a few things set to what I am used to. Parametric boxes have the Fillet option for rounded corners. Or you can put a Bevel deformer as child of parametric box. While you cannot scale a parametric object along 1 or 2 axes, what you can do is put it in a Null object; then you can change the axis of the Null to be at the bottom of the box, or anywhere you want. If you change the box dimensions parametrically, you will need to adjust the Null axis - (press L to enable axis modification...remember to press L again when done! trust me..you will mess up at first, lol ;) and re-snap to the edge/face etc. Which brings us to snap (magnet looking icon on left panel) where you can set what to snap to (vertex, poly, edge, middle, etc). Use it to snap the Null axis to the edge/side of the box, then turn off axis modification and move/snap to another box. My best advice is not to feel like the tools and methods are bad, just simply different. I know it can be confusing for a while, but stay calm and do your research and you will eventually acquire the knowledge and skill to be productive with C4D.

Good afternoon as well. I stopped selling my plugins a while ago. You might find some more info in following topic. https://www.core4d.com/ipb/forums/topic/112141-polydup-and-a-50-off-sale I have been looking into providing some of my plugins as downloadables here (see EasyUV as a first step into that direction). But due to lack of interest - and feedback - I am not sure I still want to put time and effort into this.

Maxon is following the rules and laws of economics principles. In this world, «gratitude» is a foreign word. Financially, a company lives in the present and in the future, the past has no relevance. Faithful customers may be of interest, as long as they stay faithful and generate revenue. It is obvious that the subscription model is what counts now. All over the place. For me it is a tragedy. For several reasons. I am a C++ programmer and have developed several C4D Extensions (plug-ins) which enhances C4D a lot for me. Besides of that, I am a «hobbyist» and use C4D for nonprofit projects only. My profession is programming. The subscription model means that I cannot retire, and use what I already have paid for. It is money out of the window. I jumped the Adobe ship, when they started this, and am stuck with the Adobe Creative Suite CS 6. Almost ten years old now. Additional problems arise in the software world. I have purchased several versions of the Mocha Planar Tracker. Paid versions who I own. Now, Boris has acquired Mocha, and put it on the subscription wagon. This means that the license mechanism is broken, and that I cannot move my Mocha software to a new machine, when I upgrade my hardware. This is horrible, to put it mildly. One may wonder when this happens to my C4D versions, I have them all, C4D Studio full paid from R13 and on.. There are several reasons for this change to the subscription model. One of them, not often mentioned, is that software nowadays eventually has become mature. I can use a ten years old version of Photoshop, it works like magic, and has so many nice features that I will hardly explore and take advantage of more than a fraction of them. The same applies to C4D, and not the least to the aforementioned Mocha Planar Tracker. So the customers may want to skip a version or two. Or five. Which means revenue losses for the software houses. The only way for hem to keep money coming in, then, is to turn their customers into hostages. Also called subscribers. -Ingvar

You can just use the Transfer tool. That normally also transfers the scale and rotation, but you can switch that off and set it as default to only transfer position.

If you split it like that then i have to say that neither group has it right. Xpresso and Scene Nodes are two different tools with different purposes, one can't replace the other. Xpresso is easier to use (UI/UX issues aside) since its scope is smaller and it avoids most of the complexity involved since that part is left to the object manager and the (old) scene graph it creates. Scene Nodes are way more complex than Xpresso because they replace what the Object Manager does, they create the (new) scene graph. At this point in development the Scene Manager is just starting to try to enable users to work with the new scene graph on a level that is similar to the Object Manager. The Scene Nodes represent something the users never had direct acces to before, only serious plugin developers faced similar complexity when creating own objects. It is no surprise that not every user is comfortable with this and it is really important to understand that noone expects that every, or even a majority, of users will ever be comfortable working based on Scene Nodes. The current situation is just an artifact of the need to build up a new system from the bottom up and the decission to make this available to users early (Tech Demo). The alternative would have been for Maxon to keep this development under wraps for several more versions until the Scene Manager is in a state to replace the OM, but that would also mean that we at Maxon would not get very valuable feedback from users, something that is of high importance given the nature of these changes. So please everyone, give us feedback, but keep in mind that Scene Nodes are not the final main interface for everyday use by most users. As for the future of Xpresso, i see the need for something very much like Xpresso, but based on Scene Nodes, once the Scene Manager reaches a certain degree of maturity. We might as well call it XPresso 2.0, but it would have to be something completely new that mainly has the purpose in common with old Xpresso. A lot depends on the experience we gain from current development and the feedback we get on it.

Thanks Srek for the explanation, But I think the discussion is about something different. It looks like there are two groups that just are not able to really understand each other, as most of the arguments where exchanged multible times in this thread. - One Group tries to enplane, what scene nodes are, and that they are superior to xpresso and therefor xpresso will get obsolete. - and the other group states that it likes xpresso for ist easy usability and because it is a tool that makes skripting accessible to non coders. And that a more powerfull tool might be of absolutely no use for them if is to complex for them to learn. What I read out of the discussion is, that every one now has accepted, that scene nodes is technically something different then xpresso, that it is much more powerfull and that it can reproduce everything that xpresso can do. But what I don't really can read from this discussion is a real concept to make these complex scene nodes as accessible as xpresso or even better accessible. I read That it all is just a UI thing (It will not be as easy as that) or that node groups can be produced as new asset (which is really cool, but doesn't help when you have to find it between ten thousand other nodes, that form every function of a already quite complex program). I from my standpoint I think that it is highly advisable for the technical side to try to understand the fears of some of the users here and use this understanding to form something better but at least as easy to use as xpresso. I assume that there are already some thoughts about that, but I think, that the most powerfull tool is of no use if you can not utilize it and as sceene nodes is as complicated as the whole of C4D, as we know it, Maxon needs to put as much brain into the usability as they did with the whole UI that we have right now. Otherwise it is not much more then a API. best regards, Jops

Hey everyone, I'm Haruko and I'm a longtime, largely self taught Cinema 4D user. I started doing 3D when I was around 13, before there were things like School of Motion or Motion Design School. I learned from Deviantart, Shadowness and random books from back in the 90's before everything was digital and Youtube was a thing. Anyone else remember this or am I just aging myself? Anyways, I'm a Creative Director that works in branding, packaging, photography and 3D product visualization. My longest, most contentious love affair has been with Cinema 4D. I used it obsessively until I was around 21 and then stopped for basically 9 years after feeling like I wasn't a great fit to work in the CG industry. I got back into it in 2020 when I ended up having a ton of free time cooped up in my apartment during quarantine. I'm really happy to join this community and hope I can help some people out! I use Cinema 4D R23 and Redshift. Here's some things I've made:

Made some sketches for a client and gave them three options. Unfortunately, they didn't choose this guy. I really liked it, so thought 'why not just make it for my portfolio?' At the moment, it's still in a T-pose, but as I'm pretty crappy with textures, I was wondering if you guys had some tips, especially for the clothes (shirt and safety vest) The helmet maybe could use some scratches and dirt, but I always seem to get stuck when it comes to shirts, jackets and pants. Does it need stitching, folds or creases? Dirt? Do you always have to unwrap this stuff to get the textures right?

One thing you might find helpful is the plugin for connect splines. One can add a point on one spline that is close to the other, delete the points beyond this and then connect the splines. http://www.welter-4d.de/fplugs/freeplugins_en.html#copypastepolys