Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. FLima

    FLima

    Limited Member


    • Points

      5

    • Posts

      341


  2. luchifer

    luchifer

    Limited Member


    • Points

      4

    • Posts

      389


  3. 3D-Pangel

    3D-Pangel

    Contributors Tier 2


    • Points

      4

    • Posts

      2,843


  4. gauthamcode

    gauthamcode

    Registered Member


    • Points

      3

    • Posts

      25


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/13/2021 in all areas

  1. Totally agree. These specialised apps are game changer, and enhance the workflow a lot. Highly recommended for professionals already making money doing 3D Like you mentioned, not for beginners.
    2 points
  2. I wouldn't advise to a beginner to purchase so many specialized apps without knowing the basics its just a waste of time and frankly quite a lot to learn. At the same time, I wouldn't advise any professional or studio in the field not to purchase so many specialized apps, even if he is working with Houdini, just because specialized = less time = more profit
    2 points
  3. Finally, light linking for Cycles users. Combined with the rather awesome light groups implementation in E-Cycles, and the faster renderer, well... What's not to like? (Except for that it's not free πŸ˜‰ A must for anyone working in Architectural/environmental rendering and Blender. It saves so much time. https://ecycles.gumroad.com/l/E-Cycles/launch https://blendermarket.com/products/e-cycles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sBHOvHTq_g And the new Animation denoising.
    2 points
  4. I dont know why.. But I dont get all this node crazyness. I dont like to work with nodes as I feel that an artistic task for me, becomes a lot more technical than I would like. But I know I am in the minority with this opinion, and I can see a lot of people doing INSANE and cool looking stuff with it. About particles, agree with Dave, Xparticles is awesome! So much control and brilliant integration with Redshift! But not having GPU, it limits the size of your simulations, and how fast you can preview the results, a sad bottleneck to a fantastic (and in my opinion) totally worth the price. Just saw the Reactions from Jawset, looks super promising! Will download the beta whenever I have time and see how it goes πŸ™‚
    2 points
  5. Hello all, maybe some of you is experiencing this one way or another But I am finding the stability of each C4D version becoming worse lately. I am now using S24, because it is the latest version before the new UI, and I am in the middle of two long projects, and dont have time to re-learn a new interface, etc.. Also, I dont want to lose my plugins that works with version 24, and not willing to pay after each interaction for a whole new set of plugins, updates, etc.. specially if they are (unfortunately) tied to companies like Greyscalegorilla, who are charging an absurd amount for a useless subscription. To add insult to injury, there is this much shorter support and bug fixes on each C4D version. After 2-3 months, Maxon basically drops the support on a specific version, to push you to a new one, forcing you to pay for plugin updates, more subscriptions, rinse and repeat. My question is, how is everyone handling this? Which version of C4D is working better for you? Is this happening with other 3D softwares too? I know Blender has a LTS version, which is the perfect and considerate mindset for its users, specially productions that relies on a specific version for a long time, and needs to make sure their plugins are working nicely. But how it is with Maya and Houdini? I am kinda exhausted cycling between 23 and 24 all the time, because they all share weird and different bugs that will never be fixed, bugs that depending on a project, I can work around... (i.e 23 has a better integration with Zbrush and stability with Nvidia Studio driver, but has a timeline copy paste bug that makes it impossible to work with characters... / R24 has the timeline bug fixed, but always crashes with Zbrush GoZ, horrible performance and constant crashes with the latest nvidia drivers.. having to always downgrade drivers)
    1 point
  6. Yes, actually I did. Last week I spend quite some hours going through different tutorials about Unreal, and how to export from C4D, and such. And having access to Quixel assets, available for free, is quite a plus. But in the end, without having a GPU at hand I am not sure I would benefit from using Unreal. Using the native Physical Render is currently my only option. Thanks for the scene file, Bezo.
    1 point
  7. That's weird πŸ€”, I didn't know they did that. Maybe I overflowed them with suggestions last time. πŸ˜† Could be for the same reason they put this on their support page... Let's hope that all this has only to do with the pandemic and will soon revert to a previous state. πŸ––
    1 point
  8. Older than that - 3900X - 12 core CBR
    1 point
  9. Yea, you're right. That was a typo. Meant to point out the list of 3rd party "apps" required to fill in the void left out by C4D. Dependency of an external tool can be negated if there is a native solution. But my point remains, to get into the ecosystem is expensive whether you're oblivious about the price or not, especially when Blender is free and can do without relying too much on external tools. Pricing aside my point with the drawbacks of the app remain. Not saying that C4D has to be perfect. But acknowledge the fact that there are drawbacks, don't dodge it by saying every other tool has problems so it is okay to live with these problems. A good digital product has a feedback loop. It's essential to listen to the audience and come up with solutions for what the audience are asking for. My comment was on Maxon shutting of feedback and feature requests. So now they cant gauge what the users want. I disagree. There is a standard and an expectation when investing into a DCC or infact any program. Whether it be video editing software or a drawing tool. You expect certain design patterns and features that are industry standard. My take was specifically for sims - C4D being popularly known in the industry as a leader in mograph lacks in this department which is a pity. I love C4D. This ain't DCC wars or anything. Use whatever tools you like, however you like them. Just pointing out what the users have been asking for ages.
    1 point
  10. Apart from Xparticles, ' Marvelous Designer, Substance Painter, Zbrush and Rizom UV are also being used by non C4D users like Maya, Blender, 3DsMAX, Houdini, Lightwave 3D, Daz Studio, iClone, Unity, UE etc. There is no "one DCC to rule them all". And all those names do not belong to plugins. They are stand-alone independent applications that some of them have developed bridges with C4D (and other DCCs) for faster exchange of data. Maya 1998, Blender 1994 , 3DsMAX 1996, Houdini 1996, Lightwave 3D 1990, Daz Studio 2005, UE 1998. Most of them are more than 20 years old. Users of those applications also complain about those products. They complain about the UI/UX of blender, for the crappy 3DsMAX workflow, for Lightwave 3D being dead, for Daz Studio having an exploiting online market, Houdini having a steep learning curve etc... And they should. Why shout out what they are planning ? So others can steal their ideas and try to develop them faster ? What a company is up to is no-ones else's business. This is an oxymoron. What are the bare minimum set of features if the creative idea has high standards ? The bare minimum set of features exist since version 1. Art, like Science, was always limited by the availability of tools. And being either 2021 or 1989 or 2051 does not justify any personal expectations. You can have the latest ArtRage version and still not be able to paint a Bob Ross painting. That man had the bare minimum set of features to create captivating landscapes in a 20' episode. You could have Gaia, WorldMachine, Vue, SpeedTree and Forester and still not achieve what you have in mind. There were a ton of things I thought were impossible with C4D but saw people overcome problems using their ingenuity. In 2021 we don't have artists with the same sense the world had in 1800's. Now the artist is also a technician. He has to have a deeper knowledge of the tools he uses in order to use them in their full potential. Hacking a tool to use it in an unusual way is also part of the artist's creative spirit. Correct.
    1 point
  11. From your profile I see the new system is an AMD Ryzen 9. Is it a 5900X or 5950X ? I am mainly working on an old laptop, which only has a Cinebench R20 score of 582, too slow, and not enough memory to play nice with rendering. My fastest machine (an Intel NUC 8i5 i5-8259U 32GB, CB-R20 score 1682) renders in just shy of 17 minutes. Looks similar to your newest result, but your original image had more warmth. I am also assuming the render settings are not optimized for animation, right? Anyway, thanks for sharing the scene file.
    1 point
  12. Honestly, I think the problem is Maxon's decision to push out updates every 6 months. That decision of course was made to entice people into subscriptions: "look you get new toys more frequently". But really what it creates is twice as many software tracks to maintain over time. To curtail all that effort, Maxon made another decision to stop support on previous releases after 3 months as they did not have the resources to maintain all those tracks. This worked for them as it allowed the sales pitch towards subscriptions "The best way to stay current with bug fixes and new features is with a subscription". Now, all that would have some appeal provided that Maxon was still holding on to their major claim to fame in the market with each release: stability. Honestly, that is (or was) the big draw to C4D: it was robust. Users put up with the amount of time it took to get new features because with that time came the implicit promise that what was released was 100% rock solid. But look what has happened since R21. Reports of software instability (be they real, inflicted by the user, their GPU drivers, or plugins) have increased. Well, regardless of the cause, it is a fact that good software comes from good testing. Regardless of the development time, beta testers now have less time to test each new release. Plus with all the acquisitions, the testing is not just limited to C4D but to Redshift, Forger, Red Giant integration as well. Less time for testing is not a recipe to improve quality. So I submit that these complaints are a function of Maxon's new business model. Unfortunately, what we have seen over the last few months are two key elements of C4D's reputation in the marketplace come under fire: Stability and ease of use as people grapple with the new interface. Now, C4D acolytes will cling to the belief that all is well and we are all knuckle dragging luddites for complaining. But there is one glaring issue that totally supports just how C4D's controls on quality and UI are under pressure: Missing Icons in R25 What does a missing icon tell you about quality control? Missing icons definitely do not help ease of use so why have those icons not been immediately replaced after 3 months? Does anyone care at Maxon? If you were a customer who just paid over $3000 for a new TV and the remote control had numbers and icons missing, then would you feel comfortable about the quality of your purchase or would you think "Hell, if they missed that, what else is missing with the actual TV?" . There would be immediate buyer's remorse as trust in the product has been lost. It is missing the little things that damage a product's quality reputation. Maxon spent decades building up that reputation and their new business model has set up a system whereby quality can no longer be the top priority that it was in the past. If you disagree with that statement, then please produce some icons. Dave
    1 point
  13. Not sure if your request has been met via a private PM or not, but I think what would help is if you posted two screen shots: one of the existing C4D model (showing the mesh in C4D) and the other of the actual survey data (again showing the mesh) as well as the data format for that survey data (STL, FBX, etc.). At face value, it is hard to judge the size and scope of the task your are requesting without that information. Just a thought. Dave
    1 point
  14. Is anyone going to bother using a game engine to do dynamics in C4D? Equally - are many people going to be doing their dynamics in Houdini, then bring them from there over to C4D? If they're making things bounce and blow up in Houdini, wouldn't they just stay in Houdini? Maxon doesn't make Unity or Houdini so I would have figured they'd be looking at a way of improving the dynamics in C4D rather than pointing across the road and telling users to go to another application. Sure, I can see some people saying since Unity and Houdini are so great, why bother using C4D for it or hoping for an improved solution? But doesn't this defeat the purpose of developing anything at all for C4D? I'm not sure why the existence of game engines and Houdini means that C4D shouldn't bother improving what they have.
    1 point
  15. Yeah I may have gone to far on the dust layer. It’s interesting how different it reacts from different angles. Finding that right amount do it’s not too new or to dirty so it feels out of place. Like I liked how it looked in the first still but from this angle it’s a bit much. Plus I need to go shoot a proper HDRI on location on a similar day to get better overall lighting. thanks!
    1 point
  16. 1 point
  17. Interesting post and thank you for the links. Correct me if I am wrong, but would it be unfair to draw the conclusion that you are saying that because Maxon cannot compete on key features, then they should not even pursue a solution? If you extended this same logic to everything else then modeling should go (how can you compete with modo), UV and 3D paint should go (how can you compete with Substance Painter) and 3D sculpting should go (how can you compete with Z-Brush). But...you are placing great promise in A.I solutions and yes that would be impressive. But wouldn't developing the base capability AND the A.I. framework be a doubly huge undertaking taking twice as long? Machine learning is not easy. It takes thousands of iterations to fine tune the algorithms. If I was a financial controller in the company, I would question that approach as its payback period (time from making the investment in the development to seeing that feature have a positive impact on revenue) seems too long. Better to shorten the development cycle by dropping the A.I. and implement a half-way decent set of tools and capabilities. They may not be best of breed but they could generate a pretty good response from users in terms of new licenses. Just a thought.
    1 point
  18. Modo is definitely one of my fav apps. It is small user base, so not much help from 3rparties. Slower development. But it really has some unique features. Even though I am using Blender from 2006 I would not switch my work from Modo to it. If they fix some well known bottlenecks in 16 series, that would be amazing.
    1 point
  19. You are spot on. These updates are now sloppy... and yes, unfortunately it is not a C4D exclusive problem.. but they could at least go back to their yearly releases and longer support of a software, instead of dropping everything and abandoning a version completely, before jumping into the next one 😞 Which version of C4D do you use right now?
    1 point
  20. Artistic take: If Xparticles were node based, but keep their modifiers as if, it would be awesome because you could see all you connections from your original emitter if you want debris, smoke, etc instead of having everything in a mess inside your xpsystem.
    1 point
  21. It really depends of the workflow, Blender has everything Modo has and more (boxcutter / decal machine), except for Meshfusion, wich is excellent for printing but creates geometry unsuitable for animation, so you need to retopologize them. Its also kinda slow to work with. If you dont have it already, I think Zbrush is a better addition than Modo, and supports more polycount than Blender, and it doesnt seem like Pixologic would EoL or Sell it like Foundry could. Plus, you can combo Zbrush with Blender, to clean up assets for game engine.
    1 point
  22. RE: Having less support, forcing us to go into this endless cycle of subscriptions and updates, just to get everything working together as intented, getting mediocre improvements in between? You are definitely right about this. Dev don't want to improve on the existing software. Just release a new one. Which is good and bad thing. That's why Blender LTS is a big deal. Even if they keep releasing new versions, they will still fix bugs on LTS versions. RE: I have no idea how it is with Houdini and plugins for example. Same thing with C4D. But the big difference is the updates and bug fixes of Houdini is much more frequent. So its a moot point. Unlike in C4D, where you have to settle for the problem for months despite being in subscription.
    1 point
  23. Try this one. Random point value of sphere point is retrieved. Use seed value in hash node to randomly change which value is chosen. Min max can be done with some "if" statement but I leave that up to you πŸ™‚ rnd_from_array.c4d
    1 point
  24. That video gives me a tremendous appreciation for the people who not only can internalize all those functions but actually thought them up in the first place! Honestly, their brains are functioning at a different level. Dave
    1 point
  25. there was a plugin for that in cinema some years ago. it worked quite well. I always didn't understand why it wouldn't make its way into the main app or other render engines. it was such a relief to be able to cut complicated geometry in half without calculating time or bad meshes. For me this would be a big feature. I mean everyone wants to boole once in a while πŸ˜‰
    1 point
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...

Copyright Core 4D Β© 2023 Powered by Invision Community