Jump to content

Cerbera

Community Staff
  • Posts

    17,792
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    696

Everything posted by Cerbera

  1. But I have found an additional problem on the back side. Holes in the mesh caused by extra edges up the front that have nowhere to go when they reach the back of the shoulders. CBR
  2. I am not seeing them on your model in my version...
  3. I mean selecting all polys and using the Iron tool to relax it all a bit... CBR
  4. Moved to correct section (SDS-Poly modelling). OK, now we can see that this is a phong tag problem - because of the harsh angles in your mesh, there are some angles greater than the 80 degrees you have set in the Phong Tag, so without SDS it will display a sharp line wherever that is the case. You can fix this either by turning up that angle until the sharp lines go away, or you can fix your model so it is less square and angular (probably preferable) by ironing the mesh in Poly mode. Also you have an unnecessary double edge loop near the center of your model caused by your symmetry not being setup correctly. The edge loop at the Centreline should have an X scale of 0 and be at position X=0, both of which you can sort out in the Coordinates manager... CBR
  5. At the very minimum for any modelling questions we need to see the lines, but in this case we do need the whole model as well. CBR
  6. I'd do it with a disc primitive initially I think, with an inner radius to use as a neck hole and a suitable slice removed at the front. Then you could use a cloth tag, (or manual modelling) to drape that over your model... Lower pic shows that under Cloth SDS, which adds thickness, and then that under Regular SDS L2. CBR
  7. I'd say so, yes. This video is the current 'goto' for that sort of thing... here it is deployed as knitting, but hopefully you can see how it also applies to what you are doing... So essentially you are using spline-wrap to wrap a series of 'hair' splines along your 'path' splines, and rendering it using the Spline Guides Mode of the Hair Object, with Hair cloning used to add randomness. CBR
  8. AFX can indeed do the motion blur, but I suspect the vibrate tag simply isn't up to providing the sort of movement you need on the wings, and certainly not the same ones you are using to randomize the overall flight motion. Flies wings do a 'beat' (a single cycle of 'up' and 'down', but actually a rather complicated circular movement), every 4 milliseconds, but if you do manage to get the rotation point in the right places, and set that sort of frequency, your viewport simply can't show it unless your frame rate is absolutely massive. Without any blur, this will just look 'wrong'. And so you just need to begin the test renders where you try something, render it out to AFX, add the blur, and see if what you get is realistic...if not, try something else, rinse and repeat until you do get something serviceable... I suggest you do all those tests at medium distance on a single, otherwise stationary fly - if you can make it look good when is at that level of stillness and focus, it'll invariably be fine when moving at further distance... CBR
  9. Yes ! Next step is to do the wing animation. If you try and do that with a simple up/down keyframed rotation, that will also look wrong, being far too slow, even with keyframes on every frame at 30 FPS, so we need to add blur somehow that will make it look like the wings are going fast enough. That could be done with Physical Render's own Motion blur, but that takes a VERY LONG TIME to render, so perhaps better to do it with a custom built 'blur object', which is a technique from the old cel animation days. I'll see if I can find a tutorial on that, but feel free to search yourself as well, I don't have much time today... CBR
  10. I'd be surprised if there is anyone here who is experienced at this particular combo of things ! VF and SnT is certainly a total mystery for me as to what happens there with outlines ! :) I think we're going to need your scene file whatever the case... pls can you upload it ? PS - I'll remove your dynamics tag from the post - as the problem here doesn't involve that there is no need to tag it as such. CBR
  11. That's correct; it is not possible to directly post in a main category, but there is a general Mograph Setup Sub-cat underneath that where you could have done. However, in this case I think the answer is principally going to involve the Sound Node in Xpresso, so I have moved it into the Xpresso category for now ! We can always move it later if that's wrong :) If you head over to Rocket Lasso on Twitch you should be able to watch the latest episode, where Chris briefly showed the sound setup for his Live-play Pinball table he made for Half Res. That involved sound on collision to some extent. He didn't go into too much detail, but it may be of some help. Best to scroll through the stream until you see the pinball table, and it'll be around there somewhere ! Otherwise I am no expert in tis so will leave it to those who are to advise you more thoroughly... CBR
  12. That is not how flies fly, so if you animate it like that, it will be as wrong as the first time you made this ! See my scene file for the answer to both your recent questions. CBR
  13. https://www.screentogif.com/ Or, if you need commentary too, this... https://obsproject.com/ CBR
  14. Had bit of time, so did what might be the next stage - duplicating the single fly setup 18 times, and rotating each successive circle path 20 degrees on B, which spreads out the flies along the path. Then I selected all the Vibrate tags, and did Num+1 to set their seed values differently. By doing these 2 things we can fake lack of collision by simply spreading them out, and make them look like they are doing their own random thing as they follow their paths... This looks a lot better in my viewport than it does in a 10 fps gif, but you get the idea hopefully.. Thinking about the way flies move a bit more, what we have now seems pretty ideal, as they can and do fly backwards on occasion in flight, and indeed as they do for roughly half their time around the sphere. Here's a scene file, which should save you some time setting that up... Flies 02.c4d Of course this won't be the only way of doing this, and isn't necessarily the most efficient, but is among the easier to instantly understand... You can either keep your first ever video, but make it private so nobody else can see (so you can look back in a year and laugh) or you can just delete it an re-upload the better version ! :)
  15. Initially I would focus on getting just 1 fly doing the right thing, then just 1 small group of them. At this sort of distance from them, I think it matters more what the movement is like than what the wings are doing, so I'd sort that first. That movement should be a mix of randomness and movement along a predetermined path, in your case the circle, but whilst always remaining upright, avoiding collisions and pointing largely in the direction of travel. And it is in solving all those problems together which is where the more challenging / interesting aspects of this project lie... I think I would start by animating a null along that circle spline (align to spline tag etc), but with tangential unticked so its rotation didn't change ( this is how I'd keep the flies upright). Inside that null I'd have my fly model(s), with (random seed) vibrate tags applied to them, and in the settings for those I would aim for some degree of randomness both in local movement (particularly Z) and in rotation on certain axes on a per-fly basis. Maybe something like this... Hopefully that should get you off to a reasonable start... CBR
  16. Well done for getting to a final result on your first project ! Everything is looking generally 'OK', except the movement of the flies, which is far enough away from the way that flies actually move as to make people immediately notice. Their wings don't move realistically, their bodies don't point in the direction of flight, they don't avoid each other, and they are moving at a weirdly uniform speed per group. Given that this is the main focus of the scene, I would suggest spending some additional effort getting this right, or at least more right to the point where it is not distractingly wrong ! Other aspects could be improved too, (more impactive colours, lighting and camera moves etc) but those are more artistic choices. CBR
  17. There is nothing I am aware of that can do this 'out of the box', but I'm sure either Xpresso or Python could be used to make such a control, just not sure it's worth the effort ! Because Display tags work on group nulls, and propagate down to their children, you should only need a couple to be able to control an entire multi-part object - the solid one on the parent group, and a single wireframe tag you just keep moving to the object of current interest... or if you need multi objects to be wireframe at once, then just make a separate null with that tag, and move stuff into and out of it as needed... CBR
  18. On a related note, I just needed to triangulate a mesh for a client I had already UV'd when it was quads. But because that tool is already migrated, it didn't break my UV map, which I was very pleased about... For now, I still think it is best practice to try and get modelling completed first whenever you can. Perhaps when all the tools can preserve UVs in all circumstances, which is surely only a matter of time, we can drop that from general workflow advice :) CBR
  19. No I'm afraid not. As soon as the point order changes, as it must when you add bevels, any existing UV mapping will break. This is why order of operation is so important in Cinema. Always finish modelling before you UV. Having said that, it is worth pointing out that as more and more modelling tools are migrated to the new core the amount of operations that do not break UVs increases. R21 has numerous improvements in this area. CBR
  20. This might be out of the scope of the Standard Emitter, but I think you should be able to use Thinking Particles to generate particles based on the selection tags that the VF object can generate. I'm not a great expert on that, but am probably safe giving you the general overview. If you haven't built a TP setup before (they can be quite complex) there are a good number of Youtube tutorials that can help, this being one... Hope that sets you off in the right direction for the general setup. More specifically I think you need the TP Surface Emitter Preset. CBR
  21. No, you've done exactly the right thing there ! Posting your answer might well help someone else later down the line... I think there might be another way too, involving MoSpline, in Spline mode, which might allow you to use your original as an input whilst outputting different (and more regular) point distribution and interpolation settings. But not my area of expertise, so I should leave the people that are to expound on that possibility... CBR
  22. Thank you for the feedback, and I do see your point... There is still a little duplication left to eradicate (plugins being in more than 1 category etc) and some of our forums are not directly about areas of Cinema (lounge etc), so it's not 65 categories in quite the way you describe. But yes, Cinema is a vast application, and even generalising where we could it is hard to find categories that we could omit without leaving gaps, and questions with nowhere sensible to go. When we add in all the Render engines, the plugins, the auxiliary apps that people rely on and want to talk about, all the coding and extension stuff, then we are up to 65 cats & sub-cats in no time at all ! Yes, some are empty at the moment, but I don't think that will remain the case in the longer term, and we would hope that the subcategory structure of those makes it a good deal easier than ever before to find posts in your current area of interest. CBR
  23. That is intersection caused by having too many spline points too close together. Also you have quite a lot of segments flowing down the object - you could get away with around half that density, which would also help alleviate the issue. If you can't see what to adjust to fix this pls upload your scene file... CBR
  24. That surprises me -- don't think I have ever seen an xml in my project folders ! But thanks for the correction ! CBR
  25. No, I think once you close the program, that info has gone for good... CBR
×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright Core 4D © 2023 Powered by Invision Community