Cerbera

Not really. I mean for fire / smoke etc we have Pyrocluster, which can look passable if you really know what you're doing, but it's nothing like up to TFD standard. Likewise, we can do more with visible / volumetric lights & glows than most people give Cinema credit for, and these could quite easily create a pretty decent energy ball type thing, but the results aren't usually quite as good (or as fast to render) as you'd get with a plugin in post, so doing those sort of things in AFX is usually much preferable... Having said that, this glowing ball thing took about 30 seconds to put together and render in vanilla Cinema... CBR

Excellent diagnosing there @Rectro. I learned a lot from that post :) CBR

I'd be surprised if that did work, because it shouldn't have done ! Box Mapping is not suitable for this mesh because none of its surfaces are planar ! Here's what your object should look like if UV unwrapped as per my methods above, using your newer bump map... CBR

Ideally, we'd need the scene file to be able to answer this. Pls upload it. CBR

The Core4D is a free site dedicated to the free sharing of knowledge about Cinema 4D, plugins, tips, tricks, and techniques. We share all manner of information, demo files, animations, and just generally have a great time learning. Unacceptable posts include any considered to be: illegal, unethical, obscene, threatening, unnecessarily negative/attacking, and the like. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately via the personal message system. Remember that messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of the Core4D forum or its owners. We encourage you to tell others about the Core4D Community and link them to our site. With all good things there has to be some rules, and here are some of ours: Your REAL FIRST and REAL SURNAME are required. This is visible (only) in your profile. This is so that other Core members know who they are dealing with. If you don't agree with this then don't join. Existing Core members who haven't previously supplied their real name will be required to supply it when they update their profile. We prefer members to use the image upload system, but you can also embed links from external sites. DROPBOX or GOOGLE DRIVE links are encouraged to share c4d files if they are too big to upload directly. Keep thread titles informative and relevant. Avoid titles such as "Urgent" and "HELP ME" as these don't help other users search the site afterwards. Max image size for the gallery is 1280 x 720. For the forum, please try to keep images no more than 1280 x 1024 if at all possible and ideally less than 1 MB. Please compress images (jpg, gif or png) and don't upload TIFs etc. Please zip up c4d scene files, but only if they are over 1 MB. Scene files, resources uploaded to the downloads / Market sections must be your own work and not copied from somewhere else. By uploading you're putting your material in the public domain. If you don't want your resources being used for commercial use, then you need to include that in the terms and conditions. Unsolicited advertising in our forums is not permitted. Please contact Admin if you want your product or site promoted here. We do not allow members to advertise software for sale apart from Cinema 4D. e.g. if you're selling Modo or ZBrush then you will need to advertise them somewhere else.

Mesh UV Mode will be Octane's equivalent of UV mapping, which will only work if you have UV unwrapped your object properly... Doing that is an art unto itself, but it is what you need to do to get this mapping properly... There are many ways to unwrap this sort of shape. Here is how I'd unwrap it - essentially I chose to seam it straight down the middle, and do mainly a frontal projection, which will give you least distortion when viewed from the front where your camera is likely to be... In the lower pic you can see the UV map result, firstly just the UVs on the base mesh, and then with your bump texture on the subdivided mesh... there is some distortion using this method (as there always will be to some extent when mapping a 3D object into 2D), but it is mainly limited to the inner surfaces where it will be obscured by the face. Crucially, it is even pretty much everywhere else. CBR

Although metaballs are useful for quickly putting together a rough shape, I wouldn't use them at all in any model I needed to UV map. Here I started with a simple 8 segment sphere instead, which I deleted the top point of, and just extruded the top around the general shape of the hair I was trying to make, using as few polys as possible. As you can see, this gives us a subdivided result that is not only a good deal simpler and better to UV map than any metaball result, but also a mesh that is all regular quads and eminently more suitable for later revisions / easy editing... CBR

That's actually quite a hard thing to correctly UV map, and that is what you will need to do, because none of the standard mapping projections are really suitable for this sort of organic shape.... Like Igor says, we'd need the file to be able to advise further, but if you have made this with a metaball, then the topology you will have for this will not be helpful for UV mapping, so you should consider retopologising it really very low poly before you even start the materials... CBR

We should also mention that if you are in the upgrade loop for R21, field forces might be incredibly useful here if you can wait the few weeks until it is released... they work with dynamics and particles... Personally I have some doubts about whether dynamics can reasonably handle quite that many objects, but it's certainly worth a go, especially if you can capitalize on restricting yourself to a top-down view, which means you could use frontal / camera texture projection to project high quality log textures onto incredibly low poly geometry (perhaps as simple as boxes) to minimize the calculation times as much as possible... CBR

Please take care to post in the correct section, which is not 'The Lounge'... I've moved it to Miscellaneous Questions for you, which is where things go when you are not sure which category they belong in. Also, 'R&D' is not a helpful post title, which should contain keywords pertinent to the problem. Please read the thread on How to Post for more info. Lastly, you are referring to functionality (Cloner / Mograph / Dynamics) that your stated version (Prime) of the software doesn't have, which confuses the people trying to help you, so please make sure that the version listed in your profile is the version you are actually using ! CBR

I would jump in at this point to remind you that character builds require edge loops in very specific places (principally the joints), and that the amount of radial segments in your tubes is way too high and your polys are rather uneven at the moment... Also not a good idea to start the arm with 2 capsule objects, and not with a 90 degree angle between elbow joint and fore-arm. I suggest you watch some videos on character design for animation so you at least know how these things should go together, and what is important... One of the best examples of these tutorials is right here on the cafe... This is a huge video series, as befits a task of this magnitude, so although the episode you need for the arm is probably this one... ...you should watch the entire series anyway so that you understand where the arm fits into the character model as a whole... CBR

Press 'R' to exit Region Mode ? CBR

That is correct. The hair object doesn't require an object at all, other than to define where it initially puts its guides. Indeed it can even be added to an empty scene, though no guides will appear if you do that. But aside from that initial guide placement, there is no hierarchical link at all between the Hair object and its source in the Object Manager (other than the Link field in the Hair Object). CBR

That is normal. It is only possible to scale instances in Object Mode or via the Coordinates Manager. That shouldn't change after a restart but maybe the Mode did. CBR

Indeed, no. We have to make a base mesh that has polys where we need them... We do have decent retopology tools available, but you'd need the HB modelling bundle for that, but even then it is not automatic. CBR

Why, of all places, would you put this in the Forum Rules Category, @neil hetherington ? Please take care to post in the correct section. I will move this one now to Xpresso where it belongs. CBR

Someone should model that, shouldn't they @VECTOR ? ;) CBR

Yep, not very elegant is it, but I am not immediately seeing any other way... I thought of using 2 equally sized and powered wind forces either side of it, which might give a different 'quality' of Y constraint, but don't think we can do it with clamps... Cheers for updating profile... CBR

Please update your profile to the version you are actually using... You can use 2 (hidden from camera) box colliders or even Floor Objects on its Y+ and Y- to crudely but effectively hem in its movement ? CBR

Yes we will :) Look out for those options appearing in our lists just before release date... ( @Bolos Now the cats have a golden snitch to play with) CBR

Perhaps Mixamo cannot read phong tags, in which case you need to model this with more care. I'd go around the model making sure you have even quads everywhere with no points sticking out. For example at the groin area where the patching is most obvious that is caused by a single point that is not in alignment with its neighbours. But your problems won't go away until you fix all the modelling errors in the mesh, of which there are quite a few... CBR

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

I am not seeing them on your model in my version...

I mean selecting all polys and using the Iron tool to relax it all a bit... CBR

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