Cerbera

Sure. Start with outlining the 3 smaller discs using 8 sided disc objects with an inner radius, so you get 3 rings. Get another one of those that will be the perimeter of the outer ring, and will need correspondingly more segments ( I went with 20). Then it's just a case of CO&D'ing those, then patching things together, and popping it under SDS.
 

 
If you're worried about SDS wrenching, need better evenness and border integrity, you can add another loop like so...
 

 
CBR

It is to do with maths but only tangentially 🙂 Its more to do with how close the camera is to the object, what is focal length is, and what the scene scale is. Proper DoF works at real world scale with realistic camera values, so if your scene scale is too big, then you will need an f-stop of something like 0.01-0.1 (much smaller than you could set in the real world) to get it to show if your camera is not parked inches away from the focus target. Changing scene units down like you read usually reduces things to within more real-world values, which is why the effect of this is much the same.
 
CBR

Yes it's context sensitive, which is usually what we want. But I think you mean Object info, and thats in the Object Manager under Object / Info at the top...you can get object stats or scene stats there.
 
CBR

Nope, what you are seeing there is the default HDRI, which is visible if no other HDRI exists in the scene, or it is not specifically overridden.
So you need to load another map into this Environment Override slot, just above the screen reflections settings in View Settings.
 

 
If you want that to have no effect, that image should be black.
 
CBR

This should help...
 
 
CBR

Yes, you can use Mesh Checker and its edge points functions, which can automatically detect them and select them for you. Delete will then remove them.
 
CBR

These are almost exclusively caused by convex quads, where the internal angles of any adjacent edges >180 degrees, producing an error-state polygon.
 
 
Yes, they are eminently fixable by changing the circumstances that cause them. In the case of yours above the problem points are the ones in the middle of each polygons where it touches the circle(s). If you slide those edges slightly into the circle, that will correct things and turn them into legal kite quads.
 
It does not mean that, and is unconnected with Normals.
 
 
Yes they will. They will usually be black in render also.
 
 
Sometimes, but don't try and select them, just move or slide the problem point(s) so you fix the error state and they will return to normal shading and VP appearance.
 
Very important to know your error-states in modelling - there are many of them ! Non-manifold edges, convex quads, coincident polys, isolated vertices, edge points, complex poles, degenerated polys, 'bad' polygons, coplanar polys, the list goes on !!!
 
CBR

OK, turn off SDS cage in filter settings ?
 
CBR

2 materials, glass being the base one, and then the chrome masked over the top using the alpha channel I would think. Substance will probably be helpful in eradicating seams / unwrapping that.
 
CBR

So, for example the mesh on the left below, which we can imagine has become that topologically sound but messy-as-hell arrangement of edges through much poly pushing and alteration over the course of the project; with smooth edges we can equalise and unify that to produce a mesh like on the right.
 

 
In conjunction with the Straighten Edges tool, it's a pretty powerful combo for neatening, evening and embettering topology layout.
Without that, the only way to repair this would be by sliding every point, or laboriously zero scaling sets of edges. So if I had to sum it up in a single sentence it would be 'time-saving topology neatener' !
 
CBR 

You are missing half the equation ! 🙂
 
This works in conjunction with 'ToDo' Tags which you can add to any object, using the r-click / tags / other menu.
 

 
All tags you add appear in the master To Do Tab in the Project settings, at which point you can just edit them directly and mark them done or not.
 
CBR

Btw, in case you didn't find the answer in the thread I referred you to, the way to get us scene files which are too big to directly upload is to pop them up to dropbox or whatever, and then link them here. But the pics may be enough in this case.
 
And yes, I think we can see the problem...
 
That topology there really could not be more unsuitable for rigging. You can't just rig any mesh, and expect it to deform correctly unless it has an edge flow that supports the ways in which the rig will make it deform. Your current model does not have an edge flow, so the way it deforms will be arbitrary, and almost certainly not correct. It also looks like you applied SDS or something else that made it go massively high res, which is also the opposite of what we need for a rig. You need a low poly base mesh and live subdivision surfaces.
 
The bad news, is that to make this work properly, you are most likely going to have model this again, having watched a few tutorials on SDS modelling, low poly character design, human form flow etc etc - unfortunately learning this sort of stuff tends to take months rather than hours !
 
But that is what is going wrong, and I'm afraid there is no magical button that can just fix it... More modelling XP required !!! 🙂
As a starting point, look at the mannequin primitive model that Cinema ships with. That is the sort of polygon density we need.
 
CBR
 

CAD programs do not consider topology any of their business on the whole, so the options they provide at export are not as comprehensive as we might like, and certainly can't do the slightest useful thing with edge flow - there simply won't be any !
 
ZRM is the closest we have ever got to being able to turn these CAD monstrosities into quad meshes and something approaching appropriate flow automatically. And as you say, although much of an improvement on the Instant Meshes solution, it is still a real struggle to tell it which edges are hard edges, because you have to select them on the original model, which is a deeply unrewarding process on this sort of dogshit topology, where there's 200 parts and only about 2 of the selection tools will work. 
 
So in 2022, the ONLY way to get this perfect topo is to build a new mesh on top of the step, ideally using the HB modelling bundle Retopo setup.
But as mentioned sometimes the STEP surfacing is good enough to render fine without alteration, as long as you don't need to alter the model in terms of point count or order, or to use displacement, which will just fail.
 
CBR

Not doing Shift + T to call the tool ?
 
CBR

Ah yes, the grid and flashing rim thing works nicely too...
 

 
I think the next move would be to split off the walls into a separate object and then give both those and the glass / solid panels independent thickness so that they react properly to light. That doesn't have to be done on an individual panel-by-panel basis if we remember to make sure the gridwork intersects both sides of the glass, meaning light can't bounce from panel to panel out the sides, if you see what I mean. Intersection here will be very clean, and unproblematic at these sorts of scales, unless you are planning to crawl a camera inches over the surface of them.
 
CBR

Yes there is, and it is called exactly that !  fill selection ( U,F select menu) !! Requires 2  closed loops of edges on a ring like that.
No need to disconnect anything.
 
CBR

You're going along the right lines with a blend cloner, but I would blend between 2 sweep objects, the second of which has its sweep rotation adjusted an arbitrary amount of degrees more than the first, thusly, until we get the transition / rotation we want across the desired amount of clones.
 

 
CBR
rotating steps CBR.c4d

Yes, it's because the end caps don't work with the cylindrical projection that is the default UV mapping type for a sweep object. I doubt any of the standard projections will work for this, so you're gonna have to make it editable, and adjust the UVs for those end caps manually. 
 
An alternative to that would be to disable caps in the sweep, and use the scaling spline in the details of that to taper the ends off to nothing - that way the existing mapping will work everywhere.
 
CBR

Please update your profile to correct version.
 
You need a rail spline, which is a copy of the path spline, but moved slightly to one side of it on X, then you need tick 'use rail direction' in the sweep, like so...
 

 
CBR

Regular dynamics are now under their own Bullet sub-menu further up.
 
CBR

Welcome to the Core 🙂
 
Please complete your profile before asking questions so that we know which version of the software you are using, which is crucial to providing correct answers !
 
However, providing you have it, the answer is in the question ! You can use the offset function in MoSpline to travel the existing spline you have - just pop the moSpline into Spline Mode and then reference your original by dragging it into the spline link field. Now you can use any of MoSpline's controls to address that first spline.
 
CBR

Still the same I'm afraid...
 
CBR

You're in UV mode. Try turning that off.
 

 
Axis mode is the button to the left of it (see manual) but that should be off too.
 
CBR

Those are separate splines right ? If so they should work in loft if you disable the caps, like so.
 

 
CBR
 
 

Couple of things wrong with that.
 
1. Your collision deformer does not have any collider objects listed under its Colliders tab. I haven't got time to watch an hours tutorial but I presume the emitter should go in there...
2. Your Floor (and any other objects you don't want to fall) should have a dynamics tag, as it does, but you need to turn dynamics off in the tags, so they are merely a collider, and don't fall with gravity.
 
CBR