HappyPolygon

Is your surface animated ? If it is, it's more intuitive to use a cloner for the placement. The "bad" thing is that in order to make precise placements you kneed to make relations. For example to place your objects precisely on certain areas of polygons you would need to create a new point on that polygon (essentially creating more polygons) and use that point as a selection input for the cloner. If the object is placed on point selections they won't follow the curvature of the surface though... to remedy that you'll have to use polygon selections. Also don't forget to place the pivot point of your objects to their base of placement, easy to do using the Geometry Axis Capsule. If your object is parametric you can use the Correction Deformer to make the polygon selections unfortunately there is a bug in 2023 preventing you doing that as mentioned here.

Have you seen HRVOJE's post? He replicated it using SceneNodes.

I just changed the Mode to Noise and set Animation Speed and Scale to 0. And animated the Rotation from your value to 0 over the 3 sec. Is this the type of movement you'd like to have ? (Tested in R20, don't have RS and deleted all incompatible tags) random deformer issue test.c4d

The Null object is redundant. You can use just the deformer under the object. I don't use C4D 2023, and I tested it under R20. After you make your selection don't forget to move the tag to the Cube. Maybe you forgot this step. If this is how your setup looks like then I'm afraid 2023 has a bug. Here's a test file from R20. correction test.c4d

I don't see any reason to use the Connect object instead of a simple Null... The simplest way I can think of is the following: Move the Pivot Point of both arrows on their base (where they meet the loop) Group all arrows and loop and set keyframes for the rotating animation on the Group object. Then set your timeline back to zero, select both of your arrows and set rotation keyframes at the same time points as you did with the loop. Using the global coordinates when selecting an arrow, overwrite each of the keyframes with the pitch parameter set to 0. Do the same for the other arrow but this time set the pitch to 180. This way you essentially counter-rotate the arrows with the same amount for each time interval. Alternatively set a Target tag for each of the arrows and use two nulls as a targets placed very high above the scene and very low below it.

I've found this one using particles driven by pyro.

What exactly are you trying to achieve ? We already have particles. We can use instances on particles... Do you need to make the particles move along with the fire ? I've recently seen this. Not sure if this is your goal.

At their forum there have been quite a few complaints about the app not responding in the past. I guess this is something usual. You can either issue the problem (yellow banner link) or check it weekly. I've seen AI pages like this go down due to many requests to the server , I guess it's the same with this.

Try GauGAN2 Beta from the link at the bottom of the page

ALL IN ONE LINK http://www.cgchannel.com/2022/11/best-black-friday-and-winter-2022-deals-for-cg-artists/?fbclid=IwAR3Ty9H4-2xF7h8zdZLiI6zsAigXO0Y7clHC44WrwXy1VmzFqejRacX_zTg

I overlooked that detail. Scrap everything I said. Use only Booleans. The material of each bool component is inherited to the final geometry. Don't use any materials on the Boole generators. Even the spherical "shell" can be made with bool. The set up should look like this: Bool (subtract) # Makes the hole |_ Circle |_ Bool (subtract) # Makes the shell |_ Sphere Outer |_ Sphere Inner

Maybe using a weight map instead of a field could me the collision less "smooth". https://help.maxon.net/c4d/en-us/Default.htm#html/OCACOLLISIONDEFORMER-ID_CA_COLLISION_GROUP_COLLIDERS.html?TocPath=Create%20Menu%7CDeformer%20object%7CCollision%20Deformer%7C_____4

Maybe use the Wrap Object deformer in Cylindrical mode ? Or use the Collider Deformer with a convex surface ...

You can either model it exactly like the physical object or fake it. If you want to model it physically just project one texture on the one side of each prism-like pattern (using polygon selection), and the other texture on the other side of the prisms. This can be very easy if you first make the polygon selections as simple stripes on a plane before elevating the intermediate points to make the prisms. Or you could just fake it by animating a gradient mask between the two textures inside the color channel of the Material Editor itself. I guess you could also rig an XPresso to make the gradient shift from one side to the other depending on the rotation of the object but it's a bit more complex and also not physical as the gradient shift should be depending on the camera position relative to the object and not the object itself...

The Solidify capsule does the same thing if you don't mind beveling options.

I think this is the purpose of the Constraint Tag. https://help.maxon.net/c4d/en-us/Default.htm#html/TCACONSTRAINT.html?TocPath=Object%20Manager%7CTags%20Menu%7CRigging%20tags%7CConstraint%7C_____0

HRVOJE has created a neat Linear Boundary Cloner here among other cool staff.

Earlier this year Chris tried to replicate this

https://store.e-onsoftware.com/

I'm not sure if the vertex intensity can drive the density of scattered instances... I remember asking if that was possible but don't remember the answer.

A lot of tools can be improved and most miss-outs have been addressed. But a screenshot of your case could really help us understand your particular problem. The Bevel Modifier is not the only beveling method and it certainly does not combine all the features of the Bevel operation, Extrude Nurbs, Bevel Polygon Node and MoExtrude. If one doesn't work the other probably will.

Just a naive idea... For those really sparce snowflakes, you could try to scatter actual really tiny tri-polygons with the Scatter Placement Tool

In general, any incarnation of the native tools as SceneNodes capsules or node sytems is concidered in any way faster at execution ?

Happy to see they added features towards book publishing. That's exactly what I asked them for 2 years ago in my search for a low-cost, good-featured app. I also asked them if there were any other book-specific features like an alternating page offset for preventing content sinking in the middle of the book (happens when the book is thick in content), automatic word indexing etc... They responded honestly that their app was magazine-oriented but would promote my notes to the development team.

Why don't you just model those things in the original model ? Will there be any difference ?