Jump to content
Dear members and visitors, click here to subscribe for full access to community. This includes posting, plugin and asset downloads, free premium training courses and removal of Google ads. ×

sneather

Limited Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    916

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by sneather

  1. sneather
    Thanks. But it still strikes me as bizarre, that if all of the settings seem the same, that the results would be different. What would be the point? Or, again, is there one further preference setting, hidden someplace, which further convolutes the import scale?
  2. sneather
    So, I've been using R17 for a long while, but also added R19 a short time back. For whatever the reason, I can't seem to get R19's import scale (for .OBJ) to match that of R17. I've checked, and both of my versions are using "centimeters" for their units, and I also have the same set in the import options. I normally have the scale at ".333" for R17 (as well as prior versions of C4D) - yet when I use that same number in R19 - the results are NOT the same. Any idea what the heck is going on? Thanks!
  3. sneather
    I'm using some bend deformers to shape part of a model. However, on part of the bent piece, I have a round screw head which I do NOT want deformed. The issue, though, is that I still need that screw to follow along, with the bent material - just not change shape, itself. So...is there some trick (constraint tag?) I can employ, to achieve such a thing? Thanks!
  4. sneather
    Thanks for testing that there. It seems that R19 is able to solve my initial problem, with the native Cinema tools. However, I'm curious what further experience you have with MeshBoolean? How does it handle really tough things, like imported CAD .OBJ files? The MeshBoolean video demos only show it working with easy primitives. But they never show it being used on a nasty ol' bit of tri-poly goodness...
  5. sneather
    Yeah, I don't know. Pretty sure I bought that (or something just like it) years back, only to find that it was no better or more reliable, than just using the native boole tools.
  6. sneather
    Interesting. Thanks, for also having a look. Keep us posted, when you get time to investigate further.
  7. sneather
    It's odd that there would be a difference even down in R17. I can't find any mention of changes to the boole nor bevel deformer in either R18 or R19. The options for both seem to be identical in R17 & R19. But who knows what may have been tweaked in the intervening years...
  8. sneather
    My R19 Studio is the current .053 build. I'm Mac 10.9.5.
  9. sneather
    Okay, so I had tried MY original example project in both R17 & R19 - and the results had been the same. But I only tried YOUR fix in R17. So I just tried it in R19, and it looks like yours! I'm going to have to open your file in both versions, simultaneously, and scrutinize the exact differences.
  10. sneather
    Oh, yikes. That's not good. What in the world would cause such a clear difference?
  11. sneather
    Hey, thanks for taking this on! However, when I open your project, the bevels are still not materialized (see screen cap). I'm able to get the material on the flat sec ion of the boole cut, however, it's the actual bevels which refuse to accept a material, once another is applied to one of the component objects inside the boole. Did it not look like my attached image, on your end? I get the same result in both my versions of R17 & R19...
  12. sneather
    Please see the attached file. I need to make an animatable boolean object, but something in this combination of settings is NOT allowing any material to apply to the active bevel. Can someone please take a look and let me know what I can do? Thanks! boole bevel material issue.c4d.zip
×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright Core 4D © 2024 Powered by Invision Community