Jump to content

3D-Pangel

Contributors Tier 2
  • Posts

    2,165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    79

Everything posted by 3D-Pangel

  1. Overall...I agree with the end result - especially the new features that are not icon or location dependent such as hot corners, tabs, etc. I just think they could have done a few things to make the transition an easier one. For example, you can revert back to the originally layout but you cannot revert back to the original icons. People speak of muscle memory but that is easily solved with the old layouts and ONLY for those commands that are in that old layout. What I would have preferred is the ability to switch back to the old icons just to re-orient yourself to the layout first and then (when you are ready) re-orient yourself to the new icons. Even when muscle memory kicks in, if the icon is completely different you have to pause for a minute, hover over the icon a bit, see the name come up and then once you have confirmed this is the command you want, you proceed. That actually slows you down more than you may think. The fastest way (IMHO) to learn the new UI is to create your own layout. Redo everything and rebuild it how you want it to work. The pedantic action of finding and placing each icon where you want it both teaches you where it will be located and what it looks like. People are saying that it takes about a week of use to become familiar with it but I think re-building your custom layout will get you there much faster (hours not days). Dave
  2. Personally I think it is the person who complains about the complainers complaining about the complainers complaining about the complainers. 😁 Ouch! Look, CG is not a simple thing to get into. It takes time, money, practice, patience, more money, more practice, etc. It also is NOT a skill that is 100% transferrable from one program to another. True, the techniques are transferrable but the execution is 100% dependent on the software and it is learning how to execute with that software where most of the time, money and practice goes. Once you get to a point of proficiency with the software where you are so immersed into the workflow that the interface melts away, then you have "arrived"! It just doesn't get any better than that. You just don't want to give that up like an old pair of shoes simply because it takes so much effort to get to that point. It is not that easy...especially for the hobbyist who has less time to learn simply because they have a different day job. So, with that said, I think it is valid for people to ask simple questions like "why did you change the interface when no one asked you to?" or "why was the interface a higher priority than this new modeling feature that would really improve my proficiency and help my workflow". They may sound like they are complaining, and some may actually be complaining, but from the majority I hear frustration and loss....especially with comments from hobbyists with perpetual licenses regarding how Maxon is making it increasingly difficult to financially continue with the software. Yeah... real sweat, blood and tears get invested into becoming proficient with each and every individual program. That is a cold hard fact for many of us. When that sacrifice gets threatened, then people speak up for themselves. That is natural. To some, the protection of that sacrifice is a complaint. Not me. I see what is behind it because I have made those same sacrifices. I really don't care if some on the forum cannot make that distinction....but I desperately hope that Maxon can. Dave
  3. Does anyone have experience using RenderCrate They offer a range of 3D products from models, textures, music, sound effects, backgrounds, etc...etc...etc. Essentially a full gamut of resources to be used in all sorts of 3D or video content creation. Their pricing is also very reasonable: an annual fee of $79 that grants you 50 downloads/day. I downloaded some of their free (non-pro) models, and they were okay...but there were some that were just completely dodgy too. Their texture collections also look pretty good. For those of us who are perpetual license holders, we've lost the library love that Maxon used to give us so I am wondering if this is a cheap way to get some of those resources (and more) back? Anybody use them and how good is their pro content? Their reviews look good, but you can't always trust those. Dave
  4. Rick, I understand and appreciate the difficult position a release like R25 puts you in as the front pitch man for C4D. Thank you for providing your input to the Core4D crowd. Something to consider though (as I have stated this earlier in the thread) you really should have held off releasing R25 until there was more to it. if Maxon came forward and said "Hey, we got R24 released a little later than anticipated which leaves us less time for R25 to be all that we envisioned should we hold to our traditional September release date. Therefore, to insure that we make each release meaningful, we are delaying the release of R25". Honestly, I don't think anyone would be upset with that announcement...or at least less upset than they are now. One other question: Do you really have a glowing Maxon logo in your office...at least I hope that is your office. If you have that at home...well....errr...I think a St. Pauli Girl beer sign would have been a better choice in your man cave.😆 Dave
  5. Watch what happens when Autodesk tokens takes off...then Maxon will implement it. Trust me, Maxon may even go one better:
  6. I think the biggest problem is the lack of "listening" from McGavran and senior leadership. Pretty confident that the developers know what needs to be done but it is management that makes the call and while they say they are hearing us, it is obvious that they are not listening. How do you look at R25's features and go "yeah --- this is what the users want! Let's make these four features a half-point release!" I am pretty sure warning flags were raised within Maxon about this release - but no one "listened". Not sure what happened last year to get us to this point. Plus, people no longer want to hear that Maxon is still implementing the core. That excuse is wearing thin. Was it scene nodes that sucked up all the resources over the last year? If so, is that the right strategy to put all your eggs in that basket? If that is Maxon's strategy, then they need to assess where they are with scene nodes after more than a year. What is the adoption rate by the users? Even if it is a "tech demo" (a nice term to launch a big effort without setting any expectations for deliverables), who is making scene node tutorials other than Maxon? I only found 11 on YouTube and 5 of those were from Maxon. The other 6 came from EJ, Chris Schmidt and LFO. That's it: 3 people after a whole year. Where are the user posts on all the great things with scene nodes? Are their any great examples of scene nodes on the Maxon web-site? I mean after a year or more, I would have expected more. Scene nodes may not be the big feature draw that Maxon hopes for as parametric modeling is hard no matter how clean the interface is made. Those who want to master it will go to Houdini rather than wait for C4D as Houdini's indie version is cheaper and it vastly more powerful. Yeah...I have no idea where McGavran is driving C4D because it is apparent he is not listening to his customers. Honestly, as an Adobe guy he is probably more at home with Red Giant than he is with Redshift or C4D. You always play to your strengths and people in leadership will always focus first on what they know before they tackle what they don't know. That is human nature. Well, I am getting the sinking feeling that 3D is not one McGavran's strengths. Dave
  7. Introducing a new UI is always risky. An new UI encourages people on the fence about the program to finally commit to leave and learn something else. That will always be the situation no matter the platform or the history. Normally, you would introduce the new UI with some killer must-have features so it encourages users to make the transition. Now, C4D's history since R20 has not been stellar. The way perpetual license holders have been treated just gets worse with each passing year. The focus on scene nodes as a "tech demo" is not garnering enough interest from the users as far as I can tell or Maxon would be splattering scene nodes use cases all over their web-site. Maybe I missed it, but they are not readily apparent. R23 was pretty good with the new UV and animation tools. R24, or the "Beeple release" as I like to refer to it, was great for those who like to grab hunks of stuff from the asset browser and through it all over the scenes like garnish. In view of long standing feature improvements that continue to go unaddressed (particles, fluids, character animation, light linking, updates to AR, a good symmetry tool), not sure where asset browser fit in the priority but my guess is not very high. So the history of new features from a company that is NOT known for keeping up with the industry has not been stellar. What set C4D apart was the UI...and now they changed it. That was a very risky move as it was part of their identity. Again, given their history since R20, you don't want to make a misstep when you change the UI given a declining perception from users regarding whether or not C4D will be able to keep up with other programs. But to introduce the new UI with such lackluster features is just not a smart move. I don't understand the thinking. Were people desperate for a new UI? So the UI could have waited until they had enough new features to warrant sticking with the program through that transition. Honestly, I think Maxon would have been better off to NOT release anything right now. Not sure what is coming, but it has to better than what they included in this release. But hey....their revenue is locked in with subscriptions so maybe they hope they can get away with it. Well my message to Maxon is this: Hope is a bad strategy. Dave
  8. The Maxon R25 web-page is now up. So on this page you can filter what is new by the following categories: Create, Animate, Render and Workflow. Create -- Empty. Nothing to see here. Please move on. Animate -- Another complete goose egg of nothing. Render -- Okay....I think there is a pattern here of nothing and now we have three strikes. Workflow -- Hooray! Something! Five things of something: UI, Capsules, Spline Import, Asset Browser, and Scene Manager. Now the asset browser add on seems like something that missed the R24 bus -- but when you are starving, you'll eat anything. Now the time between R24 and R25 was a bit shorter, but look at what Blender can get done in that same amount of time. So where did all the energy go? Dave
  9. Sooo....let me see if I got this right. What is new in R25 (top items): New interface (not sure if that is a plus as sometimes a new interfaces have a learning curve_) Spline import Capsules. ???? Am I missing something? This is where my prediction that subscriptions invite lack of updates due to a captured financial base come true. Judging that their launch show today immediately glossed over C4D's new features with a pretty cool presentation on a Red Giant plugin (Bang) may reinforce my fear that this release is in fact very lean. Today is a good day for....Blender. Dave
  10. That is correct. My maintenance plan was extended prior to the 8/30/21 deadline until 6/2023. All releases of Redshift prior to that date will be permanent licenses and available for all apps -- not just C4D. So I am pretty confident that prior to 6/2023, Redshift RT for Blender should be available -- thereby knocking down (IHMO) a significant barrier to Blender and that being that the Cycles render engine is not known for its speed. Cycles is a good render engine, but Redshift is just so much better. Learn more about Redshift for Blender with this tutorial Dave
  11. Redshift RT is very exciting. So glad I updated my maintenance to 2023 last August as by then, pretty sure that Redshift RT for Blender will be available as well (that will be a nice permanent license to have). Okay....now I need to look into getting a more worthy GPU. Dave
  12. Igor, Apart from tag changes, did anything else change? I ask because I am not sure how I became a newbie overnight: Now, can you change my age too? I want to be 18 again. 😆 Dave
  13. If anyone has trouble finding eportfolio.net like I did (did not show via Help window on R19 or searching Maxon.net) the link is: eportfolio.maxon.net Now, when I tried to login, it would not accept my password and then it would not recognize my email address when I tried to reset my password. So what is going on? I can't believe accept a EULA on R21 would impact this. I have the installers for R19, but they are not the full installers but rather access the installers on-line. A capability which I fear will go away. R19 is critical as it is the bridge between older files and current versions. This is all becoming very ominous for perpetual license holders --- Is Maxon slowly shutting down access to ALL perpetual licenses, even those prior to R21? Dave
  14. Neuro-plasticity is a real thing. The more you continue to learn, the easier it will be to keep learning. I used to watch tutorials with C4D open in front of me and and constantly hitting the pause button to try new things. What I found though is that nothing was really "sinking in". I try what I learned, figured I had it down and then hit play again and go onto the next thing. Well, in order to fit training into my daily routine I made a change only possible due to the pandemic. When the gyms shut down, I canceled my gym membership. When the world shut down, I canceled all vacations for two years. As my wife, daughter and I exercise regularly, I put all that money into a gym in the basement -- including a 50 inch 4K TV with an ethernet hard line connection to my router (using ethernet over powerline). That TV sits right in front of the Echelon bike and you can see quite clearly the UI interface on the TV while on the bike. Also, having purchased the Udemy Blender Encyclopedia at a deal (48 hours of training for $12), they do allow you to download the courses (about 48 Gb worth). That has been downloaded to a USB drive that the TV can play from. What I have found while cycling, is that just listening and watching, without stopping to follow along in the DCC app, does get things to "sink in" better...particularly if I decide to re-watch the same tutorials as you do need to pay attention to the bike's exercise routine as well. Then, once that is done, you go to the PC and you try what you have learned. This is where you may struggle a bit, but it is in that straggle where things "sink" in and then permanently "set" in. You couldn't do that at the gym so now that they are open, I am not going back.
  15. I think everyone in the forum needs to rethink how we categorize its members.  "Nobel Beginner", "Generalist" -- sorry they just do not apply to Mike.  When he said he sculpted his robot, I thought he meant 3D sculpt.  Nope!  Actual clay was used.  When he listed himself as "Generalist",  I thought it meant he knew a little about the major CG components of modeling, texturing, lighting, animation.  Wrong again!  Mike knows pretty much every part of the production process from concept drawings to finished product...and the finished products are of professional caliber.  Unlike CG duffers like myself, his talents go beyond C4D and include sculpting, 3D printing, shot design, "real" model making, compositing, rotoscoping, "real" miniature camera set-ups, "real" miniature lighting, CG lighting, rigging, animating, sound design, editing, ...the list goes on.  Catch his YouTube page to fully understand the depth and scope of his talent.  He brings both a rich knowledge of the old school techniques used in the 80's backyard adventure movies and the innovative spirit that went with that time into the digital age to create something wholly unique and wonderful.  That is a rarity these days and it needs to be applauded.

     

    He reminds me of James Cameron back during his early Roger Corman days and I eagerly look forward to seeing where his talents take him.

  16. One other comment....the robots eyes. He is looking right at the wall before he breaks through it. Shouldn't he be looking to the left (his right) and at the opening rather than looking at what he is going to run into? When he scraped the wall earlier, he was not looking at where he was going to scrape the wall but rather was looking to where he needed to go. So he should again be looking at where he needed to go before he breaks through the wall and that would be the opening to the left of the impact point. Dave
  17. For the quickness of the shot after the impact, I think less is more and right now it works for me. ...but with that said, if you want to add a bit more realism and "punch" to that shot, I think you need to increase the level of dust being created. Right now, it seems to be a 2D element added in AE (and very faint for that matter) when it should be generated by the concrete particles themselves and follow their same dynamic trajectory. Are you using X-Particles? XP can handle mutli-physic simulations (volume breaking generating particles that can drive a smoke simulation). There is no native fluid system in C4D so purchasing a plugin to add a few frames of additional realism may not be cost effective...though XP is such an amazing plugin, you will never regret owning it. But if money is tight, as I said before, right now it works for me given how quickly the shot lasts. Dave
  18. There was a certain innocence to those 1980 backyard adventures. It was at the time when VFX techniques were being developed and everything was new. You look at the final shot of Explorers back then and go "How did they do that?" Well...it was pure craft (fiber fill clouds glued to large crystal clear lexan sheets placed over over backlite graphics and shot from above). Today you just go "It was done in the computer". I also think that lack of knowledge of the old techniques hampers the younger generation using CGI. 100% of the challenge with the old techniques was "how do I make it look real?" which soon led to the adage that "you need to add detail that you would only notice if it was NOT there". So I submit that lighting miniatures with real lights better prepares you for accurate light set-ups for models in the computer. Real world experience automatically tells you what color the shadows should be on snow (they should have an element of blue in them) or how bright should the rim light be on a ship in space (you set the exposure for what is in the shadows of that rim light). Today, you just shove everything under and HDRI dome and move on. It is one thing to understand what is needed -- that is half the battle. But another thing to understand how to achieve those missing elements in the computer. That is where the knowledge of the old methods provide the best training. Why did fiber fill clouds work so well (they allowed self shadowing and depth and you can feather the edges differently between each motion control pass to get that natural wispy effect). Simple craft that really allowed innovation through experimentation rather quickly. I miss the old days. Don't forget Cocoon, Gremlins, Enemy Mine (great matte paintings), or Krull. All the Lucasfilm movies -- the Spielberg movies and the James Cameron movies. Dave
  19. (3) VFXcool: Flight of the Navigator - YouTube This was very informative...and a good case that ever technique can and should be used. This movie used everything --- even stop motion animation --- and was not a pure CGI film. Dave
  20. EVERYONE STOP POSTING TO THIS THREAD UNTIL YOU HAVE SEEN THIS: (3) A Boy and His UFO teaser Trailer early test - YouTube OMG! And here we are looking at his wireframes and going "Gee...would have been great if not for the lack of quads in some areas". Was this all done by you or did you have any help (other than Gene Wilder 🙂 who is the only other name in the credits)? We will of course will want to know ALL the details: Shot 1: 1) Was the drone footage in the forest from a stock reel or did you shoot it yourself? 2) What software was used for the rotoscoping? Motion tracking? Shot 2: The bird that flies in front of the robot in the second shot when he is on the road has to be animated. I thought the road was just a background still until the bird flew by. That gave the shot some much needed life. Very well done. Who did the robot sound effects? Also very well done. Shot 3: Was fluid sim's used for the clouds or was that again stock footage? If stock footage, the masking must have been painful. Shot 4: Who is the little boy? Was he lifted from another movie? Shot 5: Masterful. I love the lightening. Matching the lightning to the lighting on the robot is very well done. Shot 6: More stock footage or did you go out and rent a truck? Match moving the robot to the truck is well done but yet believable because you added a slight rock to the whole rig. Not sure if the truck is CG as well....it looks too real. Modeling the chains over the robot must have been fun. Who did the overall sound mixing? Again, great balance, mood and very well done. In the face of this quality, we can forgive a few triangles in the modeling. Dave P.S. And there is more at his YouTube Channel: (3) the CRAFTINATOR - YouTube
  21. Speaking of 80's....anyone else catch the robot from Short Circuit on the base holding the clay sculpture? Not sure if that is a toy, a 3D printed object and/or if it has any articulation to it, but I would love to have it on my desk as well. Funny that when he said he sculpted it in clay first before he did the modeling, I did not think that he "actually" sculpted it in clay! Nice! Old school! The old methods are just as valid (and sometimes better) than the new! Dave
  22. Welcome to the Core (I originally typed "Cafe"...some habits are hard to break). Great introductory image. For someone who struggles with texturing, I thought you did a great job. Also, I love the lighting. You really matched the background image quite well. Is the road element textured as well or did you use projection mapping? I ask because the highlight on the road from the street lamp on the left does not line up with the street lamp itself. Draw a straight line from the lamp to the camera and that is where the highlight should be. Sorry for the small nit on an introductory post....I am impressed by that image nonetheless. Also.....Cerbera is NOT the quad police. That implies he is running around forcing people to use quads ("quad enforcer"??). Nope. But you will learn a great deal from his comments and suggestions (maybe "quad enabler" is a better title). In any case, with talent like yours, we are eager to see more of your work in the future. Dave
  23. I pretty much agree with all the comments here. Let the tag system and the search capability do all the work rather than the moderators trying to organize things. Maybe we should have a more discussion on requiring tags and tag categories when creating a new topic. Right now, when you create a new topic, you just select through two forum levels (eg. Modeling --> Organic) but I am thinking it might be a better to start with NOT having any pre-defined sub-forum directories...initially Rather, start with only one forum category for each DCC app as proposed, but should you want to create a new topic in that forum (eg. Blender, modo, Houdini, etc), you are "required" to select a number of tags to help define that post. So when you want to create a post in the Houdini forum, there are no sub-forums but there are requirements on the selecting main "task" subject area tags (modeling, texturing, rigging, etc) and then another tag for workflow categories (viewport manipulation, object handling, UI, import/export), and then a third tag on tools and techniques (splines, topology, instances, xrefs). Finally, you are asked if this topic involves cross-platform navigation and if yes, it then asks for a target app. Again, these are just examples of tag categories and not a complete list but I think Task, Workflow, and Tools are pretty logical tag major categories to get the discussion going. If you don't work through these tag selections, the member is warned that their post will go to general category under each DCC forum and therefore runs the risk of NOT being seen or addressed as all moderators have different skills but limited time and therefore need guidance as to which questions they can answer quickly. Whether this is true or not, the user should realize that some effort is required on their part if they want to get the help they need. Not sure if this can be done or not, but I think as these other DCC forums get rolling, it is hard to define what the structure will be or which structure works best as the content will be pretty low. So focus more on the classification piece first before you focus on the forum structure and then let the tags guide you at a later date on what structure to follow once things get busy. Not sure if you have tools for moving and grouping entire threads based on tag groupings or not, but if you do then that should make creating a structure at a later date much easier. There is another reason for this suggestion.....I think coming across a number of empty forum categories is a bit off-putting to new posters particularly if they are looking for help. You look at an empty forum and you may come to the wrong conclusion that this is a dead site and not worth your time. At least the "general" section will have some posts if all the forum members fail to use the tag system. And of course, once a subject is marked "solved" by the moderator, they can add the missing tags. Just a thought. Dave
  24. There are some flaws to Lumen and Nanite based on some videos I have seen. The first is that the Lumen engine has a hard time consistently converging all GI light rays in real time. There is this shifting blotchiness which you would notice should the scene contain smooth surfaces. I would imagine to get the performance you need, the error threshold is set higher than you would use in a standard render engine. That is why all demo scenes use rocks and rough surfaces where the subtle shifting of brightness and color is not as noticeable. If smooth surfaces are used, they will probably not be a brightly lit. Another problem is with thin objects, especially leaves. If the camera is up close, all looks good but at a distance the leaves just disappear. That one I cannot explain nor could the demo operator in the video I was watching. Nevertheless, Unreal 5 still remains hugely impressive. It is just not the be-all and end-all yet of real time, hyper-realistic rendering. But they are close. I also have to admire that all demos are run on a PS5. I mean, that alone is impressive. Now, I hear two things when it comes to real time 3D being used in Stagecraft for The Mandalorian. I hear it is based on Unreal Engine but it also uses ILM's Helios render engine. Pretty certain they are not running the 70 foot diameter of LED "volumes" of Stagecraft using PS5 so the partnership between ILM and Unreal probably has developed the be-all and end-all of real time rendering. It probably requires a render farm of 1000 nVidia RTX-A8000's to make it all work - especially if they want to use for more than TV and make large format movies to be shown in IMAX theaters. If anyone has the specs on Stagecraft 2.0, please share. Interesting fact: The partnership between ILM and Unreal probably was very easy to create given that Unreal's CTO is Kim Libreri, a past ILM VFX supervisor who left in 2015 for Epic. I met Kim during Siggraph 2009 and we actually had a nice chat about fluid simulations. Quiet guy with a searing intelligence. Dave
×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright Core 4D © 2021 Powered by Invision Community