Leaderboard

You can't announce a technology preview and then have zero to show for it two and a half years later, with narry even a peep of a mention in the latest update. Maxon is quick becoming famous for simply ignoring whatever it doesn't want to talk about, as if it doesn't even exist, and at this point it looks like nodes is one of those things.

Well, that answers it then. But when you look at the computing industry in general, we all knew this day was coming. Software as a Service (SaaS) really sucks for the consumer, but everyone is moving to it. Microsoft no longer offers MS Office as a purchased perpetual license. Office 365 is now subscription only (I wonder about the "365" tag at the end....it kind of rubs in the fact that they are making you pay yearly). Honestly, how far will SaaS go? Will it extend to the operating systems? If you want your computer to boot in the morning or your cell phone to turn on, then pay the annual subscription fee. Will it extend to driver support? Well, your computer boots but the screen flickers because the latest OS is incompatible with the GPU drivers. Pay the subscription fee to get the latest GPU drivers. You may even see unscrupulous hardware vendors forcing those incompatibilities just to generate licensing revenue for their latest drivers. Forget that every piece of software you run could go to SaaS, but imagine if that extended to all the drivers and OS? And I have even yet to touch the internet and the potential for subscription sites for your favorite sites (including this one). You pass out $5 a month to maintain 10 or 20 licensing subscriptions to both keep your PC and your most common apps running along with connectivity to the internet and pretty soon you're dropping over $1000 a year. Sound crazy? Well....10 years ago SaaS was just being introduced by Adobe and now it is everywhere. Imagine what happens in the next 10 years? If people start to be over-burdened with licensing costs (and the headache of maintaining all those licensing costs) then I see a greater drive for everything going to the cloud. This completely removes the need for a personal computing device. You just have an internet appliance to access all your software from your ISP. Your ISP maintains the hardware and offers different levels of service and software in a tiered pricing model. You want basic MS Office capability? That is one tier. You want render farm access with C4D? That is its own tier. Oh...and within those tiers come monthly caps on data usage. Sorry, but your tier only supports 1 Tb of data consumption a month. Please pay $30 more for the next terabyte. Scary world, isn't it? Now, the safe haven offered by open-source programs is not guaranteed. They undermine the big tech companies' ability to milk as much as they can out of SaaS. As more of our computing infrastructure moves to SaaS, there will be an increase in open-source adoption. This is where the cabal of big tech companies push for the cloud and the internet appliance. As more people shift to the internet appliance, individual PC hardware sales will drop. It will just be cheaper for people to go with the internet appliance than pay annually for the software to run on your own hardware (helped along by these same companies raising their annual licensing costs). The law of supply and demand kicks and pretty soon owning your own hardware becomes cost prohibitive. Without a PC, you are limited in your ability to run open-source hardware because you can pretty damn well bet that your ISP is NOT going support access to open-source software. This is sort of happening now with Windows 11 "S". "S" mode in Windows 11 ONLY allows you to download software from the Microsoft App Store under the interests of insuring that you are free from malware and viruses. "For your protection" Microsoft tells you that Windows S approved software from their app store are completely virus free. Interestingly enough, Google Chrome is not an MS App store offering even though its software is at the core of MS Edge. So I guess "S" stands for "security" and not "Subscription". But who are we kidding? Dave BTW: For people who think that PC companies will fight to keep selling their hardware, here is a shocking revelation from someone who has been in the electronics hardware manufacturing business for over 30 years: These companies hate building hardware! It's hard. It has supply chain issues. There are warranty repair and reverse logistic issues. There are regulatory requirements on the materials they use. The cost of releasing a new product is very high. Lots of cost for not a great margin -- especially in the consumer market. But software is soo much easier to manage because its only cost is people. It may cost a lot for the first item, but after that it is all pure revenue. Selling software is like printing money when compared to hardware. Thus, all the big hardware vendors will be motivated in the push to cloud computing once they figure out how to sell their software into that platform as well. Ever wonder why nVidia keeps churning out all these really neat graphical applications? Who would have expected that from a hardware vendor.

Yes I have been asking for edge constraints like this for some time, and still hope we can add them at some point. Since Cinema's Poly Pen got a Re-projection tick box the functionality shown there is similar to that, but our poly pen can't do loop cuts like that without leaving the tool, only line cuts, which do reproject like the example. I think the differences between these pen tools are getting narrower, and it increasingly comes down to what you like using most - for example I never create polygons by pre-placing vertexes and then connecting them, so that aspect of Quad draw would go unused and unappreciated by me, so it is a bit subjective to a point I guess. But I also don't mind admitting there are other aspects of it I would find easier than poly pen, and there are definitely things about poly pen I would still like improved. But I am pleased with this release because for me at least, that symmetry is best in class, and another gap filled in our modelling toolset. Other gaps remain of course, but I am very encouraged that Maxon seem to be listening to feedback more and more and updating modelling tools at a very respectable pace. CBR

No surprise that Perpetual is dead. No surprise that it was done in such as sh**ty, disrespectful manner to long standing customers. Apologies for the turn of phrase - but they earned it.

Here's my take on the character to celebrate the new movie releasing today 😄

There is a lot of truth in here. I think that despite the growing education in computer knowledge there is something like over complexity for the mayor user base. especially as most users are artists not engineers. Imho xpresso represented this sweet spot between power and ease of use quite well. also material node systems like octane for example. quite some developments of c4d in the last years are on the powerfull but not so easy to use side.

The lack of visible progress.

Thats what I thought when I heard C4D 2023 and it is exactly what we predicted, when subscription came up 3 Years ago. Using R25 as a last perpetual version is just another expression of their contempt of this kind of license and customer.

Not mentioned in Chris' video is that the old Symmetry Object can now both flip and automatically flip depending on camera plane angle, which if not for the other new symmetry features would have been a major event in itself.

For the record, I want search for materials too. Unfortunately the material manager is really old code and I'm told we have to rewrite the whole thing to add it. Something we'll need to do anyway, but harder to fit on the roadmap...

There is always a bit of heat in the forum every September over a new release and I have added to some of that heat in the past. But actions speak louder than words and therefore, I would like to provide some balance to the discussions that may follow in this thread. For those with perpetual licenses, do NOT just look at what is in R27. IHMO, R26 was an amazing game changer with all the modeling improvements and RS. So R27 will be the first-time perpetual license holders will be able to get their hands on those improvements as well. Now, from that perspective, my long-standing concerns since R21 with Maxon milking their user base in a subscription model and NOT providing meaningful updates are being proven to be completely UNFOUNDED. Again, actions speak louder than words and in the interest of fairly calling balls and strikes, let's look at the actions. Now R25 was a dark chapter but when you get through the hurdles of learning the new icons, the UI is a welcome addition, and R25 overall becomes more acceptable particularly against what came before and after that release (e.g. both R24 and R26 had some neat additions - they just weren't perpetually licensed releases and could not be fully enjoyed until R25 and the forthcoming R27). In whole this has caused R25 to fade from memory (though I would like to see more work done to replace missing icons). It also shows that while some releases may be lackluster, they are only lackluster for a time. R26 made up for it so I am willing to cut them a break should not all our expectations get met with each and every release. Maxon's actions have earned that trust (IMHO). More importantly and what should NOT go unnoticed is that the benefits of their acquisitions such as RS and Z-Brush are NOT only going to be felt by a Maxon One license holder. They are being integrated into C4D as well. To me that is huge as Maxon could easily have said NO to RS CPU or required you to export from C4D to Z-Brush for remeshing thus forcing you into the more expensive Maxon One plan. But they did not. They used those acquisition to make C4D better. You have to respect that. Now, is C4D perfect? Not yet. Will it become perfect with R27? Probably not. But I like the trajectory I have seen so far, and credit should be given where credit is due. Actions do speak louder than words after all. Dave

Saw an interesting article about a controversy over AI generated art. Many people have expressed their disbelief about the capability of AI generating any worthy but as time passes things get more and more uncomfortable ... https://www.creativebloq.com/news/ai-art-wins-competition?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_content=computer-arts&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR0M8lQ3q2OK1DYI6f1ayxhO-hnTUIc_kQg_lDFF4NShq_UXAGL5pOaQsps For anyone who didn't get the latest news, now DALL-E 2 has been released publicly for personal use and here's a link for a free online AI prompt image generator. https://huggingface.co/spaces/stabilityai/stable-diffusion

Here's a compare node set to >=. It gives a 1 or True when frame is >= 30.

I think Maxon would be well served to look at Blender's implementation of nodes. Maybe Blender is better at promoting what nodes can do than Maxon, but to the casual observer it just feels like there is more success with user adoption of nodes with Blender than there is with C4D users. If true, then why? Are C4D nodes too complex? Do they operate at a lower "programming" level than Blender nodes? Do Blender nodes operate no lower than a pure nodal allegory to their standard modeling/animating commands (similar to modo's "tool pipe")? If so, then they are probably easier to learn and more inviting to the average user for experimentation and further study. Remember, there is always a trade off with ease-of-use and power with any programming language and nodes are a programming language after all. You miss that sweet spot and over-pivot to choosing power (but at increased complexity) and adoption will be slower. Choosing more power over ease of use means the nodes operate at a layer closer to the programming language itself. But they have to in order to provide the flexibility that makes them powerful. So, which of the following will lead to higher adoption rates: Having 400 ways to configure 10 different nodes to do a series of the same thing in various flexible ways or 1 way to use 1 node to do something similar but with less flexibility? Not sure if that explains the point I am trying to make. I can follow RS nodal trees, but I cannot follow scene nodes and that could explain why I am struggling to explain their complexity. Hopefully all of this makes sense but even if it does not, then chuck it all aside. BUT PLEASE look at Blender nodes and then ask why the difference in the rate of adoption between Blender and C4D users? There has to be a reason and that reason could help C4D. Otherwise, nothing changes. Dave

It's on the wrong axis. Align the bend to +X and do 'fit to parent'. Also turn on 'Keep length' if it wasn't on already. CBR

No, what you are looking at there is the subdivided result, NOT the base mesh. The deformer is acting upon the base mesh (because it is a child of it) NOT the subdivided result. If you would like it to operate on the Subdivision surface directly, then you need to put it under a Null, and move the deformer to also be a child of that null. Then you will be deforming the generated result, not the base mesh under it, and will have more available segments to support the bend. However, the rather better approach is the one I showed you above where you pull those polys out across a number of steps rather than all the way out in one go, if you see what I mean, and if you fix that the bend can stay right where it is as a child of the base object... CBR

...maybe you could add condition node and compare frame count modulo way...

Well, it just makes no sense to abandon something that is obviously on the way to being very useful and powerful, and that will give them parity with / opportunity for improvement over other softwares' procedural modelling ! CBR

Again, with all do respect, I say this: Maybe Maxon needs more beta testers who use different elements of C4D differently, or use other software quite often to help the development team craft these features better. If you have 50 testers on the beta, and none of them use the poly pen or don't bother with it because it isn't robust enough, or many have used poly pen "as it" because they don't know it can be made better, that feature never gets a second look. If you are working on modeling features make sure you have people who actually use it for modeling, and so on. If no one is asking for it, nothing changes. Although, in many cases, even if most of the customers are asking for certain features, it doesn't mean the developers will do it either. So there is that side. 😞 I'm on other betas and it can be challenging engaging with the developers who seemingly have their hands tied when it comes to implementing small changes or even bug fixes. Priorities are different. Also, cheers! I'm not trying to single you out. 😉

Oh he's VERY good 🙂 I like this little lightly ruffled feather ! CBR

Hello. Yes, Spline Wrap position can be a little confusing at first. First, make sure the Spline Wrap arrow is pointing in the correct direction for the object you wish to wrap on the spline. Understanding wrap alignment means getting to grips with the bounding box settings (pic 1). By default, the deformer will auto-fit itself to the object (Bounding Box Size) at the object's center point, not it's axis. You shift the deformer by entering values into the Bounding Box Center fields. The values will be relative to the object's center, thus negative 1/2 the size on Y moves it to the bottom, etc. Where the deformer's center lies will be where the wrap lies on the spline. NOW.. the problem with this method for doing curbs is obvious when you look at hard corners (pic 2). Plus, low-poly won't curve nicely at the rounded parts (without high segmentation). So, here is my method for curbs: Use the existing spline that you are trying to wrap. Make a copy first. Then use the Create Outline command to expand it into a closed spline. If it expands the wrong way, just undo and do again with negative value. Now just extrude it up. Give it a fillet cap if you like. Done. While setup may be a bit intense depending on how much curbing you need to do, this method is much faster to adjust later. Plus you don't have to faff with high-segmented geo and fiddly spline wraps! Pic 1 Pic 2 Pic 3 Pic 4

I don’t think you can switch Takes, but you can use xpresso with the Layer system if that helps at all.

Not really. With Quad draw you can just paint points wherever you want and later create the polygons, just hovering over four points. Among other stuff. I'd love to be able to do this with the polypen. Polypen is good, but Quad Draw is easier to use and more powerful.

I think it's not possible since takes are a higher level of control than xpresso.

Bravo! Rocket Lasso comes through with another great video. The cloth stuff at the end was really impressive and the symmetry stuff is beautiful to see at long last. The Xpresso stuff would be the most impactful thing for me as it is so useful to be able to better see the relationship between driving and driven attributes and parameters in the mouseover and be able to both see and jump to links in the AM as well. Despite seemingly missing in action node developments, this looks like a great Cinema 4D update.

Ok, 'incurvation' is the Bend Deformer ! It's not clear which part of the object you are trying to bend, but if it's the front section where you have pulled out some polygons, that is incapable of bending smoothly because there are no segments in it ! Any deformation requires enough polys in the direction of the bend (for example) to be able to flex to where the deformer tells it to go. You haven't said what you are trying to make, so difficult to specifically advise on how best to achieve what you want. But have a look at my adjusted mesh below, which shows you the sort of topology you need to support a bend in that direction... CBR

Hmmm. We are struggling with language a bit there aren't we... I am trying to work out what the word 'incurvation' could possibly mean, and I am not familiar with the concept of 'cuddling' (which means to give someone a hug!) transformations ! I'll download your file and see if I can work out what you mean... CBR

I did a double-take. 🙂

Don't think anyone has posted this here yet, so here is C4D Uber-meister Chris Schmidt showing us round the new goodies in rewardingly exhaustive detail as usual... CBR

As you can all imagine, I am delighted with this release - finally; the proper symmetry we have been asking for since... forever 🙂 It's a joy to use and real step up for Cinema in its journey towards modelling supremacy. It is more capable and flexible than any other symmetry system in any other software (that I have seen), and we have never been able to say that before !! There is a lot to love about this. First up - we don't need to cut stuff in half to make it symmetrical ! The fact that is a mode rather than a generator means we really can just get symmetry where we want it, and get rid of it when we don't with single button click or shortcut (ALT+W is the new one to remember !). What is particularly remarkable about it is the topological symmetry, which searches for symmetrical components in otherwise non-symmetry meshes, and allows you to work on symmetrical parts within them. And unlike other symmetry systems in other software, ours is not limited to transforms, and works with nearly all the modelling tools. Also doesn't break UVs ! Lovely stuff ! Important to think of new symmetry as a suite of tools within a mode, and important not to forget the helpfully flexible Symmetrize functions we now have, to instigate symmetry where it wasn't before, AND it can base that on existing symmetry hub settings ! Not only that but a pin-able hub, visible mirror planes and auto-detecting context (modelling vs sculpt) so that the same system can work with sculpting symmetry too. Don't like the yellow symmetry preview colour ? Change that in preferences 😉 So yep, that's me over the moon, and I think the devs have done a marvelous job here. While I am here I should also mention the addition of the 'draw behind' workplane option - no more annoying grids in front of your models !!! And those new soft bodies are pretty great too, but that's a post for another time... CBR

They did recently hire Joe Alter.

My family asked the same and I don’t have a good answer haha

We are definitely not only releasing 1 release per year

Check your Maxon app. Get it before the servers crash like S26. It doesn't look like the help files are posted yet.

I would love to see a way to use blender plugisn in C4d 🙂 bodypaint gone replaced with Zbrush Paint redone Boole toole more dynamics updates GPU Xparticles purchased and intergrated faster viewport, more GPU optimizations more redshift integration more redshift materials includes all assets with redshift materials cvtoolbox installed by default redshift material stacking (this is coming, based on previous maxon demo) updated Hair engine/tools to make Blender fans jealous lol CAD /2D Drawing integration with dimensions Redshift Toon

for all those wishing for a material search, we made one for our work, everyone can get it here for a small fee to cover the coding costs: https://3dtools.info/shop/matfilter/ it is a real time interactive material search/filter tool for the c4d material manger we made, i use it everyday in any project:) cheers Stefan

I don't have any hopes for R27

Personally, I don't need a single new feature -- only speeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

Probably niche, but being able to modify topology and retain pose morphs similar to blender!

you need to put the volume builder into a volume mesher :)