Leaderboard

Redshift RT is completely different from the RT technique analogous to game engines such as Unreal or Unity. It's all about getting such a technique in C4D, something similar to Unreal or Eevee. Redshift RT is a regular Redshift rendering supported by Nvidia RT cores. It is not an alternative, it is something completely different.

You would need R2023 and its new cloth simulation tools which have balloon modifiers. You would start with one big balloon cloth and create vertex maps for the pleats between the cushions and then for that vertex map area create a high cloth self-attraction value using fields to pull in the cloth and create the 6 individual pleats. To get all those gorgeous wrinkles in the cloth, you would need a pretty high-density mesh for that balloon object. Now to get the cushion to land where you want it, the only way I could think of how to do this is to run it in reverse. If you simulate it with the cushion perfectly placed in its final position and then run it with gravity pointing up while you take the air out of the balloon you may get what you want. You then cache the simulation. This is where I am not sure, but I don't see why it cannot be done: You then run that simulation backwards to get the cushions to fall down and land perfectly in the chair. Relative to the fluid simulation of the chair appearing, you would need X-particles. Create a vessel that conforms to the chair design, render it invisible and pour fluid particles into it (again with gravity pointing up). That is not exactly how it appears in the video as there is a T2 type of effect going. So as XP works with Fields, you would need 4 attractors to pull the particles to the chair leg locations from 4 separate emitters at the fluids starting point. Each emitter is tied to a specific attractor to ensure that all the liquid going to each leg is the same. Once the particles are at the leg positions; another emitter kicks in at each leg position to fill each leg column with more particles and gravity goes from -Y to +Y until the chair is formed. The seat straps that hold the cushion in place can be done with a spline extrude being animated from 0 to 100. Again, sounds easy but it will be a ton of experimentation. What you may want to do is submit this video to Chris Schmidt's Rocket Lasso website for him to work through in one of his "RocketLasso Live" podcasts where he actually breaks down and duplicates the effects of animations such as this. As this fits right into R2023's new capabilities, he may be attracted to doing it during a pod cast sooner rather than later. Now, he may not get to it in time by when you need it, but it is worth a try. I hope this helps. Dave

Corona renderer version 9 was released today. Both for 3D Max and C4D. https://corona-renderer.com/features/whats-new

If you have used a Fair SaaS license before, you should get a communukat. It looks universally formulated, only the addressing is individual. Here is a screen from this message:

Sad To hear. And I also hope for the future, that you guys find great jobs. It is a experience after all and also the bad ones have value somehow.

The simple solution here would be an animated boolean to reveal the chair, a very easy process, and the cushion animation should be pretty easy as well using C4D's new (or even the old) soft body dynamics. As far as the T-1000 liquid terminator bit at the beginning is concerned, I would just omit that altogether.

Looking forward to digging into this one.

Hey @DMcGavran, what about another purchase for Maxon? U-Render would be PERFECT as the new viewport and quick renderer of Cinema 4D. it would complement (and not compete) Redshift very well.

same with me. I really hope all the involved people come out great. And I also hope, that this amazing renderer is not lost. maybe it can live on as part of a other company or as a opensource project. It would be a shame if all this work would be lost.

So sad to read this. I was almost on the fence of buying a license, earlier this year, but came just too late as perpetual licenses were replaced by subscription-only. Best wishes for the future endeavors of all involved in the team.

yes, good looking parametric clouds. that is soooooo usefull and I waited for it so long. A feature that really triggers me to try out corona again 🙂

I´m so sad to hear this, very heartbreaking news... Big Thanks to whole U-Render Team for such as amazing job on U-Render

Oh man, that's so sad to read 😞 I've been using U-render since the beta in 2018 (and later bought a license in 2020). I had high hopes for you guys. I can't believe you're closing now that you were about to release the Maya version. That would have been a game changer! 😞 First of all, kudos to you guys for giving a perpetual license to all clients you had! Thank you so much. Big show of ethics here, so rare in the tech field these days. Second, is there any chance you guys (or the renderer at least) could be acquired by Maxon or Autodesk? U-Render would be the perfect viewport renderer for Cinema 4D, Maya and/or 3ds Max. This way your creation would live on and Maxon or Autodesk would finally catch up (at least partially) with Eevee and Unreal. .

Sad to hear. I wish the best future to everyone involved. It is always a verry sad thing if something ends, but it also gives room for new posibilities.

Additionally, I am not sure whatever tutorial you are following is giving you great advice ! This sort of form does not come out well when made like this because cylindrical forms with a lot of counter-flow topology do not surface nicely under subdivision, and yours is no exception - it looks lumpy and unattractive, because this isn't the right technique to make this sort of thing. What you do instead for a flawless and beautiful result is to model the object as if it were unwrapped (so flat), then use deformers to wrap that, or more ideally its parent SDS object into a cylindrical form. That way we get an entirely lump-free surface when we render. You should also be aware that complex poles (points where more than 5 edges meet) will cause problems with subdivision, so ideally you would avoid creating them as you modelled... CBR

Also your SDS mode is wrong - that should be Catmull Clark. OpenSubDiv Bilinear will not do the smoothing you need - it is more of a tesselation setting. CBR

It looks like you have forgotten to tick create caps when you used the extrude tool. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to create thickness on all this at once by going to Poly Mode, selecting all polys, then doing the Extrude. However that won't work if there are other problems in your mesh, and there are... This mesh has not been optimised to join all its points so it exists as multiple polygon islands within a single object, which is not helpful for adding thickness, because it will do it individually per island. So you need to optimize your mesh (points mode, select all / optimize with suitable threshold) to make it suitable for adding thickness to. CBR

All of the knots at the top of your post are already possible, because the Trefoil and the other ones mentioned are torus-knots: The values of p and q can be specified independently, but there is of course a mathematical relationship between them when used to form the knot. So, in answer to your question, no, one is not a function of the other - they are both independent input parameters. With regard to the SLICE parameters (not yet implemented), the idea was to create a cut of the knot between two angles, or more formally based on the "to be written" descriptive help: Slice Start and End Angles Allow the user to restrict the generation of the knot to only the portion that is contained within the volume of a right circular cylindrical sector with: - Angle 𝛳, defined to be the absolute value of the difference between the angles specified and oriented accordingly - Its axis made coincident with the axis of the virtual torus around which the knot is circumscribed - An unbounded radius (or more specifically, a radius that is no smaller than the sum of the major and minor radii of the virtual torus [i.e., the distance from the central point of the torus along its axis to any of the equidistant points along its surface where the points lie at the farthest possible distance, radially from its center on the toric section formed by an imaginary equatorial plane used to bisect the torus]). Or, in layman's terms, it allows for the creation of an arbitrary pizza-pie slice portion of the knot, just as it does for some of the built in parametric spline/polygonal shapes. Also, thanks for the links to the Spiros plug-in. I can use that for ideas of what other features to add.