Cerbera

I would hope those sort of posts are the exception rather than the rule, and we are certainly doing our best to encourage playing nicely and not engaging in needlessly combative rhetoric. CBR

Your video and general approach is very interesting ICM - thanks for sharing ! I really like what you did with 'sand buildup' on the leading edge... indeed that aspect had me convinced at first glance that you'd done it with actual particles ! CBR

Those are the Viewport statistics, which are not the ones to rely upon for modelling. I would recommend disabling those altogether, and using these options instead, which give a reliable count of what is going on in your scene !! The VP stats have never made any sense to me, and don't appear to be showing anything helpful, modelling-wise. CBR

Nope, what you are seeing there is the default HDRI, which is visible if no other HDRI exists in the scene, or it is not specifically overridden. So you need to load another map into this Environment Override slot, just above the screen reflections settings in View Settings. If you want that to have no effect, that image should be black. CBR

Excellent. Not having XP myself I am not the one to answer this, but at least when the people who do get here they will have all the files they need ! 🙂 CBR

Welcome to the Core ! You will almost certainly have to include the scene file before anyone can help with this. CBR

Could we have less of this sort of thing, pls ? People really don't have to explain why they are here !! At a time when we want as many people here as we can get, and are trying to welcome everyone from other software, encouraging people to not be here, or making them question why they are seems... contrary to that endeavour. And whilst we should definitely encourage everyone here to help where they can, I don't think we can usefully criticize people who, for whatever reason, don't spend a lot of time answering questions... not everyone has the time, skills, patience, or inclination !! CBR

They may have done, but I don't like them for their real-time-ness ! Most modelling questions I answer here (for example) would get a far inferior answer in real time than they do after much-considered thought and well-prepared diagrams / videos / other assets there is time for in a forum. Real time means you tend to get the first idea out of people's heads, and no1 has time to try stuff first... though I appreciate the corollary of having lots of brains answering in quick succession, and the wisdom of crowds, such as it is ! Also the amount of revisions and edits I do to posts to improve them is all wasted / unavailable in a real time format, hence why I find forums the perfect environment to help in... CBR

Well I don't use Redshift Primarily, so no I haven't noticed that, but could see why that could be the case, and indeed my own TPR of choice, Octane does a similar thing (in reverse tho) with using editor values for SDS level in final render ! If RS is doing similar, in that case just turn down the render count instead until you are actually ready to render to PV. CBR

Attributes / Modelling / Mesh Check or in 25+ under cogwheel in the main center toolbar. CBR

This should help... CBR

I am not an RS expert myself, so probably not the best person to look at this. Nonetheless I did try, but you didn't include any of the assets in the file, so all I have a is a model and material won't load ! CBR

Yep, it and every other spell checker in the universe... someone really should tell 'em. CBR

In theory, nothing should work better in those previous versions ! CBR

You are able to set editor and render particle counts differently for exactly that reason ! And indeed caching is there so you can have real-time playback before render. But even so, your particle geo should be the very simplest it can be - every polygon you save in those leads to thousands less calculations having to be performed on playback. Generally speaking you should always upload at least wireframe screenshot of what we are working with, so we can warn you if geo isn't suitable for what you are trying to make it do... CBR

Yes, you can use Mesh Checker and its edge points functions, which can automatically detect them and select them for you. Delete will then remove them. CBR

You don't need to close it to extrude. You need to make the loft editable (as it is now), and then extrude the lower edge via ctrl-dragging, ideally at the same time, and to the same height as the same edge on the angled flat bit like so... From there we need to delete some polys on the flat section where the door sections will be, for example... Select group of polys as we need and delete, select edges and ctrl drag down on Y, weld by white arrows, move axis to Y minimum, zero-scale flat. Excellent - I will look forward to that... CBR

What is that object ?!! 🙂 Yes, S26 can sort that out I believe - in several ways ! At its simplest, we have deflector forces (for the particles themselves) which you can make surround an object if it is suitable. Or you could make the particle geometry dynamic using a Rigid body tag on the emitter, and then just make the object(s) dynamic colliders ! Here's a quick scene file for that easiest of answers... Dynamic Emitter CBR.c4d Then there's a rather convoluted way via thinking particles and a moderate amount of Xpresso. And lastly (slightly) more intuitively via fields, and field forces I think. CBR

Well, I imagine it's still in tech preview because they are trying to get it right with the resources they have at hand !? And they have, let's not forget, made parts of it usable / helpful now. It is a way off perfect. And so it is still a tech preview, which they don't shout about, yet. 3 or 4 years ago the Cinema community's biggest criticism of Maxon (other than UVs maybe!) was that they didn't share with customers what was coming in the future. People constantly whinged about that, and eventually Maxon listened, and shared their tech preview of Scene nodes. Was everyone thankful, or grateful at all that they had listened to the userbase ? Not really. Instead, a lot of them just piled in on the tech preview, complaining it wasn't a finished system, comparing it with everyone else's 'more' finished systems etc etc... so really they can't win either way can they - no matter what they do, people want more, and sooner, expect it to somehow exceed what everyone else is doing, right from the get-go, and they criticise whatever they get, right out of the gate, and forever afterwards apparently ! If they show people early, it's 'not good enough', if they don't, they are 'ignoring what customers want'. We're seeing more of the same with unified dynamics - lots of people asking for it, and so Maxon respond, and start working on it, manage to unify cloth and rope in their first go at it, to massively improve on the old cloth system and include it in the first release they reasonably can. How does the world respond ? 'It isn't as good as Marvellous Designer !' a program that ONLY does cloth sim and has had 10 years + to get it right (and which, incidentally is also plagued with its own problems, bugs and I/O issues, which no1 seems to mention while they are comparing the 2!). To be honest I wonder quite where, as a dev, I'd find the impetus to get up every morning and keep working on something that might be good one day in the face of all this relentless judgement and expectation ! So I'm afraid I rather admire the people in that position who continue to do so !! It's a shame our vaulting ambition as a species is such a double-edged sword. CBR

Proximal shader and fields / field forces I think, like they do, linked to alpha map... CBR

Yes ,you need a Range Mapper. However I don't know what format that time is output in, so unsure what the parameters of that range mapper should be. One of our resident XPresso nutters will know though, so sit tight and I'm sure one will jump in soon... CBR

These are almost exclusively caused by convex quads, where the internal angles of any adjacent edges >180 degrees, producing an error-state polygon. Yes, they are eminently fixable by changing the circumstances that cause them. In the case of yours above the problem points are the ones in the middle of each polygons where it touches the circle(s). If you slide those edges slightly into the circle, that will correct things and turn them into legal kite quads. It does not mean that, and is unconnected with Normals. Yes they will. They will usually be black in render also. Sometimes, but don't try and select them, just move or slide the problem point(s) so you fix the error state and they will return to normal shading and VP appearance. Very important to know your error-states in modelling - there are many of them ! Non-manifold edges, convex quads, coincident polys, isolated vertices, edge points, complex poles, degenerated polys, 'bad' polygons, coplanar polys, the list goes on !!! CBR

Which versions of Cinema and RS is this ? Without that sort of real basic info we'll be struggling to help you. Uploading the scene file is best of all - that shows us all your relevant settings and gives us everything else we need. CBR

OK, turn off SDS cage in filter settings ? CBR

There are 2 things that you can make 'stiff' in a way that might help you - joint dynamics and hair dynamics. The latter isn't really suitable for this application, so I'd give the following a watch and see how it could apply. He really can make his tail as floppy or as stiff as he likes ! CBR