Cerbera
-
Posts
17,859 -
Joined
-
Days Won
708
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Forums
Gallery
Pipeline Tools
3D Wiki
Plugin List
Store
Downloads
Everything posted by Cerbera
-
Pic would be helpful - what sort of numbers of polys are we talking about here ? CBR
-
Yes, Project Mesh is not the same thing. Project Spline is in R25 though, under Spline / Move section... You can find any tool you can't locate in Cinema (providing it is actually there of course) with Shift+C. CBR
-
I don't, unfortunately. You would have to open that big scene in order to copy things out of it unless you can find a plugin that shows you an object list at import. I agree there is not enough information here - the import routines change in Cinema with almost every version, and you don't say which version you have, or which plugin you tried, and your profile is still empty 65 posts in ! That should have been complete before post 1, so that we don't have to spend the first 5 posts of every question trying to find out what you are using !! CBR
-
I think that should be fairly easy to srt out. You could use a shader effector on the clones, but having first assigned a grey material to a selection of all but the face polys, which will eliminate them from the shader effectors grasp... CBR
-
The SPICE !!!! 🤪 Cheers Stefano. CBR
-
Not at all - that's a very interesting way to get most of that effect, and one I wouldn't have immediately thought of ! Fascinating to see all the different approaches. Is that the Spline Deformer you have there ? And any chance of a scene file so we can look about ? CBR
-
We do need it ideally, and the SDS shrinkage we get using those techniques is something that works against that precision. Particularly problematic when you want infinite resolution on a retopo'd cad mesh and all your snapping tools are based on the base mesh, not the SDS result, meaning things need manual inflation after the model has been established, which means re-projection targets no longer apply. It's not insurmountable, but it can be a PITA sometimes, and often means I have to build a base mesh at higher resolution than I would like to minimise that problem. CBR
-
Ah gotya - wonderful stuff... CBR
-
No, I don't want to discourage you from posting - we constantly have threads featuring feedback, and yours are invariably helpful IME, but we just need to not do it couched in the seething anger that seems to surround it ! It is perfectly possible to express even deeply negative feedback without being in the slightest bit rude about it to the people who are engaging with you... CBR
-
I follow you as far as getting the pattern into the sand, but how are you getting the rake (presuming we are animating that too) to freely switch between 2 axes as it surely must do to be able to rotate from either end ? This is the sort of hierarchical nightmare that my brain is singularly unoptimized to parse... CBR
-
This is not the way to talk about anybody @thanulee !! I think Fritz is owed an apology. He has read your feedback, thanked you for it, asked you to elaborate, which you briefly did, and his latest response seems entirely reasonable to me. Why would you imagine he is pretending anything, and be so disproportionately hostile and rude about someone who is obviously trying to respond as helpfully as permissions allow ??! On a personal note - what incentive do you think this sort of thing offers developers to engage with the public if they are to face this unwarranted hurricane of piss when they do respond ?! Appalling behaviour ! CBR
-
Yes I agree 🙂 CBR
-
I am not rising to it, and tris do have a place, but ngons are technically an error state in which triangulation is not controlled by the user. CBR
-
In much the same sort of way that I enjoy pushing polys around I also enjoy watching other people do much the same, but with small piles of sand and various geometrically proportioned rakes. So sharing this, for interest's sake mainly, presuming as I do that here I may find a few like-minded souls who would enjoy it merely for the sheer zen joy and relaxing sake of it. In some ways I find myself wishing that it had @Hrvoje's dulcet tones commentating, for the ULTIMATE in zen meltiness, but the gongs will have to do 🙂 This is one of my favourites... but Here's the whole playlist... But of course I can't help thinking how we would replicate such things back in 3D land, so it's in a discussion thread so once we've all stopped appreciating this sort of thing at the aesthetic level we can hear how everyone might go about that in their various DCCs of choice... I think in Cinema we'd have trouble doing it with actual particles (certainly without XP help) but I wonder if collision deformer could get us a decent start... and then there's the 'double pivot challenge'... CBR
-
Excellent - I would mark this 'solved', but honestly can't decide who deserves it more !! I thereby leave it to OP to decide, but if any topic deserves a tick, it's this one ! 🙂 CBR
-
I agree that's the nearest we could get ! Or go for the Cornetto approach, and just whack a chocolate cone over that bit 😉 I wonder if that is why they do that to cornettos - I vaguely recall watching an interview about 20 years ago with someone saying they filled and coated the bottom with chocolate for rigidity and to seal the remaining hole left by their (apparently) imperfect automatic rolling machine ! CBR
-
Don't be disheartened ! Learning modelling to a high level may take years and years, but it's a very rewarding journey, and there is lots of help available... CBR
-
Btw, in case you didn't find the answer in the thread I referred you to, the way to get us scene files which are too big to directly upload is to pop them up to dropbox or whatever, and then link them here. But the pics may be enough in this case. And yes, I think we can see the problem... That topology there really could not be more unsuitable for rigging. You can't just rig any mesh, and expect it to deform correctly unless it has an edge flow that supports the ways in which the rig will make it deform. Your current model does not have an edge flow, so the way it deforms will be arbitrary, and almost certainly not correct. It also looks like you applied SDS or something else that made it go massively high res, which is also the opposite of what we need for a rig. You need a low poly base mesh and live subdivision surfaces. The bad news, is that to make this work properly, you are most likely going to have model this again, having watched a few tutorials on SDS modelling, low poly character design, human form flow etc etc - unfortunately learning this sort of stuff tends to take months rather than hours ! But that is what is going wrong, and I'm afraid there is no magical button that can just fix it... More modelling XP required !!! 🙂 As a starting point, look at the mannequin primitive model that Cinema ships with. That is the sort of polygon density we need. CBR
-
Welcome on in ! 🙂 Have a read of How to post thread !! We need to know which version of Cinema you are using, so please complete profile while you're at it ! CBR
-
We can never do what that cone does in real life, given that the only reason it seals into a perfect tip is because it starts off mainly liquidy and soft, gets smushed together at the bottom of that metal former thing, and then dries contiguous and crispy ! If we can somehow do THAT in 3D then the world is a wonderful place indeed !! CBR
-
You gonna be nice and share your f***-yeah math FTW scene file !?? 😉 CBR
-
Yes I was looking for that the other day ! I think it has gone. However, we can fix the points directly in the Rope Tag. Other than we also have the Rope Belt Tag for attaching them to other objects. CBR
-
Well this is excellent forum-ing everyone 🙂 I imagine we all learned a lot here ! Thank you for all the brilliant ideas and very nice to have that little mission solved ! CBR
-
I don't think it is. What we need is a top-down flat projection established before it rolls, or in my case above, the modelled equivalent which is baked in of course, if only we could get the polys not to distort with deformers. Anything we try with baked textures is going to necessarily do the same as it is tied to what is happening to the polys, and I can't imagine any standard projection is going to work if applied in its rolled state, especially given the required overlap. Hmmmm. CBR
-
Yes me too. I don't mind admitting this is properly doing my head in 🙂 We should ask @noseman - he's quite clever, and loves a challenge... ...or perhaps @HappyPolygon or @bezoor @MODODOcan ride dramatically to the rescue ? ..and here's a starter file with flat and ridged versions (S26) in case anyone wants a jumping-off point... Waffle cone 2.c4d CBR
