Cerbera

Dammit - I noticed that in your screenshot, and nearly said something about field colors before dismissing it as being too obvious ! Needless to say, had we had the scene file I would have checked, and instantly seen that was the case, and changed my mind... CBR

Oh. there's XP people here that will be all over this 🙂 Not me, but I shall enjoy watching from the side lines ! CBR

Yes you would. Rigid body Dynamics and Dynamic Connectors can handle that sort of thing quite easily if you are used to working with those sort of systems. Accurate alignment of dynamic connectors to geometry, and axis positions need to be rather precise, but other than that it's fairly simple to implement once you are familiar with the different connector types. Here's Core alumni Sam from Digital Meat explaining the first of the dynamic connectors and how to use them. You should watch that, and the several that follow it detailing the other types... Once you've seen those you should have a good idea of the specific components you need to get your oil pump pumping... OR you can go another way entirely, which would be to drive the rotation of everything with Xpresso and various constraint / target tags... CBR

OP is not helping get this solved by not providing the scene file, or showing us what it should look like ! Honestly - it's like trying to paint a hallway through a letterbox ! CBR

Did you link the relevant selection tag(s) to the correct materials ? CBR

Yes, those 3 points specifically, + also it's all too clean and shiny. needs a bit of overall dulling down I would say, even if it's new... CBR

Hi Peter - welcome to the Core 🙂 Please make sure to complete your profile - we usually need to know that version info to be able to offer the correct advice. You can select clones directly if you ctrl-right click the viewport, and select the correct object from the list that appears. Then 'S', while your mouse is over the OM will scroll to that object. CBR

We'll be needing the scene file to be able to help with that... pls upload it. CBR

Worry not, I haven't abandoned you - I am just teaching tonight til late alas... but I will be back on the case with this tomorrow if that's OK... Interesting that reversing your normals fixed things with hair, as they 'seemed' correct in that file ! We can definitely sort the material out. I am guessing you haven't UV unwrapped the model ? If not you can try one of the standard projections (in the material tag; probably cubic is best for now) OR you can unwrap the mesh and use UV mapping mode, but that is probably a bit advanced initially. OR you could use a tri-planar setup (basically Cubic++, without the seams!), which I can't advise you further on until I know which renderer you are using. CBR

Does that file almost bring your computer to its knees as well ?! There are some big issues in that file that will make diagnosing this very difficult - not least the decision to animate an applied SDS mesh ! Why are we doing that instead of animating a low poly base mesh and doing live subdivision ?! Also some fairly grim topology problems there (density / flow etc), but that's not what you're here to discuss. Unfortunately it slows things down to the point where I can't see what is colliding with what, and playback is impossible. A quesiton though - have you styled that hair at all ? Like brushed it and whatnot ? Because I seem to recall that breaks the dynamics unless you put one setting back that I am temporarily struggling to remember. Little help guys ?! 🙂 CBR

Lols - we transfer having an off day then are they ? 😉 CBR

No, something is badly off there - it's like hair is growing inside. Are the normals of that mesh correct ? Also please update profile - that is definitely not R20 ! CBR

Hmmm. That is not what hair is meant to look like ! I wonder if there isn't something fundamentally wrong with its application. Unusual to apply it in vertex mode on a character model - polygon area usually preferable. And I am not seeing a hair collider tag on the stag, right, or am I missing that ? What we really need is the scene file though, so we can see ALL the settings, and see what is what everywhere in your scene. Can you upload to dropbox or something and link here ? CBR

Not directly, but yes via vertex maps, which fields can influence. Slightly confused though - your profile says R19, which doesn't have fields ! CBR

Select it and Press C (make editable). CBR

I'm afraid that is known issue with M1 chips and that OS. Maxon are working to fix it as soon as possible, and it should be addressed in a later patch. As I understand it your file is not at risk of becoming corrupt due to this. CBR

..and how could we do that in Cinema ? Or couldn't we ?! CBR

I like Chester's way better than the constraints option, but having applied the constraints once, you don't need them after that, so you could just CStO the whole setup once done, and off them all in the process - no more scene / frame slow-down. CBR

Apart from enjoying all the lovely sculpting, I am reminded of the classic statement on sculpting by Karl Pilkington, in which he concludes that because most statues we see are naked, then carving a 'knob and bollocks' must be easier than doing trousers... still makes me laugh, years later... CBR

I notice that occasionally when I am looking through my orbit camera, which is aligned to a circle spline, and I accidentally jog my space mouse actuator, which can flip things occasionally. In my case though, jogging it in the other direction puts it straight back. CBR

No, that's not how the cloner works - it is either in Grid Array Mode (independent of other geo) or it is using your landscape object to clone directly onto, which can be done in any of the Object modes the cloner offers, but of course grid array isn't one them ! So if it has to be a grid array layout then you need another way of snapping these things to the surface object. So I would try clamp constraints next (Surface mode) I think. Those don't work on clones (god I hate those constraint tags) but, if you apply a clamp to the object under a cloner, and then make the cloner editable, all the clones that have that tag applied should jump down to the surface, and if you have set the axes of these objects properly at their bases, then they will do so hopefully as you need, without changing their grid array positions on XZ. 'A surface-clamped grid array form ex-cloner, yesterday'. This does actually work with render or even multi instances too, but you have to manually copy the constraint tag to the instances when made editable, which is not the case in regular instance mode. CBR

There is not. That only works with geo alas... CBR

Always include the scene file so we can see all the relevant settings... otherwise we're just guessing. Could be a dynamics scale thing, could be a topology issue, could be a steps per frame thing, could be solved by friction - if we have the scene file we can just find the settings you need... CBR

Well, there's BodyPaint, in native Cinema, which can paint on any channel in a material, and even a PBR material if memory recalls... However that is not very rewarding or intuitive to use so most people these days run out to Substance Painter for that sort of thing because of the vastly superior way it deals with seams and how easy it is to use. I certainly do... CBR

You've answered your own question - the geo nodes in Blender are fully developed and released functionality - Cinema's scene nodes are a tech preview and work in progress, so I'd hope it was obvious that it would be unfair to compare the two this early... I have every confidence that our geo nodes will be every bit as useful as Blender's. As for the reason the tech preview is included, that was partly in response to requests from the userbase about the future plans of Cinema, so is a good example of one occasion when they listened to their users, and also it serves as what I'd call a very sensible way to get its development seen by lots of users early on, so that they can give feedback, which will help develop their nodes to be as useful and helpful as they intend them to be. Already we are starting to see node based 'capsules' that are directly draggable into the OM to be used in traditional workflows, and some of those are hugely powerful (Rocket lasso's FUI capsules) or very useful NOW like some of the geometry operators which can, for example change the axis of a parametric object. As for who got there first, and why, not sure it matters, or that you would have accurate information about who started developing what, when !! If it's nodes we're talking about, Houdini got there before Blender, and Max a decade before that (its stack could be considered nodal to an extent) - so what ? Not sure what the point is there... CBR