everfresh

big fan of her work, so i was extra stoked when i was asked to do the character rigging for this piece... :)

same here, solid modelling i'd say, but you could have made him much more efficient regarding the poly count, especially the head. you could have gotten away with only half the poly count in total without loosing any detail. makes your life much harder for weighting and facial poses than it needs to be, also your playback speed in the viewport will suffer, since you're planning on animating a short it's really worth saving every poly you can. makes everything go much smoother...

i'm on vacation, so i choose not to care.

you might enjoy this one then ;)

^^ this. brings me back to the objective: how good is houdini with cel shading? does it provide something like s&t, the ability to create complex cel shading setups, does it have something equivalent to a hatch and a spot shader? if not, can you built something like that in houdini and how hard would that be? i've never seen anything cel shaded made with houdini, although i'm sure it's possible to create cel shaded materials with it. another question for me would be about it's character rigging tools? anyone ever dabbled with that?

guys... really? no need to take anything personal here. everyone here is right to a certain extend, at least that's how i see it. i don't think anyone doubts that houdini exceeds c4d in most areas. but it's always about which workflow is for you, some click with houdini, some don't. for some c4d provides enough functionality, for some obviously not. for the work i do and for my personal projects for instance c4d (in combo with xp and a few other plugins) is just right. sure it would be nice if we had this or that functionality in c4d houdini provides, but that also goes the other way around, maybe not to the same extend, but it does. i addition i think no one here is really really happy with the pace of c4ds development. this makes the arguing even more pointless. we all seem to agree on most aspects anyways. so i really don't get why threads like this have to derail all the time. cheers.

like @Cerbera i'm having no trouble with the existing tools, although of course it could be better... in addition to seamilar there's also a plugin around called uv-vonc, which also brings a few nice additions to the native uv-workflow.

i've not heard too many good things about the realflow c4d plugin (crashes, limitations...). and since you preordered xp4 and it will already come out in a few days i would definitely wait and see if xp4 meets your fluid-sim demands. realflow is really good at doing fluid sims, and i doubt xp4 will reach it's quality. but from what i've seen xps biggest hurdle in doing fluid sims has been covered with the open vdb mesher, seems to be butter smooth with almost no jittering at all. that in combination with the new fluid solver should get us pretty far and pretty close to realflow quality. if you're planning on doing large scale ocean sims realflow might be an option, although i think you'd have to go with the standalone version, afaik the c4d plugin can't do large scale sims either. like @grain mentioned, i'd rather go for houdini indie, you'll not only get fluid sims but a full blown vfx feature set for a fraction of the cost.

very nice renders. which render engine did you use?

yeah, i already noticed... thanks. again.

thanks guys... vector knows i'm trying to keep a low profile on my birthday, so thanks for the tease :D

nice :) since you're doing a cartoon i would stay away from dynamics for the car though... you probably want the animation to be snappy - so not physically accurate by any means...

fun! :) what's with the flickering of the trees?

you need to excuse those two, they can't help themselves, they already have meetings twice a week at AQ (anonymous quadroholics)... you need to be careful, don't get to close to them. it's infectious. i used to have an occasional ngon here and there in my characters, and i didn't mind at all. but i got too close to vector, and now i also find myself modelling everything all quads... nice modelling btw ;)

another product video for my main client, it's particularly fun to make product videos for this brand since i created the logo and claim and the whole CI as well. also their products are really high quality, always more satisfying to do advertising for good products.... rendered with c4ds physical renderer.

thanks... :) here's some wires of craig crookedile.

@Cutman is the 100k meant before or after tax? what if you make most of your income in graphics design with other software like adobe apps? those points aren't really clear on their faq....

i made this little project to get familiar with redshift, which i bought about two weeks ago. i tried to squeeze in as much as possible to learn a few things like how to do displacement, volumetrics, fog, blurry transparency and SSS with redshift. the swamp scene rendered 12 minutes at 1080p on a single gtx1080ti, the most expensive thing in there was the SSS, without it the render took only around half the time. if i had rendered that with physical i would have waited half a day for the render to finish. just so much more convenient to go to the fridge, grab a beer, and when you come back it's done. redshift is really so much fun, instant feedback on the IPR, even with heavy stuff. the look dev alone would have taken 10 times longer otherwise. best 500$ spent in a long time.

yeah, the walk cycle is a bit wonky, but hey, the surface of that floor seems slippery enough for it to be somewhat believable :D btw, you can render out a hair pass as post effect and then combine it with the object buffer...

as mentioned by myself and many others in this thread ease of use is still c4ds main strength. it seems to be particularly popular among designers and generalists, also people who usually don't have that much of a technical mindset. as for myself i've learned to like the technical aspect of things through learning c4d, and only because of that i have the perspective of being able to flirt with houdini. if it wasn't for c4d, i'd be scared sh*tless even looking at it. what makes c4d still worth every penny for me is that i'm able to produce stuff very quickly, so the money i make by using it doesn't remotely compare to it's price. so at least to me c4d is still a very good deal, although i'd also like them to step up their game. i don't do much vfx stuff for work, or have the need to incorporate the most fancy procedural eyecandy imaginable to the stuff i usually do. sometimes a little bit more funcionality would be nice, but i can usually get by with a plugin or another idea to solve the issue. even though i'm not that happy with c4ds pace of development these days, i'm still happy to use it every day. i believe houdini can be a huge time saver for complex stuff, but for the simple things c4d is still unbeatable in productivity IMO. so right now i don't think houdini is that much of a threat to c4d, even though a lot of c4d users have picked it up, i believe most of them still use c4d for the simple day to day work. for me it isn't an either or kind of question, i see houdini as an addition to my toolset, not really a replacement. if houdini ever manages to get near the ease of use of c4d it will be a threat, for now it's more like apples and oranges. others with a more technical mindset and more sophisticated needs might see it differently, but the fact that c4ds userbase is still growing tells me there's still a place for it.

understandable you're makin a cut, man... sorry, couldn't resist. my wife would slap me now :D when i saw the features of that 16.5 demo a week ago and the whole presentation a couple of days later it made me think. houdini really has become the one-does-it-all DCC software and i will pick it up again soon i guess... i was playing around a bit with it about 2 years ago and i just gave up because it was so complicated, at least to me. also my computers struggled a bit with it, got a bunch of crashes. and that's basically what made me stick with c4d, ease of use and stability, regarding features c4d falls behind rapidly, not just in comparison to houdini. i will wait for the all-mighty r20 release, not that i have high hopes for it, just because i won't be able to learn houdini that fast and i need something to get the work done. and to be honest, c4d does everything i need it to do for the kind of work i make my living with, but it's just too tempting to see how much fun all those fancy houdini features could add to my spare time. long story short: good luck, maybe we'll meet again on the other side.

looking good. but why the split between the turntable and the packshot? also if you made the packshot a little smaller, it wouldn't look so sqeezed into the frame. always try to give the elements in your designs some room to breathe, if you want to show the details, rather mix in some close up shots ;)

nice work. some framing and camera moves seemed a bit odd, and the animation could have been snappier. also some center of gravity issues in the character animation. but all in all very well done for a first short.

i'm sorry if i misunderstood. like i said, i didn't want to sound negative, i just assumed since you were talking about using katana as well in your film project post it was directly related. my bad.

katana is looking awesome from what i've seen so far. the first time i've seen a demo of it my jaw dropped straight to the floor. but i have my doubts the whole katana/mari/renderman and probably nuke workflow is practicable for your planned community film project. the way i see it you might be stuck then with one or two people having to do all the look dev / texturing/ rendering and compositing. even if you can get the foundry to give away a few temporary licenses, people would still have to put some time and effort into learning a software just for that one project, and probably will never be able to use it again because they simply can't afford it. i have my doubts that you can get many people here excited about that. i get that you want to establish a professional film studio pipeline for this project, but i think you might be shooting a little too high here. i don't want to be negative, just trying to be realistic. most people here are comfortable with C4D, and some with 3rd party renderers like arnold, octane, redshift and such. you wrote in another post that you can imagine different scenes being rendered with different renderers, how are you going to make sure the look is really consistent throughout all the shots. not that it's not doable, just means it will be again an extra effort that has to be made and probably will slow things down. again, i don't want to talk anything to death here, and what do i know really, those are just my thoughts on it, maybe others see it completely different.