Mike A

PS: one thing I would suggest: either set up your waves as a spline and revolve it, or - if you're going the displacement route, map it to a disk rather than a grid so the poly flow sits well with the displaced rings.

I doubt this will be much use - but I just happen to have a set up for this in Houdini... Maybe you can 'translate' the Houdini VEX code into appropriate code for the C4D formula deformer. Basically it's just a sine wave - with it's amplitude controlled by a ramp. Very art directable.

I saw a similar thread on another forum trying the same thing with Houdini. Similar result. The script was 'somewhat in the right direction' but not good enough to work - currently.

Seasons greetings to all - and special thanks to all of you who make this place worth visiting : ) Fingers crossed we can make the vector of '23 a positive one : )

Exactly the sort of situation in which AI might be of use to us... one can hope...

Great to see this sort of stuff on Core4D : )

Fair enough. Yes , I'm well aware of the driver bug - super annoying - particularly the time they are taking to fix it. I was involved in a bit of liaison between Redshift and Nvidia on the previous driver bug - and that took many months to fix. Happily I seem to have been able to avoid the current issues. Running two 3090's here.

I just wonder if setting your 4090 as your 'primary' GPU - feeding your monitor(s) as well as C4D and Redshift might give you a performance boost, despite doing more work?

Another way to think of it: is the map being used as colour - or as numerical data? If the latter it should not be colour or gamma corrected - therefore Raw.

What? No Houdini version? 😀 But I do agree with Dasfrodo. A logical decision - quite possibly a life saving one. Given rope / cloth and pyro, it doesn't take much imagination to see Maxon delivering a new particles system - which could leave them high and dry if remain dependent on C4D.

Anyone with experience / thoughts on the 'CG Cookie' Blender training?

Fell into an internet wormhole and came across this... https://github.com/still-scene/t3 A Houdini and After Effects love child : ) Scroll down the page for a video.

"Hey guys - we can now do bendy metal doughnuts!!" The Maya marketing department: 😩

I think you just accepted a question as an answer.

Impressive progress being made for sure.

1. No - it's just a plain blue sky type of set up. 2. Often you'd use a 'backplate' image with the domelight. You can use the domelight image itself as a background, but because you would typically be viewing just a small part of the domelight 'sphere' - depending on camera focal length - you'll need a very high domelight resolution to give you reasonable 'image resolution' in your render. Also - because the domelight is calculated at 'infinity' you can't move it up or down - it would have no effect. You can rotate it of course. So, typically you'd use a 'backplate' image - see settings in the domelight, which just covers the camera view, to be your rendered background image.

Sad to hear this news @Cairyn. You've been a great contributor to this forum and will be missed, but as another user on a aging licence I understand where you're coming from. Personally I really hope we can get some more Blender and Houdini content here and tempt you back : ) Good luck with your Blender adventures - it's a great program and I'd like to dive into it more myself - but for now Houdini is keeping me more than busy : )

My first thought was the global postfx settings in the Review 'gear' menu > Display, but I don't think they would affect a snapshot like that. There is a 'clear frame buffer' in the Review view menu. Does that help?

Obviously only Igor knows the financials - but I think HappyPolygon has made a good suggestion. I suspect there are very few who will sign up for even a minor forum subscription 'blind' - particularly when there are so many free alternatives.

Welcome Henning - great reel!

Ah - OK. I haven't done any fluid yet : )

I know this tread is about 3 months old - but just had a thought on this: How about adding *point* normals followed by an attribute blur on 'N'. Would that smooth things out?

I have to agree - change needed.

Very interesting and enjoyable - thanks for posting!

You guys are too modest : )