Mike A

That's impressive.

and... https://www.synthesia.io/

...and Redshift is, after a few years of 'freedom', now getting 'Maxonified'. The Redshift team has, historically, updated the software roughly monthly or so. Those updates used to regularly add features - some small, some large - but it was rare for a release to not contain something of value. In the last year or so, since their assimilation into the Maxon empire, we still get those monthly updates, but they contain little more than bug fixes. It's a known fact that they have product improvements which could be released now, but they don't. Why? Because they are being held back for the big R26 party. Frustrating.

I often enjoy a bit of Moritz and Manuel chat, but I thought that was particularly interesting. There are certainly some serious points to consider if you imagine a world where you can't tell the real humans from the bots.

It looks like a dodge to me. I'd ask again : )

I've got a machine on order with 2x 3090's... : ) So I'll be interested to see how it goes : )

Interesting to hear of this software, I'll have to give it a look. I'm a MOI fan. I use it a lot and have done some big projects with it. In fact one of my major clients was enthusing about some models they received from me, built in MOI, just a couple of days ago. I try not to mention it here so I don't raise the polygon-flow wrath of Cerbera ; ) LOL! It's not for everyone of course, nor for every job - but for a lot of the work I do it's brilliant.

Not at all, I think that's a very modest hourly rate... I'd charge more : ) But I am more than surprised to hear of this set up. If this is a standard test, those questions and scene files should be set, prepared and approved by Maxon beforehand. I'm shocked to find these would be freestyle dependent on the trainer, and marked as such. I was expecting the process to take a few hours for the trainer - not two days. So, the trainer in the lowest cost economy, with the lowest hourly rate, is going to get all the business then?

I haven't updated since R21 - and TBH I don't feel like I'm missing much.

Whatever the merits of the certification, at a 'suggested' cost of £1k for the 'basics' and an additional £2k for the 'trainer' it seems to me that some folks at head office have a seriously over inflated sense of their own self worth.

The real cost - at least for any trainer worth his or her fee - is in the many many hours constantly upgrading one's own skills, training materials and courses.

If only...

For Adobe - historically the re-certification cycle has been about 2 years or so. I have so many of those certificates I could probably wallpaper my office. Having said that, the Adobe system has almost broken down in recent years because they have zero interest in supporting their 'training partners'. For Adobe at least, as Hvanderwegen says, it's all about how much money it brings in. Minimum investment, maximum extraction.** I should stop before I say something I really do regret : ) **Looking on the positive side, maybe Maxon views it differently - as Matt suggests above.

I've been an Adobe Certified Expert and Certified Instructor for over twenty years - and have proctored and guided many students through their exams. My experience matches 100% with Hvanderwagen's. Like him, I had to get certified because of my associations with various universities and training centers that I freelanced with. What's the value of these certifications? Pretty much zero**. Some corporates like their in house staff to have that certification, but they are few and far between. A little while ago Adobe renamed their basic 'Adobe Certified Associate' certification to 'Adobe Certified Professional'. Really? Knowing which menu entry you need or some basic tool operation does not make you a professional. Having a wide range of technical know-how, experience, problem solving skills, people management skills, and more - that makes you a professional in my book. EDIT: ** Re-reading this it's maybe a little too harsh. Not 'zero', but on it's own it isn't going to get you a job either. Maybe two equally talented and experienced candidates, one with certification, one without - yep, it might tip the balance.

Thanks Stefano. I certainly agree that its much more the user than the engine. As you say, pretty much any of them can produce great images in the hands of a skilled user. I was certainly tempted by Vray when it first became available for C4D, but was a little uncertain about it's future. If I decided to add another renderer to my tool kit it would be high on the list.

@Stefano StrikaStefano - I can see you have V-ray and Corona listed as your renders, both excellent of course. Your work is top quality (Check out Stafano's portfolio at https://www.3drenderandbeyond.com/ if you haven't : ). Which renderer do you prefer, and why?

While there is some absolutely top quality architectural visualisation around, I find much of the middle market decidedly 'cookie cutter' these days. It all looks the same. Same stock materials. Same stock assets. Same stock animation. That's why some of the renderers have the market. It's not so much the quality of one vs the quality of another - it's much more about the overall system. Is the renderer supported with a large library of the materials and assets that are needed? When I was developing my little visualisation studio many years ago I was doing some architectural work, and seriously thought about specialising in it. I'm pretty glad I didn't. For the vast majority of projects it's become a drag-and-drop production line.

Just installed and tried this little plugin. I can immediately see it's going to be one of those 'how did I manage before' tools. So, so helpful. Thank you so much Dast!

I think it was 2008 or so! Yes, the layout and smaller elements / switches, minor UI items etc were done in Ps. Each page of the UI was a Ps document of many hundreds of layers. The main piano images and things like the rotating control knobs were all built in C4D. I remember visiting a pano supplier to take measurements and shoot photo reference of the real instruments. The models were built pretty accutately. The control knobs were animated across their rotational range - perhaps every degree or so, and then rendered as an image sequence. The UI software then displayed the appropriate frame of the animation as you dragged the control in the UI.

I'm not a musician myself, but the reson I mention it: a long, long time ago... I did the original UI design and graphics on Ivory! All the imagery - pianos, control knobs etc - built and rendered in C4D : ) https://vantagegraphics.co.uk/project/ivory-interface/ It's way overdue for a revamp and now very 'retro' - but it was good at the time LOL!

A bit of a segue: but do any of you guys know of Synthogy's Ivory piano vst? https://synthogy.com/index.php/products/software-products/ivory-2-grand-pianos

I didn't know this existed, and I use scroll to first active quite frequently. I'll be checking it out soon! Thanks Dast! I'm on R21 so unfortunately I cant test in on R22+

Very clever...

Thanks for posting - an interesting and enjoyable watch.

It's amazing how far we've come...