HappyPolygon

Man that trash bag has ruined you life ! Isn't the Tools -> Axis -> Center Axis work ? If you have it under other parents/generators try unparenting it and then change the position of the Axis.

The features were few but the new opened use cases are a lot. They just kept focusing on presenting the features but not finding interesting ways to showcase them because they were going to spend too much time on constructing scenes or build XPresso rigs (for particles). I like the new deformer. It solves so many problems of the past.

OK here's what you need to do. I don't guarantee this will work because your Plugin is not a native MoGraph generator. Reset all parameters of the Divider so the divisions match the original topology of the Plane. Make a set up as the following image Set both Voronois without source points Change one of the X/Y or Z position values in PolyFXs' Transform tab to 1. Any small value is enough to separate the polygons. (Mode Partial Polys) Set the Cloner to Object and put the Voronoi with the Divider in there. Set the distribution to Polygon Center. Set the Inheritance as an Effector of the Cloner and set the rest of attributes as shown here Now hopefully now when you change the Dividers' attributes the clones will follow those changes... I put a Random Effector on the Voronoi of the Plane to test it and all cubes scaled accordingly. I'm not sure if this will have the same effect on the Divider if it's not compatible with Effectors.

Nothing is small potatoes when dealing with old code. This is the main reason for having so few updates for old features. It's easier to re-write a tool (not fast) or expand on it than revisit it to add things in it. Too many dependencies with other features.

cpu.mp4 unity.mp4

How to use your kidneys πψ.mp4

I think this was introduced in R23. I remember using it.

Some more reviews

Where ? Didn't see that in the listed features ? Is this a capsule thing in the Asset Manager ? How could this benefit VB ? You mean melting two textured meshes together and transferring their textures to the VB ?

If my calculations are correct C4D will reach the functional capabilities of Houdini minus the fluid and granular simulations in September 2025.

The density of a volumetric object is linked to its material. You can change the look of it by changing the opacity (and sometimes even SSS). I don't have RS but I guess it's this node Volume Shader It's all documented here https://help.maxon.net/r3d/cinema/en-us/Default.htm#html/Volume+Shader.html#Absorption

???? @Cerbera

The documentation has been resolved and the first thing I see is this : Should be stated as "default option" otherwise someone will assume RS is part of C4D I think the features with most impact in daily use are the following : Unified Dynamics System Viewport optimization (from what I understood so far the optimizations concern clones and material previews) Index Display Projection Deformer (asked for that 1 year ago - OK now I know how long it gets for a feature of this complexity to get developed) Linear Pre-Subdivision (can steal some usage from the Remesh) Break Spline Modifier (MAXON ONE only) (this can be used as a substitute to stack symmetric instances in grid mode with the help of the Spline Wrap Deformer) Surface Smear Vertex Map Transfer to other mesh Spline Symmetry with Remove Outside Pattern Selection (would be more useful is it was a Capsule) I think the Overshoot of the align to spline was possible using MoSpline The Explode Mesh and Explode Splines is just the equivalent of Voronoi without source points and PolyFX. Clone onto Points node ... I thought that was already a thing... Surprised to find out there was no node for inverting a bool value... I hope that resolves the Thicken and capsules that messed with normals ... Pyro and particles was already possible by using proxy geometry but the update is welcomed assuming it didn't spent much time for development. Overall : 6/10 and to be honest I don't see me sending any new suggestions concerning these new features (which is good) so 122 minus 1 suggestions for next time because they caught up with the Symmetry-Spline one One reasonable question is: why the heck aren't all those nodes posted in Core4D from people working in Maxon don't make it to C4D ?

This is a new problem and caching isn't my forte. I suggest you make a new thread for this problem in order for more people to see it as this thread has been flagged as Solved.

I expected more modeling features not simulation stuff.... The unified rigid body system, faster viewport and Index display are definitely a plus and shine the most compared to the rest of features. The documentation hasn't been updated yet but found a nice 404 animation... I didn't notice anything about ZBrush .... I'm not following ZBrush, maybe there was an update earlier and doesn't follow the rest of MAXONS app update releases.

Yes the market analogy is not far from reality but it doesn't really explain why the size of the bucket matters but the number, which I totally get why and how the number affects render times, this is the principle under having multiple cores and threads in CPUs and GPUs... So a better analogy to the market is having more than one hands to hold one basket per hand. Size of baskets doesn't matter because you'll manage to carry the same weight in total and complete the task in the same time by either growing more hands or getting bigger baskets. But in video (thank you BENTRAJE) it's spot on at the time stamp that what seems to matter is how the CPU receives packets of data compared to the GPU... the rest is specific to the M1 architecture so I didn't watch it all. So for me, that use only C4D and not RS and thus only the CPU and not the GPU (which also shows in the Task Manager) doesn't really matter as long as I use the same number of buckets as available cores. As long as the speed is maintained the same bicket size doesn't contribute to it, only visually.

In the following video uploaded a bit earlier today Ellie demonstrates the correlation between bucket size and render time. How are the two even correlate ? Does that mean it could get even faster if it just used a scanline to render ? Does this also happen with the native C4D renderers ?

All I see is a squished cylinder and none of the effects of the Divider plugin... I'm confused, do you need to scale the cloners or the polygons of the distribution area ? Are you trying to achieve something like this ? Scale clones to the size of polygon area ?

I'm trying to assign a MultiShader to a Cloner that has a lot of spheres with different sizes defined by a MoGraph Weightmap Tag through a Plain Effector but it doesn't do anything. Do I need to use the Shader Effector ? (tried Field Color, Effect Color.... nothing) Should I be using the Color Shader Instead ? Can I use XPresso on that ? (I've never used MoGraph nodes) I want small spheres to have a light green color and bigger spheres a darker green color.

Probably but can't spot if there's a new feature on that video. It just looks like particles in a Field Force using Curled Vectors.... Only thing I noticed when trying to replicate it was that there were always a small number of particles (standard emitter) that refused to follow any force and a very slow viewport compared to non-particle pyro.

Japan is already in 2025 Severe conections ala Blender MoDependence Inpector - That'll make easier to figure out what's going on with Field and Effector references... Actually that's a better visualization for any kind of object references. https://kengoito1110.gumroad.com/