HappyPolygon

It's probably going to be a voxel cloud. The network know what is where it just looses quality to represent it perfectly if there are not enough angles of it. As seen from the 2-minute paper many far-away elements or overly complex objects like trees have a bad JPEG look on them. But the whole conversion process will look like the current method of object reconstruction. It won't be efficient to convert to polygons,

No, not yet. But you can do the opposite. (use a shader to influence hair bend)

You could use an XPresso to automatically move the second light in the opposite direction. You basically rig your own Symmetry tag.

Yeah, but it lacks copy+paste ....

I would be happy if nothing like this ever got to be part in C4D scene nodes. The main reason to use nodes should be to construct rules for adaptive generative modeling, not static modeling. He is doing everything the hard way. There is no serious reason to favor nodes over already available native tools. If he had made his Cathedral adaptive I would be impressed. The only adaptive thing he ever did in his channel was the Christmas cable in the Mouse House. As for the content, as I said before, more content will emerge as people are willing to experiment and learn the new tool. When there is no content you make some. Someone has to make the first step. Maybe that one is you.

Have you seen any good geometry nodes Blender videos out there ? Because all I have seen is either short showcases and RnD without explaining how they did it or basic staff like how to distribute clones on surfaces. I haven't seen any tutorial on geometry nodes about anything C4D is not already capable of. In fact the main reason Blender developed Geometry Nodes was to compete for C4D's Fields and MoGraph. Most Blender users use GeometryNodes for something we've been doing for mor than 3 years. The most advanced GeometryNodes videos out there are about procedural buildings in the form of kit-bashing, something that Srek has told me is already possible with SceneNodes. There's a NAB or Motion Graphics video where Noseman explains how to build a procedural building using only cloners. People see Geometry Nodes and fail to see why nodes were really developed for other DCCs. Nodes offer a parametric, procedural, non-destructive way of building scenes or objects. C4D was already offering parametric, non-destructive and procedural tools, the problem was that not all tools where build or eventually became parametric and non-destructive. For example Spline Chamfer and Spline Outline are not non-destructive. In fact any orange colored tool is destructive and/or non-parametric. Some years ago Extruding was a destructive function, now we have it in the form of a deformer covering all the inconveniences. MAXON developed SceneNodes not because we lacked the modern scene-building workflows but because the improvement of the old tools would result in 30+ new deformers and generators doing the same thing as their orange twin counterparts. Having so many deformers and generators in a top-down hierarchy in the OM has its own drawbacks. The node system offers a way to arrange dependencies in 2D allowing for more complexity, using less tools to affect more things at the same time in less room. Patience, 20 April we'll have the new mid-term release and we will know how much things have advanced. C4D is a commercial product and always aimed at simple, fast and intuitive solutions. I prefer having an easy to use node system completed in 5 years rather a hard one right now. And right now I'm having both.

Doesn't matter, upload the file for others to see.

You can also export the new volumetric object as VDB and re-import it as a stand-alone object. This can help your scene be less populated with generators that might also run computations in the background.

I don't have a video. I have some threads. MODODO has made some serious stuff in here. And Chris Shmidt from Rocket Lasso has provided two Node Assets that are completely out of this world in terms of complexity and usefulness. The reason why you don't see many or any videos about C4D nodes is because C4D users have been used to a certain type of workflow and thinking that is completely different from the node system. There was a time where everyone was afraid of XPresso (me included), now most people know how to use it. Same with the SceneNodes. As the time passes and the system gets more mature more people will start using it. Currently he manual doesn't really help with nodes as their usability is not well documented with examples and screenshots being outdated from the previous versions. We expect many updates there soon. Blender has millions of users as it is the main application used by students and hobbyists from various fields not only CGI related. It is expected for a certain number of people to emerge with some very elaborate showcases. C4D has a much smaller user power so people with node showcases are very fewer.

I thought those had an immediate effect on the object without any Mesher... damn I need to find a small VDB for testing purposes.

Is the Mesher necessary ? Doesn't the VDB work directly under the VB ?

From Minecraft effect to Terraria 😂

That's your opinion. I've used a lot of capsules for things I couldn't do before. Based on what data ? Your opinion again ? They started 6 months earlier. The project has more developers than any other DCC.

Doesn't my suggestion work on the VDBs ? I don't have a spare VDB to test it on but I think I've done it before.

Will that solve the minecraft effect ?

It's as simple as importing any other object.

1. if you import the vdb cloud via the import menu the object will appear with a blue Volume Builder icon, I don't know what the RS icon means for the type of the object, probably the VB doesn't recognize this type of object 2. Why is your material tag black ?

We don't need metahumans we only need metaraptors. Jokes aside what does Tom Cruse have to do with dinosaurs ? I was expecting a Chris Prat facial recognition.

That's why never fall for that Xfrog, Forrester or Insidium plant plugins. C4D doesn't handle geometry in an abstract way in the Viewport. I could setup this scene easily in Vue in my old 4GB ram laptop and wait 12 hours for it to render,

The animation acts weird. I guess a better subdivision of the mesh can make for smoother transition. If you use a camera with less perspective you won't be seeing the inside of the tube-like form of the object as it leaves the stage. tick.mp4

I really don't know, I just used the Weight tag in the Guides->Growth->Density material field of the Hair Object. Maybe that makes the whole simulation re-calculate the position of each guide over and over.... Maybe it's because I changed the mode to Physical on the second try ? Doesn't make sense but did make the project work the right way.

In case that does work as intended I have to add the following: The sweep thing is not going to work well because it has spherical Caps following the growth of the newly formed geometry. (that was the case with the file you provided not the concept image) I would recommend a Boolean animation revealing the object but that would have hard edges you might not want. So the best option here I think is to abandon the growth animation of the Sweep. Now that we know how to make hair disappear you can keep my setup as a reference but don't make a copy of the sweep. You will have to make it editable though. Just use the clear material on it looks like it has no material at all. It doesn't need a material, it's totally covered in fur ! Apply a Weight map on it and use an animated Field on it to drive the weighting along it. The type of field can be a spline or linear it doesn't matter as long as you get a nice weight map. As long as you don't show the edges where the fur disappears from a perspective where the hollow object shows, you are fine. Otherwise you have to make some new fury geometry follow the ends to cover the gaps which will be hard. The trick that made hair disappear completely was to use the Weight tag in the Guidees->Growth->Density material field

No, no, no, no ... something went wrong... I don't know what happened. Can you test this file ? I don't know why but now it renders fine both in Picture Viewer and Viewport. I swear I had the same result as you in the PV but in the VP I was getting the right results, otherwise I wouldn't summon you. Shot11_tick.c4d

Could you lighten the project up a bit ? I can't open the scene, my 16 GB RAM runs out