No One

You're very quick in deciding what is adding to the conversation or not, right? I just wanted to understand the logic behind your powertrip lock and if this is the forum policy from now on.

The entire paragraph above can be sum it up literally as "I didn't like the direction of the discussion thus I ended because I can". This is not moderation, this is a power trip. You thought the conversation started toxic, that wasn't the perception of people who were participating on it. Your job as a moderator is to limit personal attacks, flamewars, racist stuff, spam, unsolicited ads, piracy links, etc.. Not to delete or lock a discussion just because you didn't find interesting or didn't like the tone.

Cerberas just locked the "Leaving C4D for Blender" thread for no reason at all. I wasn't participating in much of that discussion but there was tons of interesting information there. There was no reason to shut down the discussion just because some people were being negative towards Maxon. What is the point of paying for participating in this forum if we can't have open conversations? Notice that I'm not against moderation, but that's not what happened there. Moderation would have been a warning post like "Guys, please tone down or I will lock this post" not instant lock because you didn't like the direction of the conversation. This is one of the few CG forums left. Please don't kill it with heavy-handed moderation like what happened with CGTalk.

I don't know...for me it sounds more ridiculous to go the extra mile trying to defend a big corporation that does not care about its costumers. They have millions of dollars to defend themselves and a whole HR department. You don't need to do that work for them for free.

The big difference of Autodesk approach and Maxon approach is that Autodesk buys and incorporates the most popular plugins that are filling certain holes in 3ds Max and Maya instead of copying them. It was like that with Character Studio, CAT and others for 3ds Max, as well as NEX (which became the Modeling Toolkit, a central part of Maya), MASH, etc... for Maya. I agree that Maxon does not owes Holgen anything, specially when we are talking about such basic features like filling a hole or fitting to a circle. But we can't deny that Autodesk approach is better - it rewards good plugins developers, strengthens the community and does not reinvent the wheel. Maxon's implementation of external plugins is a hit and miss. In S26, it seems they actually did a better job than Holgen's plugins. But sometimes they really miss - their implementation of the Solo button is a joke in comparison to NitroMan free MagicSolo. I still use MagicSolo and totally ignore Maxon's Solo button. I wish they had just incorporated MagicSolo.

That wasn't an Autodesk decision, it was a Nvidia decision. Autodesk kept MentalRay optional as long as it could (you just needed to turn on the MentalRay plugin in the plugin menager to get MentalRay back). But after 2 or three Maya versions, Nvidia killed Mental Ray and Autodesk had to take the render out. Unlike Maxon, Autodesk has a pretty good history of keeping legacy features of Maya working in newer versions, even if sometimes they are hidden. Wanna use the old Turtle render engine? You can, just turn it on in the plugin manager. Don't like the new Graph Editor? No problem, you can access the old one. Same thing for tons of old legacy features, such as the original Maya renderer, the original dynamics and particles system (the non nDynamics one), Paint Effects, 3D Paint, 2D Painting Canvas, etc...

Cinema 4D is the next Lightwave.

I wouldn't hold my breath. Those are the same guys who thought the reflectance channel was a good idea and easy to use...

Thanks for your analysis. My comment is definitely not a dick context between C4D and Blender, especially because I don't like Blender (even after 2.8) and I think C4D is vastly superior. But I can't help to compare Blender's speed of development and C4d's. I also worked in one of the main competitors of Maxon and they were much faster at developing than Maxon. To be honest, I think me and other frustrated C4D users are upset not because we compare Maxon and C4D to other companies or software, but because C4D and Maxon to what they were 10 years ago. It's night and day. 2012 Maxon would run circles around 2020 Maxon. But as I said in the other post, I think S26 is a good sign of going in the right direction and shows that things are improving at Maxon. They lost my trust and Maya went back to be my main 3D software, but it's good to see Maxon is getting back to its older and better form.

Are you sure? Correct me if I am wrong, but most of Blender development is externalized and they are running circles around you guys, aren't they?

No need for passive-agressive sarcasm. I'm not a programmer and I'm not saying anything remotely like what you tried to put in my mouth. So let me elaborate what I tried to say before. It has been 10 years since Maxon started working on the new core and what we can see from the outside is: 1) Maxon is not adding the features we asked and that every other main DCC has; 2) The C4D performance still sucks, regardless of the new core; 3) Maxon keeps adding features that no one asked; 4) Maxon have been using the work on the new core as an excuse for not doing 1 (new features asked by the users), even though they do 3 (stuff no one asked). To be fair to Maxon though, S26 seems to be a change in direction and they are finally delivering stuff people asked (e,g. integrated Redshift, modelling improvements), even though in a crippled way (CPU only).

We don't think about it because we don't see the advantages of the new core yet. Cinema 4D performance is still subpar. What we see from the outside is that Maxon stopped adding important features to C4D to focus on the new core (and extra stuff that no one asked for) with no obvious advantage for us. I'm pretty sure we would appreciate the effort on the new core if the performance was better. Right now it has been almost 10 years with no performance increase. It seems the new core is just an excuse to not add new features C4D badly needs.

Totally agree with you. I'm very critical of the current Maxon administration but I didn't really understand that complaint. It's AWESOME when the user needs less plugins in Cinema 4D. One of the main problems of C4D right now is that it's a very expensive software that needs tons of plugins to have the same features of other big DCCs suuch as Maya and 3ds Max. So yeah, I think we all wish Maxon would integrate X-particle, RealFlow,, RizomUV, and other plugins into Cinema4D. Getting Zremesher is a good start - and it's also good for Zbrush users. It signals that Maxon will transfer Zbrush technology to C4D without destroying Zbrush.

Interesting. Every time I come to Core4D I see a big U-Render ad...lol I thought that was for everyone, but maybe it's just because I have a U-Render license. As for U-render being like Eeveee, I would say right now U-render is closer to Element3D for After Effects than Eeveee I'd say, although it's not as good as Element3D yet. If they do follow through with their roadmap, it should get better than Element3D and Eevee. Overall, I think U-Render is going in the right direction, although I think they don't have their priorities right: I loved the NPR material, but I think they should have fixed some basic features first, like their motion blur (for example, it's impossible to get a correct motion blur in an airplane propeller) and some transparency issue (for example, the horizontal fog effect conflicts with transparent materials. Also, animated textures alphas are not read correctly). But if you don't need a correct motion blur and can live with the transparency issues, U-Render is AMAZING.

I think you're the only guy in the planet that actually paid for WinZip! 😁

This looks really good. The NPR material is particularly useful for my projects. Congratulations with this new version! Is there any fixes for the Motion Blur and transparency issues of the last versions? Also, any news about the Maya version?

Yes, and that STILL does not cover everything that Maya offers alone. You would need to add X-Particles, RealFlow, RizomUV and some Character Animation Plugin and Mocap (that doesn't really exist) to get what you get from Maya. About the limitation of Maya and 3ds Max indie: that's true but it is still miles away from what Maxon offer to indies. Also, keep in mind that outside the US and other rich developed countries, the Maya and 3ds Max indie versions would cover a lot of professional and small business operations, even with the limitation of just one license. Back in Brazil I worked years in companies with only one version of Maya/3dsMax/Cinema4D, because I was the only 3D animation guy in said companies. This arrangement is not uncommon in poorer markets, where 3D generalists are more common. I wish Autodesk indie versions had less restrictions but they are still pretty good deals and you can also get Maya LT, which has limits in features but no limits in its commercial use. Meanwhile, Maxon simply does not offer us anything since they killed Cinema4D Prime. My overall point stands: Autodesk is much friendlier company than Maxon right now and a very different company than it was before.

I don't really get when people complain that Maxon became Autodesk... This is not true and I wish it was! The current Autodesk is a much better company than current Maxon. This is not 2007 anymore, Autodesk is a much more transparent and user friendly company than Maxon has been in the last 10 years. We are not talking about the evil "lets kill Softimage" Autodesk anymore. Maya and 3ds Max indie cost a fraction of what Cinema 4D costs and they are both much more complete 3D packages (you'd need a Maxon One susbscription to get closer to what Maya alone offers). They also receive substantial upgrades every year, unlike Cinema 4D that receives a substancial upgrade only every 5 years (and a bunch of joke releases between). So yeah, I WISH Maxon became Autodesk.

7zip. it's free and it will give you the right click option to compress to a zip, just like on the mac. Also, install the QuickLook free app from Microsoft to add something similar to QuickLook on MacOS. That will make your Windows experience much nicer.

It was not my intention to generalize and I thought it was clear that it was just an US-centric example. But I can see how I could have rephrased the post better, for sure.

Don't put words in my mouth, I never said " that mac users can't be serious 3D artists". I said "Macbooks are not good for 3D" and they are not. This is not nonsense, it is 100% true. The ROI is just not there for a Macbook in terms of 3D, specially if you are using Maya (Arnold GPU needs a Nvidia GPU, which is not available on Macs) (but even for C4D if you use Octane (the Nvidia version of Octane is always more up to date and faster than Octane X). By the way, I love Macbooks and I use one for anything BUT my 3D Animation and video work.

I don't get your point. I know that, I'm Brazilian by the way (and I lived most of my life in Brazil, even though I'm living in the US right now). That's why I was clear that my example was only about the US. Even in a very cheap GPU, like a GTX 1660 or a RTX 2050 (which are not expensive because the cryptominers don't use them), a GPU renderer will be faster than a CPU render most of the time. And GPU prices started to fall the last few weeks.

You're not alone. it's a good update but nothing amazing and a little bit "too little, too late". Cinema 4D became an auxiliary software for me after R25, S26 won't change that. No, it was a bad move. Maya, 3ds max and Blender come with out of the box high quality GPU renderers (Arnold GPU for Maya and 3ds Max, Eevee and Cycles for Blender). There is no reason to not include the GPU version of Redshift with Cinema 4D. The whole point of Redshift is the speed, anyways. It's the only reason it got traction against Octane, for example. About students and GPUs: In my experience teaching 3D in a university in the US, most of my students have gaming laptops with a RTX or GTX Nvidia cards. The only ones who don't are the Apple fanboys, but they usually learn fast that Macbooks are not good for 3D and get a gaming laptop with a Nvidia GPU in the next semester.

Overall, S26 is a much better edition of Cinema4D. Not enough to make me reconsider my decision of focusing more on Maya from now on but I think it's the best update since R20. Not sure I'd call a step in the right direction though, more of a case of "acceptable, but too late". Overall, I'm really sad that Maxon bought Zbrush, which forces me to still be their client, but at least they included it in Maxon One, which is good for the users.

Maya's Arnold is not neutered at all. it's a full copy, with all the features, including GPU rendering. You should get informed before doing such assertions. It's ridiculous that Maxon is including Redshift but only CPU. Well, good for Otoy and Octane, but bad for C4D users.