MJV

I guess. Is there no way to delete faces without deleting points? Melt or dissolve maybe? I'm not at computer now.

Not sure but I think maybe faces can be deleted as long as points are unchanged.

No. Sorry.

Good news. I wonder how it complements or diverges from the Lucasfilm developed Material X which is already considered by some as the open source standard.

The a symbol in the pose morph shown above means that the pose is coming from external geometry, thus the geometry is separate from the object (absolute mode). It is possible from here to instead import the geometry into the tag and have the tag store the points internally (relative mode) without needing to keep the external objects, but the memory required to store the points in the tag would be similar to the memory required to store them externally. Either way, the different poses can't just all be gotten rid of because they have to be called on only when certain circumstances exist, the slider value is changed, different expressions call them to fix different poses, etc. I've never used Character Creator 4 so I don't know if there is an option to export the poses to a single Cinema 4D morph tag using relative targets or if Cinema offers any import option to do the same, but that is something you might want to explore. As I said, either method will require the points to be stored somewhere in the file, so you probably won't get any big performance gains or much smaller file size. Lastly, Cinema 4D should definitely offer some way to change absolute targets (stored outside the tag) to relative targets (stored inside the tag) in a single click one click option, but as far as I know it never has and doesn't currently. The only way I know of to do this is by redragging the external targets into the tag again and choosing upon reimport to make them relative instead of absolute and deleting the original absolute morph targets.

My license permits the same thing. Have you got it working with either Houdini or Blender?

The problem with xpresso is that, while almost anything is "possible", practically speaking it won't be easy and will definitely not be fast. Like, it might take as long as a second or more per frame to update.

UVs are needed for deformations. If nothing will be deformed then projection is often the better option.

I finally completed most of my objectives for my first big procedural model made in Houdini, which I started late last year. Everything from segmentation down to the different point colors can be adjusted and animated and is packaged into a Houdini asset with user controls. Renderer is Houdini Karma 39 seconds using beta XPU.

Your graph shows no final result output, but it would go at or near the end. To get the final result in this circumstance you normally use add node(s) to combine the strings into whatever the intended final result is.

Use an add node (in string mode) with "m"

Ah ok. I couldnt make out what the OP was asking about from the posted image.

Right click on the small handle in corner, which is hard to see in new layout, should offer an undock option.

Pretty sure it is possible, but depends on the precise syntax of N's and commas which I will try to figure out later for you when I'm in front of the computer again unless someone else chimes in first.

Unfortunately this is something I just can't stand or tolerate. I've tried everything possible to stop it from doing so to every degree possible and still it bothers me to no end.

Great thanks to the sponsors and everyone involved and congratulations to the other winners. I leaned a lot during the challenge and was very happy to place. I thought all the contributions were really good. The game controller and the archery set especially look like they made no compromises with poly count which is quite an achievement. I was happily surprised that my rose placed as I initially started with that and then decided halfway through that it couldn't be fleshed out enough with 99 polys and because my wife was saying it looked so fake, which is why I switched to the potato chips idea and only decided at the last minute to also include the rose. In the end I felt like the potato chip bag itself was holding that entry back as I just had a hard time getting any kind of character into it in part because of the poly count limitation, in part because the complexity of the rig I made to build it, and also in part because I wasted effort trying to insure the dynamics were working when they weren't even part of the competition. Anyway thanks again to everyone involved and I look forward to the next challenge.

Certainly never in the context of 3d printing.

What happened to the fast graphics cards?

When I say no reason to ever use booleans, I am referring to C4D only, which if I'm not mistaken is the software the OP is using. Given the highly repetitive structure of this model, I think C4D is well suited and can do it easily, but if you prefer solid modeling then go for it. I wasn't even trying to address that point.

I do a lot of 3D print modeling and there is absolutely no reason this can't be modeled in C4D and also no reason to use booleans ever for anything.

O think he doesn't realize there is a command called Dissolve that does what he wants.

I agree fixing other people's models, animation, whatever is awful. I can only imagine how much more difficult it must be to be a programmer trying to fix (or improve upon) someone else's code.

Thanks. I can't believe I didn't know this. Another good one I didn't know about. It even works in R20!

Volume meshes can not be perfectly smoothed. You have to either model it or remesh it.