PDA

View Full Version : MAXON Cinema 4D R8


Leonard
07-24-2002, 02:15 AM
meloncully says to check this out (and it's cool):

http://www.3dfortherealworld.com/

L.

Grey
07-24-2002, 04:14 AM
<----jaw hits floor :D :D

leigh
07-24-2002, 02:56 PM
Hmmm....
You know, after having read through all of that, I can honestly say that I believe the only thing C4D has going for it is the price.

The features that R8 have are nothing new or unique - they are merely trying to catch up to the level of the more industry-used software.

I really do think that the guys at Maxon should try and be more innovative in their designs for new incarnations of the software :shrug:

I personally have never used the program (and most likely never will, because I am happy with the software I am currently using), so I can't claim to know all the ins and outs of C4D, but the impression I've always got from it is that it is a kind of "poor man's Max". Forgive me if I am wrong, C4D just seems to be missing that cutting edge spark...

I've also yet to see anything truly photorealistic come out of it - and people, please feel free to prove otherwise - so I don't feel inclined to believe some of their claims about how incredible this new version is.

However, I appreciate the fact that there is, of course, a large market for this application - as I mentioned before, it is considerably less wallet-crippling than some of the other software out there.
But, as cheap as it is, what I find hard to swallow is why anyone would pay for this software, when surely it can't easily be utilised to make money? Is C4D actually used by anyone here as a workhorse?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that C4D should be trying to not only catch up to other applications, it should be trying to offer something new that other software doesn't offer.

meloncully
07-24-2002, 03:00 PM
i was kinda thinking the same thing, but not as detailed as you.

when i read the specs, i was jut thinking to myself that most of the features that are new to c4d have been around in lw and maya, and houdini well, i think the node based part from houdini.

so i think c4d should come out with some more impressive features and maybe more people would be inclined to use it.

leigh
07-24-2002, 03:26 PM
Yeah, it's like every program has it's strengths, that it's well known for - I won't go through them all, but everyone knows what I'm talking about. Some programs are just really good at one thing in particular, which is why it's an essential part of an animators arsenal, so to speak.

The impression that I get from C4D, and I get this not only from reading reviews, features such as this and seeing renders, is that it's fairly mediocre in the grand scheme of things.

If you compare it to programs like Maya, Max, Lightwave and XSI (and I know it's not really fair to compare it to these, as I think it's in a slightly different league) - it's really nothing special.
And this is something that Maxon should be striving to change. I think they need to focus on something, maybe cash in on a new trend (such as NLA) and ensure that C4D has an extraordinary ability with it - thus making it more essential to animators, and making it a more useful program, possibly even to become a competitor in terms of the more advanced industry :)

Leonard
07-24-2002, 03:39 PM
And this is where I beg to differ slightly.

I used C4D with XL6 and XL7 when I had the pleasure of reviewing them. At the time (i.e. before this year's price slashing insanity), the nearest competing application (Lightwave) was substantially more expensive. C4D not only had the capabilities to do great professional photorealistic animation work (check out Pump Action, by Phil McNally -- which was done with C4D XL5), but it was affordable. I found that for "bread and butter" work like flying logos, product visualization, etc. it was really easy to use and rendered beautifully. Granted, the character animation capabilities had never been strong until R8's MOCCA, but most work out there involves VFX and non-character animation shots.

Another deciding factor is that MAXON is a German company and has a very strong presence in Europe. This is unlike all the other companies that only have regional sales offices which from hearsay, support hasn't been great as the emphasis is on selling products rather than after-market support. For studios in Europe that needed a robust solution, the natural choice was C4D as the support infrastructure is there.

My 2 cents.

Leo

leigh
07-24-2002, 04:08 PM
Ok, I understand your point about European studios using it, that makes perfect sense :)

But I've just watched "Pump Action" now (it's the first actual animation done in C4D I've ever seen), and while it is a very good piece, I'm doubt I would call it photorealistic. Admittedly, I did view it on the smallest, lowest quality window, so my judgement of that is most likely impaired.

But in terms of what you were saying with regards to "bread and butter" work - that brings me to my original point - the only thing it has going for it is it's cheap price.

Ease of use and beautiful renders are available in a number of other packages, the only difference being the price.

Which is why I think that Maxon should endeavour to pack some more really hot features into C4D - I'm sure they would like C4D to be a competitor on a higher level than it currently is, and I think the only way to achieve that is to ensure that C4D develops a particular strength, so that when people think, for instance, of (let's say they brought out a really really good NLA system) NLA, then they will immediately think of C4D, in much the same way as people think of Maya or XSI when they think of awesome character animation.

I know that, at the end of the day, it really does come down more to the artist behind the machine and not the software (just look at Rustboy), but having applications at your fingertips that allow you to create things more efficiently and hassle-free certainly is helpful, and that is why I think that C4D could benefit more from trying to be more innovative and less "catching up to the others".

I could be wrong here, but I seem to remember that C4D used to be rather respected for some of it's lighting capabilities - for instance, it was one of the first 3D applications to fully support caustics (although I could be wrong here), but reading through the feature list here, I see nothing exciting that makes me go "wow, no-one else has that! I should really check that out!", which is something that I do feel when I read through the features lists of other software, which is the reason that I sent away for the XSI Experience disc and got the Maya Learning Edition, but will not be at all inclined to get hold of a demo for this :shrug:

Grey
07-24-2002, 05:18 PM
One thing that Cinema has always had going for it was stability.

It's always been "the poor man's" solution to a lot.

The plugin support for it is getting much better:

Nextlimit
Messiah:Animate

It's newer features, which are probably old hat to LW, Max and Maya users are welcome news for those of us using it.

I think that the "Playing Catch Up" is probably over with this release. Mocca looks to be a solid character animation tool (though I'm opting for Messiah).

Forgive me if I sound giddy, but it'll be nice to have what they're putting out :D

roger
07-24-2002, 05:21 PM
I have used LW and Maya for film and TV projects. I don't know why, but when I looked at C4D R8 I liked it. I don't know of anyone using it, but there is something about that makes me like it :)
Will I ever use it?? Only if my employer tells me to use it.
Leigh - not sure if you have seen this image made in C4D, but I think it looks pretty good.
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/carles_piles1.jpg

roger

Grey
07-24-2002, 05:35 PM
BTW: so far as PhotoReal Renders...

this looks pretty photoreal to me :D

http://www.pixelworks.at/dogfight/240.mov

leigh
07-24-2002, 05:46 PM
Roger - that pic is pretty cool, but it's only really the lighting that really gives it some *ZING!!!*, and as I said before, it's the lighting abilities that seem best about C4D.
However, the rest of this pic is fairly inconsequential to the program itself - the model is pretty standard, the background is a flat picture, and the bricks are a (noticeably) tiled photograph.
It's a nice picture, but not an extraordinary one.

Grey - I have a bloody slow connection, so I'm still waiting for the dogfight to load...
But photorealistic capabilities are to be expected of any 3D software these days, and besides - achieving photorealistic results is more to do with the artists correct use of the software. It's more innovative intiatives that I'm suggesting here :)

roger
07-24-2002, 06:51 PM
I am also not sure what all the "fuss" about NLA. Now I am NOT a animator, I am a Character Modeler but when I worked at Digital Domain I asked some of their Character Animators about NLA and they all seemed to think it was more of a "gimick".
I guess it might have it's uses in games, but for film work it does not seem as useful.

Has anyone here used it for film work??

roger

cEdRik!
07-24-2002, 06:55 PM
This is my current Project in Cinema4D........

Will be a 10min movie some day ;)

I dont know what your problem with cinema 4d is - but - if aliasī products were that good - apple would have bought them month ago ;)


heres the pictures.......

http://www.cedrik.com/test/vent/01.jpg
http://www.cedrik.com/test/vent/02.jpg
http://www.cedrik.com/test/vent/03.jpg


cheers,

cEdRik!

-JT-
07-24-2002, 06:55 PM
If it's for your personnal use only the price isn't such a good argument anymore with Maya and Lightwave dropping down their prices and being much more powerful. (but after all it's all a matter of choices).

For the europe argument, i can only speak for France but here it's 3dsmax that rules (in volume). Why ? Because it's the only 3D software that is translated into many langages. Cinema 4d does this too and i respect that, but who wants to spend thousands of hours learning and trying to master a software if you can't find a job with it. That's a problem too.

I'll still try the demo when it's out because the interface seems well thought and because i'm curious.

Still i don't understand why 3d companies don't bring the "killer app" that users are asking for, i feel they don't listen enough to users.... just an example : a lot of modellers only swear by meshtools or mirai tools for polygon modelling, it doesn't seem to be that hard to develop now (even freewares try..), but still this kind of modelling isn't included in new softwares...

sad
07-24-2002, 07:19 PM
@leigh:

maybe you should just try the demo version of c4d xL7 and see what it's capable of. please don't talk in that way of tools you don't really know!

i'm sorry, the text the making-of is in german but maybe you are interested in it:
http://www.c4d-treff.de/interview/carles_piles/makingof/daylight.html

some pictures made with c4d:
http://www.cinema4d.com/pages/products/c4d/r8/images/illustrations/wirtschaft_hi.jpg made with c4d-go. anything in the pic is geometry.
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=1&sort=punkte&id=1189&rubrik=1
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=5&sort=punkte&id=2186&rubrik=3
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=1&sort=punkte&id=1209&rubrik=1
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=2&sort=punkte&id=1409&rubrik=1
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=3&sort=punkte&id=2097&rubrik=2
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=2&sort=punkte&id=1363&rubrik=3
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=5&sort=punkte&id=1940&rubrik=3
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=7&sort=punkte&id=2361&rubrik=3
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=2&sort=punkte&id=1468&rubrik=5
1.5 million faces: http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=1&sort=punkte&id=1647&rubrik=9
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=2&sort=punkte&id=108&rubrik=10
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=2&sort=punkte&id=1378&rubrik=11
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=6&sort=punkte&id=2147&rubrik=11
http://www.c4d-treff.de/galerie/grossansicht.php4?currentpage=1&sort=punkte&id=907&rubrik=1

these are examples of c4d-work. i like it a lot and i think it is a great tool for low money. good renderer, nice modelling tools an extremely stable!

:thumbsup:

mnu
07-24-2002, 08:02 PM
Hi all,

I started doing 3D on Softimage 3.9, then I used Maya 2.5, and 3. I also tried Lightwave at school but today I mainly use Cinema4D. The main Argument for me to use it was, that it is the only 3D program currently available that has something that's worth being called "Mac support", and I'm on a Mac, as I do webdesign and print graphics, too. You all are right as Cinema does not feature anything unique. But thats not important. It's a flexible and affordable allround solution. The real strength of Cinema lies under the hood. The architecture is IMHO nearly as good as Maya's and COFFEE, the programming (not scripting) language built in is more powerful than MEL I think, as it is object oriented. I one does Character Animation for Film or Game Design Max or Maya fit better, thats clear, but for Broadcast Desing for example Cinema is strong enough. The studio where I work does all On Air Desing with Cinema and After Effects.

OK, thats my opinion...

Cinema is not too bad, cheers mnu :)

cgSquad
07-24-2002, 08:38 PM
i dont use it but once i tried its demo XL7. Its a nice LW competitor. Its very stable than Max,LW,Maya.

XL8 has new, old features. but look at the price. Its not bad. (actually i dont want to start that old THIS vs THIS threat)

Leonard
07-25-2002, 12:55 AM
Before you start slagging off at Leigh, please note that she's expressing an opinion that she doesn't see anything special in C4D feature-wise. This is a valid point for discussion and I'd appreciate if this discussion is only continued in a civil, objective manner.

Thanks

Leo

sad
07-25-2002, 01:07 AM
i understand that leigh does not want to state c4d is blah and blah and blah, because max is blah and blah.:beer:

everyone is allowed to have an opinion!

@leigh: lets shake hands, i appreciate your work and i must say that i like your way of writing down/explainig your thoughts!

i use c4d because it is a sponsoring of a little company i sometimes work for. they also bought a mac-g4 for me. great. i never could afford that much amount of money.

c4d is very easy to handle. i tried max and the main thing i do not like is its somehow techical, maybe a bit cold environment. i didn't feel at home with max.

that makes me 'shutup' when it comes to 'what is better, warmer, more professional.

:wavey:

Grey
07-25-2002, 02:43 AM
C4D is a better choice for Mac users than is LW. (Maya supposedly has huge stability problems on the Mac as well)...

C4D has been stable on every platform it's been on.

The one thing you can't say about Cinema4D codewarriors is that they rush out a product before it's ready just to be first...

You can say that about a lot of the rest...

xynaria
07-25-2002, 05:32 AM
I think the days of viewing C4D as a catch up app are soon going to go..there's some good looking stuff in this release and its arguable that the updates are a lot more usable and responsive of users concerns than R5 from Discreet who may well earn the title of hideously expensive and buggy version of C4D in future. C4D is one of the most stable apps I've ever played with and doesn't seem resource hungry. I also have a lot of time for Maxon's approach to making the app available in many guises. The modular approach is something IMHO that all apps should have had for ages.....especially Max. :)

Hookflash
07-25-2002, 05:59 AM
Leigh: What do you see in "other" apps that makes them seem special in comparison to Cinema 4d 8? Just curious.

fxgogo
07-25-2002, 09:06 AM
This is rather funny really. People have very short memories. Not long ago MAX was called the poor mans Maya or Softimage. That is not the case now, and it is not because the program has changed, but because of one word "Discreet". Since the buy-out of Discreet by Autodesk, 3DS MAX has had some very shrewed marketing and the pick up by the high-end has happened due to the association with Discreet's other High end tools. Similarily, Lightwave has had to shout out that it is a decent high-end package until recently.

The issue here is not the tools or specifics of the package, but the percieved value by the industry. And this percieved value often has no basis in reality. Also when a tool starts to be used by the big guys, you see the talent of big teams, money and time shine through. The package does not do it, people do. This then has a spin on effect where people buy packages based on the work done by the tool, thinking the tool did it. But it did not, PEOPLE did.

So now about C4D. It does not seem to be used much and there is not much work out there, but that is misleading. There is a load of amazing work being done on this package. This user base is increasing rapidly, and as it does, expect to see C4D grab a bigger portion of your, and the industrys attention. And I expect in a few years time

As for my choice, I deliberately chose C4D over Lightwave, based on how the company works and treats it users. They listen and they create solid updates that work fast. I am also impressed how well the program is coded, sleek and stable.I could see that this was a Company and product with some serious momentum behind it and R8 bears this out. Sure there are features that were and still are missing, but there are loads of features that are way ahead of the industy, as there is in every package. Don't get me started on what I miss in MAX and Lightwave.

But this talk of features is really silly. Lets try break down the pathetic heirarchial structures and zenephobic attitudes that exist in this supposed future looking industy.

leigh
07-25-2002, 09:42 AM
Okay, firstly, I'm not knocking Cinema 4D - like I said, I understand that it has a place and all that. I did not say that it's a crap program, if that's the impression that people got.

And I know, like I said, that in the end it really does come down to the artist to create something that looks great - the application is merely the tool that the artist uses.

Having said that though, I do believe that the software's features ARE important, BECAUSE they are your tools - for instance, if you were a painter who paints houses for a living, and you have to paint a room with REALLY high walls. Okay, now which are you going to use - a small paintbrush which necessitates climbing up a ladder and leaning precariously off the ladder to paint, or a paint-roller that has a long handle?

That's the sort of thing that I am talking about. Innovation.

I read through XSI's feature list, and the program just sounded so damn exciting, that I immediately ordered the Experience disc. I got the Maya learning edition because everyone knows that Maya's animation tools are, for the most part, unparalelled.

To expand on that, if I did not own any 3D software, and I was looking to buy a program, I would consider the following, for the stated reasons:

- Maya - brilliant animation tools, great modelling tools
- Lightwave - awesome renderer, and excellent, intuitive modeller
- XSI - again, really awesome renders and excellent modelling and animation tools
- Max - quick modelling and relatively painless animation setups, really easy to learn

All these applications have these very well known strengths. When I think of C4D, there is no particular "speciality" that it has.
That's why I am saying that Maxon need to be more revolutionary in their software design.

I also don't think that stability should be a strong pushing point from it's users, because most programs are pretty stable, as long as you are using it correctly, and not abusing your system (in other words, I'm sure a lot of instability in people's use of software comes from loading the programs onto machines that don't really handle them all that well, and by not having the most ideal hardware). I've used all 4 of the above mentioned programs, and I've never had any major instability issues. Admittedly, the older versions of Max weren't as stable as I would have liked, and up until Lightwave 6.5, I had a few minor irritations with it freezing up, but it's great now (I haven't used older incarnations of the other 2, so I'm not sure how stable they were in the past, but they seem fine now).

So basically what I am saying is that if Maxon want to break into the industry more (and yeah, so it is already used here and there for broadcast design, but I'm talking more specifically now in terms of hardcore vfx in film and tv work), then they need to adopt a more revolutionary approach, and offer something that they do better than anyone else :)

fxgogo
07-25-2002, 10:46 AM
I understand Leigh. I know you are not knocking C4D.

You mentioned your list of programs and their benefits. And some of the reasons you list there are the reasons I went for C4D. It has a sublime renderer, that can be tweeked to create so many different looks. I love its modeling tools and shader possibilities (materials could be more flexible though). Animation has a unique approach, which I enjoy. And lastly I liked how I interfaced with the program.

But the point is, my reasons are the same as yours but we then choose different programs. As you admitted, you have not tried the program, and loads of people have not, which is I think the main reason people have their views on it.

Again I will say, this industry is soo fickle when it comes to programs. It is like we are a bunch of bitches. People used to abuse MAX, but now it is seen as a major app. Perception changed not the program. People started to use it and then said, "Hey this is not so bad after all". I think the same is true of C4D.

So to answer your statement, C4D does have strengths in many areas, not just a few.

PS. Say hello to Glen for me.

leigh
07-25-2002, 11:09 AM
Yeah, okay so it has a sublime renderer and a unique approach to animating and all that - yes, I believe you. But you may have missed my point - that could be said of any number of other programs out there that already cater for that.

What I am saying is that C4D needs a new revolutionary, innovative strategy, to offer people something that is not already on offer.

You say "you have not tried the program, and loads of people have not, which is I think the main reason people have their views on it" - but, like I said, having read the new features list, I don't have any desire to try it, whereas, having read the features list for XSI, I did. Because XSI has far more exciting, innovative features, that make you sit up and think "YES!! This sounds INCREDIBLE!!"
People who haven't ever used the program are not going to suddenly rush off and get this software now, because it's not offering anything new. That's my point.

Also, I don't necessarily feel that the industry is as fickle as you say. I think that we use the software that does the job best.

Yeah, Max used to be abused, but that is because up until version 3, it really wasn't anything special. I don't even use Max anymore, because it doesn't quite fit in with my workflow, but I do think it is a great program, and is deserving of merits. I don't think that Discreet having aquired it and applied shrewd marketing techniques has anything to do with it - it's popular, because it is a good piece of software.

Software doesn't become popular purely because of hype - the major 3D apps that are in wide use these days are there because they do the job best.

If Maxon want C4D to compete with these others, they need to find their own niche, because at the moment, all it is, is a cheaper imitation (and I don't mean that in an overly negative sense) of these others, and not an innovative, revolutionary tool.

PS: Glen says hi too :)

fxgogo
07-25-2002, 11:29 AM
Ok, what would you suggest to make C4D a killer app? I bet you have some good ideas.

The industry is fickle. People are always squabbling over this platform and that, this computer and that. It is a hangover from the tech industry. As an aside, discreet did not aquire MAX, Autodesk aquired Discreet.

Software doesn't become popular purely because of hype - the major 3D apps that are in wide use these days are there because they do the job best. You have got to be kidding! What do you think the massive marketing budgets are for? And why do you think all those little logos of ILM et.al are in the corners of the showreels. And what about the fake, "I could not do this job without...insert program here" testamonials? People like to follow trends and the percieved leaders. Whe n they see excellent work, they then make the assumption that getting that software wil make them do that. The software companies promote that.

Why do you think the clients like to sit in an expensive edit suite, spending thousands of pounds, when they could be doing the same thing on a laptop. Cause it makes them feel important and cutting edge. It is about perception. The very place you are working at, decided not to go the popular route with Maya or SOft, but took on Lightwave (I am sure budget also had something to play in it ;) ).

if what you say is true, then Animation Master would be the leading CA software of use. But it is not. Why? Perception. No one in their right mind would think that a $300 program could do the job, noooo, it must cost loads of money.Unfortunately that is how the industry thinks.

leigh
07-25-2002, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by fxgogo
Ok, what would you suggest to make C4D a killer app? I bet you have some good ideas.

Well, I mentioned before the lighting thing.
I remember reading a review on C4D in an old issue of 3D World, and being fairly impressed with it's caustics and volumetrics. NOw THAT is an area to exploit! Slow rendering volumetrics and crappy caustics are the bane of most of us, so why not concentrate on coming out with the most kick-ass lighting engine of them all??
I'm sure we could all appreciate a fast-rendering volumetric engine :D
And as of yet, none of these programs I've mentioned are particularly reknowned for absolutely brilliant lighting.
That's just one area. I'm sure I could think of more, but I only have my lunch hour to sit and think about this :P


You have got to be kidding! What do you think the massive marketing budgets are for? And why do you think all those little logos of ILM et.al are in the corners of the showreels. And what about the fake, "I could not do this job without...insert program here" testamonials? People like to follow trends and the percieved leaders. When they see excellent work, they then make the assumption that getting that software wil make them do that. The software companies promote that.

That's why I said it's not purely based on hype. I know that hype does play a role in it. But people who go out and buy some crappy program just because someone said it was good, and then continue to use it - well, that's just stupid.
Yeah, so ILM put the Maya logo into the credits of Episode II - well, Maya is an excellent program for film work. Are you saying that it isn't?
I agree with you that the whole mentality of people thinking that just because they have the software that such-and-such movie was made with will automatically make their work look just as good is ridiculous. But you can't blame people for being stupid, they were just born that way.
However, although the software won't magically transform your crap work into good work, it will provide you with the tools to improve the translation of your "vision" into CG.


Why do you think the clients like to sit in an expensive edit suite, spending thousands of pounds, when they could be doing the same thing on a laptop. Cause it makes them feel important and cutting edge. It is about perception. The very place you are working at, decided not to go the popular route with Maya or SOft, but took on Lightwave (I am sure budget also had something to play in it

Well, for me personally, I don't care what clients think, I just prefer to watch my edit on a decent TV monitor as opposed to a laptop, thank you :) And I'm sure people will agree with me here, that editing is much more comfortable on a dual monitor machine due to the interfaces of most editing packages.
And as for going the Lightwave route, yeah I'm sure budget has a lot to do with it (for instance, Lightwaves render nodes are free, so that we don't have to buY a copy for EVERY machine on the farm). But it also has a lot to to with the work we do - we aren't doing any major character animation, so we don't need to get a new version of Maya. We actually have an old copy of it here, but don't currently use it. However, if a job required it, we would get it. It's as simple as that :shrug: And, as a couple of us have now starting playing with out XSI Experience cds (which actually got through the SA postal service, can you believe it??!), perhaps if we see that it is a better option overall than LW, then maybe Atomic will consider buying in some XSI seats too.


if what you say is true, then Animation Master would be the leading CA software of use. But it is not. Why? Perception. No one in their right mind would think that a $300 program could do the job, noooo, it must cost loads of money.Unfortunately that is how the industry thinks.

Well, if memory serves me, Animation Master used to be a very widely used package. It's decline in popularity is evidently due to the fact that better options are available elsewhere.
I do agree with you that people do doubt that a cheap package can be all that good, but if it really was brilliant, then regardless of price, I think that we would see more mention of it. Because lots of amateur/small freelance people would use it, and invariably people higher up in the industry would see it, and try it out. Surely?

Yes, perception does play a big part, but at the end of the day, the programs which come out tops are there because they are the best.
Perhaps Animation Master is still climbing the ladder ;)

Maxon need to do something to C4D, so that the film industry will have to sit back and realise that it would be a powerful tool to incoporate into their workflow. Right now, it isn't.
They all already have Maya, XSI, Lightwave, Max or whatever, so there is no reason for them to buy a program that does adds absolutly nothing to the singular/combined forces of the others.
I don't think that anyone can deny that.

And I do hope that at the end of the day, all animation/vfx houses make their software choices based on performance not hype.
Sure, hype advertises the software - without it, we wouldn't know about these programs in the first place. But hype should serve only the purpose of generating interest, after which it should be the software's performance that sells it, not the opinions of others.
Any studio that buys software without testing it, would be stupid. I doubt there are any studios that operate like that.

So I believe that at the end of the day, these choices are made because the studio has decided that the application that have chosen has been decided on for the sole reason that it is the best for their purposes.

I'm sure that C4D has been tried and tested by many, but because of it's lack of speciality, has failed to be incorporated into these studios software "arsenals". Why buy a program that does not ADD to your tools?

xynaria
07-25-2002, 12:02 PM
Though C4D does have what many perceive as an 'image' problem, it can't be getting in so many peoples way as it is now the third largest selling 3D app in the industry.
Trawling various boards, and especially including this one, most people have stability issues with nearly all the apps and particularly Max, regardless of how solid are their hardware configurations, so I don't think that can be so easily poo poo-ed as not a worthy or apt consideration. Maxon seem to have at the moment got a reasonable base from which to move forward and expand, with the biggest threat coming not neccessarily from other apps toolkits, but LW's and Maya's price reductions. There again I would say it is Discreet that have quite rightly got to worry at the moment, not just about the competition, but themselves and that double barreled shotgun they have aimed at their foot. :)

Grey
07-25-2002, 01:34 PM
Okay, firstly, I'm not knocking Cinema 4D

Yes you are. As usual, you have a whole lot of opinion about something you've never used and no zilch about (except what people tell you). Don't pretend otherwise.

"Maxon needs to do something so the film industry..."

Maxon can ignore the film industry entirely.

Selling to the film industry doesn't pay a Software company's bills... Users do. (A|Wlowered their prices to get sales, not to get Studios to use their software, studios already use Maya, and A|W is still bleeding money).

The film industry may pay YOUR bills, if you work for a studio...

Animation Master's biggest drawback was that it never played well with other software. It had DXF export only forever. It now has a plugin that imports OpenNURBS. It certainly has more users now than ever, but it's percentage of the 3D userbase pie seems exponencially smaller, HashAM users seem few and far between anymore. I never saw any work done with HashAM outside of a few web released videos.

leigh
07-25-2002, 01:41 PM
By the film industry, I'm referring to animators and visual effects aretists in the film industry :) Therefore, users.

Grey
07-25-2002, 01:55 PM
Who are still too few to make money for a software company.

leigh
07-25-2002, 02:10 PM
Grey, why are you always trying to make me look like an idiot?
All you ever do is come down hard on everyone for having differing opinions from you.

Where in this thread have I ripped off Cinema 4D or said that it is crap? Hmmm?

At least I admit that I don't know the software intimately. I am not "pretending" anything :surprised
And all my comments about it have remained on a "outside looking in" stance, so I feel fully justified in my opinions, as I have made no sweeping statements about the softwares abilities.

I am actually really enjoying this thread, and learning more about the program. Don't ruin it.

Grey
07-25-2002, 02:30 PM
Okay,

PEACE :D

Cinema4D is a stable application, never crashed on me. This is a huge issue, especially for a modeller. It doesn't matter too much what a mesh is created in, it can be used in many different platforms without much problem as things like SubDivsion Surfaces are largely implemented the same way.

There are a huge number of modellers out there now supporting the hobbyist, and a huge number of hobbyists who like having a stable aplication that's easy to use and render with, and fairly easy to bring meshes into. When the hobbyist latches onto a platorm, that platform will make money for their makers.

Cinema4D supports the WavefrontOBJ format natively, which is the best mesh exchange format there is, period. Other applications now may support OBJ, but they've been so slow in giving decent support that it's moot at this point. (LW's OBJ exports are still problematic and need fixing before using anywhere else, and max needs the Habware plugin to export them, which is also problematic).

The new features may very well be, as you say, playing catch up.

I don't see this as an issue, but as a plus since C4D is so stable, an animator now has the option of using Mocca or Messiah for animating figures in Cinema without fear of having it crash in the middle of a complex keyframing operation... (this is a huge issue). Animation takes more time and effort than does modelling, which is why so few do it. Cinema4D has well engineered, well thought out code that DOES NOT CRASH... it typicaly takes longer to develop software like that. Even Rhino, which is considered one of the most stable 3D Programs in existence, is not so stable as C4D.

NextLimit's top of the line liquid simulation is considered the best there is, that plugs into Cinema.

Cinema's native render engine is exceeded in speed only by Electric Image's Universe. (this isn't accounting for Plug-In render engines, only native ones).

Max is on top, LW follows, everyone knows how increadible Maya and XSI are. To say Cinema4D is even contending with these platforms or is an option is reason enough for C4D users, like me, to celebrate.

leigh
07-25-2002, 02:39 PM
Aaaaah, now PEACE is a word I LOVE to hear :D:D

Okay, it's a stable application, it does things well, it renders well, it animates well, it models well. It's everything that a 3D application should be.
Right, so basically now that it caught up to the others, now it's just up to them to push it further and further!
C4D has always had a very loyal user base, and I think it's time that they were given something really special and unique :)

Grey
07-25-2002, 02:49 PM
from what I understand, based on complaints I've seen everywhere about every other platform:

C4D's stability is very special and unique.

cgSquad
07-25-2002, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by Grey
from what I understand, based on complaints I've seen everywhere about every other platform:

C4D's stability is very special and unique.

It is also a standalone version of lightwave (i think so)

both leeks industry standard advance charcter aninmation tools and workflow. (it is used by studios to save money not because it is great)

yeah i know. please dont start again that old ...Lw was used in that production and i was a TD.....BORING STORY

Honestly, Cinema will not beat currently market. BUT with XL8 it has made its roots more stronger to at least survive. i saw a lot of lot great Logo design done with cinema.

SomeBody Said it does not have any thing to attract attention of industry. Its wrong. At least it has one thing.

Just think that compines were using max+ThinkingParticles+AfterBurn to save money. This can also be done with Houdini+MentalRay/PRman cost a lot.

The thinkingParticles for Cinema will attract the attention of many low budget studios. Because its much cheaper than max combo.

there can be more features cheaper in comparasion with others.

_____________________________-
There can me some mistakes in my above statement because of my misinformation.

l_farley13_l
07-25-2002, 11:56 PM
Yes stable, yes to the rest, also very easily modified for Workflow - I can model very very quickly and efficiently. With new support for edges and edgeloops it can only get faster. Working on 450 mhz is an absolute breeze. Texturing is quite startightforward and expansive as well (tex. trees in a form are inherent in SLA)

I've yet to use R8 so I'm just slightly sceptical of "mocap" mouse feature and others, but even so I'm sure the tools will be better.

I very much agree with the idea of Giant leaps - Some I came up with (before announcement) were : Very fast Motion Blur (highquality) and sub pixel displacement tools simular to renderman - that in itself would build some noise arround it.

Also was an idea for muscle develpoment - build a character from the bones up or start with a premade one and modify it. Simple bones etc - no real modeling deatails, then add muscle and fat using procedural models and paint on flab respectively.

Any other Giant suggestions ? :)

Also to be truth with you, demo-ing LW I find it very very simular, nothing really extrodinary. Runs a bit slower, has some nicer features in N-gons, basic UV, boning, and the user base is very tallented.

For use in the Film industry - its growing withe individual users - previs stuff, matte art etc. a bunch of the backrounds you see in EP2 were started in Cinema.

I'd really recomend a download

ftp://ftp.maxon.net/pub/cinema4dxl/demo/c4dxl7_demo_win_ml.zip

17.3 mb.

Most of my work (very cursory I'm afraid) was done in XL7

http://photos.yahoo.com/l_farley13_l

and a hnt of the workflow (30 min) http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12411&pagenumber=3

So that's end my babble - hope you got somthing out of it,

Farley13

(and don't say "ohh that's too big, it won't work I can't wait that long for the download" :p)

Mayamaniac
07-26-2002, 04:24 AM
:buttrock:

Don't see what the fuss is about. C4D has been around for a long time and it's getting better with every new release. I've only played with it a bit but it seems to have all the tools. Although I'm a Maya user from day one, I'm not gonna trash C4D, and no one should either. C4D users are happy with this release because of all the newly added features. Great for them, just let them be. Who cares if Maya or XSI already have those features. If I'm strictly a mac person, C4D would be my choice right now. But that would change once Maya 4.5 for Mac is out, well.. maybe, we'll see. But for broadcast work, you don't need all the features of Maya or XSI. As long as the tools you need in C4D works well, its a better bargain than other packages. Plus, the users seems to be happy with the tech support.

Anyway, there's nothing to "not get" about C4D. It has its place in this industry as much as any other leading animation packages.

MM
:wavey:

fxgogo
07-26-2002, 10:13 AM
Ok, this is a beaten horse people.

I just had a thought. Whoever gets microsoft to bundle a 3d app in their operating system, will be a very rich person indeed. mmmmm....

Cman
07-26-2002, 02:15 PM
I've always had a liking of C4D, though I have always used Lightwave.
It looks like C4D is getting better and better. Honestly lots of the stuff in R8 looks like thing that I have in LW, but I like the looks of C4D's workflow. Particularly the Attributes Manager! LW pretty much does all that stuff, but not as visually intuitive!

Grey, sorry if this was already answered, but is C4D's integration with Adobe products similar to Max and Combustion? Resurfacing, depth, etc?
How much can you affect the render, particularly in AE? For example, compositing in Z-space?

Thanks..

Grey
07-26-2002, 05:32 PM
I wish I could tell you.

I don't use anything by Adobe if I can help it.

I'm also still using XL6.3, which is one step back from the current version of Cinema).

Kaiskai could probably tell you.

Eugeny
07-26-2002, 08:15 PM
Just my 2 cent...
I started using Cinema from version 4.7, it's was a very limited program but with weary fast render and stable like a rock... Used this program till version. 6, in this time LightWave do a major update to ver. 6 to, and this update was MACH better then Cinema update. I still have Cinema and some times i do some small works on this program. The reason is i turned to LW is power - its just give me the feel what i work on something powerful, and its true... I always keep an eye on Cinema updates - Radiocity, Caustics - cool stuff (bdw. this is the same renderer like Final render for max) after that Bodypaint - Leigh u mast try this!
Dynamics - i newer used Cinema dynamics but i sure is mach better then LW or Max Reactor... Support of AE and Photoshop ah ... And now this update. Mocca - is some thing looks really good, Cinema always was lacking tools for serious character animation ( please don't tell me about Pump action), and its look better then tools i already have in LW. Thinking particles - finally, the particle system be changed (its the same from ver.4.7) and now its mach the LW particles. The same think is Pyro Claster - Hyper Vocsels in LightWave was from ver. 5.6 ! So this update is finally get ALL missed pusels to the one picture, finally Cinema can be a good all in one application. But i think the better number for this update is 7.5 (yea like LightWave) - not 8. Because giving the new number to version u need to du really new and revolutionary update - some thing what Leigh talking about... Now all LightWave users waiting for ver. 8 and rumors saying what this be a major update like update from 5.6 to 6! And after this update Cinema will be some thing usual... It's a pity...
P.S. Sorry for my english :)

Eugeny
07-26-2002, 08:21 PM
Oh, one more thing: Cinema have NLA from version 6... In this time XSI was in pampers and even Maya haven't his own NLA...

Cman
07-27-2002, 01:00 AM
yeah Eugeny, you made great analysis much more eloquently than I. :)

The Adobe integration is very nice. Some of the tools I see in the promo videos look GREAT!
I REALLY like a lot of things I see in C4D...but now I must wait for LW_8.

wmendez
07-27-2002, 02:45 AM
IMO Cinema4D is gaining the ground that Newtek is slowly losing out on. In the past 2 years Cinema has been creeping up from behind while the heavy weights battled.

IM with Leigh LW is awsome but XSI is so damm sweet.

Eugeny
07-27-2002, 08:44 AM
I don't think that Newtek loosing something. Even with this update Cinema mach the LW level but not reach... As i wrote all LW users waiting for upcoming 8 version and this baby mast be rock. The rumors says what Newtek plane to do something like Maya - complete and unlimited version, to make some really "weights battled"

pit
07-27-2002, 11:21 AM
Leigh: As Eugeny said you ought to try out Bodypaint 3D from Maxon. It works perfectly with LW (-> thereīs a special plugin for that!). In conjunction with Photoshop itīs unbeatable for texturing complex organic models. You are able to work in 11 different channels (color, displacement, bump etc.) simultaneously - the Raybrush technology developed by Maxon enables you to do so in raytraced mode - a wysiwyg paint tool!! Now thatīs something nobody else offers. Check it out - iīm certain that this app will add to your divine texturing skills and be a real workflow plus - and let us all know what you think. I for sure would like to know your opinion. www.maxon.net -> downloads -> demo!



That said I believe X vs. Y discussions are a waste of time -> go to the C4D thread for an example of that: thereīs an XSI fanatic on the loose making a fool out of himself...still shake my head in disbelief after 3 days!!! I know Leigh didnīt intend that sort of discussion and i largely agree with what she points at !!!! - but knowing that Maxon has got only 3 or 4 coders doing the app itīs amazing what they are achieving - everybody should respect that! As to the new C4D 8 features: they will make most users more than happy and are a big step forward for this app - Iīm exited about it for sure! Bottomline is: let everyone be happy with her/his software of choice - there is amazing work done with every single package out there.

Grey
07-27-2002, 06:14 PM
Maxon only has 3 or 4 Coders?

Is that true?

cdinic
07-27-2002, 06:22 PM
I used C4d at a architectural design firm producing pre visualization animation. I loved it. I ran that app into the ground. rendering on 4 machines, 24/7 we were very happy wth it. sorry I don't have any images to share.

-Chris

Cman
07-27-2002, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by Eugeny
I don't think that Newtek loosing something. Even with this update Cinema mach the LW level but not reach... As i wrote all LW users waiting for upcoming 8 version and this baby mast be rock. The rumors says what Newtek plane to do something like Maya - complete and unlimited version, to make some really "weights battled"

That's kinda scary to me.
Any chance they'll give longtime LW users a price break on the "unlimited" version?

Grey
07-27-2002, 08:08 PM
They better give their loyal userbase something... otherwise they'll risk alienating a lot of people.

Newtek's been around way too long not to understand that. Having started off supporting the Amiga (who's users were more rabidly loyal than just about any)... it would shock me if they ignored you guys.

Eugeny
07-27-2002, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by Cman


That's kinda scary to me.
Any chance they'll give longtime LW users a price break on the "unlimited" version?
I hope so... Anyway this is the problem of my boss (i still not purchased LW :) )

wmendez
07-28-2002, 03:28 AM
Lets not forget LW was written by Stuart and Allen for a major part of it's history as well, So hearing Maxon only has 4 is no suprise. I think luxology has a good team put together and has the ability to pull something off but they have to work things out with Newtek.

Grey
08-05-2002, 02:45 PM
is it true that Cinema has as it's main render engine an older version of FinalRender?

I'm curious, as I'm hoping it's getting upgraged in R8

Eugeny
08-05-2002, 03:54 PM
Yes, the renderer from Cebas.

fxgogo
08-06-2002, 09:40 PM
I far as I know Cebas helped out on the GI and radiosity part of the renderer and that is all. I wouldn't presume that is it a simple copy of Final Render, older or not. Judging from Maxons other features that are also seperate plugins or products, I would say a 'technology for share of profits' deal was done.

neilyb
08-07-2002, 08:31 AM
Cebas helped with Radiosity and Caustics....thats all! Cinema's renderer is Maxons own!

At any point in the discussion did anyone mention the price differences between lets say XSI and Cinema....maybe they could account for the less exciting nature of the Cinema features......

I like Cinema, but would happily use XSI or Maya if I could afford it also....but that said in 2 releases Cinema has come A LONG WAY....now we have the modelling, the layout, the top notch renderer and now animation tools......so next release (v9).....anything could happen!

Each to his own...peace to all....lets close this thread by saying "CHEERS!":beer:

anticz
08-08-2002, 02:30 AM
Originally posted by xynaria
the updates are a lot more usable and responsive of users concerns than R5 from Discreet who may well earn the title of hideously expensive and buggy version of C4D in future.


Just about everything submitted to the user wish list during Max 5 beta made it in. You can say alot of bad things about Discreet, but they do listen to their user's.

Originally posted by xynaria
C4D is one of the most stable apps I've ever played with and doesn't seem resource hungry. I also have a lot of time for Maxon's approach to making the app available in many guises. The modular approach is something IMHO that all apps should have had for ages.....especially Max. :) [/B]

Max was modular about 10 years ago (back in the DOS days). So was Alias-Wavefronts product and Softimage. That kind of archaic architecture was abandoned long ago when computers became powerful enough handle more than one thing at a time. LW and C4D are the only big players left that haven't done a complete rewrite to update to a modern workflow. I guess if you like working like that then great. It can be an effective method of working and I think both are still great apps. I personally find it rather limiting.

Grey
08-08-2002, 02:53 AM
I don't understand what you mean by "modular?"

anticz
08-08-2002, 03:07 AM
Basically like LW's modeling module and their Layout module. Two separate apps that only do a part of the whole. LW is getting better but it's difficult to rig characters in the modeling app, and you can't model stuff in layout. You have to switch between the module's. Kind of a pain if you're trying to test you're morph setup or build morphs with bones or even combine morph animation with bone animation. The list goes on and on. The upside is there's no animation tools to clutter your modeling space. A poor argument in my opinion since I use animation tools for modeling (particle systems, bones, ect...) and modeling tools for animating stuff (parametric deformers, sub-div surfaces, parametic objects, ect...) all the time.

Roger Eberhart
08-08-2002, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by anticz


LW and C4D are the only big players left that haven't done a complete rewrite to update to a modern workflow.

I agree that having separate modeling and animation modules is very annoying, however you are mistaken in lumping C4D into this category. To my knowledge, only LW and Electric Image still do this. Everything in C4D is integrated. If you purchase something like Dynamics or Bodypaint it is available in the main program, not as a separate module.

Black&White
08-08-2002, 03:47 AM
i think seperate modules does not affect on studios. The have modeling department do modeling give it to regging and lighting/texuring department. Riggers farword it to animators. Animator just do animations. So modelers/animators has no/less problem that they are seperate.

Grey
08-08-2002, 04:37 AM
Yah, the modelling and animation tools in Cinema are integrated completely.

If they weren't I don't see how one would do point level animation as it's done with modelling functions which are keyframed.

I can even use animated deformers in my modelling if I so choose.

The "modular" settup that you are refferring to would appear only to be plugins, which are indeed modular.

bodypaint, dynamics, the forthcoming mocca are all modules, of course...

anticz
08-08-2002, 05:02 AM
Originally posted by Black&amp;White
i think seperate modules does not affect on studios. The have modeling department do modeling give it to regging and lighting/texuring department. Riggers farword it to animators. Animator just do animations. So modelers/animators has no/less problem that they are seperate.

That's great if you've got a big studio where everything is separate. That's not how the studio I work at works. That's not my point anyway. What I was saying is having everything integrated gives you alot more possibilities to solving problems and getting things done quickly. Having lots of tools available to me to do something makes my life easier. Many people would argue the opposite, that it's to complicated and confusing. If I know that there's a specific effect or animation I need to achieve, most of the time it's much faster and cheaper for me (or someone else in the studio) to build the controls needed for the shot right into the model. Or, if I need to model a bunch of rivets or something on a complex surface it's much easyier for me to do that with a particle system (Animation Tool) than it is to place each one by hand.

When I say something is modular, what I mean is there are separate pieces or moduals that have tools that aren't openly avialable or usable in other modules. I.e. are all of the creation parmaters you used to construct or model an object animatable? Are all of the animation tools available and visible when modeling (particle systems, path controllers, bones and skin, attach to surface, ect...)? Can you use or get the value of a node or creation parameter to drive the animation of another parameter? Can materials and lights drive the animation of an object and vice versa? Can materials and lights displace the surface of a model? Ect,ect,.... If so then you've got a well thought out app.

anticz
08-08-2002, 05:04 AM
Originally posted by Grey
Yah, the modelling and animation tools in Cinema are integrated completely.

If they weren't I don't see how one would do point level animation as it's done with modelling functions which are keyframed.

I can even use animated deformers in my modelling if I so choose.

The "modular" settup that you are refferring to would appear only to be plugins, which are indeed modular.

bodypaint, dynamics, the forthcoming mocca are all modules, of course...

Well then, I wouldn't describe C4D as modular at all. I was completely wrong. Sounds like C4D is indeed a modern 3D solution.

Grey
08-08-2002, 05:31 AM
did I mention it never ever ever crashes? :D (and you can even run it under Windows ME, the crappiest OS in history, and still have few if any problems).

CGTalk Moderation
01-13-2006, 12:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.