Why use C4D in a MAX / Maya world?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

REPLY TO THREAD
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  11 November 2015
Originally Posted by Cactus Dan: But if I may ask, why would it be important for Cinema 4D to natively offer that or any other capability if it's available with third party plugins? If Cinema 4D has every possible feature built into it, what would be the incentive for third party developers to make plugins for Cinema 4D? What would be the justification of Cinema 4D to even have a plugin SDK?


I'm all for plugins ...for everything that doesn't exist in Cinema. Plugins as a way of bux fixing I'm against that is Maxon's responsibility. The correctional morphs were asked for, I even provided Morph shape created with Keith solution as an example, when the morphtag was develloped. For some reason it didn't make it, a lot of fuss was made and pose morph was added. Way cool but not a way to create corrective morphs.
It's also the reason I never bought your plugins. I do buy plugins from time to time that contradict what I saying but then it's usually to support the develloper. As betatester you get each and every version for free ...so in a way that leaves a bit of money to redirect.

cheers.
 
  11 November 2015
Maybe I'm missing something - I have set up a correctional on just one angle in the attached file and animated it. Looks like its working to me.


Mock file - R17
 
  11 November 2015
Originally Posted by bunk: No, they don't. It might look like they do, but they don't.


Heh, looking at some rigs I have here they do appear to work (and for some reason they continue to work when the legs/arms are at weird poses, maybe because the leg/arm joints are in a hierarchy of other joints, who knows... )

.. but as soon as I switch the morph tag settings (say from Relative to Correctional and then back again) the morphs completely freak out and produce all kinds of weird shapes. So clearly there are some major bugs there alright.

So yup, add this to the 'why use Maya' list I guess, because this stuff does work in Maya for sure, I've seen it in plenty of rigs and I've built them myself. In those cases the shapes are always applied before the skin cluster so they may not be correctionals in the true sense of it but they do allow you to fix poses.

Or.. if you are rigging in C4D - use Cactus Dans plugins and stay away from the buggy native stuff

Cheers,
Brian

Last edited by Horganovski : 11 November 2015 at 07:58 PM.
 
  11 November 2015
Howdy,
Originally Posted by Horganovski: ...Or.. if you are rigging in C4D - use Cactus Dans plugins and stay away from the buggy native stuff ...

Hey, that's what I do.

Adios,
Cactus Dan
__________________
It doesn't matter what people say about you, just as long as they're talking about you.

cactus3d.com, cactus3d-Plugins, CD Character Plugins forum
 
  11 November 2015
Originally Posted by Kaptain Kubrick: Maybe I'm missing something - I have set up a correctional on just one angle in the attached file and animated it. Looks like its working to me.


Mock file - R17
Looks like it ...but that because it's a very poor example. The way you applied the weights hide the none functionality of the Correctional Postdeformer thingy. Turned out I still have an example on line from 2012.
www.bunkweb.nl/files/posemorphbug.c4d
Just to be sure I rebuild the scene in the 17 Demo and it's still the same Correctional Postdeformer thingy ...no idea why it's there and what it should do, but whatever it is, it gives a nice effect to your mesh.

Last edited by bunk : 11 November 2015 at 03:56 PM.
 
  07 July 2017
Sorry to resurrect an old thread - thought it made sense vs. making a new one.

I'm relatively new to the 3D game and have learnt using a educational version of C4D. So far I'm a big fan but before I upgrade to the paid version (no longer a student) I can't help but second guess my choice. So with that in mind was wondering if any of you had thoughts on the below...

- Are those of you who have been using C4D for a long time happy? Any things it doesn't do you wish it did? Is it too expensive for what it does?
- Would I be better looking at Maya/Max now they are a bit more reasonably priced with subscription option? Could this mean Maya/Max replace C4D?
- Have heard a fair amount about blender and given its free seems appealing, have any people used both who can comment on differences or learning curve?
- Looking to work in the broadcaster space where I know C4D is strong, but is C4D still the choice here or should I look at others?

I know it may be a matter of preference, but would be great to get perspectives from any of you C4D veterans! Thanks
 
  07 July 2017
Quote: Looking to work in the broadcaster space

Well that's the key. Your market will dictate your choice.

If you plan to be a freelancer or work in the broadcast industry then it totally makes sense to stick with C4D.

Not only is it still the mogaph tool of choice of many, but it also plays nice with many broadcast graphics solutions like VizRT, Ventuz, After Effects etc...
For generalists, it's also a great tool to easily and quickly make great things happen.

If you work with unity, it's also playing nice with C4D (unlike unreal engine, which seems way more maya/max oriented and for some reason always throws error about smoothing groups when I import a model, at least last time I checked).

I've been using C4D for nearly 8 o 9 years, and it had its own share of growth crisis, but it paid for itself every year.

Like many packages "catching up" to the big ones, it made big leaps for many years, but it also became expensive and development slowed down a lot in more recent times imho. At some point it was almost as expensive as Maya/Max and not offering the same funcionalities (while still being easier to use generally speaking). It was like buying an expensive macmini when you could have a big PC workstation for the same price...Modo on the other hand was also catching up very quickly, or even taking the lead in some areas, with a superior IPR renderer, modeling tools, meshfusion booleans...

But things do change quickly... Autodesk went to subscription only, hiked the prices (it is MUCH more expensive to go maya/max in the long run. C4D's MSA costs me 500 + VAT per year for the studio version which I own. Max/Maya would cost me 1600 + VAT and I wouldn't own anything in the end), Modo is also slowing down a bit to do bug fixing releases... Meanwhile C4D announced they finished (or as it seems) a big under the hood rewrite of the code, we'll get a new IPR renderer and PBR worklow with Prorender... And there is a plethora of plugins and renderers available for it...

Blender is a great piece of technology wrapped in a very controversial packaging, and it's not standard in any industry. It doesn't even want to follow industry standards. This being said, some people took action about it, and there's a new promising "fork" called bforartist which basically tries to keep the good things about blender (what's under the hood) and make the whole UI more artist friendly. But you'll also lose most of the cool commercial plugins for your work if you go Blender. So it's probably best to keep it as a "companion app".

So... in a nutshell there's always another package doing one or two things much better than C4D, but C4D is still a very good all-rounder for me within a great ecosystem of developpers.
 
  07 July 2017
Cinema4D gives you fantastic workflow. Great UI. Fast tools. Easy scene navigation. Stable. Gets things done quickly.

Its also the one 3D soft that is most geared towards Broadcast use. Has Mograph, lots of render engines, a bridge to AfterEffects and so on.

What Cinema4D cannot match is Maya's advanced character animation tools. Everything else is available in C4D, either in the native app or as plugins you can buy.

If you are working in Broadcast, Maya or Max won't give you any major advantages over C4D. C4D has Broadcast covered and is also better for tight deadlines.

As for Blender, after C4D's well laid out UI, the Blender UI design will likely seem like strangeness, strangeness and more strangeness to you.

The new, completely free Blender fork Bforartists is far more friendly and usable if you are coming from C4D: (Make sure you chose "Maya" at the splash screen interaction mode select option - this is closest to how C4D works).

http://www.bforartists.de/

There's lots of manuals on the site covering its various functions. It is compatible with normal Blender as well.

Like with Maya and Max before, Blender won't let you get things done faster or better in Broadcast than C4D.

The only interesting thing with Blender is the new Eevee realtime 3D rendering engine coming in the next version of Blender.

That would let one render some 3D Broadcast graphics in realtime or at least much faster than with regular rendering.

But I would wait for Eevee to turn up in Bforartists before using it.

Normal Blender is horrible to learn if you are used to the clean, well laid out C4D UI.
 
  07 July 2017
- Are those of you who have been using C4D for a long time happy? Any things it doesn't do you wish it did? Is it too expensive for what it
does?


Im happy, although Playback is kinda slow when working with characters. It is expensive, but so does the competitions, it needs plugins (xparticles, unfold3D, render engine, etc), but also, so does the competition (crowd simulation, fumefx, phoenix fd, etc).

- Would I be better looking at Maya/Max now they are a bit more reasonably priced with subscription option? Could this mean Maya/Max replace C4D?

Nowadays with Autodesk the motto is : release today, patch a year later. No thanks. They advertise Mash as an alternative to Mograph.. well, Mograph is bug free and Mash is not.

- Have heard a fair amount about blender and given its free seems* appealing, have any people used both who can comment on differences or* learning curve?

Havent used Blender.

- Looking to work in the broadcaster space where I know C4D is strong, but is C4D still the choice here or should I look at others?


Maya Mash is good in paper, in practice is not. Is very buggy and it doesn't have the freedom C4D have. Unlike Maya, Mograph is embedded into the DNA of C4D. You can clone everything from primitives to xparticles emitters without additional -unreliable- setup and it has everything a* Broadcast artist needs: Camera calibration, camera track, object track, motion graphics tools, easy to setup fire (TFD), easy to setup particles (xparticles), a fast render engine (amd pro render in r19)

Maya is slow because Motion Pictures industry works slow, Broadcast industry isnt.
 
  07 July 2017
Why?

In a sentence: Autodesk has one of the worst, most unfair payment / subscription models out there, and their software is generally unstable.

If I'm switching it won't be to anything from Autodesk, I guarantee you that. It will be to Blender.
 
  07 July 2017
Quote: If I'm switching it won't be to anything from Autodesk, I guarantee you that. It will be to Blender.


If you are coming from C4D, Bforartists takes about 1 - 2 hours to figure out (the basics - creating a cube, doing some SubD poly modeling to it, creating and applying a material, positioning a camera, setting up some lights, doing some Cycles test renders and so forth).

Just make sure you set interaction to "Maya" when the program starts up. That's the closest to C4D's viewport navigation.

As for Blender proper, if you are coming from C4D, Blender's UI design is brainfuck. It works nowhere near as well as C4D's friendly, disciplined UI layout.

Bforartists was usable for me after about 1 hour of playing around.

That 1 hour was mostly poking through menu tabs and mousing over various icons to see where different functions are.

I'm excited about Eevee realtime rendering coming to Blender.

But I'll be using it in Bforartists, not in Blender proper.

Blender, in my opinion, is only usable for people who learned 3D with Blender from the beginning and used nothing else besides Blender.

Coming from C4D, Maya or similar commercial 3D software, Bforartists is much friendlier to get into.
 
  07 July 2017
Quote: Are those of you who have been using C4D for a long time happy? Any things it doesn't do you wish it did? Is it too expensive for what it does?

Whilst it isnt cheap, you can at least get a full copy for what AD charge for 2 years worth of a max subscription, plus worst case scenario, you can always sell your copy of c4d and recoup the majority of the cash you spent on it, thats something to keep in mind. Max is like renting a house forever, c4d lets you get a mortgage. *edit* plus keep in mind there is the much more modestly priced broadcast edition, you might find this pretty much has all the tools youre likely to need.

Quote: - Would I be better looking at Maya/Max now they are a bit more reasonably priced with subscription option? Could this mean Maya/Max replace C4D?


Depends what you mean with reasonable. They're charging what used to be an annual upgrade fee every 2 months, I find their pricing to be terrible for anyone outside of those that just want to rent a copy for a month or two.

Quote: - Have heard a fair amount about blender and given its free seems appealing, have any people used both who can comment on differences or learning curve?

My main issue is how much work can you get with it? Absolutely there are jobs where the app doesnt matter, but imho most jobs ask for a specific 3d app. Blender may well be free but I've yet to see a job listing asking for it. Its capable, but will it earn you money?

Quote: - Looking to work in the broadcaster space where I know C4D is strong, but is C4D still the choice here or should I look at others?

If you're doing TV, c4d is probably the best choice you could make. If you wanted to do film we'd push you towards maya and houdini and for games theres max, but broadcast gfx, I'd honestly say c4d is the best choice here.

Last edited by imashination : 07 July 2017 at 02:07 PM.
 
  07 July 2017
I have to add.. C4D for Broadcast is unbeatable, not only for mograph, but for the plugins, many of them are aimed toward Broadcast, while the competition aims for VFX / Movies.
 
  07 July 2017
Cinema4D had 4 problems for Film/VFX work:

1) None of the then completely Maya-crazy people were interested in even looking at C4D - this was a cultural/perception problem in the industry. People were told "Maya is simply the best", and 100% of Maya users bought that marketing line completely.

2) C4D took a detour through Archviz/Productviz/Mograph/Broadcast GFX territory instead of focusing on things like character rigging, facial animation, fluids simulation, particles and so forth. Cinema4D also neglected the Game Development market, which was then dominated by 3DMax.

3) It took ages for C4D to get some of the 3rd party renderers that people in Film/VFX swore by at the time - Vray, Renderman, MentalRay and so forth

4) Cinema4D simply did not have Maya/Autodesk's marketing muscle. Maya was marketed like "it makes a Hollywood production God out of you the minute you buy it". In actual fact, I've seen few people accomplish anything big in Maya without some 15 - 20 specialists working on the job.

I believe that C4D will have a big presence in Film/VFX 5 years from now.

That's because so many render engines, plugins and new features C4D just did not have 5 - 10 years ago are available right now.

Its ironic, but a 3D software that was named "Cinema4D" 2 decades or so ago never had a big footprint in Cinema.

That may change by 2020 - 2023 or so.

What will make C4D popular in Film/VFX is probably its fast workflow.

More VFX work than ever is done for Movies and Television. Deadlines are getting tighter too.

At some point, a bunch of people in VFX are bound to discover that what they do in Maya can be done a lot faster in C4D.
 
  07 July 2017
I don't really think C4D is going to really crack the big movie VFX market anytime soon.

Actually I don't think Max or Maya would either too nowadays. Maya is mostly being used because of its integration with pipelines and for its animation capabilities.

Instead of general DCC apps like C4D or Maya, the high end studios seem to be going towards very specialized sets of tools in a global pipeline. A mix between proprietary tech and open data formats. NB : the very need of stuff like Alembic, OpenVDB, OpenSubdiv, MaterialX, USD etc... is precisely because those studios need to move data from one application to another all the time for modelling, surfacing, animation, lookdev, layout, rendering, compositing...

So it's Zeno, Presto, Katana, Clarisse, Hyperion, Manuka, Massive, Guerrilla, Zbrush, Houdini, Mari, Nuke, ... in combination with Alembic, MDL, USD, FBX, OpenEXR, Udim... etc...

This being said, for episodic television, independent movies, clips, shorts etc... Cinema 4D is already being used. And it's being used in big movies for huds or some smaller stuff (it used be a mattepainting tool at Sony in the past).
 
reply share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.