Cinema 4D and fluid/liquid sim production workflow

Become a member of the CGSociety

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

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01 January 2013   #46
Originally Posted by Srek: It took several years and many developer hours to fully integrate the bhodinut code. Similar problems happened with the cebas parts. Very basic difference in coding made it hard work to fully integrate this and there are still limitations that wouldn't be there if the tool were developed for CINEMA 4D directly instead of beeing adjusted for it. Personaly I don't think this kind of integration will happen any time soon again.
Py4D was very different, it was developed fully compliant to the CINEMA 4D coding standards to begin with and Maxon employed the maker instead of only buying the tool.
Cheers
Björn


i just refered to the statement ' doesn't always result in what's best for the user'.
i still think that especially SLA has become a key singature for c4d. despite the fact that the
finalRender engine more or less vanished into thin air over the years, I also think that cebas
did a great job with tp,pc and the gi-engine. IMHO these features helped c4d to develop
from its rough new form (xl5) into that what is today the c4d brand (xl6/7/8). at least
i got pretty excited about these features then

that is is more difficult to maintain external code is obvious, but i think it was worth the
effort, both for the users and maxon.

edit : i am aware that it is kind of ridiculous to argue about that, just expressing my point
of view now

Last edited by littledevil : 01 January 2013 at 12:16 PM.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #47
I agree, it was worth the effort, but with this experience in mind we are trying to do it better next time around, like with Python.
__________________
- www.bonkers.de -
The views expressed on this post are my personal opinions and do not represent the views of my employer.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #48
Originally Posted by Katachi: No I just reserve the right to not share internal future plans of my company with a public entity (which in your case is not even a customer of mine). For example to avoid people posting private (and unsafe or subject of change) information in public forums which apparently is the right choice (at least it teaches me not to do this again).

But well, i won't join this kind of personal insulting conversation (it is a mistake i learned the hard way) I just wanted to give out information here to the thread starter and interested users which I did so I leave the rest.


Your consideration of that pricing structure 1) costs us/client thousands of dollars on large projects, IF the render farm agrees to it 2) completely screws us/client if the render farm refuses. Render farms won't invest in that kind of thing if they only wind up using it on that particular project, unless you foot the bill. If you tell me you're considering that and then ignore follow up emails, I'm going to assume that and warn my fellow users of what they might get into before they fall on their swords. Sorry.
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 01 January 2013   #49
Originally Posted by Katachi: No I just reserve the right to not share internal future plans of my company with a public entity (which in your case is not even a customer of mine). For example to avoid people posting private (and unsafe or subject of change) information in public forums which apparently is the right choice (at least it teaches me not to do this again).

But well, i won't join this kind of personal insulting conversation (it is a mistake i learned the hard way) I just wanted to give out information here to the thread starter and interested users which I did so I leave the rest.



samir - what you apparently do not understand it i have been telling people that RK does not support DPIT due to need to purchase it just to allow them to render. (most users are completely aware that render only versions are usually free or low cost and gives them more benefit from their plugin purchase)

i would of course like to offer users all the plugin options they need - but at that price i could not justify it, along with the hanging threat of needing to purchase per node in the next few months - as i've only had two users EVER ask about it in the past couple years. the third was joel just last week. but for three users over two years and facing what i was told was an expensive per render client cost on top of a very expensive plugin, i just could not justify it.

had i known you now changed your plans that it WAS available i would not have to be telling users incorrect information.

the only reason i posted the our short email exchange is so that there was not "he said, she said" issue - it seemed pretty clear to me, but i posted the verbatim so that in case somehow i was misunderstanding it could be pointed out to me. there was nothing in there that was personal, or non-disclosure - you told me the same stuff that i assumed was public knowledge

i do not have time to track and follow the dozens or more of plugin developers looking for hidden tidbits of policy change, or secret changes in features - most c4d developers it seems are unable to use something as simple as a database to send out information to their users. (seems like a simple and great way to keep in touch and promote plugin updates and new products to me - that should immediately translate into higher product sales - why they don't do it? i have no idea) there are a few that do and it really is a benefit to the users.

unfortunately you always go into tantrum mode - instead of using it as a teaching moment and educating people.

so for what it is worth, i think it is a good change in your policy - as plugins like yours really do benefit from all available options to get them rendered. i just wish you had sent out an email or even a public post about the change so i could have known and not been telling users the opposite, which does not benefit you nor i.

dann
__________________
-
Dann Stubbs - dann@darkskydigital.com
http://www.RenderKing.com Value Priced C4D, VRAY, Cycles4D Render Farm
-
 
Old 01 January 2013   #50
funny how Samir claims private stuff to stay enclosed yet failed to meet certain nda agreements himself in the history. This is what I would call mildy pathetic..

Honestly, to steer this discussion back from Effex advertising to the initial question:

There is no completely reasonable solution to work with particles inside Cinema 4D right now. If you touch the millions, working gets tedious to impossible.

If you are looking for flexibel, high quality fluid solutions to be used within a Cinema 4D pipeline, either RealFlow or Houdini will be sufficient for their parts. (That goes without having to waste any thoughts on compatibility and NET issues unlike EFFEX obviously).

Turbulence FD is a nice plugin but pretty limited in its workflow, variety of controls and ability to customization.

Phyfluids isn't actively developed anymore afaik.

Although you might take EFFEX for a gapcloser between external liquissimulation applications and internal fluidsimulation plugins like TurbulenceFD, I personally wouldn't advice to rely on that if you are playing to get into serious VFX/Simulation work.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #51
^I had forgotten about Remo's Phyfluids. From the old hair rendered videos on the Remotion site from '09, it looks like development still had a long way to go.

Anyway--getting back to current available c4d/fluid workflow solutions, now that Alembic is supposed to work with NET as of R14.034, perhaps this is yet another way for c4d users who rely on NET to work with Realflow.

I just tried a test with another user, with a baked Realflow scene exported to Alembic and then imported in C4D and it worked great. Have not personally tried with NET yet however.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #52
I am not sure, if i still like the tone in this thread, at least for my understanding some
unwritten rules of nettique have been violated here multiple times. you should consider
that a large part of c4d community might read this and this might have some sort of
impact on samirs work.
there is a difference between complaints about bad customer service and simple ranting.
threatening to 'mobilize/warn' the own user base, 'falling into swords', 'pathetic' behaviour
and so on is what i am talking about. not sure if this reasoned by the language barrier,
but for me this all sounds pretty rude.

Last edited by littledevil : 01 January 2013 at 07:37 PM.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #53
Originally Posted by JoelOtron: ^I had forgotten about Remo's Phyfluids. From the old hair rendered videos on the Remotion site from '09, it looks like development still had a long way to go.

Anyway--getting back to current available c4d/fluid workflow solutions, now that Alembic is supposed to work with NET as of R14.034, perhaps this is yet another way for c4d users who rely on NET to work with Realflow.

I just tried a test with another user, with a baked Realflow scene exported to Alembic and then imported in C4D and it worked great. Have not personally tried with NET yet however.


Alembic is a good cure-all for anything that does not have a baking solution and would seem would be perfect for Realflow. Once you re-import the alembic converted mesh sequence, it's simply then Net Render distributes the files to the slaves. Seems like it should work solidly on Net Render.
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 01 January 2013   #54
Just tested a scene with an imported alembic real flow mesh. It works perfectly with Net Render. Just need to reapply the material. Strangely it took the clients about 5 mins to start working on the frames.

Be sure to updated your net clients and server to R14.034 and not just the main app.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #55
Originally Posted by threedeedom: Just tested a scene with an imported alembic real flow mesh. It works perfectly with Net Render. Just need to reapply the material. Strangely it took the clients about 5 mins to start working on the frames.

Be sure to updated your net clients and server to R14.034 and not just the main app.


Does it create a PLA animated single mesh or a sequential set of meshes?
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 01 January 2013   #56
Originally Posted by Troyan: Does it create a PLA animated single mesh or a sequential set of meshes?


Just import your realflow .bin seq into c4d in the usual way then export the scene as an alembic file. Then import the alembic file back into the same scene. Delete the original realflow mesh and reapply the material to the alembic polygon. Then send to Net.

The imported alembic mesh also plays a lot faster and smoother in the editor window as a bonus
 
Old 01 January 2013   #57
Originally Posted by Little_Devil: I am not sure, if i still like the tone in this thread, at least for my understanding some
unwritten rules of nettique have been violated here multiple times. you should consider
that a large part of c4d community might read this and this might have some sort of
impact on samirs work.
there is a difference between complaints about bad customer service and simple ranting.
threatening to 'mobilize/warn' the own user base, 'falling into swords', 'pathetic' behaviour
and so on is what i am talking about. not sure if this reasoned by the language barrier,
but for me this all sounds pretty rude.


Unfortunately there are a few unprofessional professionals on this board that love to harass Samir.
 
Old 01 January 2013   #58
Really smart to insult a developer that's made some of the best plugins there are for c4d =/
 
Old 01 January 2013   #59
It appears that there are users in this thread who have had past disagreements/misunderstandings with Samir. Whether warranted/fair or not, it should be up to them to sort it out. May I, with all sincerity and humility, ask that all of us who are not caught up in this, to please not add fuel to the fire with any further 'provocative' comments.

I say this because all too often on these forums, our emotions get the better of us and all the knives and pitchforks come out when they normally wouldn't under calmer circumstances. And I've witnessed some pretty unrestful times before that have resulted in very talented C4d community members deciding to pack up and move out. In such events, nobody wins.

Sorry, but I just had to get that off my chest.
__________________
"...if you have faith as small as a mustard seed... Nothing will be impossible for you."
 
Old 01 January 2013   #60
Thanks for the feedback everyone. It seems that despite the issues brought up here, and now that the NET confusion has been cleared up, DPIT, (at a quarter the price of RF) still looks to be a good choice if RF is out of ones budget.

I understand the frustration of those who posted. Being at the mercy of software can be extremely stressful when up against deadlines. I think Troyan as a customer and user and Dann who was just trying to accommodate his customer, had every right to express their frustrations--and its good to have this information accessible to the community so others can make educated decisions in the future. I also wonder if some of these problems could have been avoided if the rendering issues were checked first before committing to using the software for a project. I could be wrong. I guess thats what I'm also trying to work out for myself in this thread.

But after playing with the demo myself, there is also no denying that Samir has done a very good job with DPIT and it might be a good tool to have--at least for the short term, with RF eventually being the goal.

I also think Maxon could do a great job with fluids. But Im sure i dont have to tell them that. Or maybe I should try reverse psychology...
 
Thread Closed 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 08:59 AM.


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