The Dollar Value of R20

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 Display Modes
  6 Days Ago
Based on feedback...I updated the original post, raising the value of the CAD tools...and the totals. Still might be low, but I’ll go with $450 value for CAD tools.
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.
 
  6 Days Ago
I was on the Unity web page just now and I saw a third party CAD tool...works to import and prep the models for Unity. It’s, $1,100.

https://store.unity.com/configure-p...0743.1532378385
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.
 
  6 Days Ago
Originally Posted by IceCaveMan: Based on feedback...I updated the original post, raising the value of the CAD tools...and the totals. Still might be low, but I’ll go with $450 value for CAD tools.

R20 native Catia and JT import is huge! as far as i know spatial (Catia) licenses not perpetual,only license per year and it is quite expensive. for example:
the JT and Catia modul for one of the best DCC-CAD Translators (Polytrans) on the market costs:
495$ (JT) 
1450$ ( CATIA4 )  first year
795$ subscription
1950$ ( CATIA5) first year
795 subscription

Last edited by useruser : 5 Days Ago at 09:28 AM.
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by IceCaveMan: Here's a video some might have missed:

the volume builder is pretty cool! all this boolean operations to create a signed distance field makes it extremly flexible and powerfull.  the supervoxels-plugin  "only" meshes splines,geo,particles togehter in additive mode. you cant do operations like intersect/subtract inside the plugin.  

Last edited by useruser : 5 Days Ago at 07:32 AM.
 
  5 Days Ago
I've just wrapped up a series of videos I'm doing for R20 and I will say that for me, the volume modelling tools will absolutely replace the majority of what I traditionally would have done with the SDS tools. So many objects where you previously had to dick around with getting edge loops, properly flowing polys, avoiding triangles, not having the mesh too dense in one area, trying iton out odd wobbles; so many of these objects will now be VDB for me.

On the bottle image, yes the mesh is a bit low res, just bump it up a bit higher. Remember that you can always use these meshes as a base mesh to reproject a low poly SDS mesh onto. and in many cases you'll just turn the VDB off, tweak some objects and setting, flick it back on, have a sip of tea whilst you wait 10 seconds for the new mesh, then carry on.

Yes the CAD import is solid. I've thrown a ton of models at it and it has been able to bring in every one of them with no weird stuff happening, I'm actually quite surprised how robust it has been.
__________________
Matthew O'Neill
www.3dfluff.com
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by imashination: bottle image, yes the mesh is a bit low res, just bump it up a bit higher. Remember that you can always use these meshes as a base mesh to reproject a low poly SDS mesh onto. and in many cases you'll just turn the VDB off, tweak some objects and setting, flick it back on, have a sip of tea whilst you wait 10 seconds for the new mesh, then carry on.



Much of the organic stuff I build starts in etither zbrush or an x-particles skinner which results in high detailed  but super high poly mesh which can be too heavy to actually work with.
From their I use zbrush's remeshing tools or instant mesh to  create a matching model with more manageble  poly count and better topolology. I would imagine I would use the same workflow with the R20 volume modeling tools. Start with a super detailed open vdb/volume mesh and then retopo. I've said this before but it would be great if Maxon introduced a quad based retopo/remesher into c4d. In the meantime-if you dont have z-brush, -heres a link to instant meshes which is free, and sometimes works better and faster than z-remesher.

https://github.com/wjakob/instant-meshes

Last edited by JoelDubin : 5 Days Ago at 01:37 PM.
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by imashination: Yes the CAD import is solid. I've thrown a ton of models at it and it has been able to bring in every one of them with no weird stuff happening, I'm actually quite surprised how robust it has been.

This is VERY good to know. Really looking forward to this release!

thanks!

travis
 
  5 Days Ago

Re Cad tools import - a little off-topic, but in the world of tech illustration software, many which depend on importing Cad data - e.g, Solidworks Composer, Lattice, worth noting these packages  are very expensive - Composer was 8k when we purchased. I believe its still around 4-5k with 1k/year maintenance. The full suite of Lattice is much more - Corel offers a tech illustration package, but the only version imo that is competitive requires a pretty expensive plugin from Lattice - this makes the package at least 5k - might be as high as 10 when completely outfitted. 

SW Composer offers both vector and bitmap output. As you might expect, the bitmap doesn't compare at all to Cinema or any of the other DCC apps. But the vector output is nice, and easy to control. 
None of the tech illustration programs offer much in terms of material customization, though they do offer BOM tables, red-lining, etc - but those aspects should be relatively simple given the foundation and API that exists for Cinema today. 

I wonder whether the new CAD import opens the door a little to someday, either thru Maxon or 3rd party, to add a suite to tool suited to this field. Having Cinema render engine, or 3rd party  + vector illustration would significantly enhance what one could do here. I often try to match cameras between Composer & Cinema. Having the project inside Cinema for that aspect alone would be a huge workflow enhancement. 
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by IceCaveMan: Volumes delivers incredible power and a ridiculously useful new modeling paradigm. This one is pretty easy to price as there is a clear comparison with MeshFusion which came out a few years ago for Modo. MeshFusion was sold separately for $400 before theFoundry purchased it and folded it into the product. Since I purchased it and used it I believe I can say confidently that modeling w/R20’s Volumes will be better. And volumes works with more than just geometry—also working with particles, etc. Plus it supports fields in crazy cool operations and there are filters to dilate/erode etc. It is no exaggeration to say that this feature could save an artist 20, 50, perhaps 200 hours over the course of a year. Some of the most daunting modeling challenges will become child’s play. Plus whole new artistic styles are possible with it that simply weren’t before.
Ala Carte Price: $500


You really think being able to turn a few mesh objects into voxels/volumes and fuse them in various ways is worth 500 USD??? In 2018??? The 25 Dollar game Claybook, programmed by 1 guy who left Ubisoft, has a feature similar to this in its level editor. Its also volumes based and does what it does at 60 FPS realtime on GPU while raytracing everything in the game in realtime. Take a look at some of the clay physics in that game.

In R20, you are looking at something that probably 1 coder put together in 2 months while implementing VDBs generally.

If the option was there to have superclean auto-quadmesh topology generation for those volumes, in realtime on GPU, with super-low polycounts and excellent topology being maintained, then the feature - in 2018 pricing - might be worth about 250 USD on its own.


Also consider that just about everything else in R20 - like the node based shading - has arrived many, many years later than it should have.


The only really expensive thing in R20 is the CAD importer. And that probably came about as a result of Nemetschek - a multi-billion dollar CAD company - licensing a 3rd party CAD file import library across multiple of its products.


In other words - this is nowhere near being a 1,600 USD upgrade as you calculated.


Also, Maxon has once again made the mistake of spreading itself thin across many general-purpose features.

The high-end character animation features, dynamics simulation and more that quite a few Pro level CG software already have are nowhere to be seen.


So C4D stays stuck in "General-purpose everyday 3D" land once again. Its been stuck there for over 1 decade now.
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by skeebertus: You really think being able to turn a few mesh objects into voxels/volumes and fuse them in various ways is worth 500 USD??? 

Absolutely I do. Compares favorably to MeshFusion which ran $400. Has more power. Will change the game.

Originally Posted by skeebertus: In R20, you are looking at something that probably 1 coder put together in 2 months while implementing VDBs generally.

It truly is remarkable how habitually you dismiss someone’s technology or app with “Oh that’s easy” declarations. I’ would guess you’ve done this 10-20 times in the past few years with all kinds of tech from various vendors. A recent example was your anti-Apple diatribe where you dismissed seemingly everything ever accomplished by their engineering team.

Originally Posted by skeebertus: The high-end character animation features, dynamics simulation ... are nowhere to be seen....

I agree. I would have loved to see that.

Am I somewhat uncomfortable with a $1,600 estimate? Yes. I’ve wondered if it should be higher. I also concede that my valuations are subjective. Others might have very different opinions and that’s fine.  :-)
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.

Last edited by IceCaveMan : 5 Days Ago at 05:06 AM.
 
  5 Days Ago
Skee...you and I have had some nice chats on things in the past...like w/Macromedia Director and other trends, etc. I will be frank with you. If the tone you’ve had in your posts lately continues I will be setting you to ‘ignore.’  I do not want to do that but your posts can sometimes be harsh, negative and combative... and I’m looking to de-stress my life where possible. Do as you wish but I wanted you to know. I want to hear what you have to say...but not at the expense of my health.
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.

Last edited by IceCaveMan : 5 Days Ago at 04:52 AM.
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by IceCaveMan: Absolutely I do. Compares favorably to MeshFusion which ran $400. Has more power. Will change the game.


It truly is remarkable to see how habitually you dismiss someone’s technology or app with “Oh that’s easy” declarations. I’m not exaggerating to say you’ve done that two dozen times in the past few years with all kinds of tech from various vendors. I wonder if someone were to talk about nuclear fusion.... you’d claim high school kids could it have it functioning in a summer internship.


I agree. I would have loved to see that.

Am I somewhat uncomfortable with a $1,600 estimate? Yes. Should probably be higher.

How is it compares favorably with Meshfusion?  how can you control the edges, make a library of objects  etc.  Meshfusion have years of development.
Obviously i didn't tested R20 but what you would rate "favorably"?
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by Bullit: How is it compares favorably with Meshfusion?  how can you control the edges, make a library of objects  etc.  Meshfusion have years of development.
Obviously i didn't tested R20 but what you would rate "favorably"?

I would say its favorable to Mesh Fusion in these respects:
-It has several mechanisms to effect contouring...very fast and easy, including the smoothing layer controls
-It has attributes that can be animated for motion graphics
-It works with fields to assist in all manner of organic or abstract or eroded shapes...and still more animation options.
-It works with non-mesh scene objects like particles

Where MeshFusion would have an advantage is that keeps things polygonally lighter than Volumes
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.

Last edited by IceCaveMan : 5 Days Ago at 05:08 AM.
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by IceCaveMan: I would say its favorable to Mesh Fusion in these respects:
-It has several mechanisms to effect contouring...very fast and easy, including the smoothing layer controls
-It has attributes that can be animated for motion graphics
-It works with fields to assist in all manner of organic or abstract or eroded shapes...and still more animation options.
-It works with non-mesh scene objects like particles

Where MeshFusion would have an advantage is that keeps things polygonally lighter than Volumes
not only lighter, but also cleaner with a proper mesh flow and UVable. i guess it's hard to compare what's "better" here, depends highly on your individual needs. for mograph surely volumes are, for proper hard surface modelling i'd favour mesh fusion.
__________________
________________________________
my stuff on vimeo
 
  5 Days Ago
Originally Posted by everfresh: not only lighter, but also cleaner with a proper mesh flow and UVable. i guess it's hard to compare what's "better" here, depends highly on your individual needs. for mograph surely volumes are, for proper hard surface modelling i'd favour mesh fusion.
Possibly it will be more challenging to UV a Volumes model. I look forward to seeing a demo of strategies to approach that.

I’m finding triplanar projection reduces the need to UV..but of course often unavoidable. Yes a valid point.
__________________
C4D R19 Studio, MODO 902, VRAY, Octane, Cycles. PC/Mac.

Last edited by IceCaveMan : 5 Days Ago at 05:57 AM.
 
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 06:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.