TP Status

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 08 August 2013   #46
Originally Posted by cmyk: To get the most out of TP, you have to have a working knowledge of Xpresso. which is fine, and allows the artist/tech to create very complex and customized sims, but the learning curve to even begin wielding TP is that much more steep is all.

Other than tinkering with the included presets, TP is mostly aimed at advanced users.

XP is on it's way to make advanced particle systems accessible to any C4D user in almost any skill level.

It'd be nice to see Maxon choose to make TP more accessible to those not steeped in Xpresso, or have a more artist-friendly GUI, now that XP is quickly showing what some focused development along those lines can do. But, I like to see a third party have the freedom and community support to offer an affordable and robust modern solution to these more advanced areas of CG.


You just said everything I was trying to say, but so much better - thank you!!! words are hard!
__________________
mike griggs : creativebloke : 3D, vfx & digital
creativebloke.com
 
Old 08 August 2013   #47
Originally Posted by Srek: Thats is available as a preset node in Xpresso, it's not connected specifically to TP.

From what I can tell, this preset actually finds the nearest vertex--not point on surface.
__________________
Khye Kading
 
Old 08 August 2013   #48
Originally Posted by Troyan: Let's not forget that you can't cache TP without a third party plugin or a weird workaround using Mograph cache.


That all changed with R14 (Alembic)

https://vimeo.com/46776463

EDIT--and although the other methods (besides mograph) are 3rd party, the choices are now numerous and mostly inexpensive (or free in some cases)

nitrobake
steadybake
pcache
TP partio
XP

Much better than it was 5 years ago thats for sure when the options were 0

Last edited by JoelDubin : 08 August 2013 at 04:51 PM.
 
Old 08 August 2013   #49
I don't find TP particularly difficult to use, although I find most people in studios I've worked for are scared off by the xpresso and lack of entry level tutorials introducing the core concepts. Please don't mention cineversity as this is not good value for money for advanced users.

However, TP is ridiculously slow when it comes to high particle counts. I wasn't particularly interested in x-particles as most of the effects can be replicated in TP (although there isn't a good volume render option out of the box) until I realised it has great performance with huge numbers of particles. This made me realise how badly TP needs some love.
 
Old 08 August 2013   #50
Originally Posted by neonghost: I don't find TP particularly difficult to use, although I find most people in studios I've worked for are scared off by the xpresso and lack of entry level tutorials introducing the core concepts. Please don't mention cineversity as this is not good value for money for advanced users.

However, TP is ridiculously slow when it comes to high particle counts. I wasn't particularly interested in x-particles as most of the effects can be replicated in TP (although there isn't a good volume render option out of the box) until I realised it has great performance with huge numbers of particles. This made me realise how badly TP needs some love.


That's the thing for most artists with deadlines and budgets X-Particles fills the gap that TP and Xpresso does. It's not that we shouldn't learn TP and Xpresso, it's just if there is a quicker, easier to setup option for the cost of a day or so's work on a job that needs particles.....you start using X-Particles which will cover the majority of particle work that you may require, which will turn many users away from the more complex embedded system which is slower anyway.
__________________
mike griggs : creativebloke : 3D, vfx & digital
creativebloke.com
 
Old 08 August 2013   #51
Originally Posted by neonghost: I don't find TP particularly difficult to use, although I find most people in studios I've worked for are scared off by the xpresso and lack of entry level tutorials introducing the core concepts. Please don't mention cineversity as this is not good value for money for advanced users.


http://www.digitaltutors.com/11/training.php?pid=1129

Maybe this helps. I'm already planning a second tutorial which focuses more on particle concepts. But this first XPresso tutorial explains all the basics from navigating in XPresso, creating Nodes, concepts, vector math without beeing a rocket scientist and some pretty advanced setups including a car rig and a dynamic jellyfish. I also think DT is a good resource for tutorials since you have access to the whole library.
__________________
www.simonfiedler.de
 
Old 08 August 2013   #52
Originally Posted by teleliq: I'm already planning a second tutorial which focuses more on particle concepts.


there´s one already, by the meantime you could also use this as a TP resource:
http://www.digitaltutors.com/tutori...ts-in-CINEMA-4D

maybe it helps.

cheers,
fuat
__________________
insekt8.de
 
Old 08 August 2013   #53
Foam+Bubbles

Hey hey,

I need to make an animation like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpy_Zh-8sKA

my problem is the bubbles and the foam, i need to make a little realistic, any one have an ideia how to make it???

Thanks
 
Old 08 August 2013   #54
Originally Posted by JoelOtron: That all changed with R14 (Alembic)

https://vimeo.com/46776463

EDIT--and although the other methods (besides mograph) are 3rd party, the choices are now numerous and mostly inexpensive (or free in some cases)

nitrobake
steadybake
pcache
TP partio
XP

Much better than it was 5 years ago thats for sure when the options were 0


5 years? Try one year. What was available a year ago just didn't work as we'd hoped. XP had no caching, no alembic in R13. And even alembic, as great as it is, I wouldn't call a perfect solution if you are dealing with several particle systems emitting a large amount of particles over a long animation compared to a caching system. All of the options we have now are great but it's mystifying where there is no caching system for something that's been around so long and really is something that needs a cache system. Great that there are plugins now but when you have a huge project that requires splitting up among possibly 5 farms to complete, organizing everyone to install the plugins necessary which may just be for your project alone is a huge hassle.
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 08 August 2013   #55
Originally Posted by Troyan: 5 years? Try one year. What was available a year ago just didn't work as we'd hoped. XP had no caching, no alembic in R13. And even alembic, as great as it is, I wouldn't call a perfect solution if you are dealing with several particle systems emitting a large amount of particles over a long animation compared to a caching system. All of the options we have now are great but it's mystifying where there is no caching system for something that's been around so long and really is something that needs a cache system. Great that there are plugins now but when you have a huge project that requires splitting up among possibly 5 farms to complete, organizing everyone to install the plugins necessary which may just be for your project alone is a huge hassle.


Fair enough and good points
The "5 years" reference was really meant for mograph (actually more like 7 years ago) which as you mentioned already, does allow for caching of TP but is definitely not the best method. I have used it to cache multiple TP groups within the same scene. Was a PITA to set up thats for sure, but it worked. Actually the big obstacle I faced getting that scene rendered was that at the time it couldnt run on NET as it was way over 2 gbs once the particles were baked. Luckily that cache size limitation has since been fixed on NET. Well---not that it matters now (thats for another thread)

Anyway--I do agree with you Troyan, ideally, TP should have a baking option built in.
In the meantime, if you still use TP, check out pCache if you haven't.

http://www.plugins4cinema4d.com/pcache.html

Works great.
 
Old 08 August 2013   #56
Originally Posted by JoelOtron: Fair enough and good points
The "5 years" reference was really meant for mograph (actually more like 7 years ago) which as you mentioned already, does allow for caching of TP but is definitely not the best method. I have used it to cache multiple TP groups within the same scene. Was a PITA to set up thats for sure, but it worked. Actually the big obstacle I faced getting that scene rendered was that at the time it couldnt run on NET as it was way over 2 gbs once the particles were baked. Luckily that cache size limitation has since been fixed on NET. Well---not that it matters now (thats for another thread)

Anyway--I do agree with you Troyan, ideally, TP should have a baking option built in.
In the meantime, if you still use TP, check out pCache if you haven't.

http://www.plugins4cinema4d.com/pcache.html

Works great.


I have and it is a great plugin. But I think X-particles covers all of my needs. So if I have to manage a plugin, I think Xparticles is the best option.
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 08 August 2013   #57
Thread automatically closed

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.
 
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 08:48 PM.


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