C4d R17 more powerfull then r21?


hello folks.
cinema 4d r21 is out !! any takers? working fine for you? I been playing around traying a couple of recipes… nothing to crazy… and I am not getting the result I was expecting.

for instances I try doing a boolean operation on cinema 4d r21 lets say I am still waiting for it to be completed.
try the same operacion in cinema 4d r17 worked like a charm.
any one cares to share the light here? thanks


Booleans are unreliable, sometimes you need to move them by 0.001+ for them to work properly


Also, try selecting (or de-selecting) high-quality in the boolean settings.

Alternatively, use a volume builder (+ volume mesher) to create your boolean: very flexible, and the result will be a clean quad mesh.

And not possible in R17.


sure thing amigos… you guys are spot on… I dont mind jumping from one software to another I was just worry I was the only one dealing with this.

thanks for your time =) cheers.


Did you notice performance issues just with booleans? The thing with booleans is they are numerically extremly problematic. It is possible that certain bad border cases were fixed over the 4 releases in beteween, which might however increase computation time.


performances issue? yes I have… have in mind I don’t use icons or the cinema 4d UI I only use the windows view panel and I work based on commands… moving from full panel view to 4 panels view it drags a bit. nothing major but annoying. every now and then I get some ghost images flashing on my screen.

thanks for your thoughts mate.


If you want to work with booleans, I’d advise to have a look at the Meshboolean plugins.

It allows for a much better workflow with booleans than the vanilla system, and is similar to hardops in Blender, dealing not only with multiple successive operations in a non destrutive way, but also handling intersection bevels at the same time.


here we go…



not a fan of plugins…

but thanks for the info.


Did someone say HardOps?


I spoke to Nitroman about this plugin, everything stays live and you animate the cutters. Seems a pretty good facsimile of HardOps.

Though I’m not sure the OP was in need of plugins but had discovered a potentially huge performance regression that is being glossed over with glib statements along the lines of, ‘Booleans are sh1te in C4D so what do you expect?’ Or, ‘Look over here, try something completely different…because booleans are crap.’

O333, post a scene file of your example for others to test in R21. It’s the only way to see if it’s a widespread issue or just a peculiarity to your own system.


I hadn’t seen the latest update to nitrobox tool… Seems he added some nice features.

It looks even better and cheaper than meshboolean.


Yes, Nitroman’s biggest fault is not making more of a noise about all of the extra features he adds to his plugins after he releases them.

This Nitroboxtool is a good example, look at the revision list particularly 1.06, there’s a lot of work being done there for no extra fee.


Actually I was just trying to help, and pointing out an alternate workflow; you know, normal 3D problem solving.


yep… and we appreciate your help!!

but I believe this is a problem only cinema 4d is facing…

the cutting tools in almost every 3d high performance software are evolving and we are still stuck on basic boolean commands? comon… and now we have 3 different material system? really ? we need this? 3? spending time bringing tools and things we don’t need and the tool we do need are been left outside because there not new anymore they dont bring the wow factor in to play?

its been 20 yrs for me… and nothing has changed in this matter…


I thought booleans were unreliable on every software due to math involved. With Hardops sometimes you need to rearrange them in order to work properly or move the cutter by a tad if you encounter artifacts.


Did you read the OP’s post? They aren’t reporting artefact issues but a massive performance regression between R17 and R21.

o333, upload a scenefile and see if others can replicate the issue.

As far as new modelling techniques go I suppose the Modo Mesh Fusion tools are the biggest advancement in hard surface modelling we’ve had which is not saying much. Nothing of course from Maxon not even modelling falloffs and still the bizarre procedural objects and polygon objects limitations still hanging about like a bad smell on the cusp of 2020.

The Houdini Boolean tool literally works like magic so they’re not all bad and talking of Houdini, procedural modelling is the future of hard surface modelling in the coming years. Destructive modelling is dancing in the last chance saloon right now as sculpting is rapidly moving in on its turf and with AI impinging on so many areas I expect it to play a huge role in retopology of sculpts and scans to the point you won’t be able to tell if a human retopoed the mesh or not.


Yes, I read it, and I even tried to replicated it, but in my end, Booleans work as usual.

C4D is special because you can sorta work like “Houdini lite”, nesting objects with parametric extrusions, sweeps, and on top of them use a boolean operator. Sometimes the best advise is to convert your parametric object into a mesh (Current state to object) but you loose the ability to change it latter.

The only thing I can think of, is if the OP is trying to Boolean a Text (with the new bevel tool), we all know bevels on text tend to add a lot of small geometry than can crash a boolean operation (I had to test this in R21)

I have used Modo very little, but I thought Mesh fusion meshes couldnt be exported outside Modo ( I used it when it was a plugin for Modo). I love the LiveBooleans in Zbrush and the Zmodeler (very different workflow from the usual pulling / pushing vertex). Im going to have a look at the Nitroman video, although I dont think its at the level of Boxcutter.


I remember beta of LWCad for C4D.
It had nice CSG features, by using carve lib(or not)


What about the volumetric modelling tools (plus Fields)? They’re pretty impressive you have to admit.


Not really, have a look at Houdini’s VDB modelling tools which are far more complete. The Volume tools in C4D were a good start in R20 but in R21 you’d reasonably expect them to be much further developed. It’s almost like the dev isn’t even trying.

If the volume tools had some really good automated remeshing tools, something that no other DCC has got then it would be worthy of some praise. Maxon seems content to be a follower rather than a leader and have removed ‘innovative’ from their company manual.