Re: Camera addon for use with Redshift

[Emilio Hernandez]

I hope you find it useful!

Cheers!

Abrazo.

---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-06-02 20:22 GMT-05:00 Francisco Criado :

> Thanks Emilio! Already saw it in redshift forum but had no time to use it.
>
> Saludos y gracias!
>
> Francisco
> El jun 2, 2014 9:40 PM, "Emilio Hernandez"  escribió:
>
> Hello list.
>>
>> I want to share with you the ehRSCamera addon  for use with Redshift.
>>
>> In the link you will find a pdf file with the documentation describing
>> its features and use, as well as the xsiaddon in case you want to use it.
>>
>> The plugin is free for any purpose.
>>
>> Cheers and thank you all.
>>
>>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/unk9jbeyrxyq6m1/AABbki4OHNTbvNpxLL3GKFe8a/ehRSCamera
>> ---
>> Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.
>>
>

RE: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Matt Lind]

Well, most people on this forum submitting their thoughts on C4D, Houdini, 
Modo, Maya, etc… tend to review it from a film/video perspective.  Many of the 
bullet points are not applicable to other market segments such as games.  
Examples: Alembic support, 3rd party renderers, render farm accessibility, etc… 
  All the transition guides I’ve seen to date, regardless of source, tend to 
omit the lower level features leaving many of us in the dark or only give us 
part of the picture.  To use an analogy, if art were math class where you have 
to work out a long multi-page problem, a film/video artist is mostly interested 
in the final result and can obtain it from any means necessary including a wild 
guess, whereas a game artist must use the correct process to get the answer.

I’m interested in the lower level control over manipulating objects and 
organizing them in intelligent data structures (assets) to abstract them or 
minimize their dependency on the host application.  We need to apply metadata 
onto assets so our engine can read that data and know how to process the asset 
in the context of the game.  Often metadata is applied as userdata blobs/maps, 
or re-purposed vertex colors, UV properties, user normals, etc.  Many DCC 
applications have metadata and lower level features, but not all of them expose 
the functionality to the end user or do so in a user friendly way.  Sometimes 
you have to dig into the SDK to get at them at all.  Softimage, for example, 
have had user normals since XSI v1.5, but you had to use the SDK via 
script/plugin to expose the capabilities to the end user.  User normals and 
associated tools didn’t become available in the menus until Softimage 2011.

I’ve taken Modo, Maya, and Houdini for brief test drives to look at very 
specific features and intentionally did not look in the manuals to test how 
intuitive their implementations were.  In the case of vertex colors, I figured 
it out for Maya, but it was clunky.  Houdini was more intuitive to get started, 
but I couldn’t determine how to make multiple vertex color properties on the 
same object and specify which one to paint.  Modo…never did find the vertex 
color tools.  Probably spent more time cursing at the screen because the camera 
kept rolling on its side each time I orbited/tumbled the camera.

Anyway, working with lower level functions is what I’m interested in regardless 
of DCC app being reviewed.


Matt



From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 5:04 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition 
software that SI didn´t have?

It depends.
I haven't had enough time with it to know for sure, but if you are in need of 
it for
games (and I assume that is where your interest resides) I wouldn't know enough
how low level you would need to get.

In terms of a VFX or character animation (non real-time) use of vertex colors, 
normals, etc.
I have so far been very impressed. The viewport is very informative, updates 
quickly (depending on how much you have in your scene, of course).
Vertex colors, weightmaps, enveloping, n-gons, unfolding, mirroring, etc. have 
all worked far better than my experiences with Softimage so far.
Granted that my tests have been isolated and not yet production examples (for 
those specific tools). Use that to take what I say about them with
the appropriate grain of salt.

So far, things like weighting points, painting weights, controlling deformers, 
etc. have all been quite good.
There are many tools that may have no use in a game space (again, assuming that 
is where your interests are), but have been
very easy to pick up and use at high degree of control really, really quickly.

It certainly isn't me being some savant with new tools, either. It just seems 
to make sense to my Softimage-encrusted brain.

Also, I have to say, the amount and quality of the free tutorials out there for 
C4D is a huge boon to anyone making that specific transition.
We have a Digital Tutors account, and they even h ave a 17 part series called 
"Cinema 4D for Softimage Artists"

http://www.digitaltutors.com/tutorial/1598-CINEMA-4D-for-Softimage-Artists

Which was very helpful, too.

Sorry I can't be more specific on the questions you asked, but if I get more 
time in those areas, I will happily report what I find.

Perry



On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Matt Lind 
mailto:ml...@carbinestudios.com>> wrote:
How is C4D for doing lower level stuff like working with vertex colors, 
manipulating normals (orientation), UV editing (unfolding, mirroring, working 
with islands, …), controlling tessellation of polygons, etc..?


Matt





From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Per

Re: Camera addon for use with Redshift

[Francisco Criado]

Thanks Emilio! Already saw it in redshift forum but had no time to use it.

Saludos y gracias!

Francisco
El jun 2, 2014 9:40 PM, "Emilio Hernandez"  escribió:

> Hello list.
>
> I want to share with you the ehRSCamera addon  for use with Redshift.
>
> In the link you will find a pdf file with the documentation describing its
> features and use, as well as the xsiaddon in case you want to use it.
>
> The plugin is free for any purpose.
>
> Cheers and thank you all.
>
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/unk9jbeyrxyq6m1/AABbki4OHNTbvNpxLL3GKFe8a/ehRSCamera
> ---
> Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.
>

Camera addon for use with Redshift

[Emilio Hernandez]

Hello list.

I want to share with you the ehRSCamera addon  for use with Redshift.

In the link you will find a pdf file with the documentation describing its
features and use, as well as the xsiaddon in case you want to use it.

The plugin is free for any purpose.

Cheers and thank you all.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/unk9jbeyrxyq6m1/AABbki4OHNTbvNpxLL3GKFe8a/ehRSCamera
---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Perry Harovas]

It depends.
I haven't had enough time with it to know for sure, but if you are in need
of it for
games (and I assume that is where your interest resides) I wouldn't know
enough
how low level you would need to get.

In terms of a VFX or character animation (non real-time) use of vertex
colors, normals, etc.
I have so far been very impressed. The viewport is very informative,
updates quickly (depending on how much you have in your scene, of course).
Vertex colors, weightmaps, enveloping, n-gons, unfolding, mirroring, etc.
have all worked far better than my experiences with Softimage so far.
Granted that my tests have been isolated and not yet production examples
(for those specific tools). Use that to take what I say about them with
the appropriate grain of salt.

So far, things like weighting points, painting weights, controlling
deformers, etc. have all been quite good.
There are many tools that may have no use in a game space (again, assuming
that is where your interests are), but have been
very easy to pick up and use at high degree of control really, really
quickly.

It certainly isn't me being some savant with new tools, either. It just
seems to make sense to my Softimage-encrusted brain.

Also, I have to say, the amount and quality of the free tutorials out there
for C4D is a huge boon to anyone making that specific transition.
We have a Digital Tutors account, and they even h ave a 17 part series
called "Cinema 4D for Softimage Artists"

http://www.digitaltutors.com/tutorial/1598-CINEMA-4D-for-Softimage-Artists

Which was very helpful, too.

Sorry I can't be more specific on the questions you asked, but if I get
more time in those areas, I will happily report what I find.

Perry




On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Matt Lind  wrote:

> How is C4D for doing lower level stuff like working with vertex colors,
> manipulating normals (orientation), UV editing (unfolding, mirroring,
> working with islands, …), controlling tessellation of polygons, etc..?
>
>
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Perry Harovas
> *Sent:* Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:48 PM
> *To:* davidsa...@sfr.fr; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> *Subject:* Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new
> transition software that SI didn´t have?
>
>
>
> Transitioned to C4D and Houdini.
>
>
>
> Mostly using C4D, surprisingly.
>
>
>
> The amount of control is amazing, with really easy ways to do certain
> things that would be
>
> much harder in Softimage.
>
>
>
> The curves are better, with excellent control of booleans (even curve
> booleans!).
>
> The dynamics are really surprising, too. You can easily animate a bunch of
> instances along
>
> a path, and also have them collide with each other at the same time.
>
>
>
> Nearly EVERYTHING is drag and drop-able.
>
>
>
> The shaders are very nice, but I miss nodal shading.
>
>
>
> I really think of all the packages out there, C4D is the closest to
> Softimage that I have seen so far.
>
> It makes me sad that I have to move to another package, but every cloud
> has a silver lining, and
>
> the silver lining is that many things I do more often than not are much
> easier now.
>
>
>
> When they are difficult, then I can use Houdini.
>
>
>
> Not perfect, but overall, being out of the grasp of Autodesk feels great
> no matter what.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:54 AM, David Saber  wrote:
>
> I have not digged enough into Houdini yet but so far I'm blown by the
> operator stack equivalent: much more powerful!
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>
>
>
> -25 Years Experience
>
> -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
>



-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)

RE: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Matt Lind]

How is C4D for doing lower level stuff like working with vertex colors, 
manipulating normals (orientation), UV editing (unfolding, mirroring, working 
with islands, …), controlling tessellation of polygons, etc..?


Matt





From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:48 PM
To: davidsa...@sfr.fr; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition 
software that SI didn´t have?

Transitioned to C4D and Houdini.

Mostly using C4D, surprisingly.

The amount of control is amazing, with really easy ways to do certain things 
that would be
much harder in Softimage.

The curves are better, with excellent control of booleans (even curve 
booleans!).
The dynamics are really surprising, too. You can easily animate a bunch of 
instances along
a path, and also have them collide with each other at the same time.

Nearly EVERYTHING is drag and drop-able.

The shaders are very nice, but I miss nodal shading.

I really think of all the packages out there, C4D is the closest to Softimage 
that I have seen so far.
It makes me sad that I have to move to another package, but every cloud has a 
silver lining, and
the silver lining is that many things I do more often than not are much easier 
now.

When they are difficult, then I can use Houdini.

Not perfect, but overall, being out of the grasp of Autodesk feels great no 
matter what.



On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:54 AM, David Saber 
mailto:davidsa...@sfr.fr>> wrote:
I have not digged enough into Houdini yet but so far I'm blown by the operator 
stack equivalent: much more powerful!



--




Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)

RE: Hiding an item from a PPG

[Matt Lind]

Depends on how you want to attack the problem and how many parameters you want 
to hide/unhide in the PPGLayout.

If it’s only one or two parameters, you can call Parameter.Show(), then follow 
with PPG.Refresh() to update the PPG.  If you have a large number of 
parameters, then it might be easier to write your own PPG_DefineLayout () 
function and call it explicitly as needed from an _OnChanged() or _OnClicked() 
PPG Event, or during _OnInit().  In either case you may run into display 
glitches with hiding/unhiding parameters dynamically such as indenting and 
other alignments getting screwed up, or PPG’s growing/shrinking pushing things 
into undesirable locations – especially if embedding the logic into something 
like a relational view.

I generally enable/disable parameters instead using Parameter.Enable() as it 
keeps the PPG size constant and better informs the user of the options 
available in the tool.  Seeing which buttons/parameters activate the 
enabled/disabled parameters also helps educate the user of the cause n’ effect 
relationship.  In many cases enable/disable doesn’t require a call to 
PPG.Refresh() making it faster for PPG’s that have a large number of 
parameters.  We have a few custom properties with 400+ parameters.  
Enabling/disabling parameters is significantly faster than hiding/unhiding 
parameters in those cases.


Matt





From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yargici
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 9:38 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Hiding an item from a PPG

I'd like my self-installed custom property to hide or show one dropdown 
depending on the value set by another, and I'm failing miserably.

Do I need to completely rebuild my PPGLayout just to do this?  That seems wrong 
to me.

If that is the case, how should I best structure my code in order to repeatedly 
rebuild the layout via the triggered OnChanged event?  Should I always build it 
in my own function or in the "_DefineLayout" section of the plugin (as made by 
the SDK Wizard)

As you can tell, I'm new to this.

Thanks,

DAN

Re: Voodoo Rig Demo

[Tyler Fox]

David/Sebastien: Yes, those green lines define the plane of rotation for
the fingers.   Modelers don't necessarily keep all the joints of a finger
on a plane for the easy "just look at the surrounding joints" auto-solve,
so the extra object was added so the fingers would curl along a plane
without a bunch of tweaking.


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Marco Peixoto  wrote:

> Apart from Lightwave and later Messiah, it the first time im seeing
> Envelope Weights without the need to pain them, yeah I know this might
> sound weird to all those that always had to paint them, but this workflow
> exists in LW (and messiah) since 1998.
>
> Im not saying its the exact same methods, because it cant be, in LW and
> Messiah we always had to add lots of bones here and there to hold the
> weights in certain areas. Areas like Fingers had to be rigged with them
> fully spread apart so weights from one finger Bone would not contaminate
> the other finger(s)
>
> LW later added "normal" Weightting to the mix and Messiah had some Meta
> Effectors  to kinda achieve the same purpose. There are not that easy to
> setup but once they are there we can then change the geometry because in
> reality theres no Weights associated to them, of course that with Gator all
> of these was obsolete...
>
> Really curious about Voodoo :)
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Sebastien Sterling <
> sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i think... i think those green lines are orientation for the finger
>> joints, so that they generate in that axis ?
>>
>>
>> On 2 June 2014 10:46, David Saber  wrote:
>>
>>> yes it's very interesting but it would be better with comments so one
>>> would understand everything. For example:
>>> what are the green lines for at 1:30?
>>> why he never selects any points?
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2014-06-02 10:35, Oscar Juarez wrote:
>>>

 This last one is great!

 https://vimeo.com/97074475



>>
>

RE: Renderman price restructuring

[Matt Lind]

Prices are coming down because it's a nearly fixed-size market.  If you price 
yourself too high, you won't get a cut of the pie.

There's also a shift in moving towards real time renderers and away from 
software renderers.  Real time isn't quite ready for full prime time for 
film/video, but it is proving capable for many scenarios.  This is probably the 
main instigator of price reductions from the likes of Renderman as the writing 
is on the wall how much longer it will remain relevant in the general consumer 
space outside of large film productions that have established pipelines around 
it.

In general, industry is producing more real time applications instead of linear 
format.  Expect to see less need for 3rd party renderers in general, and more 
demand for real time engines and editing environments.


Matt




-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Kubicek
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 9:18 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Renderman price restructuring

This was my impression too, when it comes for ootb shaders Arnold leaves a lot 
to be desired.
I'd even go as far as saying that is more so with Arnold than with any other 
third party renderer I've used so far - if it wasn't for third party shaders 
generously made available you wouldn't get too far with it.

It's been interesting to see entry price levels coming so much down in recent 
years. Vray used to be the cheapest, production-ready renderer one could buy 12 
years ago (and you got unlimited render nodes per license), today, like Arnold, 
it's amongst the more expensive ones, with Redshift and even PRMan being more 
affordable, let alone 3Delight, which was always zero $ for the the first 
license (and supports practically any shader in Softimage). In any way, I never 
expected to see complex, "niche" software products to come down in price that 
much. Just cut throat competition, or is there really so much money to be made 
that it still pays off to sell so cheap? At least I think the price cut and 
free for non-com use of PRMan is an attempt to keep what's left of their market 
share, they must have lost a lot of ground to Arnold in recent years.







Arnold you get
> While I’m still on honeymoon with Arnold I have to say that its ‘out 
> of the box’ shaders leave quite some room for improvement.
>
> Examples:
>
> Standard shader: lacks a second specular layer (quite the standard 
> these days), back facing is not textureable Fur shader: you only get 
> 'Kajija-Kay’ (very old school) shading, no indirect specular, no 
> translucency, no glints Single scatter SSS is only a function in the 
> API and currently does not implement indirect lighting.
>
> While some of these deficits can be solved in the render tree, others 
> are simply not accessible without coding them yourself or relying on 
> community generosity. Which has been the situation for the past four 
> years.
>
> That being said, Anders Langlands is now working at Solid Angle as a 
> shader developer. He has previously shared shaders that address a lot 
> of the above and beyond. I see a bright future ;-)
>
> Happy Rendering,
>
> Andy
>
> On May 30, 2014, at 14:19, Marc-Andre Carbonneau 
>  wrote:
>
>> Ya...what they don't tell you is the hidden cost of programmers you 
>> have to pay to get it working afterwards...
>>
>> Viva Arnold!
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
>> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of 
>> Leendert A. Hartog
>> Sent: 30 mai 2014 07:41
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Renderman price restructuring
>>
>> Some industry nice that might interest some of you (I hope):
>> "Pixar has announced a radical price restructuring of its RenderMan 
>> 3D and animation technology. With the upcoming version, the software 
>> will be free to non-commercial customers, and will cost $495 for 
>> individual licenses"
>> Quoted from here: http://waa.ai/4jn8
>>
>> Or better yet: go to the appropriate page on the Renderman website 
>> directly http://tinyurl.com/nkbmw8u
>>
>> crossposted from the si-community, BTW
>>
>> Greetz
>> Leendert
>>
>> --
>>
>> Leendert A. Hartog AKA Hirazi Blue
>> Administrator NOT the owner of si-community.com
>>
>>
>


--
---
Stefan Kubicek
---
keyvis digital imagery
   Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3
A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien
  Phone:+43/699/12614231
   www.keyvis.at  ste...@keyvis.at
--  This email and its attachments are   --
--confidential and for the recipient only--

Re: Hiding an item from a PPG

[Dan Yargici]

No worries.  Figured it out.

I just created my own function and I'm all set.

Sorry for the noise.

DAN


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Dan Yargici  wrote:

> I'd like my self-installed custom property to hide or show one dropdown
> depending on the value set by another, and I'm failing miserably.
>
> Do I need to completely rebuild my PPGLayout just to do this?  That seems
> wrong to me.
>
> If that is the case, how should I best structure my code in order to
> repeatedly rebuild the layout via the triggered OnChanged event?  Should I
> always build it in my own function or in the "_DefineLayout" section of the
> plugin (as made by the SDK Wizard)
>
> As you can tell, I'm new to this.
>
> Thanks,
>
> DAN
>

Re: Voodoo Rig Demo

[Marco Peixoto]

Apart from Lightwave and later Messiah, it the first time im seeing
Envelope Weights without the need to pain them, yeah I know this might
sound weird to all those that always had to paint them, but this workflow
exists in LW (and messiah) since 1998.

Im not saying its the exact same methods, because it cant be, in LW and
Messiah we always had to add lots of bones here and there to hold the
weights in certain areas. Areas like Fingers had to be rigged with them
fully spread apart so weights from one finger Bone would not contaminate
the other finger(s)

LW later added "normal" Weightting to the mix and Messiah had some Meta
Effectors  to kinda achieve the same purpose. There are not that easy to
setup but once they are there we can then change the geometry because in
reality theres no Weights associated to them, of course that with Gator all
of these was obsolete...

Really curious about Voodoo :)


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Sebastien Sterling <
sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> i think... i think those green lines are orientation for the finger
> joints, so that they generate in that axis ?
>
>
> On 2 June 2014 10:46, David Saber  wrote:
>
>> yes it's very interesting but it would be better with comments so one
>> would understand everything. For example:
>> what are the green lines for at 1:30?
>> why he never selects any points?
>> David
>>
>>
>> On 2014-06-02 10:35, Oscar Juarez wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This last one is great!
>>>
>>> https://vimeo.com/97074475
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Fixing disconnected polygons..

[Steve Parish]

Perfect thanks!


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Grahame Fuller  wrote:

> Model > Modify > Poly. Mesh > Filter Points will merge overlapping points
> and reconnect everything.
>
> gray
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Steve Parish
> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:35 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Fixing disconnected polygons..
>
> I'm getting more and more assets where the polygons are "disconnected".
> Sometimes the whole model is this way. Anyone know of a graceful solution
> to reconnect the components? It doesn't have to be a fix in Soft.. but I
> figured it would be nice if there was an ICE node out there. Or maybe there
> is something really obvious I'm missing in one of the menus!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve P
>

RE: Fixing disconnected polygons..

[Grahame Fuller]

Model > Modify > Poly. Mesh > Filter Points will merge overlapping points and 
reconnect everything.

gray

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Steve Parish
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:35 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Fixing disconnected polygons..

I'm getting more and more assets where the polygons are "disconnected". 
Sometimes the whole model is this way. Anyone know of a graceful solution to 
reconnect the components? It doesn't have to be a fix in Soft.. but I figured 
it would be nice if there was an ICE node out there. Or maybe there is 
something really obvious I'm missing in one of the menus!

Thanks!

Steve P
<>

Hiding an item from a PPG

[Dan Yargici]

I'd like my self-installed custom property to hide or show one dropdown
depending on the value set by another, and I'm failing miserably.

Do I need to completely rebuild my PPGLayout just to do this?  That seems
wrong to me.

If that is the case, how should I best structure my code in order to
repeatedly rebuild the layout via the triggered OnChanged event?  Should I
always build it in my own function or in the "_DefineLayout" section of the
plugin (as made by the SDK Wizard)

As you can tell, I'm new to this.

Thanks,

DAN

Fixing disconnected polygons..

[Steve Parish]

I'm getting more and more assets where the polygons are "disconnected".
Sometimes the whole model is this way. Anyone know of a graceful solution
to reconnect the components? It doesn't have to be a fix in Soft.. but I
figured it would be nice if there was an ICE node out there. Or maybe there
is something really obvious I'm missing in one of the menus!

Thanks!

Steve P

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Perry Harovas]

Hi Matt,

Not yet, but I will look into that soon and get back to you once I have
some time with it.




On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Matt Morris  wrote:

> Thanks Perry, good to hear the opinion of someone who's actually
> transitioning. Have you used referencing much - characters in particular?
>
>
>
>
> On 2 June 2014 14:12, Perry Harovas  wrote:
>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> In my limited time with skinning in C4D, you just need to add the new
>> model parts to the weight of
>> whatever joint you want to control them. It isn't a problem, really.
>>
>> In other ways, C4D is actually more non-linear than Soft. This is minus
>> ICE, of course, which puts it over the top
>> in terms of non-linearity.
>>
>> However, certain things are much easier to change.
>>
>> Put a deformer on an object, it deforms it.
>> Want to swap that same deformer with animation to another object, just
>> drag it to the other object in the hierarchy.
>>
>> You can usually just put a model and deformers into a null, and it will
>> deform the geometry grouped under that null,
>> allowing you to keep throwing more objects (or take out objects) from
>> that group to control what get influenced.
>>
>> Soft cares about the specific points of the object you select to get
>> deformed, and as a result, you can't (again, without ICE) just deform
>> something
>> that is inside a Null hierarchy. Not only can you in C4D, but that is the
>> normal way it works, making deformers and many things that alter an object
>> more portable between different objects with totally different point
>> count and order.
>>
>> When doing rigging with joints, it is (of course) concerned with points
>> as expected, but as I said above, you just
>> add those newly created points to the weighting of the joint it should
>> deform and away you go.
>>
>> It is hard to type this without constantly clarifying that all this is
>> far more flexible with ICE counted in the mix.
>> I have barely scratched the surface with Xpresso, the C4D "equivalent" of
>> ICE, but upon first impressions, many things
>> are possible in Xpresso that we do in ICE. Most likely, many things we do
>> in ICE are also NOT possible in Xpresso as well.
>>
>> Which things and how many of them are going to take me a long time to
>> figure out.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Ben Beckett  wrote:
>>
>>> Maya is VERY SLOW
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2 June 2014 10:47, Cristobal Infante  wrote:
>>>
 I believe nodal shading for C4D is coming very soon, it's one of the
 top requests from uesrs..


 On 2 June 2014 10:30, David Saber  wrote:

> Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity
> feels? Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?
> David
>


>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Perry Harovas
>> Animation and Visual Effects
>>
>> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>>
>> -25 Years Experience
>> -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>



-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Matt Morris]

Thanks Perry, good to hear the opinion of someone who's actually
transitioning. Have you used referencing much - characters in particular?




On 2 June 2014 14:12, Perry Harovas  wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> In my limited time with skinning in C4D, you just need to add the new
> model parts to the weight of
> whatever joint you want to control them. It isn't a problem, really.
>
> In other ways, C4D is actually more non-linear than Soft. This is minus
> ICE, of course, which puts it over the top
> in terms of non-linearity.
>
> However, certain things are much easier to change.
>
> Put a deformer on an object, it deforms it.
> Want to swap that same deformer with animation to another object, just
> drag it to the other object in the hierarchy.
>
> You can usually just put a model and deformers into a null, and it will
> deform the geometry grouped under that null,
> allowing you to keep throwing more objects (or take out objects) from that
> group to control what get influenced.
>
> Soft cares about the specific points of the object you select to get
> deformed, and as a result, you can't (again, without ICE) just deform
> something
> that is inside a Null hierarchy. Not only can you in C4D, but that is the
> normal way it works, making deformers and many things that alter an object
> more portable between different objects with totally different point count
> and order.
>
> When doing rigging with joints, it is (of course) concerned with points as
> expected, but as I said above, you just
> add those newly created points to the weighting of the joint it should
> deform and away you go.
>
> It is hard to type this without constantly clarifying that all this is far
> more flexible with ICE counted in the mix.
> I have barely scratched the surface with Xpresso, the C4D "equivalent" of
> ICE, but upon first impressions, many things
> are possible in Xpresso that we do in ICE. Most likely, many things we do
> in ICE are also NOT possible in Xpresso as well.
>
> Which things and how many of them are going to take me a long time to
> figure out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Ben Beckett  wrote:
>
>> Maya is VERY SLOW
>>
>>
>> On 2 June 2014 10:47, Cristobal Infante  wrote:
>>
>>> I believe nodal shading for C4D is coming very soon, it's one of the top
>>> requests from uesrs..
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2 June 2014 10:30, David Saber  wrote:
>>>
 Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity
 feels? Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?
 David

>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>
> -25 Years Experience
> -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
>



-- 
www.matinai.com

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Perry Harovas]

Hi David,

In my limited time with skinning in C4D, you just need to add the new model
parts to the weight of
whatever joint you want to control them. It isn't a problem, really.

In other ways, C4D is actually more non-linear than Soft. This is minus
ICE, of course, which puts it over the top
in terms of non-linearity.

However, certain things are much easier to change.

Put a deformer on an object, it deforms it.
Want to swap that same deformer with animation to another object, just drag
it to the other object in the hierarchy.

You can usually just put a model and deformers into a null, and it will
deform the geometry grouped under that null,
allowing you to keep throwing more objects (or take out objects) from that
group to control what get influenced.

Soft cares about the specific points of the object you select to get
deformed, and as a result, you can't (again, without ICE) just deform
something
that is inside a Null hierarchy. Not only can you in C4D, but that is the
normal way it works, making deformers and many things that alter an object
more portable between different objects with totally different point count
and order.

When doing rigging with joints, it is (of course) concerned with points as
expected, but as I said above, you just
add those newly created points to the weighting of the joint it should
deform and away you go.

It is hard to type this without constantly clarifying that all this is far
more flexible with ICE counted in the mix.
I have barely scratched the surface with Xpresso, the C4D "equivalent" of
ICE, but upon first impressions, many things
are possible in Xpresso that we do in ICE. Most likely, many things we do
in ICE are also NOT possible in Xpresso as well.

Which things and how many of them are going to take me a long time to
figure out.






On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Ben Beckett  wrote:

> Maya is VERY SLOW
>
>
> On 2 June 2014 10:47, Cristobal Infante  wrote:
>
>> I believe nodal shading for C4D is coming very soon, it's one of the top
>> requests from uesrs..
>>
>>
>> On 2 June 2014 10:30, David Saber  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity
>>> feels? Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?
>>> David
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Ben Beckett]

Maya is VERY SLOW


On 2 June 2014 10:47, Cristobal Infante  wrote:

> I believe nodal shading for C4D is coming very soon, it's one of the top
> requests from uesrs..
>
>
> On 2 June 2014 10:30, David Saber  wrote:
>
>> Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity
>> feels? Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?
>> David
>>
>
>

Re: Voodoo Rig Demo

[Sebastien Sterling]

i think... i think those green lines are orientation for the finger joints,
so that they generate in that axis ?


On 2 June 2014 10:46, David Saber  wrote:

> yes it's very interesting but it would be better with comments so one
> would understand everything. For example:
> what are the green lines for at 1:30?
> why he never selects any points?
> David
>
>
> On 2014-06-02 10:35, Oscar Juarez wrote:
>
>>
>> This last one is great!
>>
>> https://vimeo.com/97074475
>>
>>
>>

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[Cristobal Infante]

I believe nodal shading for C4D is coming very soon, it's one of the top
requests from uesrs..


On 2 June 2014 10:30, David Saber  wrote:

> Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity feels?
> Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?
> David
>

Re: Voodoo Rig Demo

[David Saber]

yes it's very interesting but it would be better with comments so one 
would understand everything. For example:

what are the green lines for at 1:30?
why he never selects any points?
David

On 2014-06-02 10:35, Oscar Juarez wrote:


This last one is great!

https://vimeo.com/97074475

Re: OT: What strong features have you found in your new transition software that SI didn´t have?

[David Saber]

Thanks Perry for your testimonial about C4D. How does non linearity 
feels? Obvious example: going back to modelling after skining?

David

Re: Voodoo Rig Demo

[Oscar Juarez]

This last one is great!

https://vimeo.com/97074475


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Miquel Campos 
wrote:

> copy/paste from one of the post in the video:
>
> So ... When will we in the public finally get to play with this?
> [image: Matt L Derksen] 
>
> Matt L Derksen  PLUS
>  1 day ago
>
> HAHA, hopefully soon, you've played with it already :)
>
>
> 
>
> Miquel Campos
> www.miquelTD.com
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Francisco Criado 
> wrote:
>
>> That would be a nice software to migrate. Autodesk stay away of buying it
>> please!
>>
>>
>> 2014-05-31 19:08 GMT-03:00 Sebastien Sterling <
>> sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Cheers Oscar.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31 May 2014 22:44, Oscar Juarez  wrote:
>>>
 From the about page:

 *"R&H Labs - a new division of Rhythm and Hues - will capitalize on
 this wealth of technology: continuing the tradition of innovation, and
 bringing to market new tools and frameworks to streamline distributed
 digital content creation. The initial focus will be on animation, rigging,
 simulation, and fur grooming; globally distributed review tools; and render
 farm management. These tools will be used on Prana Studios’ first
 internally produced feature animated film, Wish, scheduled to start
 production in Spring 2014."*


 On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Sebastien Sterling <
 sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In time probably, it would make sense.
>
>
> On 31 May 2014 22:17, David Saber  wrote:
>
>> On 2014-05-31 20:03, pedro santos wrote:
>>
>>> Seems to keep up.
>>>
>>> https://vimeo.com/96958591
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>  will it be available to the public?
>>
>
>

>>>
>>
>