-
Which 3D FX/Tools?
-
Hi Walter –
I stand corrected about C4D’s “plastic” look. I had a feeling it was due more to the rushed nature of broadcast TV, where C4D seems to be most used, than to the actual capabilities of the package.
I’ve been working on a workflow to get as many options as possible into Element 3D, and I’m finding that I can take a whole bunch of CAD formats into Max (freeCAD – needless to say, free – also works with translating on a bunch of CAD formats), then output them as .obj files, and have them show up in Element 3D ready to be textured. It’s a pain in the neck that texture maps don’t just flow in to Element 3D, since the .obj format has the ability to save a .mtl file, which goes into a “maps” sub-folder, ready to go. That will be a request for the next major upgrade to Element 3D. There’s no reason to have to remap all your textures.
As far as my Max workflow to get .obj files with their material ID’s intact, I have to import the CAD file (I prefer .stl or .ipt, but many others work), then go into Polygon mode, select by material ID, then detach the parts I want to show up as separate map channels in Element 3D. It’s a royal pain, but not rocket science. There is a “select by material id” in the Max materials tab that makes pretty quick work of it, as well as a few script out there that will detach by material id – pretty handy.
Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com -
[Joseph W. Bourke] “I stand corrected about C4D’s “plastic” look. I had a feeling it was due more to the rushed nature of broadcast TV, where C4D seems to be most used, than to the actual capabilities of the package. “
No, you were right on — I was agreeing with you! An awful lot of C4D renders look like plastic. Not even real plastic; I mean crummy computer plastic. C4D’s default lights, materials, and render settings are decidedly non-sexy. It takes a mix of knowledge, experience, and render time to coax real beauty out of C4D.
I just wanted to back up your original assertion that most users “don’t use it to its full extent.” C4D’s Advanced Renderer was overhauled in R11 (three years ago), and last year’s R13 included the brand-new Physical Renderer (which simulates a physical camera high-quality DoF and motion blur without post effects). There are some good tools there, but I think you’re right to say that they’re not often used.
Worth noting — V-Ray is now available for C4D, too.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
Walter –
In a way, it’s the same with Max – there are so many third party renderers to bring photo-real capabilities to Max, but it’s really easy to use the default render engine, which is ok. The good news is that Mental Ray, a high-end, photo-real render engine, comes with Max.
I guess it’s just like any tool. Without the talent and experience, you can get garbage out of even a 2500 dollar software package. What I really like about Max, and Autodesk, is the wealth of free tutorial materials, and a beautiful website dedicated to teaching and information:
Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com -
Just to chime in here – I can’t speak of earlier version of C4D – but we have adopted R13, and use the built in renderer for photo real rendering. I was surprised at how good it looked in the final comp.
I’ve never seen my client’s eyes pop out of their head like they did when they saw the final comp.
BUT – using the DEFAULT materials settings, it DID look like plastic initially – I did spend time tweaking materials and render settings, and then doing a multi-render pass, and then building and adjusting in AE to get the image colorgraded and adjusted to fit the comp.
The tools are definitely there at least for inorganic objects. And VRay is also available, and that was a key factor for us. And there are IK tools built in, plus third party ones like Cactus Dan’s.
The other thing of course is that you have the most integrated round trip integration with After Effects of any 3D program.
And the learning curve for C4D seems to be among the easiest – the interface is elegant and easy to use IMO.
We are 100% Mac, so I have not used 3Ds, but have used Lightwave and Maya. I’ve never liked Lightwave as it’s clumsy to say the least, and I have never seen a “photo real” render – decent renders to be sure, but Lightwave is king of having that “digital” look. YUK!
And Maya? Maya is fifteen programmers racing cars toward an intersection, and they all collided with each other and exploded in a ball of flame and debris – the result of the smoldering wreckage is Maya. Like most Autodesk products, the interface is a kludgey klunky kollection of krap. I’m pretty sure that Autodesk hires programmers that were fired by Microsoft.
/end of rant.
SO: Back to the OP’s original comment: For real 3D work, I suggest Cinema 4D. Best integration with AE and shortest learning curve, with professional features.
I have used Invigorator, and for a down and dirty inside AE method, it works okay – but the interface, even the new one, is still a bit clumsy. It does not ray trace, though you can still fake the look of caustics with a couple techniques. When integrated into an AE scene using an animated 3D camera though, the interface becomes cumbersome.
I have not used Element yet – but it looks pretty cool. Even so, it has quite a few limitations.
-
[Andrew Somers] “BUT – using the DEFAULT materials settings, it DID look like plastic initially – I did spend time tweaking materials and render settings, and then doing a multi-render pass, and then building and adjusting in AE to get the image colorgraded and adjusted to fit the comp.”
Yes — compositing is underrated. I probably spend a quarter of my time on a 3D project compositing.
[Andrew Somers] “The other thing of course is that you have the most integrated round trip integration with After Effects of any 3D program.”
Check out what 3ds Max is doing now:
[Andrew Somers] “I have not used 3Ds, but have used Lightwave and Maya. I’ve never liked Lightwave as it’s clumsy to say the least, and I have never seen a “photo real” render – decent renders to be sure, but Lightwave is king of having that “digital” look. YUK!”
Lightwave’s VPR is actually pretty cool. It seems a disproportionately high number of Lightwave renders are space ships…
[Andrew Somers] “I have used Invigorator, and for a down and dirty inside AE method, it works okay – but the interface, even the new one, is still a bit clumsy. It does not ray trace, though you can still fake the look of caustics with a couple techniques. “
Invigorator 6 (just released) [link] does have a ray tracer.
[Andrew Somers] “I have not used Element yet – but it looks pretty cool. Even so, it has quite a few limitations.”
It is cool, but you’re right that it has limitations. It’s very important to understand not only what Element is, but also what it is not — otherwise, you will surely become frustrated in no time.
[Andrew Somers] “SO: Back to the OP’s original comment: For real 3D work, I suggest Cinema 4D. Best integration with AE and shortest learning curve, with professional features.”
+1
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
I use Zaxwerks Invigorator, Mettle ShapeShifter AE and Element and I find all to be of great help. To me it depends mostly on the kind of job I will be doing- time, money, client feedback and art direction. Based on these I select my tool. I did not find the need to go to a external full 3d app for title work and even for a lot of 3d work I do. All of the above plugins keep me inside AE. I would not be able to pick one over another- they all have strengths and limitations.
Tudor “Ted” Jelescu
Senior VFX Artist -
Thanks Tudor. I am very biased but not sure if we could meet the deadlines etc. on a project we are working on right now if we did not have the speed of our products and all of the goodness of CS6. We are working to a format of 5,000 pixels x 1080. 2D + 3D mograph, tons of assets to re-size and re-frame etc. etc. CS6 Rocks! We are doing everything in CS6. See: https://www.mettle.com/mettle-and-the-montreal-canadiens/
Cheers,
Chris
mettle.com -
Hey everybody!
I just want to thank all of you for your advice. I decided to start with VC’s Element 3D and it’s pretty impressive. I must say, there is a bit of a learning curve involved but Kramer has some good tutorials. I may eventually graduate to specialized software but for now I am very happy. Again, thank you all for your help and advice; I am glad CreativeCow exists. With out this community I would be lost.
One man with courage makes a majority.
Canon 7D
Sony Vegas Pro 11
Adobe CS6 Master Suite
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up