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