Re: Cinema 4D an option?

[Jason S]

On 08/05/14 12:08, Sebastien Sterling wrote: Cris- i know i will :P I wish the Blender interface if not streamlined and clean, would at least be modulated so you can go in and deal with the segment you need. On 5 August 2014 17:00, Cristobal Infante <cgc...@gmail.com> wrote: grab the hair and run ;) Ya I agree the interface (and many little things) could be more far more streamlined, and also render management is -very- basic to say the least. But to give it proper (comparatively far less (over-)publicized/amplified) credit (that I know of), - Cycles is very fast, while very Arnold-like in most key aspects       (which now (finally) includes both transform & deformation motion-blur, which was sort of the last (important) thing ), - all sorts of simulations (including volume effects) are quite easy, fast and can easily reach very high quality. - The shader tree (and other node view) is very clear/informative and quick to tweak, seeing and editing values in the tree,     (unlike modo, a fair number of shader trees (among other things) won't affect responsiveness.) - Procedurally treating textures as well as a very decent & very integrated 2D comp, - Without at-all being light in functionality, the app itself is extremely light, restarting (or crashing) & reloading feels as swift as wordpad :) - Very capable (if not more capable for some things) modeling, UVing, Sculpting.. with some very fluid worflows. In-out interop seems to be an issue, but eventual Alembic support is very likely a matter of time. But to me, it's single object centric aspect is it's single biggest drawback, and hope they would eventually address that (quite particularly).