https://www.maxon.net/en/products/new-in-release-20/overview/
Pro renderer give cinema 4d what it’s really need it a super fast gpu renderer with out of core rendering support
1 Like
They did the smart thing. Why waste time writing your own render engine when you can get one for free from AMD?
3 Likes
It also looks like Maxon finally gave in and decided that the best way forward in shader construction is to make it node-based.
On CGsociety, Maxon also dropped the hint that the Motion Graph could become node-based too, but users would likely have to wait till next year at the earliest.
For other uses, the video has no hints about improving things that C4D has been falling behind in (such as texture painting and character animation). They’re basically playing it safe and focusing on a few core areas again (with the exception of the viewport optimizations).
1 Like
This new volume modeling feature looks very cool!
3 Likes
A month ago I asked for a material preview for the node editor of blender, and now c4d added it. Damn, life is hard, c4d always gets the cool stuff.
1 Like
There’s another video on the main page too. This means C4D is now an industry leading app. in modelling if they also have materials and shading work across components in the same smooth way. I would even say it’s the dominating feature for them this year.
Blender meanwhile has had some code placed towards an OpenVDB implementation in the past, but all of the work on it now is towards using it for volume rendering in Cycles (having it as a modeling and skinning technology could allow the eventual removal of the old metaball objects.
we need this too in blender
Maybe not exactly the same but this is a result of two bevel modifiers on a subdivided plane, using the Only Vertices option.
4 Likes
Can I throw some random love for Cactus Dan here? He made some amazing rigging plugins for Cinema 4D, and his passing is what led me to Blender (no way I’m using the default C4D rigging for my projects).
I learned 3D with Cinema so I have some nostalgia for it, but I’ll be honest, it’s hyped up for how easy it is to use. Adapting to Blender took very little time and I actually find Blender to be more intuitive, for the most part.
I still follow C4D for old times sake but it looks like they’re still lagging behind in the areas that caused me to leave the program.
The Cowboy was a cool dude and he left way too early.
Same for me. But i think it IS easy, but also kinda limiting. Learning Maya (+XSI) and Blender gave me so much more insight into 3D, while i felt C4d is like a walled garden.
It reminds me of Apples ecosystem. I am not the kind of guy to be trapped in a system with lots of black-boxes so i am grateful that i am out of that.
Yeah, its actually a good feeling, right? Feels like the right decision. Unlike in early 2014 when i decided it was a good moment to start learning Softimage XSI. 
That’s a good way to put it, @Romanji, a walled garden. I remember how much more freedom I felt in Blender, just with how much more information was exposed to the user and the options to manipulate it. An example off the top of my head is vertex colors, at the time Cinema didn’t allow the user to paint RGB vertex colors for use in game engines (some engines use the vertex colors to control things like grass sway). It seemed like something that was missing for no good reason, but with Blender the function couldn’t be easier.
The release thread on CGTalk is mostly positive so far (in terms of feedback).
There are a few little things though that, depending on the workflow, could be serious limitations. The new node editor has no support for adding SSS and editing its parameters and does not work with ProRender. In addition, tight details on sizable objects may be a little tricky to do with the VDB remesher because it is voxel based (more or less like the Remesh modifier in Blender but with far better handling of multiple parts).
In addition, there’s no new UV tools, no new painting tools, and the handling of large scenes has not improved much beyond the newfound ability to handle large numbers of instances (ie. duplicates of an object). It turns out the new core is likely not done yet and will go on until who knows when.
Regardless of that, most of their users are upgrading because they like the new stuff as is despite those limits (that would mean another good year for Maxon).
It means another year of waiting until (and IF) the “new core” finally arrives. If you have played this game since C4d R16 you’ll might get a little impatient (or run out of patience).
I am sorry to see this more pessimistic but another year and Houdini and Maya might finally catch up to Cinema in terms of motion graphic and if that happens all is lost for Maxon.
Scene and object handling is where the new core would come in handy, so far i haven’t seen ANYTHING which implies that Maxon can even pull it off. The explorer/browser/outliner is still slowing the whole program down, object handling is still lame and the new fields might be useful but suffer from the same lag and general slowness which brings C4d down to a grinding halt the moment you get serious.
Also the node editor has no API for external renders, yep, that makes totally sense. 
This version brings less to the table than what i have seen with half-yearly 0.5 upgrades, back in the days.
The mindset of users who happily upgrade can only be described with two words: Stockholm syndrome. 
My experience with Houdini was an incredibly steep learning curve more in line with programming/mathematics than modelling/rendering. I haven’t worked with C4D but I’ve looked at it a lot and one of the things I routinely hear is how easy the UI etc. is, especially if you’re doing things like broadcasting or motion graphics. It seems like Houdini is less equipped for this kind of thing. Do you think we’ll just see C4D shift increasingly further into the television/broadcast market and give up on film, letting Houdini/Maya take that place instead?
There is no shift because C4D never had a place in Film and VFX, with the exception of Title sequences (not anymore) and the occasional SciFi HUD (Iron Man for example) and computer displays (which is in line with the Mograph ability of C4d).
I would say that in the future Maya, Houdini, maybe Blender will eat away more from Maxon’s market position in TV and Broadcasting. And that is the only strong market position they still have.
1 Like
i think c4d will always have users because of it’s easy to use and his stability, compared to maya’s mash c4d is very intuitive and can do complicated thing in a little number of click in contrary of Houdini ( well then of curse for advanced animation Houdini beats them all). btw when i’m talking about c4d i’m also talking about x-particles because without it c4d would be useless.
You just have to see the 3d artist on behance to see that c4d have his place in the industry of graphic design & motion graphics & 3d illustration ect
Most major title sequences, like all of the Marvel stuff is still done in C4D(Perception, I have a buddy who works there, they also do screen FUI) as well as the majority of TV shows(Elastic/Patrick Clair).
C4D still has a stranglehold on title sequences. Idk about their market-share getting eaten away but a lot of Advertising agencies are using Maya(still?) and it looks like a lot of the advanced C4D users are moving onto Houdini.
As a C4D user the only reason I’m on this forum is because of 2.8. It may pull me away from C4D(outside of work).
I admit that there is a certain kind of wishful thinking in my statements.
I wish Maxon would get their asses kicked by the competition so that they put more effort into their product (or drastically lower their price).
Even if i am an disgruntled ex C4d user, i do not wish to see C4d vanish, but rather see it live up to its full potential.
@Dave_W
Kinda funny to realize that most of these great TV-show Intros come from one or two agencies, and all of them are using C4d + Octane.
It kinda makes sense since one could say that these and the tile sequences are essentially Motion graphics.
These kind of sequences are very elaborated, but outside of that i think compositing software like Nuke, Fusion and Flame do the majority of general title sequences.
Nuke, Fusion, and Flame only put together sequences made by another package and/or footage from edit. Maybe I misunderstand what you mean by including this softwares? I’ve worked on motion design projects that use flame, nuke, etc.