Jump to content

Welcome to INSYDIUM ONLINE

The place to talk about X-Particles and Cycles 4D

Steve Pedler

Administrators
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Steve Pedler last won the day on July 20

Steve Pedler had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11 Good

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Steve Pedler

    xpShaderFalloff Bug? SOLVED

    Thanks, I've found it now, though there is no layer shader there, just the xpShaderFalloff. The problem is not a bug, it's a serious limitation in the Cinema SDK. For any animated shader to work, they must be given the current scene time. For almost everything else in Cinema, you have access to the scene and therefore the current time. With the exception of (you guessed it) falloffs. With a falloff there is simply no way to get the scene time, it just can't be done. I remember spending hours on this when writing the falloff before concluding it was not possible. So animated shaders are out, I'm afraid. Re the other problem - PV render vs. the viewport render - my guess is that you mean the viewport appearance is different to the PV render, is that right? Because if you do an actual viewport render, it looks the same as the PV render. This is because in the skinner you have two settings, Polygon Size and Render Polygon Size. The first is used in the viewport, the second at render time. This lets you work with a low-poly mesh in the editor and a high-poly version in the final render, but as you found, if the render size is significantly smaller than the viewport size, the mesh can look very different. Make them the same, and the viewport mesh will look like the one in the PV render.
  2. Steve Pedler

    xpShaderFalloff Bug? SOLVED

    I can't find the layer shader or shader falloff in your scene file. Did you upload the correct scene?
  3. Steve Pedler

    stepping and lagging particles

    https://community.insydium.online/index.php?/topic/390-please-post-a-scene-file/
  4. Steve Pedler

    Why Won't This Render? SOLVED

    This isn't a problem with Cycles, the same thing will happen in the standard renderer - that is, if you try to render the current frame to the PV, it won't do so. This happens because when Cinema renders an image to the PV (but not to the viewport, and not in the RTP of Cycles) it clones the current document then renders the clone at the specified frame. In many cases this works fine but for many dynamic scenes what gets rendered depends very much on the previous frames; data will have been generated and updated in those previous frames that each succeeding frame needs. This frame will then alter the data for the next frame. If you try to render a single frame to the viewport there's no problem as you're rendering the document present in the editor and all the data has been generated and updated. But if you render that frame to the PV, it will not have that data and so what you will get is essentially whatever was on the starting frame of the animation. Try your scene with the standard or physical renderer, you will see the same result when rendering a single frame. The solution, if you want one specific frame to be rendered to the PV, is to render the frame sequence from the start to the one you want. Yes, it is a pain to have to do that but it's the result of how Maxon implemented the external renderer (which is what standard and physical are considered to be when rendering to PV and why it's easy to add multiple render engines to Cinema).
  5. Steve Pedler

    How to get the Bridge for R20

    1. The bridge is included in the latest version of XP, so all you need to do is download the latest release using the download link sent to you when you bought X-Particles. 2. For early access, see https://insydium.ltd/products/early-access/ 3. There will never be an X-Particles 5, it's just 'X-Particles' with no version number. Our system of constant updates means that there will never be a new numbered version as such, instead you get repeated updates at intervals. This lets us get new features to you much faster than releasing a big new version every couple of years. You will get the updates for free as long as you have a current valid maintenance package. Hope that helps, Steve
  6. Steve Pedler

    xpShatter isn't showing SOLVED

    Shatter is currently available in the early access build of XP, you’ve got the release build. See our website for how to sign up to the early access program (it’s free).
  7. Steve Pedler

    Please post a scene file

    When asking for help in this forum please remember that it is extremely helpful to anyone who might want to answer that you post a scene file to demonstrate what the problem is (unless that would be of no use in the given context). Unfortunately, experience shows that queries without a scene file are much less likely to be answered because it takes too much time to create a file to try to reproduce the issue. Please note that screenshots are not an adequate substitute for a file though by all means include them as well as a scene file if you wish. Many thanks, The Management
  8. Just to clarify, the original XP used percentage variations but the overwhelming opinion of users was to switch to absolute values as it is now. So we listened to our users and changed them all. There is no setting to switch between actual values and percentages I’m afraid.
  9. Steve Pedler

    Particle Mass Not Working SOLVED

    Actually, your original post described the physically correct result. With the same grav strength objects of different masses fall at the same rate (Galileo first postulated this). So particles with different mass values should fall at the same rate, as you saw. If you want them to fall at different rates, you either have to add drag (which is why a feather doesn't fall at the same rate as a cannonball - it's due to drag from air resistance, not the difference in mass) or alter the gravity strength, which in this case either means two different modifiers, or as Lothar showed, use data mapping. That's the better solution as then the strength can be made proportional to mass. True, it's not physically correct. But who cares as long as it works? If you're interested, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo's_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_experiment
  10. Steve Pedler

    xp trail deformer not working on nearest by index

    The trail deformer is working correctly. Remember that any defomer only works by displacing vertices. In a standard trail there is a vertex for each frame, which allows the sort of effect you're seeing there. But in nearest by index mode each spline segment is just one vertex at each end, so the deformer can only move those. If you look carefully you'll see that the trail does move, it just doesn't do what you thought it would. If you then go into the spline quicktab and set intermediate points to uniform with 8 points, you'll see the difference the extra points make.
  11. Steve Pedler

    render particle display SOLVED

    To do this you need the Display Render object. That’s in the early access build, so you’ll need to be using that.
  12. Steve Pedler

    What should i do?

    For free? I hope you’re not asking for a pirated download. You can buy at our site but we don’t store or even see your CC details. Only PayPal see those and they are long established and very safe. If you still don’t like that idea you can try a reseller such as Toolfarm, another very reputable company.
  13. Steve Pedler

    xpScale Growth (substep issue)

    Unfortunately this is inherent in the way the modifier works if you choose ‘set by falloff’ mode. The value returned by the falloff or field is always between zero and one. In set by falloff mode this value is subtracted from 1, so when falloff value is at maximum (1.0) the value becomes zero and the modifier will set the radius to zero by multiplying the maximum radius by zero. With more than one substep, the falloff value is first divided by the number of substeps. All modifiers which use substeps do this. So a falloff value of 1.0 becomes 0.5 if there are two substeps. In this mode this value is then subtracted from 1.0 to give a final value of 0.5. The radius is then set to its maximum value multiplied by 0.5. You can see therefore that as you increase the substep count the initial radius will be set closer and closer to its maximum. That is why you see what you do. The final result is that you shouldn’t use set by falloff in this scene if you need multiple substeps. You’ll need to experiment and try to make it work with one of the other modes, which shouldn’t be affected by the number of substeps in this way. Sorry about the long explanation but I wanted to make it clear that this isn’t a bug but is the result of the way this particular mode works.
  14. A small number of users of the latest (March 2019) Early Access build of X-Particles in Cinema 4D R20 have experienced freezes and crashes when using Explosia FX. We're sorry about this and have corrected the fault. If you encounter this issue please re-download and re-install X-Particles from your personal download link. This should resolve the issue. If you don't experience the problem there is no need to re-download X-Particles as there is no change in functionality. Thank you, The Insydium Team
  15. Steve Pedler

    Download link for demo doesn't work

    We have tried this at our end and everything is working correctly. We would suggest you register again with either the same or a different email address and you’ll be sent another link. Try that and see what happens Steve
×