If you plan on working in a factory like Pixar or ILM then you'd probably
be
better off learning Maya since it's fast becoming an industry standard and
with Alias aquiring Motion Builder..well.. the character tools should be
the
most feature-rich off-the-shelf software for character animation.
Personally I love C4D for it's EASE OF USE... I've been using both for
several years. When I want to create something extremely fast and without
a
lot of clicking through endless menus I go straight for C4D.. If I want to
diddle around for weeks at a time digging through menus I reach for Maya.
Sure, it's powerful but sometimes power and features can bog you down if
you're just trying to whip something out really fast.
Ask many character animators who work for the big companies and most
likely
they will tell you to buy a copy of Hash Animation Master. It's got every
character tool that you could possibly need and I think it still goes for
around $300.
Price of software doesn't really seem to be an issue these days. I think
it
comes down to your future plans... If you plan on getting a job in a large
company and want to be a cog in a giant production pipeline then you'd
probably want to learn Maya. Every company uses it and expects it's future
employees to know it. If you want to work at home on your own animated
short or you're not sure this is the career for you then Hash is the
solution to get your feet wet. There are quite a few people that created
demo reels with this software and were hired at Pixar.
If you want to create realistic characters (a la Lord of the Rings) and
need
control over every muscle & tendon then you're probably best off with Maya
and something like Muscle TK (a plugin for creating muscle/skin
deformation). XSI has great character tools and even some pre-built rigs.
It's worth a look as is 3D Studio Max (although I could never get past
it's
cluttered interface).
The bottom line for C4D is ... it's not the most widely used software for
character animation in the industry but excellent results can still be
achieved. It has some really nice features (soft IK being one) and
overall
ease of use. but Before buying... ask Maxon for some character animation
reels then compare those with the likes of Hash and Alias. Also check out
www.cgtalk.com for more info.
Good Luck in your decision!
G
"alexs" <alexSPAMs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:auhm919d3thmb6fg8dadbhef0q0s4mm714@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (this thread also posted in 3dattack.net|3D ATTACK|CINEMA 4D Q&A forum.
> Will monitor this NG as well.)
>
>
> I've been looking at the choices for high-quality character animation
> work, and have read all the rave reviews of C4D (post-release 8) in
> general. There seem to be a huge number of C4D plugins, from Maxon as
well
> as 3rd parties, but as I
> climb the learning curve on jargon and concepts it becomes no clearer
> which 3D suite I should be seriously considering for my dive into
> animation.
>
> After viewing DreamWorks' latest disaster, Madagascar, I see how even
the
> most costly tools crank out real visual crap when misapplied or
> underutilized. Doing a frame-by frame checkout on Pixar's The
Incredibles
> shows true awareness of
> human visual perception (like perfect motion blur) that makes all the
> difference. Watching rapid motion in Madagascar was like watching the
> Wallace And Grommet preview before the feature: a tiring, annoying,
> flickering, stop motion-like
> quality -- something I don't see in Pixar movies. We won't even go into
> Pixar's superior storylines and scripting.
>
> What I'm trying to get a grip on is how suitable-to-task C4D animation
> tools (w/ or w/o 3rd party plugins) are compared to those of Maya, the
> current 300-kg gorilla of professional animation. I know Pixar develops
> and uses proprietary tools
> they aren't about to sell to competitors, but I like their visual style
> and want for myself the best tools that can offer a hope of approaching
> Pixar's standard.
>
> So I'd like to read some commentary from experienced animators who can
> address C4D's character animation tools & techniques made easier by its
> basic and plugin-extended features.
>
> How does C4D presently handle the following character animation
techniques
> (please excuse my ignorance of 3D jargon):
>
> 1) Muscular-skeletal/rigging connectivity and subdermal volumetric
> bunching/relaxation. Would include joint rotation incor****ating parallel
> bones (e.g. ulna & radius) and limits of motion, as well as dynamic
dermal
> mesh expansion and
> contraction with realistic paint/texture mapping.
>
> 2) Muscular-contraction based movement definition. Would include
dynamics
> of inertial buildup and slowdown, script specification of which muscles
> contract in sequence to effect motion.
>
> Why am I obsessing over anatomical-derived motion? Because even the big
> boys in the animation industry still find unnatural movement time-curves
> and Gumby-like flesh dynamics to be acceptable. Exaggeration and parody
> are fine, but I suspect
> there's a deeper underlying ignorance of natural movement and how to
> achieve it.
>
> 3) Film exposure-analogous tem****ospatial integration, a $10 way of
> expressing the concept of motion blur on a frame-by-frame basis. Not
sure
> how this is done today, in animation or in rendering. I don't imagine
> microstepping during
> rendering would be time/cost-effective, but it would be the closest to
how
> film is exposed. How would C4D fake true motion blur?
>
> 4) Flesh inertial effects: the "jiggle factor" done whole-body, not just
> wiggling boobs and buttocks for titillating the fanboys.
>
> 5) Audio tools for keyframe synchronization of facial macros. I've seen
> some examples of this but they seem pretty lame at present.
>
> 6) Recording/capture and playback of motion macros/scripts that can be
> executed simultaneously to generate complex body motions. I imagine
dozens
> of scripts running at once to allow speaking, hand gesturing, running,
> hair motion etc.
> without bringing the system to its knees.
>
> 7) Realistic hair & cloth tools, including turbulent/chaotic flow, wavy
> vs. straight hair. Lots of hair sims look limp and unrealistic --
> something not quite right about stiffness and motion decay after
> disturbance. Multiple layers of
> clothing, and muscle/dermal "pushback" (term?) for clothing that is
tight
> in places, loose in others.
>
>
> Maybe I'm demanding too much; I dunno, because the 3D market seems
chaotic
> and I don't have a sense for where it's going or what animators can do
> with C4D vs other suites. There's quite a bit of rooting by biased
diehard
> fans, agitprop by
> industry ****lls etc. A little impartiality would be nice.
>
> Maybe the current industry practice of employing dozens or even hundreds
> of bullpen "artists" (frame grunts) to fake the above works for now.
Seems
> awfully inefficient, however.
>
> Sorry for the long-windedness. I would really *like* to go with C4D (the
> naive American's cheering on of the underdog!), but want to climb the
> right learning curve and keep my cash investment reasonable as well. If
> only Maya comes close to
> all of the above, so be it. I'd like some enlightenment from the pros
> first, however.
>
>
|
