Hello, there are so many cool things about Blender, but there are 2 things that keep me attracted to Cinema 4d. Can anyone explain or maybe take a closer look by Blender developers.
Why Cinema 4d is so much faster when it comes to render any scene for video. Any scene with reflections, transparency, refraction and so on Cinema 4d renders so much faster than Cycles. With simple setup I have render object right away on Cinema 4d while Cycle takes for ever. You can check on your own with Cinema 4d Demo for free.
Why with rigid body acts unpredictably . I set conveyor belt using array and curve modifiers. When I put objects on conveyor belt and apply rigid body it acts unpredictably on Blender. While on Cinema 4d it just working perfectly without too much adjusting?
Do you want to talk about Cinema 4D? I guess you better as Cinema 4D developers how their render works.
Or are you talking about Blender? In that case I suggest to open one thread for each of your questions in the according sub-forums. This way you will receive much better support.
Please note: Rhetorical comparisons of one software over another are not allowed [Forum rules].
I guess he is talking about the difference between those two programs. And the answer is clear: They have more money for development, so they can hire more developers and achieve faster some new features.
This is very challenging area and it takes time and patience to develop new features for cycles. Unfortunately Blender Institute don’t have as much resources for develop Cycles as fast as how those giants do. But they are doing their best with the resources they have and I’m really impressed how far Blender has come.
Blenders cycles would be at least 2x as fast if it had adaptive sampling but that is not on the roadmap right now as it seems. Also depending on your graphics card, if you have 2 of nvidias 980ti graphics cards(about the same price as cinema4d) then we wouldn’t have this discussion.
Render is not faster at all, what you get is render without any GI. Like scanline in 3dsMax. Turn on Physical render, and GI, set it to Monte Carlo and you will see that is even slower than Cycels. As a matter a fact C4D render is one of the slowest renders on the market.
C4D GI can be very fast for simple light paths, the kind you’d expect from motion design. But it’s very, very slow for complex light paths, monte carlo or cached.
I like C4D OK. Really easy to get some interesting systems up and running. The renderer is kind of ho-hum though, and even if C4D were faster, it is not nearly as flexible as Cycles.
Yes C4D renders global illumination far far faster than blender because irraidiance cache.
But what about shadows?
try rendering with shadows turned on, AREA shadows not hard
Hit render, look at the render pass of shadows, resembles the kind of shadows you’d get from a render in BL cycles with 10 samples doesn’t it
A possible solution would be to turn on physical renderer then crank up the settings, but when you do that the render time isn’t massively different from BL cycles…
when it is still a significant difference but still.
Well op was comparing it to Cycles. Direct comparison is like comparing apples and oranges…
Also irradiance is useless as soon as you need to animate something that moves, so you fallback to QMC as only option or have crazy high settings for irradiance but you never know what might go wrong there… Which is at the end, in my tests, slower than Cycles especially if you have good GPU. I have C4D and Arnold which is in some cases faster than Cycles. But C4D physical + GI and QMC (no flicker ever) is slower than both. C4D native is great for motion graphic where you can fake a lot with AO and some emission in shaders, but it is not only motion graphic …
I am also a long time C4D user, still using it at work and from time to time private. Although Cinema4D is really a great package and probably should be used by a lot more people (I don’t understand, why so many users fight some of the CG dinos all the day), the renderer is indeed not the fastest one. And it can get very slow with blurry reflection and the like.
Also the material system got complex and I am not talking about “the good complex”, the new reflection system feels slapped on top.
So as far as I can tell (I am still new to Blender), both engines work well, both have their good points and both have some problems.
You can’t really compare two render engines like that. What kind of settings did you use in c4d?
GI and all the sweet stuff is off by default in c4d, while it’s on in cycles.
For me, the outliner and the mograph module are two greatest advantages of c4d over blender. Still waiting for an intuitive outliner implementation in Blender (drag and drop, multi select, sensible hierarchy - child objects moving with parent etc)…
Thank you for your response. I amazed by Blender that such a powerful program is free. I posted my concerns when I started to do something on it and then compared to Cinema 4d that I used it before. I know Blender is great in so many things that I don’t have to write about because it is obvious. I just point it out things that maybe developers will take a look and make Blender even better. You developers are great anyway to make Blender happened.
Let me be clear I am all for Blender. I will use it anyway. I just compared simple render result with default setup on both programs. I did it not downgrade any software but out of necessity.
I do rather simple motion graphics designs for video and don’t need such spectacular render. Can you set up Blender Cycles so it has similar quality like Cinema default setup and similar speed?
Thanks. OK. Does Blender has simple set up for Video Motion Graphics people so cycles happen faster. Unfortunately I use anisotropic textures quite often for logo and so on. Didi you see my send point regarding rigid body issue I face: 2. Why with rigid body acts unpredictably . I set conveyor belt using array and curve modifiers. When I put objects on conveyor belt and apply rigid body it acts unpredictably on Blender. While on Cinema 4d it just working perfectly without too much adjusting?
I got this very complex factory object to work and unfortunately not the latest generation computer. In my case only Blender and Cinema opened it quite fast enough. (Houdini and Maya almost doesn’t open it at all and when they open interaction just goes for ever). However out of those two Blender and Cinema the texturing anisotropic texture is so much faster on CInema.
I have complex factory object. It looks like only Blender and Cinema open it quite all right. (Maya/Houdini/MOjo are very slow). I use Blender 2.76b and Cinema Demo version to check things out with default setup. I need just motion graphics video HD quality. WHen I apply anisotropic texture Cinema is so much winner.
