Topics created by peter_horvath

Hey Peter,

you can reach out directly to us via mail. While there is some end-user aspect in this, I think it is best handled by SDK. But thanks for asking and caring about submitting to the right place! I will forward your mail/request to the right places. But as hinted at above, I do not see the Node team being all thrilled about this.

Maybe also make the case why this is needed as making the case for something usually increases your chances compared to a "I want X"! Maybe also line out how you envision for this to work. E.g., request to introduce an attribute which can be set on port bundles. As for example maxon::DESCRIPTION::UI:NOSORT which is then respected by BuildPopupMenuForDescription.

What we very likely will not do, is that we completely turn this off, as both Scene Nodes and Redshift have a lot of data types with many sub ports where it will be hard to find things without alpha-numerical sorting. I could be wrong about all this as I am neither in the Nodes nor Redshift team, but that is the hunch I have when I look at this system.

Cheers,
Ferdinand

Thanks for looking into it @m_adam.

Maybe this is specific to Arnold, but there are shader parameters that are not linkable. It's a flag on the parameter. Typically, boolean and enum type parameters are not linkable, like the ones highlighted in the screenshot below. But could be any parameters really, depending on the shader code.

image.png

Hi Ferdinand,

Thank you for the detailed description, it's very useful, I have a good understanding now how this should work. Yes, the main goal here is installer optimization. Unfortunately, hosting online is not an option. I'll give it a thorough testing to see if we hit any limitations with this approach, and we might drop the idea if so.

Thanks,
Peter

Sure, no worries, it's not a high priority, more like a nice to have feature. We can manage without this. I was just wondering if something like this could be possible already in the context of node materials. Thanks.

Hey Ferdinand,

Thank you for investigating and digging deep on the topic, much appreciated. I'll handle this as a limitation for now, until an official solution exists. But don't worry, it's not a high priority for us at the moment.

Thank you,
Peter

Thank you for taking time on this. Definitely promising. I'll give it a spin to see if I can reach the desired results with any of the mentioned approaches.

Hey @peter_horvath,

Just as an FYI, you are currently limited by the issues lined out in the video, i.e., you will have to use LoadFile at the moment to get a meaningful particle simulation (or let the document be cloned by RenderDocument). The Simulation team has already fixed that issue, it will be delivered with the next major release of Cinema 4D, i.e., 2025.0.0.

In case you want to test that fix, I would recommend moving this discussion over to the beta forum.

Cheers,
Ferdinand