Cinema 4d Material Editor

[Elwanda Menhennett]

Iam running AE CC2015 13.6.1.6 and when I go into Cinema 4D (16.038 build RB121092), I don't see the SPECULAR option in the MATERIALS EDITOR. Using the book "After Effects and Cimema 4D" by Jackson and other places, they show a SPECULAR option in the editor but I don't see this. Is the current verison I using not have this anymore? Was it moved to RELFECTANCE? If so, how is it different? I am new to Cinema 4D and I am trying to learn how to use it but it doesn't help when my study materials are different from the actual program. Thanks.

It was moved to Reflectance. It's pretty different. The reflectance channel was a big change in C4D R16. It's way more powerful, but also way more confusing. Older versions of AE (and thus older books) are talking about C4D version R15 or earlier. You may want to look up some tutorials on using the reflectance channel, but the default specular that it adds in the reflectance channel is pretty similar to the old specular.

Thank you for the answers. I did a Google search and found some good info. I just wish that the book I was reading, published only last year, was more up to date as I think the specular feature is very neat.

No, I don't know them. In fact the only other Hoiums I know are my dad and two brothers. Hoium is a Norwegian name and you'd think by living in Minnesota I might know some other Hoiums, sort of strange that I don't.

One other note on the new C4D Reflectance channel - due to it's poor user interface there is a plugin that can make adjusting all the settings easier. It is called "TopCoat" and is available at Greyscalegorilla - Cinema 4D Tutorials and Tools for Motion Graphic Designers

This issue has come up in the last two days. After using anything in the material editor, and constantly the image node, even if no image is attached to it, the software will stutter and lag across the entire platform. Everything in C4D will take 10-15 seconds to click on and activate.

Did you try reverting to a previous version (e.g. C4DtoA 3.0.4) to see it this is a new bug in the latest plugin? Does this happen even in a very basic scene (e.g. some basic objects with basic materials)?

With Vray1.1, at least, you can use regular Cinema materials.

So for editing you can have the animated Cinema material, either on

your subject or maybe just on a dummy object visible to the camera.

Then for rendering use the VrayMat only.

Ah ha, I see what Lennart means. Use a Cinema 4d native material for the animated face texture, then render it as the viewport. Native cinema 4d materials only get blown out when you do the full GI render through vray. Then for the final render, switch the native material for the proper vray material.

What I cant figure out is, how to create Emissive Materials as node materials. In the PBR Material node, there is no Emissive input. I also cant find any extra node for emissive. The ready-made pbr Material has an emissive texture slot and a multiply value, thats why I am wondering.

As for the glow: I tried to build a node shader exactly like in the video for my car headlights, but it doesnt affect the glow. It is just white. What am I missing?editor_4_beta_screen_151503841 107 KB

@DIO, I agree with @Evgeni_Popov that we will likely need to see a PG to determine what is going on with your material and scene. And the second part of the video you linked above will be going out tomorrow. Out of pure coincidence, I added an unlit shadow catcher like you had described above in the project, so it may have a technique that you might like.

In terms of emission on PBR, I have another demo that does this technique that will come in a video series after the current one. In the mean time, you can dig into the project and look at the shader to see how I added emission to the PBR node material. It is done for the UI that is projected on the device in this sample product page demo. The code for the project is not in a playground since we needed to set up a complete html solution, but it is all available on github for you to download and run locally. Looking into the screen node material will have the specific parts you are looking for in how to combine an emissive contribution with the PBR node.

You can see that I used the UI texture that I passed into the shader to block out the diffuseDir and diffuseInd contributions so I could add in the emissive texture and not alter the colors that I had specified in the UI texture:

You will want to use the individual channel contributions to add in your emissive color, but remember that these outputs are linear outputs so you will need to convert your emissive color to linear to combine, then convert the product of those operations back to gamma space to pass to the FragmentOut. Hope this helps!

My remaining problems are that the node materials dont find their textures after building the scene in the editor (@julien-moreau is aware of the problem) and the shadow of the directional light, which looks fine in editor but looks jagged and works only on part of the shadow casting meshes in the build scene.

But the main thing are the problems with the opactiy masks of my environment meshes. There are sorting errors everywhere. Between different meshes and on one and the same mesh using an opacity mask. It seems I dont really have control over that in the editor so far.

No, please don't make it more complex. If you want to support advanced users create a separate material editor or additional advanced controls that experts can fiddle with but keep the main material editor as simple as it is.

For example at my screenshot above - if I would like to add a decal on the top, than I would add a second diffuse layer and move it to the top. This layer needs to get the decal texture and transparency mask. If I like to get the clear coat effect over the decal too, than I would move the reflection on the top. It's like playing with bricks.

Here a raw and simplified example how the UI could be looking. Material layers are UI blocks, that could be free arranged in the top-down order. If needed, additional layers could be added, for example the second diffuse layer.

No, diffuse means the basic color/texture, incoming light will be diffuse reflected. No blurring. The orginal Enscape naming is "Albedo" for this layer. For me "Albedo" sounds to abstract and so I chose a more classic naming.

That could work. But it's important to somehow hide advance controls for 'regular' users. You and me might know how to use this stuff but someone who just want's to get decent results quickly will be quickly intimidated if there are many controls...

Ooops, sounds bad. Enscape controls are basic only and a lot of controls are missed for pro users. From Vray I know that the UI can be switched between different modes for beginners/advanced/experts. Seems to be useful for Enscape too.

Thing is, if your point is to keep it simple for your less advanced team to understand it better, I believe that the way it is named and displayed right now is not a standardized way amongst other 3D softwares, I found it way harder to understand than other softwares such as revit, vray, 3dsmax. Lets say you go on poliigon.com and you want some neat textures; you'll know exactly which file to associate with which label (reflection, gloss, normal, bump, displacement, diffuse) but you see, the fact that you ask what the diffuse is, makes me wonder how relatable the material editor can be if someday you decide to diversify your 3D software knowledge.

Although, my point of view. And i've been away from enscape for a little while because I keep facing weird bugs with glass, mirrors and the space between two faces which lets light pass, but looking forward to try the new version soon.

The problem is that the word "Diffuse" means to spread out and/or soften as it is used in most other industries that I have experience of: the obscurity level of glass is referred to as diffusing it, photography has diffuse lenses, stage lighting has diffusers, diffuse filters in editing software blur the image... (Although I admit "Albedo" is a bit of an obscure word and refers to the reflection of light.)

Long time Max and C4D user here, I miss the flexibility that a proper material editor gives, being able to layer up materials, to adjust reflections properly, use displacement maps etc, also having to mentally translate "Enscape" terms into more established terms.

....but the major difference is that with the ancient Max/C4D maaterial systems, you can create materials that could never exist in reality. This can lead to your image just looking wrong and you don't really know why.

I afraid on the long run the pro users will be lost on this way. And can't many options be used in a wrong way? For example it is possible to add a strong DOF also if a wide angle lens is used? From a real world experience this is wrong. (Please don't limit it too now. )

Unfortunately, reality tends to be boring and flat and uninteresting. I think that most users of enscape are trying to create dreams and show an ideal or aspiration that is rooted in reality, but pushed beyond that. People want to create art rather than reality... and in art, the term "reality" is a fluid concept.

I've been watching lots of conferences, talks and lectures about realism, creating pretty images, paintings and sculptures: Most of the key advice is to start with reality and then bend it - if you deliberately put a barrier to prevent people from going beyond what is "real" then you are going to become a starting point for people to move into other programs; the really good artists, the 'showcase' talent, the blossoming creative people will abandon your software for other tools that do the same thing. (And most of the development for current rendering software is currently for 'real-time' results)

3a8082e126