Cinema 4D for architectural stills

[Leejc]

I would like to produce still photorealistic architectural images. I am a Mac user and would like to stick with the Mac if possible so am thinking Cinema 4D would be the best application for this. Is there any major limitations to Cinema 4D or any advantages to using something like 3dsmax over C4d.

I will be learning the app from scratch and updating my Mac so could switch to PC if 3dsmax was the way to go!

[Sindala]

Well, i've been working with cinema4d for about 3 years, it's a quick program to learn and you can get rather good results in a short time. Personally i based my choice on it's good interaction with vectorworks, and the price.

however after three years i have to say i'm not so sure it's the best choice ever.

For one it seems everyone uses 3dstudio, so cooperating or hiring gives problems. Also the advanced lighting isnt all that, it's hard to get a smooth image if the model is big. There is only one thirdparty renderer, final render, and it isn't very stable, the results are very nice though.

 

I my opinion, if you want a quick result i would go for cinema4d if you want to invest in the future i would go for 3dstudio, but that's just my view.

[IC]

Thought about LightWave?

 

Oranges aren't the only fruit. Try the demos.

[STRAT]

i like avocados.

[AJLynn]

Or, if you know you want stills and animation isn't important, try a Modo demo (luxology.com - demo to be available "soon") - it's relatively inexpensive, Universal Binary, good polymodeling toolset and a very interesting looking materials and render system.

[Leejc]

Thanks guys for all your comments, I hadn't considerd Lightwave or Modo but I'll certainly look into them.

[bricklyne]

It might also be helpful to note that a big reason why a lot of people use 3DS Max, ( for archviz stills) is because it's the only means available (at the moment anyway)of accessing V-ray renderer, which is the de facto industry standard and leading renderer. There is currently a Vray for C4D plugin in the works, so that might also influence your decision, as well as a Vray standalone due to be released as well.

 

But for pure architectural modelling, I don't really believe it matters either way, since both software offer powerful tools to achieve this; once one is comfortable with the respective interfaces and workflows. So, if you're more comfortable in Mac ( and why not MacTel since you're upgrading and have the best of both worlds), then you might as well stick with C4D ( or check out Lightwave and Modo as others have suggested). Otherwise, MAX ( or more specifically 3DS VIZ) is always a good consideration for the PC inclined.

[Leejc]

Thanks. Does Vray offer greater speed or is there a quality enhancement too.

[STRAT]

as it stands now, speed. people will argue the image quality is better too, but, imo, it's different. c4d in the hands of a good artist can make it as good as anything on the market.

[Ernest Burden III]

I don't think the GI in C4D is up to the competition. Just in the few minor efforts I've made with fr2, it produces much smoother GI results, and faster. vRay should be similar.

 

Maybe next week we'll hear about a new AR engine at SIGGRAPH. If not, C4D for GI arch-vis is too far behind the rest. I'm done with it as of now (well, tomorrow or Monday).

 

Cinema is great in all many respects.

[Sindala]

as it stands now, speed. people will argue the image quality is better too, but, imo, it's different. c4d in the hands of a good artist can make it as good as anything on the market.

i don't really agree with you there Strat, if you look at all the best images, which are dicided as the best by judges, arent they almost always made with max and vray? For instance in the expose 4 book most are made with max and vray. There is only one made with cinema4d, yours, so good going there btw.

But statistically max and vray are the best for archvis.

[Ernest Burden III]

statistically max and vray are the best for archvis.

 

By the same reasoning McDonald's is the best for eats.

 

Cinema is a well written, well supported program that is highly stable and fast at most things. Just not GI. The GI engine is one of many modules and it needs an update badly. The rest ranges from good to among the best in the industry.

[STRAT]

if Maxon dont radically update the AR in the next release i feel they'd be commiting suicide. but i feel they obviously know this and have it in order.

 

as far as the gi engine stands now, yes, it's way out of date. i have now real complaints about it's external gi rendering as i feel with the correct knowlege from the user it's still reletively fast, but internals are a complete different story.

Also, dont even try to render a gi animation in any shape or form as that's totally out of the question.

 

but i still think as far as quality goes it's down to the user. if my m8 uses max and vray, and is the same skill level as me, that doesn't mean he'll knock out a better render.

[Sindala]

By the same reasoning McDonald's is the best for eats.

 

I don't remember seeing the McDonald's in any michelinguide

[AJLynn]

i don't really agree with you there Strat, if you look at all the best images, which are dicided as the best by judges, arent they almost always made with max and vray? For instance in the expose 4 book most are made with max and vray. There is only one made with cinema4d, yours, so good going there btw.

But statistically max and vray are the best for archvis.

 

Vray is fast and easy with a good GI engine, therefore more people use it (especially the people who take their tech seriously enough to pay more for a render engine upgrade, and there is a strong correlation between that group and the group of people who are very good artists), therefore more very good work is done with it.

 

Doesn't mean it is capable of rendering images of a higher quality than other software is able to.

[manta]

"It might also be helpful to note that a big reason why a lot of people use 3DS Max, ( for archviz stills) is because it's the only means available (at the moment anyway)of accessing V-ray renderer, which is the de facto industry standard and leading renderer."

 

you can get vray for truespace for $299...don't know how well that's working out...

 

Quality is irrelavant, all rendering engines can reach close to the same quality given enough time and experience, I've seen Povray renderings that were totally photoreal, and thats free, it all boils down to speed and ease of use, and what ever happend to Brazil...I haven't seen anything new from them for years...

[Justin Hunt]

what ever happend to Brazil...I haven't seen anything new from them for years...

 

They dont want to do a "Maxwell" on us , my prediction is something soon

 

JHV