[spekoun]

Hi to all...

Maybe my thought is not new. But would not be better to integrate MW material settings into Cinema material setting dialog. Current tag system is very complicated to manage. You have to do many needless steps. For example: make dummy material only for mapping. I am not coder, but is it really too difficult to add maxwell settings into C4D material editor? I thing that sort of integration would solve much current problems and better the workflow.

[AndreD]

i´m almost happy with mxm-editor and mxm tags...

of course, it should be possible, to integrate the whole mxed in cinema-material editor but for me, it´s ok to work with the standalone-solution..
just fix the "saving" bug.
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=17095

[beppeg]

I quote AndreD
Now I can have only one scene with both m~r and AR materials and it's very usefull for me

Edit: for me they can delete all the others materials tags exept for the "Custom mxm", with the new wizard they are unusefull.
Instead it would be nice if the custom mxm could take the name of the geometry or the mxm name in some way for fast search and selection

[spekoun]

It seems, I did not explain my wish clearly...

I am very happy with MXM-editor too. But that custom MXM connection would be better integrate into material setting. Custom MXM is enough for me too. Managing tags is sometimes difficult with complex scenes with many object and materials. For better tag control i make "dummy" C4D materials, so i have to set mats twice.

The best would be to have possibilities: adding custom MXM via tag and via material setting, though...

[beppeg]

Sorry spekoun for not understanding
What do you think about a new panel, something like MXM Material Editor, similar to the cinema one, with the list of the mxm in the scene with preview ad the ability to select all tags connected with the mxm tags, or geometry connected with the mxm and so on ?

[spekoun]

Not bad idea too. But it will not solve my problem with doing dummy C4D material for mapping, i think... That is what bothers me the most...

[Tyrone Marshall]

I quote AndreD
Now I can have only one scene with both m~r and AR materials and it's very usefull for me

Edit: for me they can delete all the others materials tags exept for the "Custom mxm", with the new wizard they are unusefull.
Instead it would be nice if the custom mxm could take the name of the geometry or the mxm name in some way for fast search and selection

I agree Beppeg, I prefer only the custom mxm, and I do agree with your other suggestion.

[beppeg]

I'm glade you like it, Tyrone
What do you think about the possibility to have more mxm per object?
And what about unique names for mxm tags for fast search and selection?
Can we see this improvements in the next update?

[dyarza]

Now that the SDK is out for windows, how difficult is it to to do some of this?

I am not a programmer by any strech of the imagination, I just know some basics, but maybe there is someone with the ability to put something together. There is certainly no shortage of willing testers here.

Since most people are reasonably happy with using .mxm tags, maybe there is a way to "feed" some C4D material parameters to M~R via the SDK.

Lets say that you specify a C4D material with a texture map. The nice thing would be to have the ability to generate an mxm in an automated way from said C4D material. The current tag has all the options and switches that we need, this should be doable.

If we spent half the energy that we put into complaining about Next Limit into it, I bet we could do it.

My two cents,

D

[Tyrone Marshall]

I'm glade you like it, Tyrone
What do you think about the possibility to have more mxm per object?
And what about unique names for mxm tags for fast search and selection?
Can we see this improvements in the next update?

Hello Beppeg,

I agree with the idea of having more than one MXM per object! Unique names for search and selection would be something like the automxm feature in the Sketchup plugin. I have forwarded suggestions for these items, let us give the coders some time to think about it.

I think it is good to know what other users think about these as well.

[noseman]

[conspiracy theory]
May I ask this.

A material, is a tag.
A so called "material tag". The good thing about it, is that You can edit it's instance (in the material manager) and all the objects that have it get their own update.
Is there a reason why NL chose to use typical tags?

Is there a possibility that it involves a bit more inside knowledge of the C4D sdk than the original coder didn't have (or something like that?)

Could this be another one of those STUPID NL polocies, that are making our lifes harder?

Or am I just having my typical conspiracy theory in mind?
[/conspiracy theory]

[beppeg]

Thanx Tyrone
Waiting for the coders response

Sorry noseman but if you update an mxm, all the objects with this mxm are updated too

Maybe I don't understand another time

[noseman]

I am just curious as to why NL chose a diffrent approach for applying materials than the C4D standard method.
The 3D studio Max plugin uses the programms standard material.

Of course the mxm tag saves the day, but it doesn't justify why they did it like this.

Finally, when the bugs have been squashed and we have the ability to apply more than one mxm per object I will be a happy camper. Until that day, NL delivers crap software.

[Boris Ulzibat]

I am just curious as to why NL chose a diffrent approach for applying materials than the C4D standard method.
The 3D studio Max plugin uses the programms standard material.

Of course the mxm tag saves the day, but it doesn't justify why they did it like this.

Finally, when the bugs have been squashed and we have the ability to apply more than one mxm per object I will be a happy camper. Until that day, NL delivers crap software.

May I disagree with you? this way of applying materials has a significant benefit - you can have BOTH types of mats on a single object - this thing is great, and having an CustomMXM tag doesn't limit the number of such tags on an ojject by itself, the implementation of this tag function does.
An object inside C4D can have lots of instances of different or similar (that's important) materials on it, and the tag remains the same, so the problem is not in the way the assigning goes, but in the way it's coded!
I tried the MAX way of maxwell materials, didn't like it.
Assigning similar customMXM to a lot of objects doesn't seem to be a workflow killer to me

[noseman]

This is what I was thinking of.



I think it serves both purposes and is better than the tagging system.

You may disagree with me disagreeing is the only way we will have any progress in our lives.
If everybody aggreed on everything, the world would be a boring place