Thanks again Noseman!
That sounds at least doable - and while still being a pain the Engine Interface should take care of itself, I guess it could make it workable.
Now let's see if the job actually lands - I guess afterwards I will know much more about C4D and the Engine than I ever wanted to ;-)
Cheers and thanks for sticking around even after you “moved on”! ;-)
Wow, that sounds pretty bad.
Thank you very much Noseman!
That would actually be one of the first things I would expect from such an interface, dealing with updates to the asset, otherwise it's a bit of a one-shot-thing that sounds good on paper but does not stand up to production demands where change is inevitable and a big part of what could make this idea great.
Having a connection to the procedural Houdini from C4D is awesome, but only if the connection itself also is flexible and procedural in nature.
I could live with the internal parameter names having to stay the same or some other limitations, but what you say sounds as if even the most simple kind of workaround is barred ATM.
So I wonder: Is there a way in Cinema 4D to have parameters and animation separate from the asset it drives?
Like I animate a set of a dozen dummy parameters and link them to the parameters in the digital asset for instance by expressions. If I have to replace the asset, I do not lose the animation, but only have to re-link the animation and settings to the respective parameters?
(Sorry I didn't use C4D in ages although it was one of my first “serious” 3D applications when it first came out for PC… )
I guess if this job happens we'll have to do some re-thinking of the process…
Thanks again and cheers!