Please keep asking questions, as I believe that a problem comes back until it is solved. So, I try not to avoid anything here, and please never take my "moderation" (AKA keeping things organized) personally. New theme, new thread. Same question, old thread. Yes, yours was slightly different the second time; hard to find the right balance.
So far, I have answered Cinema 4D questions over 35,000 times in a Forum. The times I had to say there is no option (AFAIK) are very low. You can check even the past twelve years at Cineversity.com.
I'm sure that I do not know all, as I might find tomorrow a solution for something I was not aware of today. However, each question leads me to explore, and I'm under the impression that there is no failure, only gained experience. I assume I have some experience. 😉
So, I am happy to get your and other questions; they lead me to things I wouldn't have explored otherwise. I also try to understand the overall tendency and put this in discussions during our meetings into the mix. I try to be a voice for our members here, but please use the "Share Your Idea option; otherwise, I sound like someone who generalizes things without factual background. Thank you.
With that being said, I tried today several other options. But even if you use the path of the Sweep and cut that, the resulting shape with have straight edges in x, y, or z, per clone, staircase-like, not tilted as the spline asks for...
Joints are nothing else than objects that move points around.
Polygon objects are based on Points; when those points are moved, we move the edges and, consequently, the polygons. As a result, the mesh gets deformed.
If two or even more Joints influence a certain area, it is typical that each influences the system a little bit differently. This is the weighting.
This must always be, with no exception, 100% in total. Sadly that is often not explained why, other than it needs to be 100%. If it is less than 100%, even the slightest bit, a moving forward caharter would leave these parts more or less behind. If it is more than 100%, those parts are moved fast forward.
If you have more questions, please never hesitate to ask.
The offer to get chocolate from Switzerland is super tempting. Literally, very sweet of you! Thank you very much! But it certainly is not allowed to send food to the U.S.; I don't want to bring anyone in trouble.
Your offer made me smile, as I have visited Friends in Switzerland often or had the pleasure of being there for a while while traveling to Italy or France. (I lived in Berlin and Munich for two+ decades. So that was easy)
Your offer made me think about the decades of traveling in Europe and the little mountain of chocolate I ate. 😉 That is already a gift.
I wish for your project and look forward to the movie. Thanks for the offer!
Yes, Scatter would be the correct name—no idea how that happened. 😉
Should I blame my text correction, hehe? No, it was certain me: So sorry about the time you wasted.
The Matrix-Scatter is a comfortable way, a mixture of Matrix and RS-Tag (Redshift Object Tag).
This means there should be one way or another to get to CC4.
I just started with the Adobe Substance package. I had it many years before Adobe bought it. I'm happy to have it finally back. So, if there is a way with it, I'm also happy to look into it. Perhaps you know more about Substance and CC4.
The idea is to rotate the points around the axis but not the axis itself.
The position of each Point is based on the Object Axis. With this, the Normal is a Local idea. So you need to rotate the "surface" but not the axis. How to do that? Rotate Point from the X-Pool>System Presets> Matrix in XPresso.
A good mesh is based on knowledge and/or manual work.
It is not often that a roof gets a deformer treatment. With lots of polygons, deformers might work; the kind of deformation indeed dictates the structure of the mesh. Just lots of polygons are often slowing down the processing. So, we end up doing it manually anyway.
I hope you can see something positive in struggling. It always indicates that you are growing.
How often have you had that feeling in areas you take now for granted? Keep that in mind.
In, Through, and Out.
It is a cycle. We get so used to what we know, but if we look back at how much it has cost us to get there, the easier it is to endure those times we experience right now, as we can imagine the positive outcome.
Besides, please share your questions in the Q&A forum so things speed up and you can focus more on creativity.
The core idea is a Spline (Path) with another Spline (Profile). Then a Sweep is used.
The Profile Spline would extend the shape as it runs with its middle along the Path, so I used the Transform Element Capsule to get the axis to the "outer" point. Half of the width of the profile. In this way, the Path is also the final size. One of my targets here was to define the size without guessing.
With an Extrude, the Path creates the Fill of the door. I used a Bevel here, so it doesn't show up on the side (nearly no offset)
The XPresso handles the "half profile/axis" process and the User Data Mixer. Most of the parts (Formula) are done to allow the profile to shrink when the door is much smaller than the frame. This is more for comfort than needed.