Hi rent-crash,

Please remember that the rotation is the key, not the position.

The following approach benefits those who learn best by doing and reflects a hands-on, trial-and-error methodology often seen in creative fields like 3D modeling, animation, and game design. Since I know very little about your background, I might be dead wrong here.

My suggestion is to set up a few joints in a new file. Freely. Then again, try to match them roughly; the key is to be different for this exploration. I even suggest rotating some of them. Copy them for a backup, just in case.
Save the scene. Save iterations.

Set up a cylinder with no caps that fits closely to the joints and has enough density (not too high) in the mesh. Bind it. Name all joints similar to the Mixamo rig that you like to improve.

Then, use the Definition workflow to get a good motion transfer from the source mesh to the target mash( the one with the cylinder).

Save this. Take the definition tag of the source, rotate a few joints, and then define again. Explore how that affects the target rig.

Why do I suggest this? The typical problem I have seen over the past two decades is starting with an important (your robot) model and missing perhaps the playful and destructive exploration of meaning setup. Something that you can trash without any regret. But here is the time investment that lets you focus on more complex things.

If you save this, returning after a while and messing around is easy to refresh your memory.

Sure, that sounds like a lot of time when something bigger and better is waiting for you. But you will gain a solid command of this area faster when you explore it without consequences.

This is just a suggestion. You can toss it, but I don't mind. Perhaps it doesn't fit your learning style, so ignore it. But can 10 minutes do a lot of damage?

Enjoy

P.S.: your output is 4800x6000 pixels, which requires a lot of resolution.

A 100% scale, but a crop with a 16,3984x8,192 image in the Dome-Light based on 8*8 large squares.

The sides are concave, which is a benefit, but look at the squares of 8*8 pixels.

I think the reflection works and shows details. Even I think that 16K is way too little for this camera setup.

I hope that clears the "dull" areas of the image. Please let me know if there is anything else; I'm happy to look into it.

Cheers

You're very welcome, thought-priest.

The "Backdrop off" idea was just for your exploration, to "see" what the rendering can "see".

Yes, those images can become large, and I have some HDRI (since I have loved to shoot my own for over two decades) that are much larger, 64K+ wide.

The small ones are more for lighting purposes only. Whereby only a very few in the Asset Browser are color precise, going by the light that would be expected, most of them are sadly color correct, easily swappable [sic], and lost, so they're used for my use).

My take on your question about washed out:
Washed out can have many reasons; often, little to no knowledge while developing those HDRIs leads to their limited usability, and I'm sorry that my input to the latest selection (in the Asset browser) was ignored. Hence the lower quality. I hope we can do better in the future.
Like a sunset is just more orange, one should expect a gray card to be gray then; things like that ruin it. In my opinion, one should always set up HDRIs. I use my Spectrum-meter (Sekonic C-800) and a light meter to shoot HDRIs. I do not trust 3rd parties, nor have I seen clear information about them. Libraries are for testing, to be frank. The worst case is Radiance (.hdr), which is a fake format 4*8bit integer, not 32bit/float/channel, and has pretty much the most questionable color management from all, meaning none in all cases I have seen.) so, if you can shoot your own.

Cheers

Hi thought-priest,

Switch the Backdrop off to see what information is behind the Gold Object. As we look at the sides of the object with a nearly tangential "view," the information is taken from the nearby background. You can't see it until you completely switch off the Backdrop.

That part of the image is around 1/20th of the viewing angle; roughly 2º is used for that part, while close to being tangential. So, the background does not have so much more. Quick guess: You do not even have 15 pixels for that side from 6K HDRI! While the image in a reflection should always be at least 1.5 times higher than the result (as the image pixel and rendered pixel rarely match (share a resulting pixel, which blurs the image), effectively, that side area has ten pixels (horizontally) in terms of average quality.

All the best

Hi Gemini,

I do not know the project setup, so what do I look at?

There is an option in the
Main Menu> Modes> Viewport Solo (which affects the active object.

Besides that:
Can you place it on a layer and set the layer to Solo? What do you see then?

Is this helping?

If not, can you copy that object and paste it into a new file? What will be the result?

All the best

Thank you very much for your reply, thought-priest.

R.H. = Rotation Heading. Sorry, I thought you adjusted it, so I assumed that is known, but yes, I should write those things more clearly. Thanks for pointing this out.

One of the book's core principles is the attempt of the photographer to visualize not only the field of view but also how that field of view continues after being redirected by a reflective surface.
Since nature has no pixel resolution, we need to understand that in detail in a 3D setup.

You might find that light on metallic surfaces has no effect, but the source has. In this way, you could just go with Emission-based materials. (Exception: Caustics might be a wanted effect or casting shadow to other objects)

Alternatively, use two or three Dome Lights and mix and direct the "light sources" in those and adjust each more to your liking, whereby I would use at least one without any HDRI as a global fill (or even test light in the beginning).
Placing these lights on a separate AOV (Arbitrary Output Variable) allows one to check each in the RS Render View separately. I think that is what you were doing already)
My typical idea of the light source (while others use it differently) is to go to block lights and use purely Intensity. When the mood/balance is in the way, I like to have selected all and work then with the so far untouched Stop slider to go up or down. This helps to get back to the initial or manage the scene more easily, like on set.

Long lenses, like 600mm, are very close to an orthogonal view (I wouldn't use mine to shoot a macro, though), which I think was the target here.
Please add this camera to your scene as an exploration. It provides the parallel impression perfectly if that is wanted.
CV_2025_drs_24_CIot_01.c4d

Scale is always OK; perhaps setting the scene scale up as well helps (Attribute Manager> Mode> Scene).

You might often find the suggestion (at least I made it quite often in the past) that the best scale indicator is when the objects are insides/around three digits before and after (e.g., 123,006), which is, since years, not longer a needed, but a good guideline nonetheless.

Enjoy exploring your scene, as pulling off the right mood and expression is, at least for me, the most fun.

Cheers

Hi rent-crash,

Please focus on the part of Rokoko/Sam's video after 20:30.

Here is what is different:
The Character Definition Tag is placed in the file (from above) to the Character Rig, which indicates a setup strategy that is new to me, which is why I wrote that I need more time with it.

I needed more time to explore it, as I hadn't seen it in all these years. I always question my own knowledge to stay open-minded.

My current conclusion is, that is not a way I would even remotely suggest.
Why? Take a look at the definition found, what it has connected, and if that fits one's overall understanding of the process.

The Character Rig has several Joints rigs, not just one. Each has a specific purpose. What a Character Definition tag does, when applied to this Character object, is it finds all and connects all. Here is one problem, not the only one.

To my understanding, Sam connects the MoCap rig (Snaps to it…). This now influences the Character Object's Rig (the Retarget part of it, not anything else.) This is important to understand as this external Joint rig needs to be Defined and Solved with any incoming new MoCap, NOT the Character Object's Rig.

In short, we have then three separate rigs: Incoming and exchangeable, the rig "snapped" to the Character Rig, and the Character's Rig. I use the term "snapped' to differentiate the idea of the definition tag.

If you have any reasons to stay with the setup I saw in the file, I have no idea how to solve that; quite honestly, I can't see how that could work.

As a side note, all three must be in a T-Pose during the initial process, and any misalignment will cause problems.

All the best.

Hi rent-crash,

I hope (no promise) to get some time today to check everything with the latest releases (Rokoko/Suit/Coil/Studio and Cinema 4D). I haven't used it for a while, … working on another project. Since I like to answer with practical experience from current setups and not from memory, I handed it over to Sam:

To give you a reply more quickly, please explore this link:
https://youtu.be/dGBw_KKRfLA?feature=shared&t=512
Sam explains two workflows!

My impression of your file, you have seen this video, correct? But your character is in A pose and the Mocap is in T pose, correct?

I have to explore this more, it might take some time.

My experience over the years with Rokoko is simple, if the initial alignment is not done properly, it is much more work down the road.
These steps need to be good.

The Character Definition Tag maps between source and target, which means it is relative! Any derivation from an idea state will show up, and yes, that happens predominately with the fingers for me.

Enjoy your MoCap session!

Cheers

Thank you very much for the reply, thought-priest.

One more tip: explore other HDRI from the Asset Browser, and try to avoid the ".hdr" formats as those are typically inferior.
The "JHDRI_…" named ".exr" files will surely be preferred.

Besides that, you can set up Photoshop to easily test patterns, like stripes, to test resolutions, i.e., how much you need for the Object camera relation.

My best wishes for your project.

Hi thought -priest,

Thank you very much for the file, this was very helpful!

Here are my findings, just observations:

Remove for a test the HDRI. Then go to the RS Tag and shut off Receives Shadow. Perhaps place a little HDRI with a monochrome color R=2, G=0.5, B=1, so you can see the difference better, especially when soloing channels. Typically, a 512x256 size does this well. Float.

The HDRI has a lot of black in it, which shows in the reflections and is not well stitched. With the monochrome HDRI, you can easily compare the black areas from "infinite bounce reflections or part of the context.

The side of the object, with very few details, is relatively flat, like a typical mirror. This means that the camera's resulting (reflected) view angle of 600mm is equally small, which captures a very small part of the HDRI texture and contains very little detail. (More about this is described in the book "Light, Science and Magic", pretty much any edition, to my knowledge).

I saw that the R.H. had a high value, which normally indicates a lot of searching for the right angle. The HDRI itself has a very small resolution for this work. It could be easily 5-10 larger if you like to have readable results on the flat sides. Those mini resolutions work well for Concave surfaces, not at all for concave, while flat being in the middle, especially given the long "lens", even with the full frame as the setting.

I hope this is useful and not received as anything else.

This will be a great image, I' certain about it.

Cheers