Feedback: V-Ray Camera as a separate object

[shaio]

Hey everyone,

We're exploring the option to make the V-Ray Physical camera a separate object, instead of being a tag as it currently is. There are pros and cons of being a separate object and we need more input to make a final decision.
What advantages or disadvantages could possibly bring this to you and your specific workflow? Can you share your general thoughts about this?

Any feedback would be much appreciated.

Thank you!

[123456_]

I want to know if the camera calibrator tag of c4d will continue to be effective if the vray physical camera becomes a separate object, and what benefits can it bring when it becomes a separate object?

[sirio76]

I think there's nothing wrong with the current camera setup, at least for my workflow. Are there limitation coming from the C4D camera system?

[zAppledot]

I am curious about the advantages of the vray camera object. And what would the workflow look like if you already have a cinema 4d camera in the scene but want to convert it to the new vray camera object? Right now, it is easy to add the vray tag.

[akos_kiss]

First of all I appreciate the community outreach for a feature like this!

For our team the integration of the standard c4d camera with other camera related features inside c4d are really important (camera morph, stage, tiled camera, gsg camera plugin, camera calibration, easy access for xpresso & scripts etc.).

This decision would be easier to make and more rounded if we had the pros and cons for both of the solutions my concern is that if we get a v-ray camera object and c4d changes something or adds a useful feature we would need to wait for the v-ray update to make use of it.

So at this point the v-ray physical camera tag works fine. If you could elaborate on the pros and cons of a v-ray camera tag it would be great and we could give better feedback

[arcadiano]

First of all I appreciate the community outreach for a feature like this!

For our team the integration of the standard c4d camera with other camera related features inside c4d are really important (camera morph, stage, tiled camera, gsg camera plugin, camera calibration, easy access for xpresso & scripts etc.).

This decision would be easier to make and more rounded if we had the pros and cons for both of the solutions my concern is that if we get a v-ray camera object and c4d changes something or adds a useful feature we would need to wait for the v-ray update to make use of it.

So at this point the v-ray physical camera tag works fine. If you could elaborate on the pros and cons of a v-ray camera tag it would be great and we could give better feedback

I absolutely agree with akos_kiss' remark.

Personally I prefer using it as a tag, as it is right now. For example if I want to match a camera properties' (focal length, aperture etc) with an other camera I can simply drag the camera tag over the new one and that's it. I don't know if this would be so simple with a dedicated Vray camera object.

[shaio]

Thanks for your input, guys.

To quickly update you on the topic, we've diceded to stick with the tag for now. I'll keep you updated if we change direction and try to explore the option again. Also, I'm most probably going to add this to the Ideas Portal for voting as well, so if you feel the need leave your input there too.