hi, I've moved the answer about the output path to this thread Cheers, Manuel

hello, I will consider this thread as solved without new information from you :) Cheers, Manuel

Hi Riccardo, Thank you for the detailed answer. With the many options available, I chose one that fits best with our installer. Again, thanks for the help! Maxime

Thank you @m_adam it's really helpful! I was going to a wrong direction. I chose to do a project that has every new aspect to explore :)) I will for sure disturb you in future with my questions. I appreciate your suggestions. Parvin

@a_block Hi Andreas, Thanks for your help and you are never too late! That actually makes more sense. Unfortunately I can't seem to replicate the issue again on my machine, as it seems that it's been working for all my updates. I will have a look on one of my team machines when released and see if that could be the problem. Thank you again!

@fwilleke80 thanks for bumping it, I will bump this topic when the issue will be resolved. For the time being, my workaround provided previously still work. Cheers, Maxime.

The mode specifies how data can be read from the Morph Tag. By default, they are presented in a compact way (aka only modified points are stored for some internal optimization). But if you SetMode with c4d.CAMORPH_MODE_FLAGS_ALL | c4d.CAMORPH_MODE_FLAGS_EXPAND then all the points are then readable from outside of the morph Tag. I adapted the Python documentation to match the C++ documentation so it will be available in the next documentation update. But I would say the C++ documentation for SetMode is pretty self-explanatory, what is the part you don't understand? Cheers, Maxime.

@m_adam Wow, this is truly great. What a fantastically written response, I really appreciate it! Learning a bunch from this example, way more than I asked for. Thanks again Jenny P.S. if only the py4d documentation had examples like this, we would all be better programmers

Ah I think you're right - I take the object right from the document without a clone or anything. Thank you!

Hey @darrellp as you figured out, it was not on the correct category. But in any case don't worry, maybe I was too harsh and unprecise, I'm sorry about that but in the end, as I said, you are new here, so don't worry if you break the posting rules the first times :)

Hi zhhm156, so for coming late here, but it took more than expected. After getting in contact with the team in charge of the development and making some further researches, it appears that the VerifyServerOnClient function is indeed deprecated. I'll get back on this discussion in the future to notify about potential workaround to achieve a similar functionality. Best, Riccardo