zerebrush

OK, got to confess that I am no tech head, but after reading most of this thread here - what do you really want? Speed while working? Workable poly counts that are numbered in millions of polygons - the more the better? A stable program that handles all the above and more? If you can agree to that - get ZBrush . 32bit, no Cuda - no worries. And, just to make this clear - no fan boy here, got both (ZBrush/3DCoat) so I am not biased - although I find that there is a lot that speaks for "32bit, no Cuda ..." . i7-2600K @ 3,40 GHz, 16 GB RAM, W7/64bit, GTX580

Nu, sicher, man "muss" das nicht in die LC Gruppe schieben, man möchte das . Man möchte das, weil das move tool aus reiner Gewohnheit in der ersten Modellierphase gebraucht wird und das ständige Blättern/scrollen irgendwie total im Wege ist. Wenn es "derzeit" nicht möglich ist, Befehle innerhalb der Gruppen zu verschieben, wann - bitte - ist es dann möglich? Zur Tastenbelegung: es erschließt sich mir nicht völlig, warum hier lediglich eine "Multitaste" ( "drückt bitte zwei mal STRG A" oder so ähnlich) möglich ist. Ein ersatzloses Überschreiben des Urzustandes sollte doch im Rahmen des Möglichen sein? Schließlich und endlich gibt es ja für Jeden sicherlich Tastenkürzel die nie gebraucht werden. Ein solches Tastenkürzel mit für den jeweiligen User sinnvolleren Kombinationen überschreiben zu können - warum nicht? Weiterhin fröhliches Schaffen ...

Hallo, nur ganz kurz: aus unerfindlichen Gründen befindet sich das "move tool" in der "Adjust" Gruppe der Werkzeuge, nicht in der modeling Gruppe (LC), in welcher ich alle anderen Modellierwerkzeuge finde. Ok, kann man (und wenn ja, dann - bitte - wie) das move tool zum Inhalt der LC-Gruppe machen? Habe es mit diversen short cuts für das move tool versucht - war alles schon belegt . Ist ganz einfach so, dass ich gerne mit LC arbeite (dort mit der "GeneralBrush") und speziell am Anfang eines Modelles zwischen move und der GeneralBrush wechsele. Danke schon mal...

Hi, last week I downloaded the ZBrush/3DCoat applink (August 2012). After installing yesterday I could bring an object from ZBrush to 3DCoat, but not back to ZBrush again. I changed the install folder that the applink still uses, and pointed to the right path (more like installing into a new folder outside of the ZBrush path, and then copy&paste to the right place, would be nice to finallyget this fixed). Inside ZBrush I get every message and menu that should be there. Inside 3DCoat I can work without any limitations. When I try to go back to ZBrush (taking the object with me) --- nothing useful happens. If I ALT/TAB back into ZBrush, there still sits the object in all its (unaltered) glory. So - what I miss (besides the initial function of applink) is a remark for what version of ZBrush the actual version of applink really is. Something like "... works only for ZBrush version XYZ" would be more then welcome. The state of applink for ZBrush 4R4 is, sorry to say, absolutely useless. I don't know if the applink developement is more of a volounteer business, but it really would be nice if somebody could either do some work on it - or simply call it done. Thanx for reading ...

I am using Vue from version 4, aeons back , and found it to be the most intuitive renderer/terrain editor that you can get. With the versions, prices went up (not meaning that some versions would have rectified that), so I went and did the same: got 9Complete. Had the chance to see Complete and XStream (Infinite) side by side. Seeing Complete struggle rendering on the same scene as XStream (this one running like a charm, obviously) - OK, Complete is "cheap" but you have to take in account that you will miss a lot of functionality by using it. No multipass rendering, no GPU usage for AA plus some other features that should have place within an application that is entitled "Complete". Turned to 6 Infinite again. No nagging - just reporting to maybe help others to avoid the same trap.

Thank you, will try both.

Certainly (sorry): as you see, you see nothing. Placed the cursor over the model to indicate: it is there, but it just won't show other then in wireframe mode.

Hi, found nothing performing a search for this, so: importing an obj from Silo only gives me a greyed out area where the model is overlapping the grid. Switching to wireframe view "solves" this. Good for sculpting - bad for painting. Nvidia FeForce 9600GT, this happens in both modes, GL and DX. Checked out the normals for the model - all in order. ??? Thank you.

... same here: more then enough room for version 3.0. With the first quarter of 2009 gone for good - any news on the release, please? Not that I would be bored or afraid of the ongoing changes of our currencies, just curious!

Hi, good news for anybody on a budget: Microsoft purchased Truespace (Caligari). Now, where's the "good" news about that, some might ask. Well, not being overly fond of Crimosoft myself - Truespace is free to get for everybody! Not stopping at that, if you visit the Caligari site, you can also go and grab every video tutorial - old and new - for free, too. Over one DVD worth of zipped tutorials. Have fun....

Well, think it needs a slightly different approach. It really is a mix of how things are physically, and the way you would paint (canvas, pencils/bushes, brain ) a human skin. A lot of different facts determin how your skin will look. You might want to consider (just a few examples) - the thickness of the meat under the skin >> with bones tightly under your skin you will have some blue in your base color - the looseness of your skin - folds not only have highlights/shadows, but a very different "hue" then the unwrinkled parts - skin that is stretched over bones - again a different hue. Then you will might want to add unregularities like pores, your hair stubbles andwhatnot. What helps - have a look at some paintings, portraits and the like - really learn from the "old masters". Knowing a bit of the way how the muscles under the skin are oriented will help as much as the knowledge of general anathomic things (bones). You might spend some time without the machine - good luck!

Hi, most certainly this post should be moved. Sorry, but I could not find another place to post my question, dealing not with any possible "bugs" within 3DCoat, but with the lack of some basic knowledge itself. Because I mostly like to know what I am doing/using, I looked up "Voxel" within the Wikipedia, and got this here: A voxel represents the sub-volume box with constant scalar/vector value inside which is equal to scalar/vector value of the corresponding grid/pixel of the original discrete representation of the volumetric data. The boundaries of a voxel are exactly in the middle between neighboring grids. Voxel data sets have a limited resolution, as precise data is only available at the center of each cell. Under the assumption that the voxel data is sampling a suitably band-limited signal, accurate reconstructions of data points in between the sampled voxels can be attained by low-pass filtering the data set. Visually acceptable approximations to this low pass filter can be attained by polynomial interpolation such as tri-linear or tri-cubic interpolation. Now, I am not afraid to confess, that the above lines did near to nothing to help me understand the nature of Voxels. Maybe I can get some digestable answers here? Thank you for reading!