RenderBlur

Hi Eric, Excellent job! You're very good at clearly demonstrating and describing the tool at hand, hope you do more vids. -Jim

32 bit Windows still only allocates max of 2 Gb per application instance. There is one method around this using the /3Gb switch in the boot.ini, here is Microsoft's article on it, or you can Google for more: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/pae/paemem.mspx -Jim

Hi, The video was clear, the size was good, and the zoom-in on the menu selections was effective, also the playback was smooth for me. The audio is clear throughout and even though I don't speak dutch I was able to follow along very well! I can make two suggestions, but these are very minor. First thing, the noise in the background was consistent and the tutorial's audio would no doubt be even better without it, I'm guessing it was a fish tank? Second, you might consider breaking it into two parts. Overall, a nice demonstration of per-pixel painting, thanks for sharing! -Jim

+1

My 2 cents, personally I wouldn't worry about the Tutorials being off, I think correcting these terms in the program itself is much more important. The thing is, Tutorials will never be universal for every version so instead they should be labelled and identified with the software version they were done on. Look at Dan Ablan's many CG tutorials, each is clearly identified with a version (Modelling in Lightwave 8.5, Rendering in LW 9.6, Modo 301 Signature Course, Modo 401 Course, etc...) -Jim

One minor quibble I found, once you navigate to any page like Tutorials just as an example, there seems to be no way to get back to the start page, the one with the News item in the bottom left. Just a suggestion but usually on websites without a specific Home link they handle this by making the main Logo clickable and that returns you to the main page. -Jim

I love it! Easy to navigate and each page fits into the new theme perfectly. The way the Gallery is presented is beautiful. -Jim

Hi, I just watched the new set of video tutorials from Javis about the new surface tools in 3.2 (and BTW thanks Javis, you're tutorials are always great!). It seemed to me that the Absolute tool could exist as a checkbox option for the Extrude tool. And also the Gum tool could be a checkbox option for the Rapid or Draw tool. I think in the videos the Absolute tool is described in that way, as being just like the Extrude tool but with one difference. Consolidating these as options on existing tools might not just clear up the number of tools but also make the purpose of some of these much easier to understand. Just wanted to put this out there as food for thought. -Jim

Just wanted to say I am totally in support of this effort, I think it's very much needed, and I'm happy to see that Andrew is putting his support behind it. This is such a big topic and just reading through this thread we're already seeing discussions falling into different categories. There's UI aesthetic choices and customization, there's the workflow of 3DCoat itself (rooms vs. other layouts), and there's consolidation/organization of tools. On the topic of the new UI fixing the current bugs, I can rattle a few off the top of my head: 1. Progress bars should be used in more places. Example: import a Logo image in Voxels, make it quite large, then hit Enter. It now looks like 3DCoat has hung, it's non-responsive and there's no indication it's doing anything (of course we know it's working to create the voxel object). 2. tooltips like in the Material window are not just slightly inaccurate, some suggest you take an action that is completely wrong 3. there's tools thare are presented as multiple separate menu options instead of one popup window with options (like the Quandrangulate context menu) There's many more examples. Might be good to create a UI bug list to keep track. -Jim

Hey Javis, I'm signed up and looking forward to it. I don't want to steer the webinar, but want to offer this thought. As a newbie one thing I'm hoping to learn is how to get the work from 3DC to other apps (in my case, Lightwave). For example, say I'm done with voxel modelling, and I've completed the retopology, then as I understand it I create a UV map for my topology right in the Retopo mode, then I unwrap the UVMap. At this point I go to save as a LWO model and am presented with the Save dialog with options that confused me, like the mid-poly/hi-poly options (didn't my retopology define the polygon count?). Another example, the current UVMap tutorial (the one with the penguin) is great but it doesn't show how to finish, that is saving the UVMap, painting on it, and then final export to see it in another program. Or a workflow that goes full circle, that is, import a LWO, create the UVMap, paint on it, then save it and load it in another 3DApp. I have a feeling these are easy things but I don't seem to find where they are covered. So any help would be great. Again, just some food for thought, looking forward to the webinar! -Jim

Hi, Wes straightened it out and I was able to download the videos yesterday with no problems. I've started watching the videos and they're excellent. -Jim

Same here. I replied to Wes again but haven't heard back yet.

Same here, ordered yesterday but this morning hit that "Bandwidth Limit Exceeded" error. I replied back to Kurv's email about it so maybe Monday it will be sorted out. -Jim

I'm a newbie myself but I'll see if I can help here. I'd say there are at least two major reasons for using Retopology vs. exporting a voxel directly as an OBJ: 1. to lower the number of polygons of an object (objects with high polycount can drastically slow down your use of them in other programs and can lengthen rendering times) 2. to control the polygon flow so you can make an object suitable for animation You said it seems like alot of hard work, but compare it to modeling a low-poly object from scratch while trying to establish good polyflow at the same time. Sure you can do that. But if you need to rig and deform the object for animation, you'll find it less than optimal. Animated objects that deform greatly benefit from a good polygon flow that follows along where they bend and stretch. Even if you don't animate an object, reTopologize is still greatly beneficial to reduce the number of polygons of any object. See 1 & 2 above. Well, the class was also supposed to cover retopology wasn't it? But again, see 1 & 2 above. ->And I'm still not certain what the difference between functions Sculpt, Voxles and Retopo are.... In general, voxel modelling allows you to model in a mode where you don't have to worry about stretched polygons, or polygons at all. It's a great starting place for modelling. Sculpt, I haven't used it so I may be on the wrong path here, but it's where you can paint displacements on a polygon model and the displacements alter the polygons. Retopologize - allows you to control how to lay down polygons over an object, whether it's an existing object with polygons that you want to redo, or a voxel object that needs polygons. Hope that helps! -Jim