jedwards

Member
  • Content count

    180
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About jedwards

  • Rank
    Novice

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. Hey Leigh, nice work on this so far! In regard to your performance issues I'd be curious to see how you break down your sculpt into manageable chunks. In my limited liveclay testing I've tended to stick with smaller sculpt layers, no different than how I would with pure voxels. This always worked best for me for performance prior to live clay so I stuck with it. I'm pretty obsessive with building up large shapes and then breaking off pieces for detailing - probably too much in fact, but it does seem to reduce my problems with performance and stability and gives cleaner bakes in the end, which is all that matters I guess. I can see where you've done that in your last image as well as areas where I would have broken things down even further. I tend to break stuff apart even at clothing seams and overlapping materials as I go. Sometimes I think it's overkill but it does seem to help. Ultimately I think zbrush is still going to give the best performance for managing large, dense object sets. Thats just one of the huge advantages zb will continue to have over the hardware dependent sculpting programs. Llooking forward to seeing the final! James
  2. After using dynamesh on a few things I still prefer voxels as a blockout tool. The flow is still faster in 3dcoat since I'm never really increasing the resolution until I'm happy with silhouette. I found I was babysitting my mesh resolution far too much with dynamesh, whereas in 3dc I never think about it. Zbrush continues to have the more refined toolset in several areass so I'll probably not really change my workflow between these apps with R2. One thing I much prefer with dynamesh over voxels is how the transpose tool can be used to duplicate meshes on the fly, and depending on the mode (add or subtract) you get a boolean without breaking your flow. This applies to mesh inserts as well. The workflow in 3dcoat could be streamlined in this regard.
  3. You have no business bringing your grudges from other forums to this one. Annoying to this community and unprofessional. keep it over there or find something more constructive to do entirely. Also, as mentioned, not the best of first posts to make an impression with.
  4. Just popped in to say thanks for the picmat eyeball trick! I don't make my way into the WIP forums nearly as often as I should so I was backtracking through your posts when I stumbled on it. Also made me realize I don't play with materials nearly enough. Cheers!
  5. I think the detail examples you are seeing are misleading. The app installs with prefab meshes, so you are limited to customizing them from there. Try to sculpt eyelids and such on that head and you will hit a resolution wall quickly. For this reason I'd say it's more of a toy for non-sculptors than anything, even for doing block outs away from a computer. Voxels or even dynamic tessellation would make this app much more useful. Even in 3dcoat I don't often subdivide a volume until I'm done playing around with the shape. I'd love to have a stripped down version of 3dcoat on ipad for blocking stuff out. I'd actually use that and pay money for it.
  6. I've been curious about this program for awhile... more since I started seeing how crisp a lot of the derived meshes are from booleans in version 3. The examples seem to show a stronger capability for generating fast, complex hard surface meshes that I can bring into a 3d app and better incorporate into my polygon modeling than say taking the voxel approach and using the auto retopo functionality - which isn't well suited to that kind of work. Anyway... the new marketing scheme has me interested, so I signed up. 100 bux for the full program isn't so bad... but saving 40 - 60 bux puts another tank of gas in my gas guzzler so I can be patient for a week I suppose. =]
  7. Ok thanks for clarifying, I see where you are coming from now. I actually agree with your workflow as I prefer zbrush for detail sculpting myself and am not a big fan of surface mode in 3dcoat. I've been a zbrush user for far longer than I have been a 3dc user so I've grown to appreciate the UI for what it offers over the years. I suppose my request is coming from a place where I'm balancing 3dcoat's current capabilities right now, with what I hope they may be someday. I do all my detail sculpting in zbrush as well because the toolset and performance are still much better suited to that kind of work.
  8. Your comment doesn't make any sense. Please clarify. It sounds to me like you prefer to just model everything first. If so, why bother with 3dcoat? Technically you can't retopologize without having sculpted first. That's called modeling. Are we discussing the same thing or is this a language issue? And to correct you, retopology is NOT just for low quality game figures only, sorry.
  9. Just to clarify my last comment I am not advocating for a full blown polygon modeler to replace dedicated apps. My interest lies only in improving the sculpt first, retopologize later approach that 3dcoat has allowed me, more than any other app to pursue. There are still some deficiencies in this workflow within 3dcoat for me. So my only interest is to see that workflow improve. Adding more polygon editing functionality to primitives and the retopology room would be good for this. I have no wish for 3dc to become a full blown polygon editing tool - especially when things like AO baking, brush quality, stability, and a 64 bit mac version are still in need of attention. Andrew has proven his genius and speed at implementing features often enough that whatever he chooses to do I'm sure will get done. I just think making 3dc a full blown modeler would be a bit too much of a distraction from perfecting what is already there first.
  10. More polytgon tools would be nice. I've asked for this before. Between the retopo and primitive tools 3dcoat is already halfway there. Many times I've wanted finer control over a primitive before voxelizing it, or being able to add things like cylinders and spheres to a retopo layer rather than build those things by hand.
  11. I don't really see this as a valid replacement for zspheres or curves in 3dcoat. It's nice if you don't have either of those apps but not enough advantages to justify doing this process outside of those apps if you do have them. This bmesh stuff would be better licensed to developers of 3d apps to be used as part of the modeling process. One reason why I still prefer using curves over zspheres is that I am ultimately still sculpting in voxels, without topology constraints after I convert the curves. The only thing lacking in 3dcoat's approach is that you can't continue to use the curves to deform the voxel mesh that is derived from them. If andrew could find a way to reuse those curves as a deformation skeleton it would close that gap. Better yet, being able to use them further on a polygon mesh, after you've textured it and want to pose it. Ultimately not that big a deal for me - more of a "would be nice" type of thing. Animation though? Pointless. That requires a completely separate toolset, which I just don't care to see in my sculpting apps. Even in zbrush that's a largely unused part of the new tools for me. If I'm going to animate something I'm going to do it right, with a proper toolset. I'll still retopologize my stuff by hand because none of those bmesh results would give me what I want for a final animation ready mesh. Maybe if you're doing really simple, cartoony stuff, but not the stuff I'm working on. Even the claims to cleaner derived meshes from the bmesh spheres is largely irrelevant. Messy geometry when sculpting in zbrush just isn't a big deal anymore. There are more than enough tools in zb now to compensate for and allow you to ignore a lot of topology issues that cropped up in past versions. For 3dcoat it's a non-issue because, well... voxels. I think my favorite thing in that video was the cut/paste of bmesh spheres to create new shapes from.
  12. Costs a few bucks more to have a second OS install, but not much. Andrew's explanation for this is that he has to justify the cost of hiring a programmer to handle the OSX ports, since he develops on windows. I'm ok with that if it means he gets to focus 100% on developing features instead of OS ports, and it runs great on both platforms for me. I believe it is an extra $40 to get a win+mac license. It's basically 2 separate licenses. http://www.3d-coat.com/buy-now/?OS=MacOS&code=
  13. Oh, I'm not comparing it. I agree, on a purely technical level auto retopology generates a better mesh, and I have no problem with using it after I've finished sculpting completely, as a quick start to doing my final mesh for texturing and animation. What I am saying is that for me it simply isn't necessary to use it during sculpting. Zbrush has so many tools available that allow me to work without being anal about base topology, so I simply don't. When remesh does 'good enough', that's all I care about. I just choose to go the path of least resistance. I don't need a technically perfect mesh for sculpting in zbrush anymore. It's less hassle for me to just export an obj that retains all my voxel details than to retopo it in 3dc. I'm just saving that stage for the end, where I have to be more technical for animation and texturing reasons. Really all I've said is that I feel zbrush has taken steps to be less dependent on topology up front - which is a big reason why I was an early adopter of voxel sculpting. Will I stop using voxels altogether because of this? Nope. I fully expect the tools to continue to evolve at a rapid pace and probably leap frog zbrush again in other areas. Looking forward to it too.
  14. Greg: Yup, just export as an obj, triangles and all. Zbrush does a fine job of rebuilding the mesh in quads with a nice even distribution. More than good enough to continue sculpting with. I found this to be faster and more reliable than doing an auto retopology pass on the voxel mesh, with the benefit of being able to use subdivision history in zbrush without losing the details I sculpted in 3dcoat. My main goal is to be able to avoid working with polygons at all until I'm done, so sculpt first and only bother with retopology at the very end when I need an animation mesh and uvs, regardless of whether I start in 3dc or zbrush.
  15. Now that the game I've been working on has been announced I feel pretty good being able to say that 3dcoat has played a pretty important role in the work I've done on it. I've used it for everything from character and prop blockouts in voxels to final pieces, UV mapping, retopology and lots of texturing from scratch, to cleaning up maps baked and painted elsewhere or making changes as needed. It has proven to be a very versatile tool in my personal kit both at home and at work. Just wanted to say thanks to Andrew for such an awesome job and for trying his best to accomodate for all of our requests - not an easy task with such a diverse and rapidly growing user base. I've been using 3dcoat pretty heavily for the last 2 years in this project. Zbrush still gets the bulk of my detail sculpting, but I'm happy to be able to make the choice between tools as I need or want to. I just wish I had more time to finish personal projects to help showcase what 3dcoat can do. Since I can't do that I can at least point to a commercial project where it is being used now. FireFall