Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Transpose

I think people want two different things.

1. A non fussy way to pose/modify any part of an object quickly.

2. A system where the bones will stay in place ready for further manipulation.

It would be cool if this transpose had some kind of system that worked like an Auto Ik system. Really once u set up ik on a limb, it works so well. Even some kind of ready-made limbs system, because I'm sure people will be making the same joints as everyone else again and again.

I think it comes down to hiding the more advance rigging/transpose tools for those who don't desire them....

I find with real rigging in a full blown 3d editor, that it can get way to complex and fussy for what in reality is just simple joint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
Comparing one piece of software to another is common. The images are meant to display how 3dcoat's volumetric sculpting is different from other sculpting applications like zbrush, hexagon, mudbox, modo, and silo. I find the image a good comparison and visual aid in demonstrating this idea. I own a zbrush license and I'm not offended by the images. I think the comparison addresses some very major issues in the work flow in traditional sculpting applications. To me it's not killing another software, it's showing innovation.

If that's the case, it would be easy and fair to take a picture so you can't identify a particular software. Why the publisher of that didn't do that ? Because ZBrush is the main competitor, it is clearly the one to disavow.

You can bear that a soft you like is treated this way ? Good. I can't, and I would say eactly the same thing if Pixologic or any other company tried to sell an innovation by posting such a bad picture.

And, in the same manner, I wouldn't accept such an ugly image made with 3DC in my forum, from someone who would say at the same time : look how 3DC make bad results !

Again, it's just unfair.

Here, we have clearly : ZBrush is the Bad software ( didn't you see the picture ?? It's pitiful ! ) and 3D-Coat is the Good software.

Of course, nobody here will be shocked by this picture. We are in the 3DC forum, after all. I just hope that one day, another companie will act with 3DC the way you act now. Then, we will be able to discuss together about how you'll feel at this time.

I love 3D so much that I can't bear such a thing like that.

I loved 3DC. If 3DC only found this way to sell their product, you can bet I won't follow it anymore.

Innovation : yes, but not at any price. It's a question of ethics.

Excuse my bad english.

Alexis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Alexis,

I'm a little unclear why you would be 'angry' as well...are you also equally upset that there is free

promotion of zbrush directly below that image with 'piece of the scale(made from zbrush)'?

Seems like a pretty defensive position on something that is a reality (stretched polygons

look 'ugly' in any package).

I own both packages as well, but if one does some bit of technology different than the other

and states so, I'm not really all that upset...I just use the tool that does what I need (which

is what any 3d 'tradesman' would probably do). <shrugs> To each their own, I spose.

cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

I'm Alexis, webmaster of ZBrush.fr, the french ZBrush community.

I saw a picture made with ZBrush, a bad, ugly picture that shows voluntarily streched polygones. Besides, there a beautiful picture made with 3DC :

http://3d-coat.com/v3_voxel_sculpting.html

This is unacceptable. Even if there is no name under the picture, it clearly comes from ZBrush. What do the conceptor of 3DC would say if Pixologic displayed on their websites two pictures, one wonderful picture made with ZB, and another voluntarily ugly picture with the name "Voxels" and elements so we can clearly recognize 3D-Coat ?

At ZB.fr, we are very open to other softwares. There are regular topics about 3DC, we talk about it, we like it very much and we give informations about the software :

http://forum.zbrush.fr/index.php/topic,3668.0.html

Why ? Because we love 3D, and we don't want to talk about ZBrush only, killing other programs.

I say : Do you really have to kill a software to let live another ?

I'm very angry about that.

Alexis

I agree with complaint. I placed picture because I had no other (I have no ZB license). Left part is really ugly. So someone, please help me and make in ZB picture (not so ugly) with idea - sphere+extruded tubes that show that extrusion produces stretched polygones. It is even better to make obj and attach it. I will show it in wireframe.

I will replace picture asap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Comparing one piece of software to another is common. The images are meant to display how 3dcoat's volumetric sculpting is different from other sculpting applications like zbrush, hexagon, mudbox, modo, and silo. I find the image a good comparison and visual aid in demonstrating this idea. I own a zbrush license and I'm not offended by the images. I think the comparison addresses some very major issues in the work flow in traditional sculpting applications. To me it's not killing another software, it's showing innovation.

I don't think you guys understand and missed his point. There are somethings which are just not done. If bounders are not kept things get real ugly real quickly between competitors. Think about why you didn't see on the Softimage website crappy images of 3dsmax, And so on. Nobody does it for good reason. I think also it makes you deceptive to being sued. Being sued for misinterpretation, or something along those lines.

Bottom line being it starts wars.

Andrew, I think if you want to illustrate how 3dc does things better. U should re-inact other software's faults within 3dc and use that picture with the title "Other Software" pinned to it. It will still be obvious to all. And not step on anyone's toes.

I really don't think he meant showing a pretty picture of the faults of Zbrush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hello all,

first post here. I just bought 3DC after playing with the voxels for a day or two, it's amazing. I'm so happy to see the end of polygonal modeling finally becoming a reality.

Okay, enough with all the positivity, time to get real! ;) I've collected a couple of bugs and questions. Stuff I'm not sure about and that I don't see mentioned in this thread or elsewhere (although it's entirely possible I missed it, this thread alone being so humongous).

To put things in perspective here's my system specs: Quad 6600 3 GHz, Vista home 64bits, 4 Gigs RAM, 8800GTS 512, Wacom Intuos3, CUDA stuff installed. And running alpha43 CUDA DX 64.

- First off, it seems as if there is no pressure response at all on any of the voxel tools. The Wacom pen just acts as if the pressure sensitivity boxes are unchecked, no matter how I toggle them.

- When I drag RMB, sometimes the radius will change size, sometimes the depth. I cannot really figure out when it switches, it seems random.

- some tools react very differently when CUDA is on: 'carve' destroys the object, tearing blocky holes where voxeldata looks absent, 'extrude' becomes twice as wide and smoothed out, sometimes falloff is absent, sometimes the tearing-up effect is only there when there is some amount of falloff on the brush.

For the moment my biggest question is about the Wacom though, is there anybody else who cannot get pressure sensitive response from the brushes? Maybe my other problems are all related to this one? Driver for the wacom is 6.05-7, by the way.

Jasper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
Alexis,

I'm a little unclear why you would be 'angry' as well...are you also equally upset that there is free

promotion of zbrush directly below that image with 'piece of the scale(made from zbrush)'?

Seems like a pretty defensive position on something that is a reality (stretched polygons

look 'ugly' in any package).

I own both packages as well, but if one does some bit of technology different than the other

and states so, I'm not really all that upset...I just use the tool that does what I need (which

is what any 3d 'tradesman' would probably do). <shrugs> To each their own, I spose.

cheers.

Monkey, are you joking ?

You really think that this piece of the scale is a good promotion for ZBrush ? It has only a few polygons !

What is the message ? With the little soft ZB, you can make this low-poly model to use with our great software.

Would you think it would be a good promotion of 3DC if I show this little lowpoly model in a ZB forum with the message : you can do that with 3DC. Wow.

You want to be fair ? Then show a great model made with ZBrush, along with a great model made with 3DC.

Not a scale along with a complete fish !

Alexis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I made a picture who is more clean and that can represent stretched polygon in a better way.

But the first picture is not far from the truth, there are some area of the mesh that become as ugly if you don't have a specific topology like it is pointed out (the ears for example who is the place who drive me crazy the most about this constraint).

Here is the picture, but I don't think you can't recognize Zbrush I don't know if it is offensive too.

post-783-1229535866_thumb.jpg

At this stage you can't go further and extrude branch from this without having something incredibly horrible.

But Alexis I still have to disagree with your point of view, you totally miss the point.

The goal was to show Stretched polygon, and like I said it is not something that doesn't arrive in Zbrush. Try to sculpt an ear on a full head from a sphere, even if it is possible you get stretched polygons and the worst is that these polygone drive your sculpting that's the most annoying part, having to fight with the topology

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Oh, I came here to say that within, 43beta DX 64bit If I press undo twice the object disappears forever.

32bit version crash while loading, and the 64bit GL version's text is garbled, the letters look like blocks.

Voxels has come along way, the speed improvements are great. From here I'm sitting the only real improvements needed now are with the interface esp. the voxels. I think the voxel brushs work better than the sculpture brushes now.

check out the flex tool for MODO

http://www.luxology.com/whatismodo/model.aspx

The realtime update when the falloff is changed, and the end, is ace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

OK, Andrew, I'm happy to see that you didn't mean to do that and that you understand the complaint.

Thanks for the message too, PoopaScoop.

Mantis, thanks for this picture, it is in fact more neutral than the one with ZB.

Of course, Mantis, you can obtain this ugly stretch with polygons, with ANY package ! But here, ZB is showed under a very, very bad way, and there is no picture to show what it can do the best.

Anyone can show the worst of a soft, and it is right for any soft and any technique, even voxel.

Strechted polygons are not a specific pb to ZB, so tell me, why this soft has to be shown as the one that is responsible for that problem ?

Alexis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
OK, Andrew, I'm happy to see that you didn't mean to do that and that you understand the complaint.

Thanks for the message too, PoopaScoop.

Mantis, thanks for this picture, it is in fact more neutral than the one with ZB.

Of course, Mantis, you can obtain this ugly stretch with polygons, with ANY package ! But here, ZB is showed under a very, very bad way, and there is no picture to show what it can do the best.

Anyone can show the worst of a soft, and it is right for any soft and any technique, even voxel.

Alexis

Maybe there is no picture to show how good Zbrush is because there is no need to prove it?

Lord of the Rings (Trolls, Mumakil...), Pirate of the caribbean (Davy Jones) and much more, who doubt of the power of Zbrush?

Plus there are no good picture of Mudbox in Zbrush forum and the inverse is right too ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Alexis,

(oh, you've purposely misrepresented my nickname, I'm very angry) :P

I agree that the image could have been done with less indication that it's

zbrush (but mainly zbrush users would know this right?...are you

afraid they will have a look at a new toolset?...why does that

threaten you?). But again, you seem to be overly defensive about

an image that is merely meant to point out a difference in technology.

Take a breath, it will be okay. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Great.

And the good point with this discussion and where I join Alexis, is that you should avoid to quote Zbrush as an example (like Alexis said with the scale fish example).

That would be sad to see you sue for these issues. (Ouhhh poetry)

Market is not a fair place, so that's best to be as white as possible :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As a ZB and 3DC userI wasn't offended by the original image showing stretched polygons in ZB vs. voxels in 3DC, but I do agree that the new images illustrate the differences better.

If only all developers could be as polite and honest as Andrew...ah what a dream!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I seem to have an issue with alpha 43 build in terms of textures when importing objects. No mater what size of texture map I choose it seems like the texture is locked at working in 512x512 or even lower. When I go to export the texture, it shows as the size I asked for in the import dialog, but even if the image is 4k it still looks like it was painted in a much lower resolution.

Any suggestions?

This is the same in the 64 bit versions of OpenGL and DS...

If I go into the 2.x build it's still working as expected and is fine...

Update:

Tried the 44 simple alpha version and this version does not have the issue- textures are looking like the respective resolutions I've chosen. Is this a Cuda thing issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that cuda is nearly finished.

Rigging is the only thing missing.

http://www.kunzhou.net/publications/MeshPuppetry.wmv

Andrew can you add any features like in this video?

I know you love it :)

But back to reality - this feature can't be add before release - too time consuming. Of all time consuming tasks I will choose quadrangulation because it will open straight way to painting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Now you should enter voxel sculpting mode before opening. In this case all will open fine.

It is a bug that mesh will not open correctly if you are not in VS mode and it will be fixed in next build.

Thanks Andrew! that worked.

Would it be too difficult to add a perspective amount slider? Another feature I thought would be useful is being able to snap to front,side,top,etc while navigating. using alt+shift maybe?

The voxel tree is really nice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to have an issue with alpha 43 build in terms of textures when importing objects. No mater what size of texture map I choose it seems like the texture is locked at working in 512x512 or even lower. When I go to export the texture, it shows as the size I asked for in the import dialog, but even if the image is 4k it still looks like it was painted in a much lower resolution.

Any suggestions?

This is the same in the 64 bit versions of OpenGL and DS...

If I go into the 2.x build it's still working as expected and is fine...

Update:

Tried the 44 simple alpha version and this version does not have the issue- textures are looking like the respective resolutions I've chosen. Is this a Cuda thing issue?

ALPHA43 was really raw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Andrew! that worked.

Would it be too difficult to add a perspective amount slider? Another feature I thought would be useful is being able to snap to front,side,top,etc while navigating. using alt+shift maybe?

The voxel tree is really nice!

All this is really not hard, but slightly not by the way. I have written it to my wall sticker :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
But back to reality - this feature can't be add before release - too time consuming. Of all time consuming tasks I will choose quadrangulation because it will open straight way to painting.

Talking about painting, do you plan to do something like the PTex? It is really elegant and allow to have really huge resolution texture.

This in conjunction with you Baking Texture tool could be really powerful, that's like a polypainting but much more powerful, and Mesh resolution independant.

And like that you will be prepare when PTex will be massively used after they did it with Bilbo The Hobbit. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...