Considering buying 3D-coat. A few questions please

[panupat]

- Does anyone model in 3D-Coat? Can you share your experience compare to other 3D apps you have experience, please? I plan to use 3D-Coat for my texture painting but at the same time I really want to move away from modeling in Maya.

- Is the license transferable between Steam and the standalone?

- Can I use the same license on 2 PC, at work and at home? They won't be used at the same time.

[Carlosan]

Can I use the same license on 2 PC, at work and at home? They won't be used at the same time.

yes, if you use at same time it will warn you that you have two iterations open with your license and that you need to close one of them down to use it.

[kevjon]

- Does anyone model in 3D-Coat? Can you share your experience compare to other 3D apps you have experience, please? I plan to use 3D-Coat for my texture painting but at the same time I really want to move away from modeling in Maya.

 

You can't do really do much polygon/sub division modelling in 3DC. You can model with voxels (with extensive toolset) and then use the retopology tools to create a polyon model that would be suitable to apply sub'd and render in maya, blender, modo etc.

 

Is that what you mean by your question, its a little unclear ?

Edited June 5, 2015 by kevjon

[Michaelgdrs]

Buy it, it just worth it by far

[panupat]

@Kevjon, thank you and sorry for being vague. I was thinking in terms of hard surface modeling. Organic seems to be an area 3D-coat can handle very well looking at how voxel sculpting works so I have no doubt in that regard

[Psmith]

Panupat:

 

It's a good and interesting question.  There seems to be a forming trend to model everything a little differently than traditionally has been the case.  In former years and decades almost all modeling was done using "solid" and polygon tool sets - a sometimes precise and always time consuming process.  Many times, even after modeling objects very carefully, one would have to "retopologize" an underlying "base" mesh to make it ideal for different cases and uses.

 

Recently, with the advent of extremely powerful and flexible voxel and dynamic subdivision modeling methods (I plug 3D-Coat, here) - the emerging trend is leaning toward creating both organic and hard surface models using these tools - since retopology seems always to be a necessity in most cases, anyway - regardless of the tools and methods used to produce a base mesh.

 

A hard surface base mesh can be quickly and easily made using voxels and/or dynamic subdivision for an incredible number of objects of varying complexity.  The process is visual and intuitive - relieving the modeler of the nagging task of paying attention to an underlying polygon mesh.  You just make stuff.  And then you worry about the polygonal topology at a later stage.  This allows quick construction of many versions of an object - all from a visual perspective - as an artist would usually prefer to do things.

 

I would have to say further - that 3D-Coat contains the world's most powerful retopology tools - providing a wide variety of methods and techniques for every user's taste and needs.  In the case of creating organic models - (focused on economic and practical topology for use in animation) - I will be bold and say that 3D-Coat's Automatic Topology tools (AUTOPO) can produce very practical polygonal meshes in a timely fashion.  

 

There will always be "polygonal purists" who insist on absolutely perfect topology for every animated mesh.  This, I say, is becoming more and more unnecessary for many animation cases.  There have been some extremely powerful and easy "bone binding" algorithms which have been designed with the express purpose of being forgiving to less than perfectly topologized models.  For practical animation purposes - where time is of the essence (and, correspondingly, cost is of the essence) - using an automatic retopology method as found in 3D-Coat, along with idealized bone binding methods becomes a very desirable option.

 

Move forward and be bold - experiment with making some objects - both hard surface and organic in nature, using 3D-Coat's tools.  Forget about the purists.  Focus on getting things done and usable for whatever application you need.

 

 

Greg Smith

[Frenchy Pilou]

I would say that 3D Coat has a traditional Interface against his rival Zbrush!

[Javis]

Panupat:

 

It's a good and interesting question.  There seems to be a forming trend to model everything a little differently than traditionally has been the case.  In former years and decades almost all modeling was done using "solid" and polygon tool sets - a sometimes precise and always time consuming process.  Many times, even after modeling objects very carefully, one would have to "retopologize" an underlying "base" mesh to make it ideal for different cases and uses.

 

Recently, with the advent of extremely powerful and flexible voxel and dynamic subdivision modeling methods (I plug 3D-Coat, here) - the emerging trend is leaning toward creating both organic and hard surface models using these tools - since retopology seems always to be a necessity in most cases, anyway - regardless of the tools and methods used to produce a base mesh.

 

A hard surface base mesh can be quickly and easily made using voxels and/or dynamic subdivision for an incredible number of objects of varying complexity.  The process is visual and intuitive - relieving the modeler of the nagging task of paying attention to an underlying polygon mesh.  You just make stuff.  And then you worry about the polygonal topology at a later stage.  This allows quick construction of many versions of an object - all from a visual perspective - as an artist would usually prefer to do things.

 

I would have to say further - that 3D-Coat contains the world's most powerful retopology tools - providing a wide variety of methods and techniques for every user's taste and needs.  In the case of creating organic models - (focused on economic and practical topology for use in animation) - I will be bold and say that 3D-Coat's Automatic Topology tools (AUTOPO) can produce very practical polygonal meshes in a timely fashion.  

 

There will always be "polygonal purists" who insist on absolutely perfect topology for every animated mesh.  This, I say, is becoming more and more unnecessary for many animation cases.  There have been some extremely powerful and easy "bone binding" algorithms which have been designed with the express purpose of being forgiving to less than perfectly topologized models.  For practical animation purposes - where time is of the essence (and, correspondingly, cost is of the essence) - using an automatic retopology method as found in 3D-Coat, along with idealized bone binding methods becomes a very desirable option.

 

Move forward and be bold - experiment with making some objects - both hard surface and organic in nature, using 3D-Coat's tools.  Forget about the purists.  Focus on getting things done and usable for whatever application you need.

 

 

Greg Smith

 

 

Just quoting for agreement. Especially your last sentence.

[panupat]

Thank you for your insight Psmith.

 

I found this little tutorial on Youtube. Very interesting indeed. Didn't expect Voxel sculpt to be able to create such straight lines and sharp angles (maybe a Zbrush impression). The workflow looks very similar to boolean which is very easy to understand as well. Just brilliant.

[AbnRanger]

Thank you for your insight Psmith.

 

I found this little tutorial on Youtube. Very interesting indeed. Didn't expect Voxel sculpt to be able to create such straight lines and sharp angles (maybe a Zbrush impression). The workflow looks very similar to boolean which is very easy to understand as well. Just brilliant.

You can see some really impressive Hard_Surface work exclusively in 3D Coat done by some impressive artists like:

 

Fuad-

http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?app=gallery&album=40

 

Cleitus-

http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?app=gallery&album=47

 

Garagarape-

http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?app=gallery&album=71