Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

ZBrush R2


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Under dynamesh pannel there's a button named Project. This takes some time but eliminates the lose of details (smoothing) when dyna-remeshing. I just found it and loved it. Extremely useful when changing mind on hi def cases.

There isn't such an option under voxels, meaning that a ~1M dynamesh can adopt more crisp details than a ~6-10 M voxel. That's weird, isn't it?

Dynamesh method is based on a dual contouring method, if I understood correctly some informations from NicholasBishop (blender dev). Nicholas abandoned this remeshing idea going for tri based solutions. Pixo didn't so. But they managed to construct an impressing, direct tool. I love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

So if pixologic "copied" 3dcoat. it's OK for me. What isn't OK is that 3dcoat doesn't copy zb and sculptris tools behavior.

@renderdemon, why do you have this idea? I really hope we can influence the development. I mean, to give the general idea of what 3dcoat needs for not being the 3d swiss army knife or whatever some magazines call it.

U got the point....Most big ideas are based on other peoples idea..just they have more money to make it big. So Zbrush copies some features of 3DCoat?..that's fine..I would do that..If I know I can do it better..why wouldn't I?? So I don't get why 3D coat has to be new in every aspect..there is no need for that. Make the features work..that would be a good start!

I am playing around with 3D coat for weeks now..seriously..if you guys think that 3Dcoat works fine, then I can only say..for me.. 3D coat is BETA. In almost every aspect there are bugs and issues..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

This is getting old...

If nothing works for you in 3dcoat, and everything is fine and shiny in zbrush, you know where to go.

I hate to resort to such easy talk but I'm starting to wonder if there's some commercial intent behind all that negativity and comparison scheme.

Ok I am sorry if I am complaining. The reason for this is because 3D-coat costs almost the same as Zbrush!

I am working on a non commercial shortfilm www.watersoul.moviebrats.com and I wanted to give 3D-coat a shot. I don't have budget to buy and try every software that makes promises. 3D-coat makes em, Zbrush makes em..

Which one keep 'em? I have to consider getting a Zbrush license as well... Since I can't even accomplish a very simple task in 3D- Coat.

You are right...I should stop complaining. I am sure that Andrew and the other developers put a lot of work in it...but through stones at me...I just don't see the price justified.

Sorry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I am sorry if I am complaining. The reason for this is because 3D-coat costs almost the same as Zbrush!

I am working on a non commercial shortfilm www.watersoul.moviebrats.com and I wanted to give 3D-coat a shot. I don't have budget to buy and try every software that makes promises. 3D-coat makes em, Zbrush makes em..

Which one keep 'em? I have to consider getting a Zbrush license as well... Since I can't even accomplish a very simple task in 3D- Coat.

You are right...I should stop complaining. I am sure that Andrew and the other developers put a lot of work in it...but through stones at me...I just don't see the price justified.

Sorry

Personally, it sounds like you haven't spent enough time learning the ins-and-outs of 3DC, to me. And no, 3DC price <>ZB price is completely different. You can purchase 3DC for as low as $299 from some resellers, ZB is $699. That is clearly not the same price.

Further, instead of complaining, try posting constructive ideas on how/why/etc you think a tool could be improved. That is what we do here in this community, we try to help improve 3DC and not bash the developers into submission. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Personally, it sounds like you haven't spent enough time learning the ins-and-outs of 3DC, to me. And no, 3DC price <>ZB price is completely different. You can purchase 3DC for as low as $299 from some resellers, ZB is $699. That is clearly not the same price.

Further, instead of complaining, try posting constructive ideas on how/why/etc you think a tool could be improved. That is what we do here in this community, we try to help improve 3DC and not bash the developers into submission. ;)

yeah I posted many videos last days...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Like Geothefaust said, price is not the same. But that doesn't make 3dcoat less capable. What you're doing here is posting bug reports (and for that I don't blame you, they are always more than welcome) everywhere, with videos embedded. It's fine, except you're actually not showing what you do to create the bugs, most of the time we see bits of menus and such... What's the point to say it's broken if you don't explain what you do to repeat the bugs ?

Again just look at the Recent Topics Added box: vivi, vivi and... vivi ?

Fine, why don't you make a thread with all your troubles and update it ? I think it's better for everyone to avoid scattering of informations... users and developpers alike.

In the zbrush thread you're saying 3dcoat is in beta stage, you got it. It's indeed in a beta stage. Keep that in mind please.

ah..sorry about spreading my posts around..didnt think about that...

I tried to help anyway...that's why I thought I record videos, since I am not good with words.....and most of the bugs I can't reproduce..since some of them happen out of nowhere. And I think in most videos u can see enough... I also explained when it happen..not always though...

but it's fine..no need to start a drama here..I am gonna shut up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Vivi, Were you using the "Latest Beta Version" when having these problems. I mentioned before in the beta versions, things get broken or sometimes just do not work right. All beta and alpha versions are like this regardless of software. I found the bevel dialog box bug, It was working in 3.5.25C beta but was broken in 3.5.27A beta

Now, if you find a bug in 3.5.19A (Official Version) and I'm sure there are a few bugs in the offical version like all software, never found one yet that do not have a few. If you find a bug in the offical version send an e-mail to support. Andrew has a number of times, stopped what he is currently working on and fixed a problem so a person or company can get work completed on time that was under a deadline.

We do not get to see or use Zbrush's alpha or beta versions thus never seeing what gets broken or messed up because it a closed beta team.

3DCoat could also have closed beta. Andrew had long ago decided to have an open beta approach, though at times I wonder if a closed beta would be less of a headache for Andrew...

EDIT: I think a could idea would be to have a warning when loading the beta verson maybe something like this:

"Beta Version, Warning use a your own Risk" I have seen that on many beta version that I used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I think one of the main problems with the current approach is that a lot of fixes get merged together with new features. That leaves 3D Coat always in a state of flux. If there were .x releases that were considered stable, then subsequent bugfixes added to the latest stable version (which would make it even more stable), then users could have a true non-beta application. Because of the current approach, there really is no stable release. Just one where the bug reports have been reduced.

So a fix of the Strokes tool today, for example, should be applied to 3.5 offical release. Just my 2 pennies worth...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I think one of the main problems with the current approach is that a lot of fixes get merged together with new features. That leaves 3D Coat always in a state of flux. If there were .x releases that were considered stable, then subsequent bugfixes added to the latest stable version (which would make it even more stable), then users could have a true non-beta application. Because of the current approach, there really is no stable release. Just one where the bug reports have been reduced.

So a fix of the Strokes tool today, for example, should be applied to 3.5 offical release. Just my 2 pennies worth...

That is a good business practice also. It keeps your official and beta versions separated. The official version gets the fixes it needs and becomes more stable which is better for production work and the selling of your software. The betas push forward on the new features till they are stable. I have suggested this to Andrew a few times myself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?163463-ZBrush-4R2b-Announced

ZB4 R2b, he he (R2b2, R2D2 etc)

"create art first, then we'll listen" was their reply to my serious bugs report. Well, I didn't create anything serious, they listened though. They probably checked all these tons of other's reports. I hope so.

3DC isn't alone out there, this kind of apps isn't the easiest to do. You have to listen and to sometimes fight with all these artists... better avoid asking them to make art first. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

It seems like a odd move not to though really because other company's have already taken ideas from 3DC already. If things get patented then 3DC has unique features but if not then they are taken and in all the other 3D programs a few month later.

I am not sure but i am guessing if they had the money and really wanted to then other company's could patent technology's 3DC originally made then force them to remove the features. Hopefully that is not possible to do though but look at all the stuff happening with tablet and phone patents at the moment, they are all claiming they did things first and trying to stop the others from having features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yep, and Andrew stated he doesn't like patents (I don't like them either) but in term of business move, Pilgway should've patented removestretching...

Excuse me, it's not about liking or not...it's business ! And if you don't play by the rules, then u gonna be knocked out..even u were first!

I am not sure if Andrew did get patents on his technology, if not then I think it was very careless.

In this world u need to protect just about anything, otherwise it will be taken by others.

"Business"...who gives a damn about you?? They just steal it from you..even if it would mean that u'd have to live under the bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Where did this patent thing came from?

I was talking about how buggy this kind of apps can be sometimes. Even having lot of developers working.

Do you really believe that pixologic tried to copy anything from 3dcoat? Dynamesh comes from an open source project. Contours if I remember correctly. Nicholas Bishop builded something similar some months ago for blender.

It isn't a really live process, if "project" button is on, it's a bit lazy (especially over 1 M meshes) but produces excellent results. It works! Combine it with the wonderful zb brushes and be happy.

To copy the needs and demands of the artists doesn't stand as a sentence, Any developer tries to find solutions on this. Deferent approaches give all this polyphony, all this beauty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Where did this patent thing came from?

I was talking about how buggy this kind of apps can be sometimes. Even having lot of developers working.

Do you really believe that pixologic tried to copy anything from 3dcoat? Dynamesh comes from an open source project. Contours if I remember correctly. Nicholas Bishop builded something similar some months ago for blender.

It isn't a really live process, if "project" button is on, it's a bit lazy (especially over 1 M meshes) but produces excellent results. It works! Combine it with the wonderful zb brushes and be happy.

To copy the needs and demands of the artists doesn't stand as a sentence, Any developer tries to find solutions on this. Deferent approaches give all this polyphony, all this beauty.

Absolutely, "YES!" What do you think Shadowbox was all about? And Dynamesh is absolutely stealing Andrew's work done with Voxels. They said themselves that Dynamesh is using Voxels and the dynamic remeshing that has been the bread and butter of Andrew's implementation of Voxels in 3DC.

What bothers me is having people at work and even here, oftentimes, look down their noses at 3D Coat and yet worship Pixologic when they steal technology from the same (application). Something is wrong with this picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yes and no Abn.

Dynamesh doesn't steal 3dc technology at all. It's a different approach, IMO depended to an older solution. But it's well tuned and works.

Pixo tries to support artist's needs. This doesn't turn them to direct copiers.

As Raul claims (blenderartists forum) , all these algorithms are related to each other. Most of them are open source projects. A bit odd, but, on the other hand, fine tuning isn't something easy to do.

What is really odd... to see another app offering solutions to artists and run after it. Only then, Pixo realized these needs? This is odd. Ridiculously odd. Meanwhile, all these years, they developed a brushes engine, a glorious one. Let's not forget it. Now, 3dc, has to develop a similar quality engine. They have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I agree with everything that AbnRanger just said.

What will be annoying is as soon as 3DC does have the decent brush engine (and i am sure it will) it will probably be just as good as ZB for sculpting, so it will then get more notice in the 3D world and all the ZB users will probably be saying how 3DC stole everything including things like Shadowbox and some of the voxel tools.

As everyone says though that seems to be the way of 3D programs, ideas stay new for all of 5 mins before they are then everywhere else and the big company's take the credits as soon as they put them in the product range no matter who originally created the technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@ Digital777

Eh, most of zb users never tried sculptris, even for once. :D

But there is a minority that uses 3dc as well, some years now. Including all my friends there, lol

Everybody knows how strong, 3dc is on retopology. How superior voxels vs dynamesh is.

Nobody claimed that sculptris copied zb brushes. Though they have similar behavior sometimes.

Most of older sc users complained about the new zb like navigation shortcuts. Though it was a must after GoZ implementation.

What I noticed among zb central members, were lot of silly reactions after dynamesh implementation, like "good bye 3DCoat" etc. lol. Meaning that they knew how strong this app is and how rapidly is developing.

Let's have a strong brush system, even a 'copy' like of zb or sc and let people claiming whatever they like.

Read wishlists in zbforum. People keep asking for features, already existing in 3dc, some years now. (UV painting via layers, retopology, 64 bit, etc)

Read wishlists in 3dc forum. Better brushes and even a whole zb in place of sculpt room. lol ( a joke maybe, I'm a little confused after LC surf mode implementation)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yeah i had noticed that, i am guessing them purchasing sculptris was probably more to stop people from looking away from ZB and realizing there is other decent sculpting tools out there (even for free) than to obtain the technology it had.

The thing is some people seem to have known about 3DC but they think of it more like a workflow addon and just use it for a certain task like texturing or retopology yet it's much more than that. I think that is probably due to the fact that with other programs like MB and ZB you have highly tuned sculpting tools so you can get a lot of detail. Now LiveClay is in testing though it will get more notice in the 3D world and if things go well that will continue to happen.

The main thing that needs to be done now in my opinion is to continue to enhance LC but also merge it with the voxel features more (already happening in a way) and re-work the program updated GUI, resource system, presets and brush system etc. By the sound of things that is the plan and when that has been done there will probably be a lot of ZB users that know about 3DC.

The whole dynamesh thing seems like they were probably concerned that when people realized about 3DC more they might find ZB limiting so they probably knew this had to be done to stop the chance of 3DC taking them over when it gets popular. It does seems like a really good update however and probably a wise choice for ZB also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Digital777

The whole dynamesh thing seems like they were probably concerned that when people realized about 3DC more they might find ZB limiting so they probably knew this had to be done to stop the chance of 3DC taking them over when it gets popular. It does seems like a really good update however and probably a wise choice for ZB also.

Before dynamesh implementation, Sculptris GoZ released. They called for beta testing, I was among them. This was already posted a year ago at this time. http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?96408-Playing-with-polygons-topology

Seems like we have some inconsistency here, I was waiting for a completely different development. Even to stop sculptris and implement its engine as part of zbrush.

Why dynamesh then? I suppose, because of the easy boolean operations-remeshing. But, with what a lose. Dynamic tessellation (LC) can provide more crisp and detailed results. Maybe pixo did the right thing for them. Their graphical engine can handle tons of faces-vertices and they already announced an 64 bit new build.

Scenarios, we're just talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Beat, I'm not sure. Pixo loves evenly subdivided quad meshes.

Their painting system is based on microvertex technology. Their graphical engine is based on pixols. Am I right?

Do they have to change everything? The whole core system?

We're talking about UI issues, asking for more tools, better solutions, but do we really have a vision on what a core system means? What are the limits of such a system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Member

Hi there,

I had a look at ZB 4R2 videos and honestly was a bit surprised at first.

Wow! They are copying 3dCoat tools! was my first impression too.

Still, Zbrush didn't managed to copy 3dCoat friendly user touch, so...

...Tally ho! Long live to 3dCoat!

They add a new tool inspired from 3dC, well, in a way they honored Pilgway team.

Do not fear to send back the elevator to Pixo team then :) (probably doesn't make sense in english,sorry).

Go go go! 3dCoat!

Good to hear people opinion here. Feel better now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Hi there,

I had a look at ZB 4R2 videos and honestly was a bit surprised at first.

Wow! They are copying 3dCoat tools! was my first impression too.

Still, Zbrush didn't managed to copy 3dCoat friendly user touch, so...

...Tally ho! Long live to 3dCoat!

They add a new tool inspired from 3dC, well, in a way they honored Pilgway team.

Do not fear to send back the elevator to Pixo team then :) (probably doesn't make sense in english,sorry).

Go go go! 3dCoat!

Good to hear people opinion here. Feel better now.

True, but hey...two can play at that game
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Zbrush did something more than copying 3dc.

Something less. And less is more sometimes.

And if my opinion counts, ZB UI is more friendly than the 3dcoat one.

It's a winner in every aspect.

A winner, the closer to artist's needs. Pixologic takes artist's opinions seriously. They invest on art! Compare their forum with anything else around.

They don't quite follow professional's needs. Straight forward. A great invest in the future of 3d art.

They didn't follow what developers had to propose either.

Only what's practical for an artist's needs.

About the avatar image, thanks

I posted it here, a cycles render

http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=8946

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

...And if my opinion counts, ZB UI is more friendly than the 3dcoat one.

It's a winner in every aspect...

That's a big negative. Lot's and lots of people would wholeheartedly disagree along with me, here. That UI is dank and horrid to me. Plus, it places an unnecessary learning curve on new users. Look at Mudbox. You want a UI that works...take copious notes, there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I like the MB UI abn, I just don't have it.

I didn't say that Zb is better on this. I just learned how to handle it and it's efficient for me.

In 3dcoat I'm facing a one way without return UI. To have to bake 5-6 times, do edits until I have a decent displacement export (MV) isn't great. In some cases I gave up and did the job in Zb.

The zb UI, is it dark? The colors you mean? Rather the hidden functions, I guess. Colors are customizable. ZB UI is wacom's best friend, don't forget it. I never use mouse there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...