Andrew Shpagin

3D-Coat 3.7 updates thread

1,787 posts in this topic

So far my initial test with 3D-Coat-V3-7-04C for the mac has brought up a strange behaviour with the default shader i.e unable to change color of the shader.

Importing the shaders folder from V3D-Coat3-7-018 resolved this issue as well as other strange shader behaviour such as blank shader preset windows.

Also

Photoshop CS5 Extended post-2166-0-04393800-1329787950_thumb.pn as well as my version of Modo 3 have an issue/ cannot import .obj exports from 3DC. They can if processed through ZBrush.

I've attached both the 3DC export of a test reduced mesh and also that of the same mesh once imported and exported out of ZBrush

compare_obj.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addendum to last post: The .obj issue is not something exclusive to this version but is carried over from earler versions also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far my initial test with 3D-Coat-V3-7-04C for the mac has brought up a strange behaviour with the default shader i.e unable to change color of the shader.

Importing the shaders folder from V3D-Coat3-7-018 resolved this issue as well as other strange shader behaviour such as blank shader preset windows.

Also

Photoshop CS5 Extended post-2166-0-04393800-1329787950_thumb.pn as well as my version of Modo 3 have an issue/ cannot import .obj exports from 3DC. They can if processed through ZBrush.

I've attached both the 3DC export of a test reduced mesh and also that of the same mesh once imported and exported out of ZBrush

compare_obj.zip

What about LWO? Any luck using that from 3DC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew,

Excellent work on the new clone tool! New hope!

Could you please put paint from a photo onto a model and show the cloned result and the original photopaint beside each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew,

Excellent work on the new clone tool! New hope!

Could you please put paint from a photo onto a model and show the cloned result and the original photopaint beside each other?

132983834062.jpg

The difference between images is the same as when you using transform (CTRL T) tool in Photoshop - single bilinear interpolation.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about LWO? Any luck using that from 3DC?

Yes Lightwave works fine.

Liveclay getting so much better each update too - great fun last night playing with Liveclay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between images is the same as when you using transform (CTRL T) tool in Photoshop - single bilinear interpolation.

Top excellent work, Andrew!! Very good results. You made it!!!

This means clean industry advantage over:

Mudbox 2012SP3: its photo paint is slow as hell on my GTX280, Mudbox clone distorts textures with weak projection code and does not recognize CUDA cards 1GB RAM, despite workaround environment variables set)

Zbrush 4R2b: its "spotlight" 3D texture paint CANNOT paint onto lowpoly!!

MARI:the best painting tool currently requires super-expensive PC with LOTS of RAM!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Lightwave works fine.

Liveclay getting so much better each update too - great fun last night playing with Liveclay.

Thanks for checking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends how big a 14 million polygon model is isn't it ?

I find 14 million polys per part of model more than adequate for anything.

I like you abn but sorry dude I'm still not agreeing with you on that one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be a good idea to add tesselation based on resolution of projected pixels so there is no pixelation without having to go to insane tri counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pixelation on image depends not only on density but more on painting technique. Even hge res without AA will show ledder on the edge. For sharp lines on t-short ledder will be invisible at all if edge between black and yellow will be a bit more antialiased - bigger width of contour edge will be used. Also if you need some features to look sharper you may increase density locally. This is obvious advantage over just etxture painting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also vertex painting method needs a lot less data as only the triangles and colour are needed as opposed to the triangles ,the uvs and the texture map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may be true, but this supposed "crispness" compared to texture map painting is bogus. Even on a 14 million poly object, graphics are VERY pixelated

The 'pixelated' effect that you mention is due to aliasing. Anti-aliasing techniques is a well studied subject. Rather than being upset and going on rant how this techniques is useless to you, I suggest to take a look on the bright side of things.

Good job, Andrew! Definitely something useful, especially if the painted attribute values can be exported from 3DC together with the mesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Static objects that have been 3Dscanned with an accompanying texture that need to be " polished" and 3Dprinted , would benefit enormously from a direct workflow.

I dream of: Load scan, sculpt, paint, sculpt, paint, print. The texture needs to be projected on the outside of the voxelhull, in such a manner that any additional piedestals are easy to add without losing the texturedata in the process. Then determine Thickness; 3,5 millimeter to suit the material, p.e. bioplastic or bronze.

:wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

." Also if you need some features to look sharper you may increase density locally. This is obvious advantage over just etxture painting.

"

Was thinking about this today.

But I think we all appreciate that there are options to approach a project differently in 3D Coat whatever your pref.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the new vertex painting facility folks? Love to give it a spin but can't see it.

Maybe I'm running the wrong version 3.0.4C

Ah Ok just downloaded the latest version for Mac - so you can just start off in the paintroom in voxel surface mode - sweet :-)

Ooooh it's lovely - thanks Andrew!!

post-2166-0-68978600-1329948506_thumb.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I've been in 3D long enough to know what anti-aliasing is and that I can at least paint a straight line on a texture map without a hideous amount of pixelation..."aliasing" (better?).You call it a rant, I call it countering all this hype a good dose of reality. The attached image is using a 4k map. Could get the same on a 2k. Neither is as hard on the system as having to crank up the resolution on mesh (and then adding vertex color data on top of that).

What advantage is that? You mean you can't increase LOCAL resolution on a UV map by scaling the islands/cluster where you want extra resolution in the same manner? It's been done for a few decades now. How is this some major breakthrough? Ptex will do essentially the same thing, but on the fly (increase local areas of density).

I imported a midpoly model for PPP, set texture size to 4096. Drew 4 yellow lines where aliasing could be clearly seen at 100% res.

Export Diffuse. Opened the TGA in photoshop. Resized the image with bicubic (best smooth for gradients) or bicubic smoother (best for enlargements) to 2048 x 2048. Aliasing disappeared at 100%. My target resolution was 2048x2048.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ran into a bug in 3-7-05B for the mac. Attempts to switch into proxy mode creating hangs.Consistant and repeatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I again finding myself disagreeing with the adversarial tone, I do agree with Abnranger that vertex painting is of limited value for high res textures. 16 million poly's is about on par with a 4K map, but that's not that much really. Depends on the kind of work you do - that's entry level for many textures that I require.

That said, vertex/poly paint is a *great* system for low to medium res texture work. PTEX or PP painting works well for higher res work (to a point - it is pretty laggy with high res and high res brushes for now). The only downside of having both is the split focus in development will likely mean that neither gets fully sorted out anywhere near as fast as if there were only the one.

/b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I again finding myself disagreeing with the adversarial tone, I do agree with Abnranger that vertex painting is of limited value for high res textures. 16 million poly's is about on par with a 4K map, but that's not that much really. Depends on the kind of work you do - that's entry level for many textures that I require.

No Technology suits all thinkable requirements at the same time.

4k even when entry Level for your highly specialized work is certainly not what everybody will need. Those who need a Tool to quickly create Design-Concepts

can come along with far smaller Texture--Sizes. A 2k texture which isn't shabby for many purposes only requires 4Mio Polygons...

Good also least that you still go the conventional Low Poly Route then - it's not being abolished after all. That said - I would not at all be surprised if Andrew came up with

some sort of intelligent System to work on even far larger meshes as also possible in Zbrush with HD-Painting.

Vertex-Paint was as he said a thing he had planned for long time already and I think it is good to deal with it when the Application is still relatively young as it may have

greater consequences on how one has to plan the GUI. Especially when also parallel Painting and Deformation would get hooked up...

The new System opens 3DCoat even more to non Digital Content Creation Industries. Medical users for instant who create Colour Facial Scans now could use 3DCoat

to solidify the Model with Voxels and for fixing some Seams on their Scan-Results without having to go through a Retopo-Process/Baking Process.

One thus far can spend 6Digits on such Scanners but one could not Postprocess them properly in any straightforward way.Going the Retopo-Way is no option for those

Medical Users - it makes no sense for several good reasons.

I think it's also utter Nonsense to say that having Vertex Painting and the conventional Route being developed at the same time will as clear consequence slow down the

Development Process. Things are not always as linear and it's impudence to think that we Customers could forecast how things will further develop.

Of course it's gotten an even more complex Project now. But when Vertex-Painting makes new Users maybe also from other Industries purchase the Software this could well pay off

and additional Developers can get hired.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.