Forums
-
General
-
- 467
- posts
-
- 3.2k
- posts
-
- 49.6k
- posts
-
-
3DCoat
-
- 59.7k
- posts
-
- 1.3k
- posts
-
- 625
- posts
-
- 7.3k
- posts
-
-
Community
-
- 13.6k
- posts
-
- 797
- posts
-
- 20.3k
- posts
-
-
International
-
- 276
- posts
-
- 76
- posts
-
- 1.3k
- posts
-
- 738
- posts
-
- 3.3k
- posts
-
-
Topics
-
Question: [Feature] Freeze brush (surface) - does it have topological masking?
By JoseConseco, in Questions & Answers
- Awaiting best answer
- 1 vote
- 4 answers
-
- 4 replies
- 125 views
-
Question: [Solved] Normalmap error
By Sui, in Questions & Answers
- Has best answer
- blender
- substance painter
- (and 1 more)
- 0 votes
- 3 answers
-
[Feature] How to freeze parts very close to other parts...like in blender?
By Werner_Z, in General 3DCoat
- 4 replies
- 151 views
-
- 0 votes
- 6 answers
-
-
Who's Online 3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 80 Guests (See full list)
-
Posts
-
By JoseConseco · Posted
awesome. Thanks, btw any idea when ver 19 will be out? -
This issue is marked as solved on version 2024.18 please give a try -
Yea. Actually this one is the previous. Can you mark this one solved. -
-
This feature will be added on version 2024.19
-
This feature will be added on version 2024.19
-
on version .18 a new Feature was added Select multiple Sculpt layers for ghost or visibility
-
On version .18 was added a new feature - Retopo via decimation works for all selected objects, each selected object will be retopo-ed into the separate group.
-
Yes, you can polypaint or vertex paint any Sculpt mesh on Surface mode. That video that shows version 3 is outdated in terminology. Previously Sculpt workspace was called Voxel Room. No, it is not a texture. You assign a color to each vertex and paint them in surface mode. So the model needs a retopo mesh created for it, uv seams and unwrapping plus baking. The vertex colors will be baked for the model. Watch the videos from 14---18 to understand how these functions work. The whole series of videos are good for a new users of 3DC.
-
I am not sure that 3Dcoat supports Wayland, did you under X11? I am working with it on daily basis on PopOS, which is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. But yes, in nutshell, it works better and more stable under Windows than on Linux, which I can say for every 3D app I use. Maybe Blender is exception. -
Greetings. I just discovered that you can use the X, Y, and Z keys to translate an object in space. I was wondering if there was a way to do the same with rotation and scaling, but without assigning specific hotkeys to every value for scaling x, y, z and rotating x, y, z. I found the attached when I clicked on Edit > Transform Without Gizmo. It seemed to indicate to me that you can use x, y, and z in the way I'd like depending on if you're in rotate, translate, or scale mode. In practice, this doesn't seem to work. -
Thanks Carlosan, but that does not help at all. The lips or eyelids of a character are all part of the same mesh, on the same layer. The best would be Topological Freezing. What would be the best way to ad my request to JoseConseco's request? -
I guess people with different workflows have different thoughts about this. There are people who doing the majority of works in Coat. And there are people like me who use it in companion with SP, Blender and other software. For the later group of artists, they sure have adapted to other software and therefore have little need for this. If the integration would result in an increase of price, it could sure be a con when purchasing. I would say making improvements and optimisation is necessary but there is no crucial need of a professional engine. Also making export and autopo better will be extremely important. It is generally impossible to work/texture with models from Coat other than triplanal mapping in SP or box mapping in BL. They are hardly editable outside Coat. Like I said early, building an entire scene inside Coat, is just impossible. Even a professional engine can be added, its use will be limited to a single or maybe a few objects due to the polycount. So why spending large amount of resource to implement something limited when you can use the resource to build improvements that can benefit all users?
-
The only thing is, my work content process so far has been completed in 3dcoat. So if possible, I hope that the rendering process of 3dcoat can be more complete or better (it does not need to be too professional or perfect) The current rendering engine is actually very good for amateur rendering enthusiasts, but what is the problem? 1. Refraction calculation of transparent materials leads to complete darkness. 2. The effect of specular reflection is disappointing You only need to solve these two points. It does not need to be too large or complicated. It is enough for amateurs. It will definitely be difficult to implement all functions in one go. Bugs and conflicts will definitely be difficult. If you solve them step by step, Would it be more appropriate? -
yea there are other things needed before this , like quads only in surface .. ive needed that since i bought the software -
Hmm, I don't see a point in getting something like Octane/Vray inside of 3DCoat. Is it just for better quick renders and material preview? I have my doubts the developers are integrating and allowing any further shader network manipulation similar to other DCC apps and renderer plugins. Most concept artists, I imagine, are comfortable already with pushing models and texture maps out of 3DCoat into other rendering dedicated software. This will just lead more requests in users desiring a more general and broader 3D package with 3DCoat. Can the developers really support that change in direction? What kind of refactoring is required on that? There's a lot more to be considered. I highly doubt it would be 'free', and it would be something Pilgway would have to consider into their licensing pricing. I also don't expect out of the popular rendering software companies to be supporting a 3DCoat implementation in the long run - especially a company like Chaos Group, so I doubt it's them as an option. Maybe if I understood the intention of this kind of implementation more than as a general question this would make more sense for me. -
-