AbnRanger

Andrew, why are there multiple applink directories? This is super confusing and totally unnecessary. Can we pick just ONE and make it clear in the Blender addon/extension which one that is? It's confusing to me why there is an APPLINKS folder and then a 3DC2BLENDER folder.

I know it's frustrating and thank you for helping by pointing out the exact issues you are having. However, please be patient because 4.2 really changed the way addons/extensions are handled, and I personally get emails from other addon vendors (from whom I purchased Blender Addons, such as AutoRig Pro and others), stating they are working all the kinks out, too.

Just hover your cursor over the tool and if you see a little youtube icon at the bottom of the tooltip, it will say that hitting F1 on your keyboard will take you to the tutorial for that tool.

In the Paint and Retopo Rooms, you can hover your cursor over most of the tools and hit F1 to go to the video tutorials for those. I will soon try to link the ones in the Sculpt Workspace as well.

I am not getting the result you mention except the subdivision. Yes, it uses Loop Subdivision, however, even though it is triangulated, it still maintains much of the topological flow until you completely remesh the Surface mode object (like hitting the ENTER key...similar effect as DynaMesh in ZB). If poles become a problem for you, try to make sure you have REMOVE STRETCHING enabled in the Toolbar. That remeshes (dynamic remeshing/subdivision) only under your brush. https://app.screencast.com/3PHM2LT5h5eDP

I have asked for a lot of features over the years. Many were implemented and many were not. When hundreds of people are making requests each day/week, that is what will happen. We have to get in line and wait our turn. Sometimes, I have to repeat my request multiple times before it gets implemented. A lot of it comes down to priority, but also whether or not Andrew really sees a need or if a feature will really benefit users. I would like to see Factures get more fully integrated with Smart Materials, but that may not happen for a while, because Andrew is working on other things. On a personal note, I think the Quad only mode in the Sculpt room is a matter of usefulness. I personally do not see a dire need for it, and I doubt Andrew does, either. Please record a video showing precisely why it would be such a game changer for you, personally. That may be all it takes for Andrew to finally look at it. I don't feel the need for quads, myself, and feel like I can sculpt whatever I need to in Voxels or Surface mode, as is. But I am open to change my view on it if someone can show me what difference it would make. Regarding polish and stability, I agree, and that is why I am always reporting bugs as soon as I spot one. I know it can be frustrating at times, especially if you have a tight deadline to meet. Nevertheless, you are missing my point about the developer of the modeling/CAD tools. Not every developer is able to squash bugs and work on every part of the application. He has made some tools for the Sculpt workspace, but his task is what Pilgway gave him to work on. If you are upset with the pace of development in the other areas of the application, feel free to send emails to support@pilgway.com

It would be very helpful if the Bevel tool had a FIND EDGES feature similar to what the Angulator tool has...but, when the user is in the Bevel tool, an option that is in the CURVES menu...FREEZE SELECTION TO CURVE...should also be in the Tool Options. When a freeze selection is converted to a curve, it needs to be a single path...not an elliptical closed curve like it currently generates when converting a selection to a curve. This would make the tool much more useful, as there are many times where a user will want to bevel a number of different edges at the same time. That is easier to do in a poly modeling environment where you can select an entire loop with a single click. In 3DCoat's Sculpt workspace, this selection is much harder. You have to spend time manually making the curve.

I said it multiple times and it seems I have to repeat it again...the developer working on the CAD module has virtually nothing to do with UX, Sculpting or Painting tools, so polishing or reliability is not affected by his work one way or the other. He was hired a while ago for this area, only, and he is just doing HIS job...not Andrew's. Adding a CAD module does not distract from work being done in the rest of the application. Pilgway "can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time," so to speak. Send Andrew an email (support@pilgway.com) mentioning the problems you have with the other areas of the application. Don't forget, they are still doing all this work right in the midst of a war, where Russia targets civilians practically on a daily basis...a Children's Hospital and large shopping Mall was recently targeted by Russia, so it is still a very distressing situation they live in, and Ukraine has been tightening it's Mobilization rules. Both co-owners of Pilgway have post graduate degrees in Physics, so they may also be contributing to the war effort in some technical way. Some of the staff could also get called up at some point.

I have the same one, so it may not be that. Did it send the automatic Crash Report?

I tried to create a mask at different resolutions up to 11 million, and had no crash. Did you mean that you create a simple mask with the Angulator tool active...nothing special...just a regular brush selection? If you could send a crash report, that would tell Andrew whether it is a driver issue or something hardware based. I used a brush > cleared the selection and then clicked on the MASK EDGES button = No crash.

CONFIRMED BUG: I ran the same test on my end and it is easily reproduceable.

I understand your personal preference for polish over added features and to a large degree, I agree. However, Pilgway reserves the right to do whatever they think they need to do to compete effectively in a market that has a growing behemoth (Blender) to compete with...pumped full of corporate donation$, even if it doesn't yet match 3DCoat's capabilities in certain areas. They want to be able to diversify 3DCoat's market to the CAD segment, too, because the Entertainment segment is getting thinner and thinner, thanks to Blender. As I stated in another thread, the developer working on that is already tasked to work on the Retopo/Modeling tools and there are already a number of NURBS/CAD centric tools (including Polygon to NURBS conversion feature that is an expensive plugin for some major 3D applications) in 3DCoat. Andrew works on the rest of the application, and has other developers that assist in him those areas...so, THAT work is not hindered by the addition of a CAD/NURBS module. That module is strictly a business decision on the part of Pilgway...it is not being done to simply add more features.

You can contact Sales@pilgway.com and paste your issue mentioned here. Normally, there is no refund with any software, as sales are final, but Pilgway is very fair. If you are bogged down from bugs, they will likely understand your situation and give you a refund. However, you have to take into account that you are probably using a public BETA build (most of them are). First, in the Update Manager (access in the Help Menu or upper right portion of the splash screen), look on the left side of the page and choose the latest STABLE build. They are indicated in green. Build 20 was the last stable build. Try this first and see if helps and it is a really good practice to test your issue on a sample file from the splash screen. If it is still producing the same problem on that file/model, then chances are high that it is indeed a bug and not a problem with the mesh or UV's. It sounds like an issue with the mesh, because most of the time, working in 3DCoat, you are not going to have crashes that frequently...unless there is just something messed up with the mesh itself. This is why it is so helpful to send a screen recording and work file. It will get a fix or resolution much faster. If you have never even attempted to send a bug report, then it really isn't fair to Pilgway to apply a higher standard than you would with other applications....because you will find problems with most of them. You can look on 3ds Max, Maya, ZBrush and Blender forums and see all kinds of complaints about bugs. I have had my fair share of frustrations with bugs over the years, but being patient pays off. The plus side of cooperating with the developers of Pilgway, by sending bug reports if you find problems, is they will in turn try to return the favor by giving your feature requests more priority than it might otherwise get. You get to have more and more of an impact on the direction and functionality of the application, which is hard to do with most other applications.

I am simply saying that it is far more efficient to communicate directly with Andrew. That is what I do when I have a problem with the software. Sometimes I might share the problem on here, to see if others are experiencing the same, but I know the best way to get some action taken on it is to go directly to the man who can fix it.