Jump to content
3D Coat Forums

AbnRanger

Contributor
  • Content count

    7,385
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,430 Reputable

5 Followers

About AbnRanger

  • Rank
    Master

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    Dnashj33

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Enable
  1. AbnRanger

    3DCoat 4.8 BETA testing thread

    3DCoat has a streamlined workflow with Photoshop, so it helps to view PS as an extension, on a 2nd Monitor. Just hit CTRL + P to move layers to PS and CTRL + S in PS to save and update those changes in 3DCoat.
  2. AbnRanger

    Auto retopo multiple objects simultaneously?

    You might try this technique
  3. AbnRanger

    What would be your dream Applink

    I think the Blender Applink makes Blender the perfect rendering companion for 3DCoat. There is some Vertex Paint functionality for Concept Artists who would want to export straight out of the Sculpt Room w/o UV's....but I don't think Roughness is yet enabled for it.
  4. AbnRanger

    3DCoat 4.8 BETA testing thread

    ....and it appears the 4.8.39 notes are incorrectly labeled 4.8.38. There are also some typos (like duplicate lines) that need to be corrected.
  5. AbnRanger

    3DCoat 4.8 BETA testing thread

    Usually on the first page of this thread.
  6. AbnRanger

    3DCoat 4.8 BETA testing thread

    That usually means there is a discrepancy between the location of the exported file and where you are telling the applink to look for those temp files. There is a list menu for the Temp directory in the applink. Make sure the chosen location is where you pointed to. Might be best to export to MY Docs/ 3DCoat 4.8 / Exchange, make sure the Temp directory in the applink panel is pointing to that folder, and it should work properly.
  7. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    I think that would be very doable for Andrew. It's something I have thought about asking him, because it would allow the Pose tool to be much more useful, if one could use vertex/edge/poly selections of low poly mesh to be used as an FFD cage. Conform Retopo Mesh might also be enabled for brushes as well, because it could operate the same way REMOVE STRETCHING does, in that it performs the operation once they user mouses-up (stops stroke). There is a bit of a performance penalty in more dense meshes, but REMOVE STRETCHING is barely noticeable on lower to mid resolution meshses. Merging/Consolidating Paint and Retopo Meshes would allow Paint Meshes then to be modified this way. With both large scale tools and with brushes. There actually is a current implementation of Subpatch levels in the Paint Room. It's in the VIEW Menu > Adjust Tessellation. If Andrew could merge that panel the Surfaces Panel, it could be highly useful for Quad Mesh Sub-D work, on Paint Objects. We also need to have PPP mode store depth data like Micro Vertex does, so we can more easily create Blendshapes/Morph Targets
  8. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    I don't know everything Andrew plans. Just expressing the little I do know, and that is introducing Quad meshes + SubD levels means more than just adding a new mesh type. He'd have to go through and enable every brush and tool to work with it, and it would add a 3 panel to have to work with. It would take a TON of development time and return very little investment. Think of it this way. Let's say you have an old (15-25yrs+) vehicle that you'd like to sell. It needs major body work + new paint job. So, you take it around town to get a few estimates to see what it will cost to get that done. The cheapest place will charge $5000 USD. You know that if you were to try and sell it afterwards, you still would not be able to sell it for half that amount. It's a great idea to have the work done, but in terms of dollars and cents, it makes no sense. The point here is, not every "Great Idea" makes practical sense in ones specific circumstance. For 3DCoat, I'm saying it doesn't make practical sense to me. I still would like to see Andrew consolidate the Retopo and Paint Meshes, so there are fewer workspaces and mesh types. But, I am not seeing clear advantages of complicating the Sculpt Room with yet another mesh type/platform. Who knows. If he does plan to make Paint Meshes editable in the Sculpt Room, it might change things.
  9. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    Here are some additional free resources. It may not wow you, but at least you get your money's worth.
  10. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    If I want to learn how to do a complete and high-end character, let's say in 3ds Max or Maya. The last place I would look for it would be Autodesk's own website or forum. They have lots of videos, like we do, but full project series videos are most commonly found on 3rd party sites, like the ones I previously mentioned/posted. https://gumroad.com/metalman123456123# Pluralsight also has some "Organized" training. Youtube is a great platform for free training and is in a high traffic area to make it easily accessible, but it doesn't lend itself to the kind of "Organization" you are referring to. That's why you have Quick Start Playlists for the different areas of the application. I'm sorry to hear it doesn't meet your standards. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz7E0meXd2yMj4TKY2h0Rbg/playlists
  11. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    Long threads with multiple users persistently asking Andrew to add Quad-Based Sculpting w/ Subdivisions (when he could have gone that route early on, but strategically chose to go with new technology....Voxels and later LiveClay) is somewhat tantamount to forcing him to do something he doesn't want to. Mainly because it would require a large investment in development time and capital, when he doesn't really see a need for it. Nor do I, to be quite honest. I have yet to see clear advantages of doing so, because all the supposed advantages I've seen are either minimal or can be easily replicated with currently available tools. I cannot stress enough that there is simply NO WAY possible to have a Unified Quad Mesh (with UV's) and keep it....while switching back and forth between Voxels and Dynamic Tessellated meshes...along with all the modifications made to the surface...large and small alike...NOT EVEN IN ZBRUSH. You could before Dynamesh and Sculptris Pro, but now that they are there, you have to do a bit of planning and use a number of workarounds, including the necessary use of Z-Remesher to regenerate a completely new mesh w/ clean quad topology. And with a new mesh, you also have to redo your UV's. In 3DCoat, if you have a low poly, UV'mapped base mesh, that you want to use to bake all the details down to, and have it conform to changes you make along the way, you have that option! If I want to model something in the Retopo workspace and later merge it with my Sculpt mesh, I can do that, too, with Voxels and in many cases, Surface mode, too. I would much prefer Andrew add tools that further enhance the current workflow, or streamline it, rather than adding another platform that adds to the complexity of the app...not only for the user, but most importantly, for Andrew. This has to be a nightmare for him...especially the part about adding quad subdivision levels on top of the Multi-resolution/Proxy levels that are already in the app...and adding that on top of an already somewhat confusing VoxTree panel and Layer Panel (Sculpt Layers). I can only imagine the headache and difficulty it would be for Andrew to try and implement, and for what real added benefit? Not much, that I can see, and I've been using 3DCoat since V3, over a decade ago. IMO, Instead, what would be the most beneficial use of development time, instead, would be: 1) Sculpt Layers completed with Layer Masking support. 2) An improved Noise Generator w/ a library of different procedural noise patterns (like ZBrush's NoiseMaker), Most definitely. 3) Vector Displacement brushes? Yes, please. There are some tools that offer a decent alternative (like Import w/ On Pen option), but for things like Dragon/Alligator/Reptile scales, it's almost a MUST HAVE. ZBrush added this support a few years ago and Mudbox has had it since the beginning. Speaking of Vector Displacement, having a properly functioning Vector Displacement map on export (from PPP) 4) Bringing the CONDITIONS Painting list menu into the Sculpt Workspace, when the Freeze tool or Pose tool is active. 5) Work on improving the UI. SO MANY SMALL changes need to be made. Things I've been asking for for years before this Quad Mesh w/ SubD levels request 6) Improvement of UV editing performance, mainly in the area of moving shells around. I was working with a larger model with about 6 UV maps, but most of them were rather simple and only 2k in size. Yet moving the islands around was slow as frozen molasses...because it's single threaded. 7) Spline Deform option in the Pose Tool, or a separate tool altogether 8 ) Improved Brush Engine in Paint Room. Using very large brush radius' especially on 4k or larger UV maps, has long been a sore spot. I don't know if a GPU paintbrush engine is still in development or not. 9) Channel Opacity/Intensity sliders in the Layer Panel (when texture painting) is abysmal and virtually unusable. That certainly needs to be addressed well before any Quad SubD request. 10) Liquefy type of tool in the Paint Room 11) Color Picker Bar in the TEXTURES > ADJUST > HUE-SATURATION Panel. The user is flying blind without it, as they don't know what color they moving toward. 12) Revamped Layer Masking 13 Adjustment layers (Photoshop style) 14) Consolidation of Paint and Retopo Meshes, so they are one unified mesh. This would allow the Tweak Room to be removed, and UV tools in Retopo Room removed...so that all UV work is done strictly in the UV room, where new and experienced users alike, would expect it to be. Andrew could get a lot of these done in the amount of time it would take to add Quad Meshes + SubD levels in the Sculpt room. I'd personally rather go that route, instead.
  12. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    I still don't think it's a good idea to try an impose such drastic changes, for I feel are minimal benefits. If someone were building an app from scratch, perhaps. But, you have to think from Andrew's perspective. He's spent YEARS developing the tools that are in 3DCoat and you are asking him to scrap all of that, for the most part...just so it will be more conventional (quad based). Again, you can perform all of those modeling edits in the Sculpt room right now, using the Pose tool, which is the Modeling Swiss Army Knife of the Sculpt Room. And unlike ZBrush, you can make your original low polygon model or retopo mesh conform to large scale changes while you are working on a VOXEL or Dynamically subdivided model. Once you use Sculptris Pro or Dynamesh, you practically kiss that original low poly model good bye, SubD levels and Sculpt Layers, all. The Mutli-Resolution (Proxy) workflow in the Sculpt Room is a viable alternative to conventional SubD levels...which again, get scrapped, anyway, when working In ZBrush, the moment you use Dynamesh or Sculptris Pro. In 3DCoat, you don't have to worry about that. When you need to step down to a lower poly level, select that level in the Proxy Slider and click the cache icon. Boom. You are working at a lower level and can return to your higher level with a single click. It doesn't have to work the ZBrush way for me to get the same function. I think it's already a lot to ask just to merge Retopo and Paint Meshes. Zbrush has a certain way of working, that requires a number of steps to work around it's limitations. I just wish more users would accept that 3DCoat's sculpting platform is simply a different approach with different technologies (ie Voxels. Dynamesh is still not Voxel sculpting...just the remeshing part. Same as hitting the ENTER key in Surface mode) and stop trying to force Andrew to make it fit ZBrush's conventions. After all, Pixologic and Mudbox thought enough of 3DCoat's LiveClay that they stepped out of their old convention to add it to theirs.
  13. AbnRanger

    I will not be silent this time. Just my opinion !

    Agreed. There has long been a connection between the Paint Room and SCULPT Objects, but never a connection with the Sculpt Room and Paint Objects. I really hope this means Andrew is working on the latter. I was just trying to tweak a Football Player scene with lots of low poly, UV mapped Paint Objects. I couldn't TWEAK the pants area because the underlying skin would not come along, when using the MOVE tool in the Tweak Room. It's kind of frustrating how deprecated and limited the TWEAK room really is. Enabling Sculpt Move, Transform, Pose tool would be a HUGE improvement. I sent Andrew a video a month or so ago, fussing about the Tweak Room, but he never answered back. I hope this is at least in part, a response to that.
  14. Yeah, if 3DCoat could export directly from the Sculpt Room w/ Vertex Color and Spec applied with the Applink, Evee and Cycles would be a better option for final renders.
×