AbnRanger

You can import the high-res mesh into the Retopo Room, and then build your lower poly retopo'ed mesh over that (it snaps to the hight-res). I would do all the UV and painting in 3DC, as the toolset is far more robust for the task. If that is what you choose to do, you would then want to export (via the Retopo menu from the menu bar) the result to either PPP (Per Pixel Painting mode...normal map based relief) or MicroVertex (Displacement map relief...although you have the option upon export to bake a normal map as well as displacement).

+1. I've been meaning to ask for this for some time now. It would come in handy quite often. Been having to make such "Insets" Manually one cut at a time when extrude/inset has been a standard use tool in 3D applications for over a decade.

http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2010/12/google-body-browser.html Now, you have a pretty nice anatomy reference that you can orbit around and such...pretty nice. But you have to have certain browsers to use it. I went with the Firefox 4 Beta...it's pretty sweet, and the big improvement is the speed, not to mention really clean appearance.

Try one last thing....on your voxel object/model layer, right-click and choose "Fill Voids." See if that doesn't help. I had major issues with some hidden holes months back, and couldn't get AutoRetopo to work on a particular model. Andrew took a look-see and found holes in the volume. He made this tool for this reason and he also said those holes can cause problems when baking maps.

Actually, I think all that can be avoided. If Andrew could merge a variant of the FFD lattices from the Primitives Tool with the Pose Tool. The would give Andrew the Lattice control many of us have asked for. The Pose tool would have a lot more juice, and avoid complicated bone structures. Instead of bones, you'd have FFD lattice options to turn to in the Pose tool, for more control. The way it would work is to have the FFD primitives tools load when you check FFD, and instead of a green primitive you see a semi-transparent transparent one. Where this primitive intersects with the object/layer(you have selected), that is the volume your lattice will control...and you can use the selection tools in the pose tool to affect the falloff/weighting. I think adding the ability to save the deformer, perhaps as a child layer would make it even better. Much like Andrew was able to utilize existing tools (strokes and freeze) in 3DC to use in Auto Retopo, he could possibly do the same here.

I agree with this, when you are talking about non-animated objects in the scene. Auto Retopo makes a lot more sense when you have a bunch of objects to have retopo, in order to populate a scene or environment, for example. And I think it even makes sense for clothing, as I know 3ds Max's Cloth (garment maker) applies a kind of random triangular mesh anyway. But when we're talking about animating a character, I just don't think it makes sense to even attempt to use an automated process, no matter how close it gets you. It's better to just get an efficient routine down, doing it manually than to make multiple attempts with Auto Retopo and then end up having to do quite a bit of clean up. For one thing it tends to often spiral edgeloops (instead of making each one a closed loop)...and that makes it a nightmare trying to clean up. In all my attempts, it's been hit or miss. Sometimes it's so good, I have to giggle a bit (feeling like I cheated on a test or something), other times it just doesn't seem worth it. Going back to Characters....sure, for ones that will not be in the foreground, near the camera, you might could do fine with Autopo....but it's almost like going out to a fine restaurant and ordering a Hungry Man TV Dinner. Sure it's food, but....

He was told that increasing resolution would be the solution, and it is. What specifically isn't working for you? You can't find the Merge command, or can't find the Increase Resolution icon? I think the UI team has been changing some of the names of the tools a little. One of those is the "Increase" (Resolution) button in the vertical toolbar on the left. In the lower left-hand side of the UI, it looks like it's been re-named "Res+". However, the icon at the bottom of the Vox Tree Panel is still there (the Tooltip says "Increase Resolution"), and that's what I always use. Hope that helps some.Upon merging a model into Voxels, you can scale your model, before you hit the ENTER key, to increase the resolution, as another means. Just be careful that you don't scale it up too large. Again...no more than 50-60% of the total grid size, and the model should be manageable. 10-30% of the grid is optimal, in my own experience. You just don't want to be around 10-20million polys (polys as in a skin that essentially acts like shrink wrap for the voxel volume beneath), when you are roughing out your forms. You can see how many polys and object/layer has by looking toward the bottom center of the UI.

I think there is a misunderstanding here....not sculpt room tools in Surface mode (within the Voxel Room), but the reverse. Mirroring the Surface Mode tools/engine into the Sculpt Room, so you are working with geometry.And as for Modo 501 replacing the need for programs like ZBrush, 3DC and such....nah. It's just like the Viewport Canvas tools in Max. You can do a LOT of your 3D texture painting in Max, with some very Photoshop-esque tools/layers/blending modes, etc....but I really don't even bother using it, when I have 3DC to use instead. These specialized toolsets will never be outdone by built-in tools. For example, even if Newtek licensed 3D Coat to be integrated with Lightwave, it would soon be left behind in development as these types of arrangements always tend to one time deals. Imagine using LW with an integrated version of 3DC v 3.1....now you can see why Modo's sculpting tools will neither catch up, nor keep pace with these applications.

Yes, that is what I have been asking about for some time now...and I actually think it may prove to be the fastest sculpting model in 3DC. It would also be great for people who want to bring in models and just detail it without having to go through the retopology process. You can do that to a degree with Voxels (by importing the original mesh into the Retopo room and use that as your Retopo mesh), but staying in Polygonal mode when you import a model, has it's own advantages. I think the best thing about it though, is that it would make 3DC the most versatile sculpting toolset (Voxel, Polygonal, and Image-Based) in the business, at that point.

Yeah...that's why you want to increase it one level at a time, before you hit "APPLY" or the ENTER key. As far as scale. If it's tiny on the grid, it needs more resolution, but if it takes up a large portion of it, then you will have a slow go it. So, maybe a scale where it's somewhere between 10-30% of the grid

You have a Freeze tool, but it resides in the Surface mode...so whenever I need to use it, I just switch to that mode. I never use hide anymore. It doesn't really do anything functional that I'm aware of, save maybe allow you to get nice hard creases along the area hidden. When you hide in ZB or MB, I believe it dumps the hidden portion from memory, thus allowing better interactivity in the viewport. That's not the case in Voxels. Hiding doesn't save you any memory or give you more FPS.If you have a recent build, when using the transform tool, you have a checkbox in the tool options panel, "to center mass"...many of us had been asking for that for some time. It got added a few months ago. You also have the ability to "cleanup" your object by filling any holes before you're done. Right click the layer and choose "fill voids." doing this may actually save you some frustration when using Auto Retopo and baking Normal maps and such. I had an issue with a model once, and could never get AutoRetopo to work with it. Andrew took a look at it and found it had a number of hidden holes that was the cause of the problem. He soon thereafter created this tool to fix that problem. I agree about the lattice. It's been requested often. I mentioned a possible solution in your other thread, in the feature request section. Andrew listens, but has to prioritize the requests/bugfixes.

I like your idea, and Andrew will entertain any good ideas from the userbase. Much of the toolset is a result of this close interaction with the community...such as the "Cache to Disk" feature and Multi-Resolution. I e-mailed Andrew and made the case for "Cache-to-Disk", and he said he would consider it. As he was in the process of implementing the feature, he added some additional functionality...that is having a low res proxy in place. As it turns out, that gave him a platform for Multi-Resolution...something he had been wrestling with for a while. Another case is the Auto-Retopo feature. Andrew was working on a method that was introduced at Siggraph 2009...many from the community here added the ideas of being able to lay down some guides where we want edgeloops to flow, and paint areas where we want greater polygonal density. I added that maybe using the "Strokes" tool to apply guides for the edgeloops would be easier for Andrew to implement. Sure enough, that was how it worked out. So, the point is...if you really think you have a good idea, that can help everyone, shoot Andrew an e-mail (support@3d-coat.com), and explain it. If you can make any visual aids (in Photoshop), to help communicate the idea, then please do so. The 3DC UI actually was born from mockups and input from the community here. I think this willingness to respond to user input is one of the things that endears me to the program and makes it my favorite application. I don't think you'll find ANY application where your own input plays a bigger role in its development than 3D Coat. With all of that said...your idea sounds like it could help speed up all the sculpting tools in Volume mode...which is always welcome. Granted, the Multi-Res functionality is a terrific solution to the slow downs one experiences in Volume mode, but not having to use it as much would be greatly appreciated too. Andrew is supposedly going to be working on optimizing CUDA for volume mode, so now would be a good time to forward such an idea. I also would like to see a freeform deformation lattice added to the toolset. We don't want to overwhelm Andrew with too many requests at one time. But when he has the chance to look into it, I think one way to implement it without too much fuss, is to perhaps create a variation of the primitives tool (ffd), using the same gizmos/lattice options...and use a semi-transparent version of the primitive (that would normal be present) to essentially mark the boundaries of an object that will be deformed. What I might do is perhaps make FFD Lattice capability an option from within the Pose tool. This way you could use the selection tools within the Pose tool to set your falloff. This could make the Pose tool in 3DC incredibly powerful.

I find that sometimes, if something is amiss with the UV's, that is why it appears to bog down. When things are done right, baking is pretty decent on fairly new hardware.

Assuming it is not the 30 day trial, then you should have gotten an e-mail with the serial. If you have to format your main HD and install a fresh OS then, you will have to install serials on everything you re-install. But if you have a backup, then you should be able to restore your system with the backup image. In that case, no re-install should be needed. If you are sending your system to a shop, have them restore it for you.

Just go to the 3.5 updates thread (1st page) and download the latest build and re-install. If you're on a trial, it will just reset to a new 30days. If you have a license, you'll just enter the serial again. No problem.

Yeah, before you hit "APPLY" or the ENTER key (that will convert the model to Voxels), you usually want to hit the "Increase Resolution" icon at the bottom of the Vox Tree panel (layer panel), at least once...if it still doesn't look like it captured it correctly, hit UNDO and try it again...but this time, Increase the Res an additional time. It also will be more accurate if you scale it larger on the grid. The larger it is on the grid, the more Voxels it has. You will get a prompt to ask if you want to keep the original scale upon export, so don't worry about scaling it up in the viewport. However, be careful that you don't scale it too large. Otherwise it will be slow working with a model that is too dense. Also, you will want to close the ends of the coat, because I have found that Auto Retopo will try to make the object double sided, and that may not be what you want. One other nifty tool at your disposal is that you can import your character into the voxel room, and then use the Cloth (Simulation) tool to get that coat to drape better. In the Cloth tool options you can select your coat mesh from its directory location or from the Retopo room, if you have already topologized it there. It's good to at least get some natural weight and tension. You'll have to play with it a bit to find a good result.

I happen to appreciate the way 3DC layers work...as opposed to being FORCED to paint separate maps/channels on separate layers. When you export...3D Coat combines all the bump/normal channel information from multiple layers into one map. So, you could have 20 layers with bump/normal detail but it gets baked into one bump/normal map upon export. 30 layers of color, one color map upon export, etc.If you want to paint only bump/depth on one layer, knock yourself out...all you need to do is turn off color and spec for that layer. You can even export any layer as a separate map. So, if you want to paint a dirt map...knock yourself out....SSS map....knock yourself out. You are not limited from doing this in 3D Coat. Compare that to Mudbox, where you have only one channel per layer. In 3DC, you can have it either way. What is wrong with that much flexibility? Andrew should focus on Voxel Sculpting and leave painting to the professionals? Really? Please elaborate. So, you have Image-Based Sculpting (LIVE normal map/Displacement map relief and detail) with Mari and have a full-fledged Ptex toolset (not just PTex file format export capability), where you can export out and render in ANY render engine? Can you select from a library of 3D models, manipulate it's orientation, scale and such in a preview window and then use that model as a brush? 3D Coat started and continues to hang it's hat on it's 3D Painting toolset, and is arguably the most versatile of the bunch. I bought it as a replacement for Deep Paint 3D and I wouldn't trade it for Mari or BodyPaint any day of the week. It has room for improvement, but then every application does.

I think the lighting in 3D Coat's render is more like Sunlight/Daylight lighting in programs like Blender, 3ds Max, Maya, Lightwave, C4D, etc. It's easier to get decent results with it. For Graphic Design projects, you could do a lot of your rendering in 3D Coat and tweak the result in Photoshop, thereafter.

In the Tutorial section, Greg has a nice little series that goes from sculpting a game character (Ghost) in Voxels to painting textures in Per Pixel Painting mode. Also, you can search on youtube for "Fugazzi3D"...he has the most that I have seen so far.

They are saved, until you clear them. They are far more persistent than you realize. Once you go back to that stage of the wizard, they will be in place. I've opened up files months later and found the strokes still there.Give it a try...delete the Retopo layer and restart the Auto Retopo wizard again. No, you won't see it when you first start, because the first procedure is to paint areas where you want more polygonal detail...THEN, once you move to the Strokes segment, there they appear...still waiting.

The strokes you make will remain until you clear them. I can save the file, leave the app and come back to restart the AutoRetopo procedure, and as soon as I move to that step (strokes) in the wizard, those same strokes are still in place. Just because you don't see them when you UNDO or something, doesn't mean they aren't stored and waiting. They are.As for deleting strokes, you can do that. Simply click on the line you want to edit/delete. It then is highlighted in white, and you can delete it. There are some things the Auto Retopo tool is REALLY good for and others that it's not. If you want precise polyflow, even when you put down proper guide strokes, you will have some clean up left to do. It can get you pretty close, but it's still having to do a lot of guesswork. That's why I really don't waste time trying it with characters. The manual Retopo tools are pretty darn fast as it is. I think clothes, non-animated objects in a scene, and such is where you would find more benefit using Auto Retopo. Using the Strokes tool 80% of the time, you can knock out a character Retopo much faster than you might think, As the body is made up of cylindrical shapes, and then with the facial retopology, you can just trace where you want your edgeloops, and hit ENTER. If you have your character sketched out, you might try to get in the practice to drawing the topology over the face in Photoshop, or you could render out a front view of your sculpted Character (before you start Retopo'ing the face/head), in the Render room, and take that over into PS and do the same thing. That way you can more quickly hash out where you want to put your topology, and use the Strokes tool to trace it in short order in the Retopo room.

I don't notice any lag in Win 7 w/ CUDA when you use reasonable brush sizes on objects up to 20mill polys, so how could Linux with lag be 5 times faster? What are you using to measure this by? There is some lag if you work with oversized brush radius' in Volume mode, and to a lesser degree in Surface mode. Of course, that is why you have Multi-Res...to handle those situations, and it is ridiculously fast at doing it.

Wow...never expected to see that. Thanks for the taking the initiative . I'm slowly learning Fusion using the PLE...have been a long time Combustion user.

I think that approach is the most sensible one under your set of circumstances and needs. You have enough expense with other Graphic Design-related software. Blender is P-E-R-F-E-C-T for any Graphic Designer looking to implement more 3D into their designs (that's sort of how I got hooked on 3D). I think you'll end up in 3D, though. If you have fine art skills, the 3D industry is where you want to be. It's the one area where those skills will not only get fully utilized, but where you can just let your imagination go free. That is not the case in Graphic Art. You are often stuck doing page layout and text editing (in Adobe InDesign or Quark). To me, the Graphic Design Industry is for fine artists, what Internet browsing is to an expensive new Graphic Card. A complete waste of resources.I have a client/friend who is in such a predicament. I saw some of his personal artwork, which is fantastic, and yet he's been working in the sign and graphic design business for years. He's almost stuck in it because he has a family to support. He should be doing Matte Painting or Concept Design work. But now that I've strayed way off topic...time to return. Yeah...Blender's got PLENTY of juice for what you need. If it were commercial, it would likely be priced right about where LW is or higher. It has exceptional animation/rigging tools, as well as it's own compositor. I think you are also being a bit too harsh on it's native render. It's not bad at all...and should be able to do whatever you ask it to do. Nevertheless, you may be able to contact Vlado over at the VRay forums and ask about an upgrade path to 2 if you buy the stand alone now. There is a good chance he may make the v2 upgrade available for free when it's released.

VRay(2) makes more sense for me, seeing that it has VPR/Fprime ability in RT, and you can switch between GPU mode or CPU mode (GPU may not always be best since it relies on the graphic card's VRAM). http://www.youtube.com/user/ChaosGroupTV?News=VR2#p/u/19/5rWEFcEKYVE It also is supported by Vue Xstream...so that pretty much fills the need, without having to step out of Max entirely to render out the scene. FinalRender wasn't supported by Vue, and the darned IPR isn't stable enough to rely on...so that pretty much settles it for me. Thanks for the tip Geo. I wasn't sure RT was any better.