simmsimaging
-
Posts
225 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Posts posted by simmsimaging
-
-
It can't replace the current paint room since A. it is the current paint room and B. that would remove all painting on poly models like game objects.
Yeah, I didnt ask if it would replace the paint room, but rather if this is intended to be the 'fix' for the other methods within it, or not. It's not clear to me how this is intended to slot into the current workflows, or slot into the path of development for painting in 3DC. It's an interesting function, and I will certainly check it out, but my concern is that we end up with a 3rd semi-finished paint system rather than 1 finished one. I'm all for whichever works, as long as there is one that fully works, if you know what I mean.
/b
-
I've been out of the loop a bit lately and am just seeing all these posts about voxel painting. I'm wondering if this is supposed to replace the other two painting methods, or are those still slated for the improvements we were discussing not long ago, and that Andrew acknowledged needed some love?
/b
-
1320981469[/url]' post='69076']
+1. Bucket Fill is slow as frozen moloasses, indeed, but what I do to get around it is to click on "FILL LAYER" in the fill tool options panel. If I click on the object instead, it takes a long time. Clicking on the individual island that you want to fill, in the Texture editor is another way to get near immediate response. But I agree, it is otherwise painfully slow.
I really think Andrew needs to revisit the Paint Room once he gets all the Voxel/LiveClay work under wraps. It is starting to fall behind tools that wasn't even available a couple years ago. Mudbox didn't even get texture painting until 2009, and in only 2 years it has surpassed 3D Coat's painting capability, and of course it has REAL ambient occlusion. I watched an Autodesk webinar yesterday for Mudbox 2012 and was extremely impressed.
3D Coat still doesn't have Layer MASKS (not to be confused with brush alphas by the same name), and that is a major limitation in my opinion. I use layer masks in Photoshop like a baker uses flour, and am leaning toward using Mudbox to texture paint from now on,for this reason alone, not to mention the performance (although 3D Coat's painting has come a long way in that regard, when Andrew made it multi-threaded).
Fully agreed. LC and voxels are cool, but I bought 3D Coat to, well, coat stuff. I gave up on the paint room updates and bought Mudbox 2012 just a few weeks ago. There are still some things that 3DC does better but the speed is great and the simplicity of the interface is refreshing. I'm not totally happy with it, and am not sold on the long term just yet, but I feel your frustrations anyway.
b
-
Sounds like a good feature suggestion. I'll log it for you.
Greg Smith
I have asked about this before. Basically you need to be able to paint with white, or some other colour in the depth channel (or spec for that matter). It's not supported and I don't think I received any indications of whether or not it ever would be. Hopefully you can drum up some interest in it, as it's a major gap in the workflow IMO.
/b
-
I like to do all my work in surface mode, uprez to the point of not being able to see loss of detail while pressing enter.
3dcoat, same software, 3 workflow, that's why I like it !
And that's one of the things I don't like about it - can't please everyone
My feeling is that there are too many half-baked avenues for most of the stuff I have seen in 3DC. It's suffering too much from trying to be all things to all people with all workflows. That's my POV anyway, although I know that issue has been beaten to death on the forums...
On topic though: I have this same loss of detail problem with 3DC. Either i lose it in voxels moving from surface to voxel (although that is partly avoidable with higher res) even then I tend to lose all the fine stuff on exporting to the paint room. Auto-retopo doesn't seem to give me very good results on complex shapes. Retopologizing isn't something I've gotten any good at mind you, but even when the mesh is close the finer stuff seems to go out the window. I've had better results exporting a dense mesh out of the voxel room and remeshing it in Zbrush. The advantage to that is you can get sub-d levels back in the game, so you can actually UV and paint it still, but the detail holds up much better.
-
Many thanks to artist
when you show your artwork is a big pushing toward motivation for us!
Great work on the new features.!
I'm more of a lighting/render/materials guy so I don't have much to show in the way of modeling (always used 3DC just for texturing) but I'm really loving the voxel/LiveClay workflow for creating liquids. Here's a current one I'm working on for a chocolate splash/swirl. Just pulled it all out of a cube primitive and really didn't take that long. Some other fluids that need to be thinner/finer might be more difficult with Voxels/LC but I haven't tried yet. This mesh is around 10 million tris and would need more to get a lot finer than it is now.
Anyway, I've been using Zbrush for this a lot lately and even with dynamesh there are issues for me with getting fine enough detail (due to the res cap in dynamesh). In many ways it's easier to get what I want with 3DC these days, which is a great thing IMO.
That said, I'm all for simplifying the UI and various pipelines possible with 3DC. It's a bit chaotic in there
/b
-
This brings me to the issue of layer masks, like you have in Photoshop. It's not the same as using the eraser. A layer mask per channel and having a thumbnail for each on the layer (have the ability to maybe CTRL click to toggle through the different thumbnails, and CTRL+SHIFT click to activate all the masks) would be really sweet. I rely on layer masks all the time in PS, and not having that ability in 3DC makes it feel a bit clunky and primitive, when you have is the Eraser tool to use.
+1 Layer masks is a major missing feature.
-
bumping this thread: any thoughts on implementing something like this?
Just bumping it again
I'm on a new job with another set of elements/logos that need to be positioned in 3D space and I'm constantly back and forth to Photoshop tweaking. Even a simple move tool for layers would be a huge asset.Filed a mantis request as well.
/b
-
Great job!
/b
-
So I had a look at ABNRanger's UV demo vid that was posted the other day - thanks for that, it's a nice overview of the methodology. I think it helped clarify where we are differing too.
The points in your process where you are working on things like fingers and toes, where you need to click an endpoint edge, then a starting edge, then shift-click to join them: that is the part that I think could be simpler with the "paint" pre-select of the sort in Unfold3D. Your approach works of course, but it does depend on multiple clicks, and some experience to visualize the flows and put those end points in good places on the first try.
What Unfold would let you do is click your start edge, then as you hover over and trace out the line you wish to mark it would highlight it as you go, so you would draw out the seam and it would flow point-to-point as you painted along. When you got to the end point you would click and it would create that seam all in one go.
Of course you can also just click a starting edge then go straight to the end point and it would try to connect them up by the shortest continuous path. I just preferred the 'paint along' approach of pre-selecting because sometimes the path it chose was not the one I liked/wanted, particularly on long runs with less than perfect edge flows. Having the point-to-point paintable approach is, I think, also just a whole lot faster when you have messy meshes that don't have nice clean edge flows where the full edge loop function of 3DC falls down (as did the loop function of Unfold of course)
This is function that would only enhance what is already possible in 3DC and make even your worfklow a bit faster/easier. A true paintable selection is possible too, and can also make for pretty quick selecting/deselecting, but even just adding the first option would be great. I think with that minor tweak 3DC would have probably the best UV mapping tools I have ever tried - it probably already does
/b
-
How about a little speed test, then (since you....know
)? You do a full character (seam selection and unwrap) as fast as you can (with this new method) and record it...and I'll see if I can't do the same and beat it (recorded). Andrew already has a full plate, with a lot of long-standing requests yet unfulfilled, not to mention having to try and address a host of stability issues. Asking for features that don't offer much, if any, added benefit can only fragment his development efforts further. That's why I'm outspoken on these things, sometimes. I've seen them repeatedly jump ahead of the line...ahead of things with much greater priority.I'm good with leaving it up to Andrew, and the general level of demand.
/b
-
This is a very good point! The current implementation of the Edge-Selection Tool does work perfectly on nice Edge-Loops.
It perfoms much worse though when it doesn't find Loops.
Have to agree with the last few posts: I think you are assuming it will be slower based on experience with a different tool, and it just doesn't necessarily apply. I am not guessing that it can be faster, I *know* it can be, for me anyway, because I have used both.
Anyway, if Andrew can see fit to add a more flexible point to point, or a paintable pre-select based on a similar approach, it would be great. It doesn't need to replace the existing toolset, so you don't have to use it if you don't want to.
/b
-
Can you show a link to a video where that Paint selection of edgeloops occurs? I can see it if you're paint selecting vertices, but even then, it's not very practical on anything but a low poly mesh. The current seam selection is MUCH, MUCH faster than trying to select by painting. In fact, it's faster than the Point to Point seam selection you are describing. I know because I have a Max plugin (XRay UnWrap 1.5) that unfolds LSCM and ABF++ like 3DC does, and the closest thing it has to 3DC's method is Max's point to point, selection...or selecting entire loops on the model and then clicking "Convert Edges to Seams." I find, in practice, 3D Coat's seam selection to be the fastest there is....period, and why I use its UV tools instead.
When you hold down the SHIFT key, it will stop wherever it finds a seam. So for a head, you would use one (SHIFT) click for the neck. One for the eyes. One for the nostrils. One for the mouth. Two for the top of the Forehead and then one to split from there, down the back of the head/neck. And depending on the topology, it might take a few clicks around the ears. It doesn't get any easier than that, no matter what you use.
Sorry, it's actually called Unfold3D. You can see a vid on their site that shows how the interface/selection works:
http://www.polygonal-design.fr/e_unfold/tuto9.php
I understand that paint selections can be a hassle on dense meshes, but they are super fast for cleaning out (de-selecting) areas and can be quicker than repetitive shift-clicking.
I know the shift thing in 3DC and it works pretty well. Unfold had that as too, but it also had the option of holding shift and as you moved along a seam it would pre-select up to the point you were at, then when you clicked down it selected the edges along that path. I haven't used Max's point to point, but this one works very well and is super fast. 3DC cannot quite emulate that without multiple clicks. Some meshes and selections would matter more than others.
Anyway, it's one of those things - if you don't use that method and don't like it then so be it, but it's far from useless and would be an improvement upon the 3DC tools if it were there as well.
Another thing of use that Unfold had was marquee selections to quickly select/de-select large blocks at once. That would be nice too.
/b
-
Paint Select would be utterly useless in this case. I use it from time to time in Max, and I certainly understand it's usefulness there, but when talking about edgeloop/seam selection....think about it. You are going to be painting edges that cross the ones you are trying to select.
The seam selection in 3DC is already ridiculously fast, so I'm really surprised to hear someone ask for something better. Please watch the UV tutorials. I don't think you understand just how easy it is. It's WAAAAY faster than even paint selection would be, if that were an option.
Actually I think I understand it pretty well, but I still think painting selections is useful. I used that method all the time in the program I used to do all my unwrapping in (UnwrapUV) and the painting of edges for creating shorter loops etc is very handy and I find it means less click related mistakes.
That program also had a slightly cleaner method of doing point to point selections. The current 3DC way is workable for sure, but adds an extra step. It would be better to select a starting edge, and then to be able to just hold down a modifier and click the end point and have the loop go to that point, instead of having to define a start and end edge and then shift-click the loop between.
-
Howdy. Is there a way to paint select uv seams rather than clicking and shift clicking? I looked around but, didn't find anything. Basically like Maya's paint selection tool that uses the Artisan functionality. Would speed up seam creation even more!
http://download.auto...Number=d0e88893
Thanks!
+1 for this.
b
-
I updated to 3.5.15A, there are some changes:
- better stability in exporting/filling holes over huge meshes
- new iten Voxels->Edit scene scale - there is description in menu
- some bugs related to gizmo in retopo tool fixed
- pose tool bug fixed
- floating license changes, but I will announce it a bit later
I hope mac & linux versins will be done today.
I updated to this version and 3DC is crashing my computer totally when trying to import a mesh for per-pixel painting. Memory usage goes through the roof and the whole computer just bogs down to the point I have to just force-restart it. Tried it with two different .obj files - same result. Also happened when using the app-link script to send it from Max. I have not had time to look into the Mantis thing for bug reporting so I'm just noting it here.
/b
-
I trid all -
- bake to 8K texture
- use Ptex with basic 8K texture
Everyting works but one issue that was not related to texture size.
I made a new scene and tried again and I was able to do 8K as well. Not sure what happened, but previously there was no 8K option - the list just ended at 4K. Anyway, if it happens again I will save the file for you.
b
-
I'm just getting around to trying this out again - kinda gave up on Ptex at first
I can't seem to get the Texture Bake options to allow me to bake a map larger than 4K. Is that a built-in limit or am I missing something?
b
bump.
Any takers?
-
Sorry, if I understood right the missing feature you need is to darken or lighten the specular color already there?
Yes, basically. I would like to be able to paint with black as well as white (or any colour for that matter) to create variation in the spec map. Right now it will only paint with white, or erase. You can lower the specularity slider and paint over it with darker grey, but doing it that way sets a maximum value that is not pressure sensitive so you can't create very nice subtle gradients very easily.
To be able to do the same in th depth channel would also be a great benefit, for all the same reasons.
/b
-
simmsimaging. Maybe you already know this, but in layer menu you can select "Color to specular" that helps a lot.
Thanks - that provides a different functionality again - basically the same workaround I already use, which is to paint a colour map to be later used as spec. Thanks for the tip, I didn't know about that function, but it doesn't fill the gap for me still
/b
-
I agree. It would be much easier and quicker to have the ability to paint black, instead of switching tools, erasing, switching tools, painting white... Rinse and repeat. It might not sound like too much an issue, but if you're on a job with a tight time allowance, well... Each minute counts.
Another thing is that we still cannot paint colored spec maps, but that's another topic.
I would happily make it part of this topic
Something to consider about this: it is not *just* about how long it takes, it's more about how it affects the flow of work. Anyone who deals with creative processes will know what I mean: you get into a groove and you do things you just can't or don't do when it's broken out into separate chunks. For me it is very much a question of driving the process into the background so I'm not even aware of it. Painting colour in 3DC is great this way, but depth and spec are pretty simplistic and just can't keep up with that flow.
I know this particular aspect of 3DC is fairly small to some people, but it's an important part of the texturing workflow, and if you are going to put the tools in there you might as well go all the way
Just my POV, but I would love to hear Andrew chime in on it.
Thanks /b
-
Maybe some of the problem with producing Specular highlights with 3D-Coat has to do with the way we "used to do things".
Instead of thinking about specularity in terms of shades of grey that need to translated into "shiny-ness" or highlights, (the old way of thinking) - just think in terms of adding more or less "shine".
For applying Specularity the 3D-Coat way, I just use a mouse and the "Specularity" slider. Gets the job done fast and you can just switch to a "Brush Alpha" to get a sharper edge or a more feathered one.
It's all quite simple - and I think it should be - for something so basic.
Greg Smith
Have to disagree with you on this one
It's not about old or new ways, just ways that make sense. You can think of spec as more or less shine, but no matter how you think of it, in the end you have to create that with greyscale values, so being able to *add* blacks is a necessary component. Only being able to "remove white" to add black (or add less shine as you put it) is just a clunky way of doing it by comparison and involves flipping brushes and tools and makes it harder to do it with good creative flow and it is harder to get the nuanced tones that make for more subtle mapping.
It's no different than painting layer masks or alpha channels in Photoshop, and I toggle between painting black or white constantly in that process.
Anyway, to be able to freely paint and flow through the creative process you need a smooth interface, and this one just lacks IMO.
Andrew: any chance of adding this functionality or is the discussion just moot anyway ?
-
In my own tests, if "Depth & Color" are checked "off", and I start painting with 100% specularity - I am able to go back and paint any other level over the top of this - all the way down to 0% (totally matte).
Also, the "Eraser" tool erases all specularity (same as painting with 0%). This would be the equivalent to painting "black" on the specular map, directly.
The color swatch doesn't seem to have anything to do with the level of specular highlight being applied - everything is determined by the "Specularity" slider.
Try this experiment: Open a model for per-pixel painting, (it will receive AUTO UV mapping), raise the "Specularity" slider to 100% and, using the regular brush, paint on your object. Lower the "Specularity" value down to 25%, and paint right over what you just painted (you should see a greatly reduced highlight) - and then try lowering the value to 0%, and you should see a totally "matte" highlight replacing the previously painted ones.
Do the same experiment as noted above, except use the "Eraser" in place of painting 0% Specularity. You should see the same "matte" result.
To be totally convinced that all is working as designed, paint different areas of your object with widely contrasting areas of Specularity and, from the "Textures" menu, export just the "Specular" map. Open this up in any painting app and you will see all the levels of gray, white and black.
Greg Smith
Thanks Greg - getting warmer for sure
The spec slider combined with eraser does provide the functionality I was missing - but there is still something cumbersome/funky about the workflow this way. Using a tablet, you can't paint "less spec" over "more spec" by adjusting pressure, so you have to either manually reset the Spec value or erase. It's a lot of manual toggling around and loss of pressure sensitivity etc so it's not a very smooth way to paint, compared to just toggling between white and black and simply painting. This is how I do it now: making a new layer in the Color Channel and painting a black and white map that I later use as as Spec. Is it possible to implement a simple system so that when painting in Spec only the brushes respect the paint swatch colour?
Thanks again for the info though: it's a huge help just to be able to do it at all
b
-
Sorry - meant to also say: thanks for helping with this!
b
3D-Coat 3.7 updates thread
in New Releases, Bugs Reports & Development Discussion
Posted
No worries
Had a quick play and it does seem very promising. It seems more responsive with high res brushes and large brush sizes than the other paint methods, and the lack of UV hassles is nice for sure. I'm a bit iffy on always having to voxelize models to paint though - as that process always seems lossy to me (in terms of sharp details). Perhaps that's just a matter of learning the process better, but the docs are not very extensive and it's not clear to me how to really tweak that process.
Anyway, it's cool, but had a few questions if someone wouldn't mind explaining a couple of things:
1) how do I increase the res of the painting - by increasing the voxel res *before* going to surface mode?
2) how do you get the painting out of there and into a texture map and model you can render in, say, Max and Vray?
Thanks in advance
/b