Calabi

Thats great thanks for the vid. However I have a couple of problems I try and pick a light peach skin tones but they are highly specular, bright and shiny like HDR. I've turned off the button at least I think I have unless there is another one. Also what about the dots do you use the many dots alpha, because the trouble is its too contigouous, you end up with a bunch of lines instead of discreet dots.

I'm wondering if I can paint in 3DCoat similar to this technique in Zbrush? http://www.alexandervonsass.com/skintut/ http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=48840 How do I go about setting up the airbrush and materials, etc?

You win!

I was just being a counter point to your propanganda. I dont care what the person above gets, but I dislike someone expousing personal experiences as universal fact, and saying things in block capitals DOES not MAKE you ANYMORE right. PhysX and Cuda are Nvidia exclusive, unless Nvidia becomes a monopoly or opens these up to everyone they will not be future proof. Thats my opinion the same as the above was your opinion. Nvidia are having lots of problems at the moment, a hell of a ton of rebranding, loads of cards arent even being sold. The new cards they are making technically arent even going to be graphics based. Unless this fermi comes up to par in the not too distant future then they will be in a lot of trouble. But whatever. edit: Those Benchmarks dont seem that significant to me, you only gain a few fps, and they only work best in a few specific circumstances. I think its foolish to buy a card for a single piece of software, whereas you can get a good all round card.

With ATIs better performance at a better price plus its future proof nature, going ATI would be more of a no brainer. Just for the inf my x1950 works perfectly fine in 3D Coat. I'm not sure how much the cuda perforance scales but having a fast cpu and graphics card could make up for that, plus the potential of opencl in the future.

Thanks for the tip.

That brings up a question of mine what shaders are good for modelling with. I see some vids of people using the clay one, but is there a reason other than it just looks like clay because I use that one, and it can sometimes be hard to see the surface, it can be too bright and nondescript in places. I sometimes use the default with a dark brown colour, whilst it looks like crud it seems to me to show the surface a bit clearer.

Thats what I think all the tools need normal surface space based operations instead of/as well as the camera based axes.

People are always going to be like that though. When something works perfectly well someone will always suggest "What would make that loads better would be wings". Of course wings would make anything better, and they've been added to loads of things already, but sometimes the time is not right to add wings. People arent ready for cups with wings, toaster wings, cheese wing or wheel wings, so those budding, would be inventors, with those genius wing variant ideas, have to wait, for the time when people are willing to accept wings on rice, beer wings, Blackberry with wings. But when that time comes, those would be inventors waiting in the wings, will reap the wings based consumer whirlwind.

Yeah I did use references from that same site. I think it is a bit rubbish. Lots of flaws, including the lips. I'm trying other things at the minute, but will start a new one, perhaps a male face as they are more distinctive, supposedly easier. Thanks for the comment.

Real edges arent that sharp anyway you have to bevel them or whatever to get good renders etc similar to real world edges.

I'm not trying to purposefully dis your idea, I just think that every idea should be questioned and until it is something, then it is rubbish(including my own). Ideas are easy, implementing is hard. I do have a tablet, but even with that it can be hard to get the exact pressure I want(but then it does only have 512 levels). But I dont think any software should be dependant on it. But then it need not be you just set the pressure the same way you do with the size of the brushes.

I dont know, I'm just having trouble understanding it, it sounds complicated. Having to do repeated strokes exactly over a first stroke, and being reliant on a tablet. And how do you set which area is reshaped. How is it any better than just adjusting things using right click or the gizmo?

I wouldnt say its artist friendly to have to think to remember to press enter every so often. And yeah it does take several minutes to convert the voxels and what if I forget to press enter after a while, and there is a lot of surface to change, and then it crashes or I think its crashed and force quit the program. I prefer the immediate conversion, you dont have to think about it worry about it at all.

A simple head I made with my attempts to learn to sculpt. I may try and give her hair, have to figure out some approaches. Any Crits and comments welcome.

Very awesome, hands seem a bit big but it is a monster. Was it all modelled in 3dCoat?

I was talking about Zsphere2. Getting them to work on the ends of skeletons and building up the masses in a less uniform way is difficult at least for me anyway, and it is just a nowhere near finished surface. I agree about the ability to draw the geometry straight out would be perfect with voxels, it should be one of its defining features. I just dont think it needs to be done with the curves. It can be done a lot simpler with the tools already. You just use the geometry already created as references and draw the new geometry off of that.

Zspheres arent that great compared to voxels. Its a whole extra disconnected step in creating a model. Putting down the strokes can be awkward inconsistant, its hard to understand how these little bubbles work, and to get them to flow how you want them to. And thats only It wouldnt be to hard (probably) to just adapt the spheres tool to work something like that. Just have instead of its direction being always in the view space, have its direction that the brush is pointing or normal of the surface.

ATI for me work fine in most 3d packages. If you dont want to get the best performance per buck, then buy Nvidia, if you do then ATI. Most Nvidia cards are being discontinued at the moment anyway, dont know about that model. Just on a simple level buy the card which is the best performance or wait for a newer card with a higher performance. Both cards drivers have problems in certain situations, ATI are no less reliable than Nvidia, unless someone has some proper evidence.

Thats true, but you end up with perfect uniform geometry, and it takes time and planning. Whereas using, the spikes, spheres, tools, its quicker and more human, and if you have a lot spikes, like a porcupine or something.

I have a small request. Part of the good thing about voxels is being able to spontaneously draw geometry. I like the idea of using the sphere, spikes, and other similar tools, but it can be hard to draw using those tools. To draw in a straight line from a surface you have to be at an exact ninety degree angle from it, then you have to try and get the exact spot where you want. I dont know about anyone else but for me it can be difficult. The idea is to have an option to move the sphere/spikes(spontaneous drawing tools) in the direction of the surface/normal, or the direction of the brush(same thing), so that it may be easier and quicker to get more ordered geometry.

Its not really a work in progress just a mess . I call it MetalRacerHead.

Cool, thanks. Here's what I did for a quick mess about with it.

Wow, that was great. Reminds me of watching Rolf Harris paint. Just seeing this rough sketchy lines, and saying what is that, and then like magic it suddenly turns into something you recognise. I like how she works with the randomness of the sand.

Its because the spline is adhered to the surface, to get it to extrude you have to have the spline outside whatever the depth is of the planar brush.