synapsemassage

Hello Andrew, I'm using this for a week now in ReTopo, but I'm not convinced about the improvment. While I like better capturing, RMB seems to me not consistent, RMB resizes the brush, moves points or makes quads depending on the brush size and brush position: it doesn't work always the same. I understand the intension, but in this case it's a bit of an overload of the RMB (IMO): it breaks fast interaction routines and automatisms. For me it's not convenient having to resize brushes to switch between the functions of "moving vertices" and "making quads". I sense other faster possibilities with other keys and mouse buttons and less interrupting workflow. Still close to what it is now but less interuptive. Another one: while hovering over the retopo mesh it is currently not possible with RMB to change brushsize. User must find an uncovered spot of the reference mesh to change brush size. Or alternatively use the brush slider in the GUI (usable but not convenient) or scrollwheel/touchstrip (to slow, not stepless). Best regards.

BUILD: v3.3.13, 64bit CUDA OS: Windows Vista 64bit, SP2 BUG DESCRIPTION: in Retopo-room point & faces: RMB to add faces doesn't work. STEPS TO REPRODUCE: RMB to add faces.

Hi Greg, hi guys, my first post in here. As you guys are talking about the auto-stuff, maybe this is interesting for the "paint weights indicating quad density" thing http://people.csail.mit.edu/ibaran/autorig.pdf. Actually this is auto-rigging-skinning, considering this being strongly related to mesh density, it might be of worth taking a look into the algorithm (solver for heat equilibrium over the surface). Yeah, automatic stuff is cool as long it's not ruining my work;-) Pretty sure automatic is going to change a lot but not right tomorrow. As far as I can see auto-retopo still needs my helping hand and my time. It's cool that you guys received these positive responses at the conference, 3d-coat deserves it! Very nice piece of software indeed. About this guy you talked to... It's just one guy! I think china is a weired idea. Im my eyes making a game is strongly depending on communication and how to make your team share the same vision. Don't think it's going to be easier or cheaper with china at all. Making a fantastic game needs a fantastic team! Most likely he will burn more money explaining his vision/communicating/reworking stuff than saving with cheaper artists. He is not the first to try this and not the first to fail. Maybe a thing like this makes sense when producing solely for one region like china or asia in general or just with a dedicated chinese team with it's own project. IMO outsourcing makes sense when you need specialists or when knowing you're going to f**k up the deadline without a hired helping hand.