Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

vivi

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by vivi

  1. Personally, it sounds like you haven't spent enough time learning the ins-and-outs of 3DC, to me. And no, 3DC price <>ZB price is completely different. You can purchase 3DC for as low as $299 from some resellers, ZB is $699. That is clearly not the same price.

    Further, instead of complaining, try posting constructive ideas on how/why/etc you think a tool could be improved. That is what we do here in this community, we try to help improve 3DC and not bash the developers into submission. ;)

    yeah I posted many videos last days...

  2. This is getting old...

    If nothing works for you in 3dcoat, and everything is fine and shiny in zbrush, you know where to go.

    I hate to resort to such easy talk but I'm starting to wonder if there's some commercial intent behind all that negativity and comparison scheme.

    Ok I am sorry if I am complaining. The reason for this is because 3D-coat costs almost the same as Zbrush!

    I am working on a non commercial shortfilm www.watersoul.moviebrats.com and I wanted to give 3D-coat a shot. I don't have budget to buy and try every software that makes promises. 3D-coat makes em, Zbrush makes em..

    Which one keep 'em? I have to consider getting a Zbrush license as well... Since I can't even accomplish a very simple task in 3D- Coat.

    You are right...I should stop complaining. I am sure that Andrew and the other developers put a lot of work in it...but through stones at me...I just don't see the price justified.

    Sorry

  3. So if pixologic "copied" 3dcoat. it's OK for me. What isn't OK is that 3dcoat doesn't copy zb and sculptris tools behavior.

    @renderdemon, why do you have this idea? I really hope we can influence the development. I mean, to give the general idea of what 3dcoat needs for not being the 3d swiss army knife or whatever some magazines call it.

    U got the point....Most big ideas are based on other peoples idea..just they have more money to make it big. So Zbrush copies some features of 3DCoat?..that's fine..I would do that..If I know I can do it better..why wouldn't I?? So I don't get why 3D coat has to be new in every aspect..there is no need for that. Make the features work..that would be a good start!

    I am playing around with 3D coat for weeks now..seriously..if you guys think that 3Dcoat works fine, then I can only say..for me.. 3D coat is BETA. In almost every aspect there are bugs and issues..

  4. they are comparable.

    3d coat has better topology tools. paint in layers with spec and normal mapping. layers can be used to mask other layers. voxels make tangled regions impossible. other than that I find them pretty comparable.

    like most 3d tools. it's a preference. the surface details are much better in zbrush.

    the rough volumes and surface forms are a bit better in 3DC.

    here's a 5 minute mesh from voxels made using autotopo and auto uv's with baked normal, color and AO layers to illustrate Psmith's points.

    hmm..weird...in this video he is using the grow brush using a mask...but when I use grow, the mas won't affect the sculptping...

  5. If you have the hardware to support them, voxels offer sculpting freedom and flexibility not yet available with a polygonal workflow, (but we're working on it).

    It's also pretty well been established that 3D-Coat has among the most advanced Retopo tools available.

    With regard to texturing, it's hard to beat 3D-Coat's speed and simplicity for painting with any combination of diffuse, specular and displacement channels, simultaneously.

    3D-Coat is the only app that has an intelligent and very useful Auto-Topology toolset (AUTOPO), which, when used skillfully, can save hours, if not days of creation time.

    These are just a few of the advantages of adding 3D-Coat to your Zbrush pipeline.

    Greg Smith

    About the Auto-Topology.. it ain't true.... wrap-it, a plugin for 3Dsmax has that too and it is loads faster than 3Dcoats. But yeah..I like using 3D-coats Retopo..it feels nice. So nice that I dont wanna even use the AutoRetopo... :)

    At the moment I can'T see a reason why changing from Zbrush4 to 3D-Coat... 3D-coat is still a baby. It can become very powerful though. But isn't Pixologic also going into Voxel direction? They have more money.

    Look what Updates the shot out everytime...BIG updates...with superior features...

    For me it is important what u get out of these applications..it is nothing worth to me to have a cool model, but not being able to export it with the same quality!

  6. I have noticed the artifacts that appear on the edge when using the and extrude before. If it's fixed in orthographic mode why do you get problems when not in that mode, this seems like a bug to me really and switching to another view type would be a workaround also so it would be much better if this could be fixed.

    ortho or not..doesn't change anything to me...

  7. I also do all my extrusion type of work in orthographic mode and use the arrow keys on the keyboard to change xyz planes...

    Press "5" on your keypad to change to orthogracphic mode.

    I also did that...won't help..must be a bug in the new .27A

  8. Andrew, this sounds promising. Do u think there is a way to implement a function that would allow to Export/import the instances without loosing it's instancing, into my 3D animation software?

    I know that instancing might work different in all applications, but maybe there is a way to do so? It will loose the instancing for sure during export, but maybe there is a way to tell the importer/ exporter which instance consists of which object.

    On my factory for example, I want to use proxies, so that I could put the whole factory together of just a few parts without increasing memory.

    This would be a cool feature and I think that even Zbrush doesn't have the possibility to do such a thing.

    Vito

    I tried to put down my idea...don'T know what's possible though...

    https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1L9sCSM3YUArZmU-LNO75oANVI-tYfFswFDapNGOeMTg/edit

  9. This is one way of doing what you are asking.

    Merge without voxelizing. check your merge settings, it's there... Close and reopen 3Dcoat before doing this, explain about that later..

    The model will be place in surface mode no need of subdividing.

    Make instances of your model using the intstancer tool (left toolbar) and use the transform tool to to scatter them around. Instances will be put in the subtree of selected volume (default setting). Making more intsances of the main volume will keep muliplying your instances. Uncheck the Put in Instance subtree and see how that affects creating your intances.

    Once done, RMB on your main layer and go to export/ export scene....

    All instances and main model will be exported.

    Just experiment around with the instancer tool to see how it functions...

    Picture shows you a cube with the instances in 3DCoat and a picture of them in my modeling program after exporting scene.

    3DCoat will triangle them...

    Digman, thanks for your reply.

    I know what you explaind, but I am also thinking of using the pen tool to place objects since it would be very fast!!

  10. Merging is surface mode is a lot more complicated. In general it is boolean operation. Booleans operations in general not stable.

    But you gave me a good idea. I will try because I have good boolean routine.

    Andrew, this sounds promising. Do u think there is a way to implement a function that would allow to Export/import the instances without loosing it's instancing, into my 3D animation software?

    I know that instancing might work different in all applications, but maybe there is a way to do so? It will loose the instancing for sure during export, but maybe there is a way to tell the importer/ exporter which instance consists of which object.

    On my factory for example, I want to use proxies, so that I could put the whole factory together of just a few parts without increasing memory.

    This would be a cool feature and I think that even Zbrush doesn't have the possibility to do such a thing.

    Vito

  11. I was thinking, it would be very useful if I could use the merge tool to scatter my objects that I have created in my 3D animation software, without voxelizing it. Though 3D coat allows only one object to be merged, then switching to surface mode which then won't allow further merging.

    Is this a logical restriction? I thought it would so cool to have the merge tool ( on pen function ) to replicate on voxel objects.

    My goal is to build a huge factory for my shortfilm which is very complex but uses some repetitive objects scattered and realigned around the whole thing. If I use voxel, I will end up with a cool model which I then won't be able to export back to my 3D animation software. So I was thinking I could model my kit bashing objects, bring it in to 3D coat and scatter it around.

    Is there a way to do that?

    vito

    post-3388-0-67410000-1319994261_thumb.jp

    post-3388-0-09117300-1319994435_thumb.jp

    post-3388-0-43996900-1319994450_thumb.jp

    • Like 1
  12. Ok, I am sorry you lost some work.

    Surface mode is for adding all your details and then "Retopoing and Baking". You "do not" have to leave surface mode. As you discovered if you go back to voxels you will lose detail unless you have tons of ram to boost the resolution up up very high. One of the reason surface mode was added was for adding smaller details as you would have to push the resolution so high in voxel mode eating tons of ram. Now the surface room has gotten even better for working in with LC and remeshing in the works.

    Voxel mode--- create larger and medium form

    Surface--- small to fine detail ( you have discovered this already) just your mistake of going back to voxels.

    Nice fish, sorry again you lost the work.

    Thank you for your reply...

    I see..so voxels are only for creating a sort of base mesh?

    cheers,

    vito

  13. Think about layers as you think about Photoshop layers. Layer0 is like Background in PS.

    When 3DC bakes voxels->paint room it creates layers named as voxel objects. Color is baked to that layers, but normalmap is baked to single "Normlmap" layer.

    Regarding white - check if you have not chosen color only view mode.

    Also check if you are using 3.5.27A - there was problems with sequential baking in previous versions.

    oh i see...gonna download it right now.

    thanks heaps

    vito

  14. You should understand well organisation of objects in 3D-Coat (I think same for max & maya)

    - object is just set of polygons, it is independent on UV sets.

    - materials are also sets of polygons, usually UV set contains severalmaterials

    - UV-sets correspond to textures. They in general exist independently on objects.

    - layers exist through all objects and UV sets.

    So if you merge object in paint room from retopo room - it creates 1 object, materials that correspond to retopo groups and UV sets that correspond to UV sets in retopo room. Every merge retopo->paint creates this set. So objects and UV sets may be related but it is not 1:1 correspondence.

    If you will do some simple retopo piece and merge you will get 1 object 1 materialand 1 uv set. Better if at least UV sets will have unique names. If you willmerge object from Filemenuit will also create additionalobjects, materials and UV sets.

    Thanks Andrew, I still didn't get it completely though..

    Basically you are saying that a layer is not per object base, but kinda a scene layer.

    I also understand the UV editor, but think that it needs to be closer to the layer panel. always having to open the UV editor is not the best solution I think.

    I tried to make a video on the layer problems...

    but I lost the audiotrack...so u better scrub to 1:50

    I still don't understand it well.

    sorry if it is something simple that I just don't get....

  15. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcTll-owhVM



    The kit-bashing workflow is awesome...but without a way to export it to a animation software...it is useless.
    MODO for instance has also a kit bashing technique but, because u dont have voxels...u can easily export it. Although I have to say..I saw MOD in action, and it was slow, I didnt like the kit-bashing there.

    I have some ideas on how to kit bash and still keep the flexibility to export the whole thing..but since I am not a programmer, I dont know if I just had a bad dream or so :)


    vito
×
×
  • Create New...