Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

L'Ancien Regime

Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by L'Ancien Regime

  1. 33 minutes ago, cineacoat said:

    I had to make a new account to see the upgrade price from V4 to 2021 of 3DCoat.  After making I then entered my v4 license which it didn't seem to take with the only 2 options as "False" or "cancel".  Clicking false it said false, then I clicked it again and it had my license number. and a price of 75 euro.  It would not let me do that with Textura probably because no one would want to go from 3Dcoat pro to Textura seeing as 3DCoat has Textura built into it.


  2. 27 minutes ago, preecher said:


    i can't upgrade either.  got my license to show in my account but per the instructions there is a download button for the last few versions but there is no upgrade button.  i go to store and find an upgrade button which has a box that is greyed out but if i hit it 2 times it says it is in my cart but when i go to cart it says it's empty...no biggie i know you will get it to work soon...


    i'll be back...  thanks for all your hard work!!!

    Yeah I'll second that. Thanks for all your hard work. 

  3. I'm trying to upgrade; I hit on "Find my V4 license button and I'm entering my license key and it's saying that it's false. I'm also entering my email address and that's being listed as false too.

    It's not accepting my email address either even though I can sign into my 3d Coat online account with my email address and it does a reply to my email.





  4. 5 hours ago, nickloong said:

    I hope the old version of the curve lasso tool can coexist with the new version
    Instead of removing
    The old version of the curve tool is much easier to use than the new version.
    Very convenient for quick styling

    I agree...

    • Like 1
  5. The first photonic computer will be going on sale by the end of the year. I've been fascinated by the idea that computers could be run with photons instead of electrons since the 80's when I read an article in Scientific American about them. But the promise of those efforts failed, mainly because they tried to create transistor style logic gates that used light. But light and electricity are physically very different so that analogy didn't work out. However a reassessment of the potential of photon computing has produced a new product from a young company; Lightmatter.





    While the optical transistor was dying, a new kind of optical computing approach was being invented. In the mid-1990s, the field of quantum computing was growing rapidly owing to new proofs that showed that quantum systems could solve problems that were intractable on classical computers. There were many known approaches to implementing quantum systems, including using photons (single particles of light). In 1994, in hopes of building an optical quantum processor, Michael Reck and co-authors described a system that used arrays of a fundamental optical component — the Mach-Zehnder Interferometer (MZI) — to perform an important mathematical operation called matrix multiplication.







    It's not good at logic operations, but what it does excel at is Linear Algebra, machine learning, chemistry, RAY TRACING. (go to the 15 min mark in the You Tube video)




    This is that 1983 article in Scientific American I read;


    https://ur.booksc.me/book/10696832/e271e8    (downloadable PDF of the original 1983 article)





    • Like 1
  6. NL0TnJI.png




    China Economic Observer reported a chip agent revealed that to meet the growing demand, suppliers were no longer keeping their counterfeiting practices secret. Instead, they are openly creating separate production lines to expedite the sales of counterfeit or refurbished chips. Furthermore, businesses are no longer offering the shoddy products at half price. Many are being sold at full market value.

    The agent identified two types of counterfeit chips. The first involves recycling used chips from e-waste by removing the logo and cleaning them for resale with new packaging. The second involves packaging the substandard chips from the regular production line and selling them as good products.

    Not surprisingly, customers were often dissatisfied with the product’s performance, reliability, and durability. However, the deficiencies were not immediately evident until after the chips were used over time or under extreme conditions. At which point, it would be the customers or manufacturer of the final products who suffer a loss, while the fake chip providers often avoid troubles, according to the chip agent.

    • Confused 1
  7. 8 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

    I am just speculating, but it seems they are using the nodes as a direct competitor to Substance Designer, but rather than in a separate app, it's a separate addon. Nothing wrong with that decision. They might change their mind, but I presume that was their plan, and I cannot blame them. 

    One thing that should be remembered that 3D Coat is no longer just a one man operation. Andrew has taken on other talented workers and has a payroll to meet.  If long term license holders are charged an extra $100 for V5 or 2021 whatever it's called that's reasonable.

  8. 3 hours ago, RabenWulf said:

    Definitely depends on workflow, but I am in agreement with you if the workflow is good. 3DC has always been missing good procedural options, especially for masking and texturing. Substance Designer/Painter is pretty much the gold standard right now for the procedural aspect. I hope Andrew and the team have considered making an equivalent of the substances themselves (advanced smart materials) which can have their own set of sliders or functions attached. Call it "Coats". If "Coats" could be made in 3DC, and used in other software like Blender or Unreal, that would be a huge help in driving 3DC adoption.

    If used alongside sculpting via sculpting layers, then it adds a unique approach to sculpting that even Zbrush does not have. Imagine "coats" for voxel modeling and or tied to a brush (coat brush)? Lots of potential to market the hell out of that.

    yeah IOW sculpting with straight up displacement maps generated in a compositing laboratory.  3D Coat is already half way there with the 3d sculpting in the paint room as you directly paint with normal maps. Real time sculpting with textures and displacement maps generated in a node texture workspace would be pretty cool...

  9. 3 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

    Andrew hasn't given me any information about it, so I am just as uninformed as anyone, regarding this.

    Well that may be good news then; if you don't know what the ultimate form of 3D Coat 5 will be then perhaps we will be getting a new heretofore unseen interface too. The literature says we're getting a Substance Designer style parametric texture generator and a new interface. Here's hoping...

    And a Substance Designer style of parametric texture generator will be well worth whatever extra money we have to pay to extend our licenses ...

    • Like 2
  10. 17 hours ago, Yousung said:

    The node system is included in the beta version.

    But there is no information on how to use it.
    I've looked through the documentation, but I can't figure out how to use it.

    I may be wrong here but that link you posted was to a shader generator for the sculpt room , like red wax, or car paint or a lambert, a blinn. The new Node system is apparently a competitor to Allegorethmic Substance Designer that generates complex textures parametrically...that's what I'm taking from all the talk about nodes. But it somewhat confusing at this point. Maybe Carlosan or AbnRanger can set me straight on this.



  11. 4 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

    Replacing all the icons and adding Tool Groups is no small deal. Remember how drastically changed (or lack thereof) Maya and Max's refresh a few years ago, or what about ZBrush's UI? They probably made some small changes for the past 5 years or so, but it is largely the same UI. 

    Obviously, it's not easy making core structural changes and thus cosmetic changes are about all that can be done, many times. There was already so much to be done that trying to restructure the core UI in time for this major release, probably just wasn't doable. I think there will be some changes to the layers and perhaps some other UI elements, coming in the near future, so this is probably not all.

    Is the material node system in the B55 yet? I can't find it. Is it only going to  appear in the full V5 (2021)?

    As for changing the interface radically, this is a dilemma for any program; you have the long term users that have learned the ins and outs of the program over the years, your faithful base, and they don't want the trouble of relearning a new interface which can consume a lot of time and then you have new users baffled by the arcane logic of the program. You 're going to go with the long term faithful userbase if you know what's good for you.

    • Thanks 1
  12. 2 hours ago, Silas Merlin said:

    By crippling I mean the beta tools being stripped off 4.9

    As for the new 2021, I take it you have not tested it yet at all ?
    It has been available in beta for a long time now, you can get a copy on this thread :


    Yeah I've got B55 installed. It's alright. But it doesn't have the node stuff in and there's a lot more stuff coming. I do believe there is a new interface coming...at least that's what it sounded like in their announcement. Or have I missed the node editor in B55?



  13. 4 hours ago, Silas Merlin said:

    In the case of hardware, I can understand that you lose some/gain some when upgrading to a new device. There just comes a point when the old hardware has to be replaced.

    This is not the case here. This is software, the old version works just fine.  crippling it by choice is something that is beyond my comprehension. 

    Let's not assume they're "crippling" anything. I think the old GUI is a tangled mess and I'm looking forward to a new redesigned interface.  Let's just wait and see. 

  14. 24 minutes ago, Artomiano said:

    Aaahhh. Thanks for the tip. Problem was, the layer system in the sculpt room is not the same like in the paint room so I had to take a closer look to achive similar "layering results". Okay so far. It works. But ... nevertheless ... that every room has its "own" layer subsystem is complicated. :(


    That doesn't trouble me too much because the different rooms are such different beasts that require their own approaches. I've been playing with Zbrush Zmodeler and I haven't really looked at the new polygonal modeling tools yet for 3D Coat. So in that room I'm just as much of a novice as you; I don't know what I'll find there, if it's going to be useful to me or not but I'm going to give a good effort to learn it just to see what's there. Who knows?

    Personally I struggled with texturing, trying many solutions and for UV mapping (back when I tried to do UV mapping in Maya it was so bad it turned me off totally) and then when I discovered UV mapping and texture painting in 3D Coat it was an amazing liberation for me. I prefer it to Mari; it's more visceral and sensuous to handle less abstract and detached. And it's less of a click fest than Zbrush so it's more direct and simple to use though for someone learning it that may seem hard to believe. Stick with it, and keep working with it. When you master it you'll find a lot of enjoyment in it. Is it perfect? Do I wish it was better, easier? yeah I do but maybe that's my own failings. It's a miracle to me that I even have this supercomputer on my desk and I can sculpt and paint with it at all...




    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  15. On 6/29/2021 at 1:43 PM, Artomiano said:

    Hm ... don't know. ZBrush is an industry standard, so I assumed that its user experience could be better. But that's a theory. ;)

    The problem with Zbrush is that it started out in an odd manner. Instead of directly trying to be a simple 3D digital sculpting program it started out as this weird hybrid; a 3D/2.5D program that at the time boasted of being the next evolution into a kind of  2.5D Photoshop. This was based around the idea of PIXOLS. The idea was that you sculpted stuff in 3D then went into 2.5D mode and composited your now fixed objects into a 2D plane that still allowed for changes in lighting and illumination. This had the potential at the time of being very powerful as you could assemble scenes that were huge with great complexity even though the angle of view was now fixed. I may be wrong but my impression was that the development team was deeply influenced by their resident artist, Meats Meier. 

    What ended up transpiring was that everyone piled in for the 3D sculpting tools and ignored the 2.5D stuff. It simply never caught on and over the years, well now decades the 3D sculpting tools rapidly grew in power but the 2.5D Pixol stuff just faded into the background. The problem was that the 2.5D pixol stuff made the interface needlessly complex and annoying for those that didn't understand all the extra stuff you had to do because of it. I knew all about this and even I would get enraged at say inadvertantly turning my sculpt into a 2.5D Pixol object that was fixed in space and not being able to immediately Ctrl Z my way back out of it.  Of course you could just CTRL N to ditch the Pixol transformed sculpt then drop a fresh version of your sculpt sitting in the stack, BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHY? It also meant that there were 3 distinct ways to save your work in Zbrush; ZTL, ZDOC and ZPR (Z tool, Z Document, and Z Project)


    Here,  learn all about it. Try not to puke on your keyboard. That's hard to clean up.

      The whole 2.5D thing seemed to encourage the pictorial horror vacui of Meat's Meier's style, or psychological mindset. 


    So the end result was a needlessly complex interface with a lot of extra clicking and a requisite  awareness of whys and wherefores of it all. Like Utopius said you can get used to it, and I have, but still it's vexatious when you're learning the interface and trying to learn say human and animal anatomy at the same time. 

    It's one of the main reasons I prefer 3D Coat to Zbrush; 3D Coat is simply easier to learn to operate and more straightforward in getting you to where you want to go, if sculpting is where you want to go and not some elaborate and esoteric compositing with billions of Pixols (and even with  2003 computers Zbrush could deliver billions of Pixols, I'll give it that).

    Having said that there's some things in Zbrush I wish Andrew would incorporate soon into 3D coat, like a proper sculpt room lighting system instead of unwieldly and ineffective lighting system he has now.  A powerful lighting studio in the Sculpt Room is simply indispensable to serious sculpting. In fact it would be nice if it were more akin to Maya's lighting system than even Zbrush's system which really is a bit annoying by comparison to Maya with that tiny little ball and those tiny little lightbulb icons  with all the obscure little sliders. Everything in  Zbrush's interface is so fidgety and tiny...eecch.


  16. On 5/24/2021 at 1:44 PM, splinetime said:

    Andrew shouldn't have to respond to this kind of abuse!
    I have been with 3D coat a long time. This man is the most dedicated and responsive software developer I have ever seen. The program rocks. The scope is ambitious and software design is not click and drag.

    I appreciate the program, the development and you Andrew, and those who assist.

    Carry On!

    I have always had the highest opinion of Andrew both as a creative artist and programmer and as a man. This program is in Beta. There's going to be glitches. That's why I have 4.9.72 and Beta49 installed. The only thing I'm waiting for is the day he asks me to pay for the final upgrade on 3dCoat 2021 which I will do with pleasure for this superb tool.

    • Like 2
  • Create New...