Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

L'Ancien Regime

Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by L'Ancien Regime

  1. 10 hours ago, Scary M said:

    I should clarify that I Never said I stretch the application over multiple screens, my issue is I cannot run the app at all on single screen when I have two displays or more displays of different resolutions, hardware accelerated application should really be kept on a single screen. If you look at my video I have it displayed on one screen. With the offset present. Setting the resolution to the same on all displays means I can at least run 3dc on one screen.

    My issue is not a multi screen support only the ability too use the application at all on one screen.

    Aha. I got confused because I was watching a video by Tenitsky on this the other day...



    • Thanks 1
  2. The dual screen thing doesn't work at all. I'm using a Wacom 24" pro and an LG 4k next to it and the primitives come in totally stretched out, distorted. This is not the way to dual or triple monitor an app. Houdini does it best with Maya a close second.  You have to have floating attribute editors  that you can tear right off the main window and place around at wil and  in justice to 3D Coat there is no sculpting program that can multi monitor properly. Sculpting programs have to run super fast since they handle millions of polys that would freeze up normal DCCs so you find that Zbrush, Mudbox and 3D Coat cannot off load menus and attribute editors as separate windows from their main window.




    Frankly I find that doing without multiscreening is not an issue. What is an issue is the manual/documentation. I would have liked it to be as good as Rhino 3D's at the very least. Asking for Houdini's level of documentation would be a bit of overkill.

  3. Is there any demo of the subd capabilities of the new polygonal modeling tools? What mathematical topology model was used? Good old Catmull Clark?

    It's all looking good. I like what I see. 

  4. 5 hours ago, stusutcliffe said:

    Put a request in, wherever you do that, they could sneak it in Version 2021...cant be that hard....says the the feller who litrally knows zero about programming...

    I just tried signing into Trello and Mantis and it's no go  for posting anything. I can't figure that stuff out. This entire board is called Feature Requests. Why isn't enough to just mention it here without jumping through all those other hoops?

  5. 9 hours ago, stusutcliffe said:

    Dont think you can lock the viewport window.  The way I use image planes is to select front/side/back whatever, then go to Orthographic.

    Or maybe make a camera so you can return to the exact view you had.

    That's a problem when every second move you make disturbs the absolute angle of front or top or whatever, even in orthographic. 

    • Like 1
  6. Among other improvements to the reference images.


    Scaling is unweildly, counterintuitive, not precise.

    It's too easy to be using a move tool for example and slip off the sculpt you're working on and inadvertantly move the reference image you're using. Very vexatious. Perhaps there's some control at present to lock it in place but if there is I can't find it.

    At present, I dread using the ref image in 3D Coat, I avoid it.



    Hint; Maya does it right. Simple, straightforward, easy to scale and position, totally stable in the viewport once put in place.



  7. I agree with you about the render engine development. Instead of developing their own they should have simply created a deeper link embedding Renderman and Radeon Pro Render with full functionality rather than making their own. 

    But then perhaps Andrew just fancies exploring render engine development for his own satisfaction.

    I don't care for Blender as admirable as it may be.  Perhaps I just don't want to have to develop the muscle memory to run a workflow that demands elaborate hotkey combinations that change their sequence with every plug in you load into it.  Personally I like the different work rooms in 3D Coat.  The layers bar is annoying though with accidental shifts from Voxel to Surface mode always a hazard.

  8. CAD is about BREP. I said that already. Not NURBS. NURBS is more for elegant surface designs like car bodies and expensive yachts.

    And your argument merely serves to reinforce my idea; all these people trying to do hard surface modeling with voxels, or polygonal ngon mesh or dynamesh or even SubD's are making peepee in the wind (yes, Blender 2.90+ too). BREP is the ultimate in hard surface modeling, especially when it comes to  splitting or shatter booleans or any other kind of boolean workflow not to mention elaborate chamfers and bevels.  A solid BREP modeling system in 3D Coat would solve your problems and I bet Andrew could implement it quickly if he wanted to. If he did it all with a non destructive node workflow like Houdini  that gave you a bulletproof dependency graph/history then so much the better.  And as a by product that would also open the door eventually to parametric modeling like Autodesk Dynamo or Rhino Grasshopper down the road.

    This is a model using NURBS tools, polygonal tools, subD and voxels with Houdini's OpenVDB tools, translating back and forth effortlessly between modes, entirely within Houdini, no plug ins, no  Vanzhula Modeller.  I often wish that SideFX would just purchase 3D Coat and bring in Andrew as a senior developer at Houdini.

    Rather than seeing a move like this as ignoring old glitches and bugs, I see it as leapfrogging those problems in an audacious manoeuvre  that simply makes your vexatious old bugs disappear into irrelevancy with an entirely new innovative approach. This is what Andrew excels at; rapid innovative development that no one else has done.





  9. On 1/1/2021 at 5:44 AM, sprayer said:

    why people here very often looking on CAD tools in 3d coat? Do you understand what it's sculpt software and this is have nothing with CAD. Do you think engineers will use sculpt tools? CAD have own formats and eco system for production, calculating weight, and you can change every step without undo
    Though i want to have tools for making perfect hard surface to make product render for concepting, right now you cannot make perfect shapes to have perfect edges on renders in big resolution like in zbrush 

    Actually a lot of CAD tools have added SubD toolsets, even Alias, and with Grasshopper and Dynamo there's a lot of momentum towards procedural tools in there too. Rhino has some sculpt capability now.

    The point is that when you want to model the world there's all sorts of things that have to be modelled and no one toolset can comprise all the necessary workflows to attain them. Model an engine block without proper bevels and chamfers like Siemens NX or Creo or Catia is an impossibility.  Both Modo and Houdini with the Modeler plug in have a workaround with Mesh Fusion, derived from Groboto's initial work. 

    3D Coat is my favorite program because Andrew is what I call an advanced thinker. He can take a white paper proposal and implement it as a vital toolset that nobody ever thought was necessary or possible, as he showed by being the first person to implement automated retopology, or the first person to implement sculpting with voxels. He beat Houdini to the punch with voxel implementation. I think that he could blow everybody away, MOI3D, even Rhino, Modo, even Maya  if he just focused on making 3D Coat the ultimate artist's modeling toolset.  Obviously he's not going to be able to take on Catia ICEM Surf or Autodesk Alias but Maya has a NURBs toolset (not a very good one either it's basically Alias 1999 or something like that).

    NURBS does make sense but more importantly BREP makes sense. Look at the incredible variety of work now being produced by 3D Coat users. It's not just organic modeling anymore. You're missing the point if you think Geomagic is just NURBS. They bought Freeform which was the first computer sculpting program, preceding Zbrush by several years. It was a project by a team at MIT using an expensive haptic device so it never caught on.  Thus in Geomagic you can create seamlessly in NURBS, BREP, SubD, polygons, or if you choose, a kind of dynamesh that allows you to sculpt and then go back and forth at need or at a whim. This is the ideal for creative people. You shouldn't have to be limited by a specific app to where your creative desires lead you.


    I mean look at this; is this organic sculpting? This is the work of one of the foremost users of 3d Coat.




    • Like 1
  10. The ideal workflow would be if 3d Coat emulated GeoMagic, with polygonal/ subD/ NURBS/ BREP/ and then OpenVDB tools all in one modeling package so you could just seamlessly go back and forth between modeling modes at need. No need for amateur hour hard surface modeling tools. The real deal for machine design with BREP and NURBS. If nothing else your bevels and chamfers would be perfect regardless of the underlying shape of the surface. Then voxelize it for sculpting like Geomagic's free form sculpting.



  11. Mantra render of the per pixel paint on the left and the microvertex paint on the  right. 

    Aside from their sloppiness as just test paint jobs (it's going to take a while to tie down the finer points of the technique) I think I'm prefering the results from per pixel painting.  It's more subtle in its effects.



  12. hahaha oh man....this would hurt.


    Nvidia has launched the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, a new entry-level card in its GeForce RTX 30 Series of Ampere-based gaming GPUs, joining the existing GeForce RTX 3090, 3080 and 3070.

    The new $399 card outperforms the much more expensive previous-generation Quadro RTX 2080 Super.




    Last time I found a new Radeon VII for sale new a month ago it was more than twice the price I paid for it. 




    Hey Carlosan how would it work if I ran a 3060 simultaneously with my Radeon VII..



  13. The micro vertex techique requires a lot more delicacy to lay down, and attention to layering but in many ways it gives superior results. The lowest layers should be hand painted for broad color effects then the displacement no more than 13% at the very most while the simultaneous color layers should be around 56% or so depending on the base photographic stencils you're using.  With the Per Pixel approach you' almost need to go double that, particularly in the displacement.

    This is just a crude test but sort of a valid example



  14. I was reading the wiki on these two systems and I was wondering if there was any way to take advantage of both; say to go in and paint in Micro Vertex and then after to load the entire project as  Per Pixel and go in and add details with the the latter system, thereby getting the benefit of both their advantages. 

    The wiki indicated that it wasn't possible but maybe somebody out there knows to the contrary. 

  • Create New...