RabenWulf
-
Posts
246 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Posts posted by RabenWulf
-
-
19 minutes ago, metrons said:
lots of great info here, thanks everyone. i've tried rapid and mud and buildup. they all produce weird strokes still. i say weird coming from zbrush, i know how a stroke will get laid down. i guess in the meantime im going to build out my shapes and detail them mostly in zbrush...sigh...
i still think 3dcoat needs some work on its clay type brushes. sure love sculpting in this program though. i just dont think the brushes are there.
You see it as well =)
Its something zbrush users or those with serious experience with zbrush would notice.
One thing I am confused about is that if the "presets" are so good and are the answer to every bad brush in 3D Coat, why are they not the defaults? There is some maintenance required to clean up the whole set of tools/brushes.
Agree that sculpting is a bit more fun in 3D Coat though, its more familiar and conventional.
-
Just now, AbnRanger said:
Wrong. Doing the video can prove conclusively whether there is any truth to the your claims...claims wihich I say are bogus. You have a bias and I have a bias, so let's put the cards on the table and see who is right and who is wrong. One of us has to be. My contention is that you've been just repeating what you've heard other ZBrush users say, and have not really experienced this huge disparity, yourself. You hate the brushes. I like them. Only one way to found out and this would be a good way for everyone to see whether there is any truth to this notion (that 3D Coat brushes suck, as you say).
There are enough videos going over what zbrush does, what comes out of it and how its used... just watching a zbrush video and a 3d coat video on sculpting shows the difference. You wont seriously learn zbrush before you make a conclusion, yet you want me to go and start making youtube videos for you? Its unnecessary. I took the time to learn and seriously use 3d coat, why dont you do the same with zbrush?
"My contention is that you've been just repeating what you've heard other ZBrush users say, and have not really experienced this huge disparity, yourself "
Your contention is just confirmation bias. I OWN ZBRUSH, so how foolish is it for you blindly proclaim that I am just repeating what other zbrush users say? How can you blindly make such an absurd claim, one that you cannot objectively back up? I put down money, time and effort to learn a large assortment of applications. I like 3D Coat but want it to get better, otherwise I wouldnt be here. Do continue to learn and objectively analyze various applications? What about exist in application neutral art communities? Perspective matters.
The disparity in brush strokes/displacement, in masking, in grouping and workflow, its real. You would not figure this out though if you keep running away from learning and analyzing zbrush. You dont even have to like zbrush to see what its doing right or better, where the standard has been set and vice versa. Common sense.
Also stop going back to this old "3d coat brushes suck" projection you have a habit of doing. Just because something isnt up to where it could be doesnt mean it "sucks". Can you not look at everything in such black or white terms? There is improvement to be made here. Whatever label you choose to tack onto the current status of the brush system for sculpting doesnt matter, only that there is improvement to be had and that its obvious it should come well ahead of something like sculpt layers. -
10 hours ago, AbnRanger said:
You see, I hear that a lot, and I think it is utter rubbish. But let's prove it one way or the other. You record yourself sculpting with these superior brushes in ZB, and superior masking, and post it on youtube. Do the best you can. Not just a little doodle. Sculpt something pretty elaborate that demonstrates this superiority and I'll emulate it in 3D Coat, and post it on Youtube as well. And then we will post both videos on 3D Coat's Facebook and Google+ page. So everyone can see if there is anything to this supposed superiority/inferiority. I'm up for it. Are you?
I have noticed that you have a habit of saying things like "I hear that a lot" or "a lot of people"... how do you prove this? How do you know what people are doing or experiencing? It seems like you set yourself up every time to back your firmly planted bias on this issue. Its not like I cannot understand your bias, you have talked about it in the past...
Remember its not the first time we have had this discussion on here. Back in October you admitted that "That weird interface has largely kept me away from ZB" and that you have dabbled in the trial a bit. Imagine, writing off a program because of the "weird interface" or that pixologic copied 3DC over the autoretopo. Remember you also called me a "zbrush fanboy" just because I replied with some information about zbrush that was positive on a 3D Coat forum... (Quote: " You're the one coming across as a ZBrush fanboy, since you are trying to promote in ON A 3D COAT FORUM. ")
My point here is that you have established you have an anti-zb bias in the past as well as never really jumping into ZB. You have at times admitted zbrush is better on the brushes but blame it it on "head start" they had (which is not entirely inaccurate), but also go into a feature comparison... you said what makes 3D Coat great is the dynamic topology and ability to vertex paint interchangeably. That certainly is a bonus point for 3D Coat for that particular workflow, but it still doesnt erase the quality issues and workflow of other features or base features (like sculpting). More features is not necessarily a good thing if the stuff they are built on isnt the best it can be.
So with that said, doing the videos is pointless. It wont erase your bias, it wont change my experience or observations. All one has to do is look at the content coming out of both applications to see the wide gap in quality of sculpts. Sadly even blender has better sculpts coming out of it than 3D Coat at this point in time. I too prefer to use 3D Coat for as much as possible, and its certainly not bad when you compare it to dying product like mudbox. At the very core of a good sculpting workflow is the brushes and how they interact with the mesh, the algorithm that displaces the geometry and how its used... as well as masking (and selection features in general, example: Polygroups) and transposing. All three of these need some serious work in 3D Coat, this really shouldnt have to be up for debate. All the extra features, are not as important (this includes sculpt layers, also applies to ZB as well). 3D Coat will be able to showcase a lot more high end sculpts if it improves the quality/workflow of those 3 things.
Just try putting aside your anti-zb bias, spend some time with it based on those 3 things mentioned, and you will see the obvious difference. Btw I do not want 3DC to copy ZB, I want it to be better or at least catch up to it on the basics... and right now its doing none of those things. Still usable in production? Sure depending on what you do and the quality expectation (as well as realism vs stylized). Lack of polygroups and masking options can result in a lot more work though and time requirements (plus effort) are also important. Focus on building up the foundation, not luxury features like sculpt layers which do not show their worth until the actual quality/workflow levels up.
-
2 hours ago, AbnRanger said:
Not saying some brushes cannot be improved, but I love what he did just prior to 4.1, and do not see what all the fuss is about...especially when using Artman's presets. I bet most everyone who complains about the brushing in 3D Coat really have not even tried to use them or the Mud/ Rapid/ Clay brushes. I've used Mudbox and I prefer to sculpt in 3D Coat now, with all the changes that were done. Seems to me that most just try a few voxel brushes and give up...not knowing that it's a much different experience in Surface mode. With a little tweaking of the settings and flattening curves, you can create a number of Go To brushes.
I'm sure they have tried them, as I have many times. Their effectiveness compared to something like zbrush is grossly over exaggerated. They still have the over all problem of the other brushes, which probably has something to do with the brush engine or way in which the displacement is occurring. Even with that problem, you still have really bad masking features (or lack there of) that are a bit too basic, polygroups and surface selection..ect... over all the sculpting isnt bad when you compare it to a mudbox or blender, but once zbrush comes into the picture the quality and expectation levels change drastically.
Also the same with surface mode, its a bit silly to think that people just stop at voxel mode and come to a conclusion. Careful of confirmation bias.
Sculpt layers are just not something that should be considered a priority when it comes to sculpting. Andrew has something really good with 3D Coat but instead of more features persay, the quality levels and workflow need to level up a bit.-
1
-
-
" i guess someone could say 3d coat just works differently, coming from zbrush i feel like this brush is going backwards for workflows compared to zbrush. its such a powerful brush in zbrush, i use it 95% of the time and its killing me not having this working like zbrush does in 3d coat. really would appreciate any insight on this. "
Thats one of the few things that have been killing me with 3D Coat... the brush system and the way they appear on the mesh are just not quite right... I gave up trying to get zbrush like brush strokes (and quality) from 3D Coat but its just not possible until Andrew improves upon the sculpting features.
@AbnRanger " This is why I hope, with 4.7 now released, I hope Andrew turns to Sculpt layers first. "
Sculpt layers are nice feature but they are not really a necessity. Whats the point if the sculpting quality/brush types and strokes as well as workflow just isnt up to par? Its far better to focus on getting higher quality, higher fidelity sculpting results first as the base, then add on the extra companion workflows like sculpt layers, otherwise the development is just working backwards and thats not good.
The zbrush alternative is a pretty good market thats been somewhat untapped. 3D Coat can really fill that niche with some serious work on the sculpting aspect. -
On 7/8/2016 at 9:01 AM, dimitribastos said:
I hate to be that guy, but I will deliver on the original deadline. I just don't think that it's fair with everyone who dedicated their time and efforts, and planning, and design, and modeling, and texturing, and rendering in order to complete the contest within two months. Now a lot of people have 50% more time to work - time that other people may not have.
I think you just broke the contest.
Please, do read this as constructive criticism. Next time would be great to have more solid rules.Extensions are fine. It means you have more time to polish your entry and more people can submit. I get that sometimes people wont want the competition, but also look at it from Pilgway's point of view. What do they get out of the competition? Most of these competitions are done to get some good marketing material out of them, while also generating interest in trying out the software. Two things have happened.
1. Not enough material has been created to generate some good marketing material.
2. 4.7 has been released, bringing in more interested parties. To get people interested in delving into a new release, the extension further aids in that endeavor.
Remember, this is not autodesk here, they dont have mountains of money to throw out. Its a small studio in Kiev, Ukraine with a niche market. Its in every 3D Coat user's interest to see the software get out of the niche category.-
2
-
-
Just noticed there is some weird behavior when rotating with the Curve tool active (green sphere) via the Voxel room when Symmetry is turned on. It seems to jump around and fly towards the navigation camera. Checked back and noticed this is happening in older builds as well as the released one.
-
Cheers!
This software is really leveling up.
Love the new professional look (website, styling).
Looking forward to seeing how the sculpting and modeling features develop past this point. Painting is top notch (could use some workflow/UI improvements, but feature set is solid).-
1
-
-
On 7/6/2016 at 6:05 PM, LucidMovement said:
This would be a very useful tool. It would also be very useful as a sculpting tool.
I think so too, but would prefer to see the actual sculpting quality (results, brushes, workflow) raise the bar a bit first. The particle brushes if not done right end up just being more of a gimmick than something important as well. So there is a lot of risk with very little reward to get out of it imo.
-
I doubt it. Its available for my other two posts. Only that one is missing. Anyways this is a diff topic altogether and we are going off track.
Is there any mention on what 2.7 will mainly focus on development wise? -
Just now, Michaelgdrs said:
Hmmmmmm , i see the edit button.
Next to + and quote. (after you made a post)
By the time I went back it was gone. Maybe its a timed thing.
-
31 minutes ago, Michaelgdrs said:
No this is not a paid upgrade , its FREE.
For license you can take it from 4.5 folder in your documents or just re enter the serial as ussual.
Thanks, I figured that out not long after I posted... the edit button went missing. I have no idea why.
-
1
-
-
1) Is this going to be another paid update? (noticed it doesn't recognize my 4.5 license) I was under the impression it would have jumped straight to 5.0...
2) Is there a list of what 4.7 will focus on and or what is (if any) the main development focus for the 4.7?-
1
-
-
Speaking of that, I really hope some more love is given to sculpting in general (surface and voxel)... I definitely want it to see 3DC level up a bit zbrush and surpass it with the kind of quality sculpting you can get out of it.
-
Heya, so I have been out of the loop for awhile. Noticed the new pbr shaders... they are very nice addition.
That said, is there any information on what exactly is being worked (features/major improvements) on at the moment or are we just seeing mostly bug fixes at this point? -
Regarding the brush behavior, I noticed two different things happening. If it skips around, I have to restart 3d coat and its fixed temporarily. What I experienced after loading it up and having all settings reset to default required an entire PC restart to get the behavior back to normal.
-
Damnit I was just warming up to 3D Coat again and it messes up again. Was using it earlier today, everything was fine. Loaded it back up and all settings were reset, didnt remember past save files but for some reason my custom matcaps were there. On top of that, the Brush behavior isnt the same before, the quality dropped. Color Blending starts showing banding. Why is this happening? So frustrating. Anyone else have weird issues like this after 4.5?
-
Yep, right now if you are doing hand painted style texturing, 3D Coat is probably one of the best options out there for it due to tool set, layout and ability to quickly pull colors and blend them together. A handful of blizzard artist are known to use it. Otherwise its usually photoshop or a plugin for 3ds max. I managed to pull out some what better results in Mari, but due to its unique design (and formerly price point), I can see how it wouldnt be considered...at least just yet.
ON a side note, here is Blizzard's Tyson Murphy in action.
-
1
-
-
I believe they are still the same Raben.
Sometimes i get those too , sometimes not.
That's unfortunate, I thought it was improved. I get it with all shaders and custom matcaps unfortunately outside of the first few defaults. Granted you can see a bit of this in other applications its just way more pronounced with 3d coat.
-
It appears there are still issues with matcaps/shaders... For example this artifacting along some edges/angles. Didnt the Shaders get an update with 4.5 or is this still on the todo list?
-
1
-
-
Right... reading comprehension and following up on the topic (with specifics) isn't your strong point. Since you opted to stay vague and I assume attack me personally as a result, I'll give you some advice...Stop, because you are embarrassing yourself (and quite frankly this community, small as it is).
-
(1)
I've already told you several times that I've been studying Zbrush since it first appeared. I still am. For certain functions it's indispensable. But having said that I prefer 3D Coat overall. I suspect most of us here feel that way; that's why we're here even though the big party is over at Zbrush forum.
(2)
I've never liked the sortware's ergonomic concessions to the 2.5D workflow in Zbrush, the Meats Miers style of working
It's a major pain in the ass. I want to scupt in 3D, Period. I don't want that 2.5D garbage. And I don't care if it can produce 3 Trillion pixols. I don't want pixols and I resent the interface concessions they continue to make to allow for the pixol workflow.
(3)
And as for clicking too much yeah I stand by that.
Here's a test you can all run for yourselves;
You're making a figure; you have it roughed in. Now you want to add fingers and a thumb to its hand.
(4)Maybe I'm just not adept enough at ZBrush but I've discussed this very task with expert Zbrush pros and their steps for doing what should be a simple task are arcane and clumsy, hell, vexatious compared to 3d Coat's simple clear workflow.
1) No you havent. List the times you have said something along the lines of "I've already told you several times that I've been studying Zbrush since it first appeared". Here let me do the work for you. The number of times you have said something similar to the above? 0
What you DID say, in two separate post is that you "work with it and its gimmicky" and that you are 62 and have a history degree. Neither count as suggesting you are constantly telling me several times that you are "studying zbrush since it first appeared". Additionally "studying" is far different than using. Its a silly word choice to use... nor can you call it an academic field of study.
I am not trying to be rude here but you either have no problem lying or are just imagining things. Neither of which helps your argument, and if you have a valid one and made a good case... chances are high I can/will agree with it.
2) Define "concessions to a 2.5d workflow". When I saw you try to make some distinction between 2.5d and 3D as being your primary argument... I suppose in response to constantly asking you to address what terms define "gimmicky"... I couldnt help but laugh. It sounds like you are just making stuff up at this point. Zbrush still has Zdepth (its in the name), it has a grid, you can transform in xyz... and the results on export are assets in 3D. So your whole basis on 2.5D being the problem is literally ABSURD.
You say you have been "studying it" constantly but clearly not based on that response. Looking at their documentation once a month doesnt count either, no more than I can flip through flight sim 2000's user manual and then tell everyone I "study planes".
The reason for coming to this conclusion is that you seem to be basing it off of the 1999 zbrush which started (after a siggraph demo) as only a very limited 2d + 2.5d painting application. Zbrush has moved waaaaay past that point, long ago. On top of that you mock the "pixols", saying you dont want them. Why? For what good and specific reason? You cannot possibly have one. Funny thing, Pixols contain x,y and z information... guess what other name uses a similar technique? Voxels. Who uses Voxels? 3D Coat. My point is your dislike of "Pixols" seems a bit odd.
At the end of the day, both zbrush and 3d coat have the user working in what appears to them as a 3D space and it gives 3D results...thats is literally ALL THAT MATTERS.
3) "clicking too much"
Again what are you clicking? You have a tablet, and a pen... you can drop in a mesh item and start sculpting. With dynamesh, you dont worry about topology. Everything else you need is just tied to a modifier key. Sliders are part of the interface or via hotkey (S brings up a size slider under the tip of the pen, hold and drag left or right). To suggest this is all "clicky" seems at odds with how zbrush actually works. You will have to give specifics to make that a valid argument.
On creating "fingers"... simple, hold control and paint a circular mask(s). With control still selected, tap the empty space to invert (faster than doing it via ctrl+I) and then either use a tool that pulls out the form or easier just use the move widget, hotkey M. This lets you quickly pull out the shape for fingers. If you chose to have them as a separate poly group, they can be easy to select and isolate...or you can just tell zbrush with a click of the button to send it over as a separate subtool. This is literally a quick and low step process. Again with dynamesh you are not worrying about topology. Additionally, a lot of artist just have tools (brushes) that automate fingers anyway and its easy to do... you make the finger once and convert it into a tool. You cannot tell me with a straight face this is some how "clicky".
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6C-cBuP60GjVmxXR1ZOZ1VwRXM/view?usp=sharing
I pulled this out of a sphere in a very short period of time, just using masks, quickly pulling out the shape with the move key, 2 brushes and dynamesh. Very little "clicking" required outside of sculpting on the mesh itself. I was able to get better results faster and the polygroups made it very easy to manage. If you need to see it in action though, go youtube anyone working with dynamesh and creating creatures or body parts. Perhaps you think the only approach is zspheres, which is a much older workflow.
4) Maybe you are not. But if not, why pretend to be? I don't see the logic in that. I question the "expert zbrush pros" you talk to in order to come to the conclusions you have... tbh it sounds like you just made that up but if for some reason you didnt then I would severely question the "pro" qualifications of the people you are talking to.
Conclusion, I get that zbrush seems alien at first to a lot of people.. and it rubs them the wrong way. But its really not alien at all... its very simple...just different in how the menus are laid out. I disagree with your assessment that 3D Coat is more direct, its not. They are about the same on the directness level. I do agree with the control preference and layout in 3D Coat... which I have been consistent on. The controls are great and mirror controls In Modo (with maya keymap) perfectly. When quality and time become important though, those will trump preferential controls and layout. That might be the difference in pro vs hobbyist mentality, who knows.
I think everyone here can agree that we want to see 3D Coat get better, but to do that we cant be suggesting that 3d coat and zbrush are on the same quality level with the sculpting workflow/results. Thankfully 3D Coat (as per original subject of this thread) isnt only picked up for the total sum of its features, but often the ones its really well known for and that is painting and retopology. Nothing wrong with that either, people used to pick up Modo just for its modeling tools, its taking them awhile to get everything else up to speed to compete with its rivals. Now retopo is great in Modo, UV editing is better than 3D coat imo with fewer "clicks". They wouldnt have gotten to that point though if the userbase kept telling them those features were already good or on par with specialty apps.
-
1
-
-
Look, I'm 62 years old. I have a university degree in history from UBC (Times of London rated #32 in the world)
I know exactly what I'm saying. Doing the simplest tasks when you're sculpting in Zbrush is a frustrating click fest. I don't want that. I want a straightfoward approach to sculpting and painting.
Zbrush is getting maximum hype, and since it was first on the scene (actually it was second on the scene after Free Form Ghost) and it has such a huge user base of professionals that it appears that it's superior mainly because of the sheer quantity of work that has had to be done on it. Ryan Kinglien, Zack Petroc and Scott Eaton have done fantastic things with Zbrush and that's great.
.....snipI get it, you are old by your own admission and feel your degree is some how relevant to this conversation. So what does that have to do with asking for specifics and on naming your terms regarding the use of the word "gimmicky"? I feel like you just rambled on without actually backing up or addressing what "gimmicky" means within the context of a sculpting application. Is that a reason to get bent out of shape over?
So far what you have given me is that you believe its full of hype and you are under the impression you click too much inside of it. Is this correct? Do you see that from an outside perspective, this starts looking more like a grudge rather than legitimate criticism?
So if you are unwilling to try and learn a specific piece of software, how then do you know how to evaluate it objectively? Why bother getting offended over it? Nearly every video regarding zbrush has them up and sculpting with very few "clicks" at all...especially since we are working with cintiqs and tablets here. This isnt a software war here, there shouldnt be any sides in this conversation... talk specifics if you are going to throw out sentiment based terms like gimmicky or hype because otherwise it just looks like a confirmation bias run wild.
-
I can't tell though, if you were being sarcastic with the Windows 10 comment?
If Zbrush were more accessible I would definitely have tried it out. Even though I'm a hobbyist and use Linux, I'm not adverse to spending some money on software I can use. I have a education license for 3D-Coat and I have purchased Octane when it first came out. I even spent way too much money on Pfhoe (matchmoving software), which doesn't exist anymore (it got rolled into Pftrack). Not sarcastic at all regarding Windows 10. Its a great OS/update, easily the most significant since xp and 7. It certainly hinders the appeal of hopping on over to Linux at this point in time (imo). There is just not much to gain (software wise) by making such a move.The new CEO has been playing all the right cards so far, especially with the free update.
Regarding money and zbrush, well they do or at least did have an edu version, not sure if its still around. There's the trial too. Its value is really dependent upon the kind of work you do I suppose. Regarding tracking software, seems like Mocha has been playing their hand right as well as you can find Mocha lite bundled with apps like Hitfilm and I believe AE.
Something wrong with 3d coat clay brush?
in General 3DCoat
Posted
Funny, I clearly said "What about exist in application neutral art communities?"
How on gods green earth did you get zbrush forums from that? Why do you think everyone not singing the praise of 3D Coat sculpting is some how some plant from the zbrush forums? Its insane. Take off the tinfoil hat please. I am recommending you spend some on time on non application centric forums, get out of the echo chamber for yourself and interact with artist from all over with no one exact set of tools. Polycount is one such recommendation.
The fact you ignored everything else has been noted.