rubeos

Same problem for me (sticky keys), which I had already reported/requested some time ago. Thanks for this report.

Thanks for all the updates. I would just like to suggest other improvements for the future. A command to reverse the selection would be useful when you use ctrl+shift freeze/mask. For example, ctrl+left click or double click on the empty canvas space to invert selection. For me it’s not a big deal because I have the shift+A shortcut to reverse the mask (only in trasform) But it would be more elegant to complete the default command package also with ''invert'' (and possibly hide commands). All these masking controls are activated automatically when you use 'pose' tool. But it would be useful to activate them automatically with the 'transform' tool too. Now the freeze mask disappears when I activate ''transform', and this is a counter sense. If I want to move the selection I am forced to use the pose tool. If you use gizmo, in transform and pose tool, it would be extraordinarily convenient to have at least the main commands on dedicated gestural shortcuts, for example: ctrl+shift= reset axis; and also shortcuts to center mass, to main axis. I dream in 3DCoat the logical and practical unification of all these little things, that make the workflow modeling more fluid and faster. The basic concept is to use as little as possible the tool’s options menu, in favor of intuitive shortcuts, as is trendy in mobile apps.

Exactly what I think and what I did. In my opinion there is still too much redundancy and overlapping of concepts and commands, as well as brushes. I agree, some rooms are well separated, but others should stick together: sculpt, retopo, modeling (and partly paint). ((I appreciate the effort, but the gesture is faster than the voice. The voice is tiring to pull out every second, I want to be silent when I work.)) To sculpt, the controls must be few and easily accessible. For 90% of the sculpting work it is enough to have excellent brushes: ''standard'', clay, crease, pinch, grab, flatten, inflate. In addition to masking/hiding/cutting tools based on various shapes: circle, box, line, etc. Other things are rarely needed. Luckily in 3DCoat already has these excellent brushes and it is not very problematic to customize these things. Editing, cutting, masking, hiding brushes can all be greatly improved and better integrated with other brushes. In Sculptris, an old sculpting program, it was possible to globally decrease the number of triangles of a mesh. The algorithm selected triangles start from the densest parts of the mesh. Often using this command, with awareness, you could have a model with good resolution and detail but with fewer polygons. It’s hard to explain, but it worked.

I read the great news from Andrew’s Twitter. Live booleans on high density meshes should look a lot like emerging SDF technology. One advantage may be that no conversion will be required.

Hello, is there a way to disable the undo brushes? I mean, I would like to do the undo of an action without the current brush going back to the brush I had used before. I can’t find this option in the preferences.

Sorry, maybe I don’t understand, but I guess that’s not what I was asking. These functions that you indicate are certainly very useful but what I meant is a fast and essentially destructive masking and hiding system. Basically based on some sticky keys and a gesture system, exclusively dedicated to masking and hiding. For example, in Zbrush you have any brush active. Press ctrl and activate the mask tool, when you release it you will find the previous brush again. Along with this there are other related functions, such as deleting all selection, invert, etc. It’s very useful, intuitive, fast, few clicks...once you have learned it you can not do without:)

I notice that after so many years 3DCoat still doesn’t consider a basic idea..or has taken it into consideration, but thinks that it is not important enough. Years ago I also created a topic, obviously people don’t care about this simple feature. When sculpting, especially complex organic models, there are two very important functions: masking and hiding. These must be thought with intelligence to be super fast to run, practically without taking your fingers off ctrl/alt/shift and detach the pen from the tablet. It would be CRUCIAL for the sculpting to have a shortcuts system for this. And it should be provided by default, when opening the program. Like Zbrush. It is not about becoming proud because of fears of imitating Zbrush, simply Zbrush has discovered the most natural and fast system to do it, and should be imitated (or improved, if you are able). A fast masking/hiding system allows fast masking, with everything that follows. Existing tools and workflow could take on new life. Often in an organic figure it is necessary to quickly isolate a part, in order to sculpt the undercuts or hidden parts.How many steps do you have to do now in 3DCoat to do these things? Starting with the fact that, to make things slightly simpler, you have to map masking and hiding yourself. The current 3DCoat masking/hiding workflow is extremely clumsy. It is neglected as a concept, you can not see how useful it can be. Please bring extreme attention to this.

Thank you so much for this, I think it will be very useful to me. In my opinion, another guide on workflow modeling, how to make voxel, surface, low poly and now also mesh to nurbs interact fluently would also be useful.. I see that 3DCoat is a very powerful software, with unique advantages in the 3D landscape and yet this abundance of tools and possibilities disorients the beginner. There are too many overlaps of concepts...for example the concept of resolution...or the tab/rooms. Many things, tools and functions should be merged to make all the software more streamlined and intuitive to understand. Kind of like Plasticity. I am aware that changing the layout and the current logic of 3DCoat involves a great deal of organization and thinking.

On my keyboard there is a very useful key, next to the shift key. I was trying to assign hotkeys to this key, as I did in Blender, but 3DCoat doesn’t seem to recognize it. Is there a way to activate it?

No I haven’t tried it yet. Thanks for the suggestion.

I can assume you use the stylus pen with your right hand. However, the devices are the same for all of us. In the end, a slice of people encounter the same banal problems and inconveniences due to the position of the hands on the physical tools. Using the pen with the right hand (or, to a lesser extent the mouse), the left hand places almost always on the left of the keyboard. Given these conditions it is very inconvenient to press: Enter, Delete, numeric keypad (located at the antipodes) plus, minus, ...and in general all keys become uncomfortable as you move away to the right. To press these buttons you almost have to cross the left arm against the right, or force you to lift the pen from the tablet. That’s why I always hated Blender’s Y key, for the snap on Y axis. Blender’s keyboard is not logically and functionally mapped to human anatomy. The keys that are most frequently used should be mapped to be pressed quickly in the area of the keyboard where is the hand that does not hold the pen or mouse. In my case the left. In my case the snap on the axes should not be Z,X, Y. But Z,X;C. Luckily Blender allows a strange alternative snap mechanism by holding the alt key.

I have gotten used to using the tablet pen for polygonal modeling as well. From my point of view it would be important if there were ALSO options to somehow virtualize the mouse wheel on the viewport. For example by simply moving the pen up or down in the viewport space before apply. This way both mouse and pen users can be satisfied. In my opinion Blender is fast with polygons, but I massively use shortcuts, positioned on the left side of the keyboard, pie menus, and pen-optimized navigation, my right hand almost never comes off the tablet. There are still several commands that are difficult to use with the pen. One brilliant thing is that you can use the same navigation commands (zoom, pan) to navigate within the menus. I agree with you, polygonal modeling is still extensively important....also because you only do realistic curved surfaces almost only with SubD. I also agree that we should look at the best software in a certain field of 3d work, not to copy them but to improve the working experience for users.I am not saying that 3Dcoat should have the same tools and interface as Blender, but neither should it deviate a lot from what is considered best. After all, Blender is one of the most popular, perhaps the most widely used software....everyone has a copy of Blender on their computer, even if they use Maya. So coming from blender if you go into 3DCoat and find the modeling room with significantly different controls you won't be motivated enough to model polygons in 3DCoat. Unless the difference in tools is justified by a unique and deep interaction with voxel tools or whatever..but I think that will be seen in the future. And in any case everything can be improved and done better, even the polygonal modeling in blender. I apologize for the length of the post but these are topics I am passionate about and I end up writing too much

I agree with the requests above but.. Roller operation no please! In my opinion...and I think in the opinion of everyone who uses the pen stylus+tablet for both, sculpting and modeling. Pay close attention to the controls for the pen tablet. Offer the same options that are required above but also for the pen tablet. The mouse is not the future for 3d/2D artists...(assuming that there will be a future for human artists ) The mouse is incredibly tiring for sculpting. And those who sculpt with a stylus pen get used to using that for polygonal modeling as well. Even Zbrush is behind on this concept, incredibly ....for example, sliders are not designed to be comfortable to use with the pen. For example: right and left mouse keys are on the body of pen. But forced navigation via right pen key is inconvenient and fatiguing. The best navigation combination for pen users is : alt+shift= pan; alt+click left= rotate, ctrl+alt=zoom. . This is fortunately possible with 3Coat. Also, those who use the pen with their right hand find it extremely easy to find the shortcuts on the left side of the keyboard. Many addons for blender and other software still do not offer a fast alternative to the mouse wheel The pen tablet works even with cheap models and costs only a little more than a good mouse. The stylus pen offers an incoparably more natural and fluent experience for switching between different artistic techniques without the need to change devices: sculpting, modeling, drawing and painting (similar to holding a real brush in your hand) .

I am trying this tool again, also following the video above. I premise that I could be wrong or not know the program well, but. It is cumbersome to use the + and - keys, and in any case you have to choose the axis in the tool options tab each time. This tool is very nice and would be extremely useful, but it needs improvement. The need to manually choose axes, in the tool options tab, needs to be eliminated. The depth to which the cut should go should be chosen visually, on the 3 axes, simply by rotating the object from time to time. I think it is simple to achieve this improvement: first click (pick point by rmb action) visually at the point (on the object) where you want the cut to go. Then rotate the object to the cut position and right-click again (something like a cyclic command), this tentatively establishes the plane cut based on the user view, as happens when using ''cut-off'' without the ''on-plane'' option. Getting something similar I think has always been possible with vox hide as well, but in a different way.

I think so.. but I actually saw this video this morning

I saw the new gizmo on the official yt channel. It looks great! This seems like an important change, a very convenient for users.I didn't understand if it is included in the latest version of 3DCoat. It allows you to visually move it from one geometry element to another and back to act on the geometry itself (if I understand correctly)

Being able to more precisely control the depth of cuts and extrusions would be great. The option to choose 3 points is complicated. Sometimes I've thought it would be enough to just rotate the view a little bit, and click at a point on the geometry you want the cut to come to, then go back to the plane of view you want to perform the cut on and proceed. Basically it's a quick visual and intuitive approach to the command. When I try voxel hide I miss a simple command that creates new voxels geometry. It could be that, with voxel brush activated, by pressing shift+ctrl, for example, you could add geometry, so that two essential functions are merged into one brush. This function is present in many software when it comes to tools that need to remove/cut/add. If default option is cutting, with a sub-key you can reverse the function.

I don't want to criticize, just push for a better product, already great anyway. Python, new things under the hood. New user interface. Color room for me is good...I mean, secondary priority. Highest priority: modeling, modeling, modeling...and better workflow among the things down there . I vote for smoother workflow between tools (and interface). Now there is too much redundancy of brushes and functions: many brushes are just small variations of major brushes... they don't really offer consistent differences. I would like more order and logic and unambiguousness in the controls and options. More stability and less unpredictable behavior in shortcuts as well. More compactness at the workflow level in the scultpting/modeling rooms: too many options, too many overlapping and confusing concepts....subdivisions, layers, voxels, meshes, brushes for voxels but also for meshes.., something more streamlined and clean at the conceptual level is needed...see plasticiti. The beauty of being able to go into 3DCoat and find, more or less, the same polymodeling tools as in Blender. Instead you need to adapt to alien, discombobulated, tools ...that I can't use despite periodically trying again and again....because I sense that this is only an intermediate stage toward more advanced, hybrid tools, voxel/nurbs, which no other program has now, and my goal in 3D is to have creative freedom EVEN in modeling curved surfaces without too many topological entanglements. If 3DCoat doesn't do this soon they will take care of it in a year or two by software with SDF...or zbrush....when they eventually realize that it is the only thing still missing in modeling. The main brushes: clay, pinch, move, etc. are great and there is not much need to improve them. The 4 or 5 brushes that matter and that are indispensable works well. Except, as I said before, to diversify them in a more precise and recognizable way....Michelangelo sculpted so well because he had only a few tools ...hammer, coarse chisel, fine chisel, and little else.

I also join this thought, I hope that there will be peace as soon as possible, that everyone can be free and at peace with each other, this is my wish as a simple user. It must be terrible to work under these conditions, because the situation IS terrible. In many other countries I think software development simply would have been suspended.

Plasticity evolves at an insane speed..

I, too, hope that maximum effort will be placed on innovative tools other than traditional ones, so, add some more ways and tools to model in sculpt room. Hybridizing the techniques could result in something completely new. I think 3Dcoat is on the right track. With this tool it is easy and quick to create a curved surface. I think I had already written my opinion about it. For example, why not make it so that this simple 'primitive patch' tool have more control points, vertex snaps, and other sub-tools and enhancements that could create a particular workflow: an editable grid but with the freedom of voxels (in the specific field of curved surfaces....because hard surface/solid modeling is already mature) Maybe there is already something like that in development in the current 3Dcoat tools, I just don't know enough about it yet. Modeling with SubDs is fantastic and for some things still unsurpassed by other modeling techniques, I was just wondering why no one ever talks about it, and if it is really such a given. SubD modeling in my opinion is destined to be obsolete in a few years, as far as the artistic and concept design is concerned...(ok maybe I'm being a little drastic ) Because, for most people, anything that is slow and/or tiring to do and learn goes out of fashion IF THERE IS A FASTER AND FUNNER ALTERNATIVE. It can't go on like this....i Subd requires great technical expertise, experience and a lot of time. As far as I know now there are few alternatives to polygonal/nurbs modeling as far as curved surfaces are concerned. While instead tools for solid modeling abound, in 3DCoat, Zbrush and others. This is how I feel about the topic, but I do not claim to be right or to know everything.

If you look at the demos on his twitter you can't not think that this is something very powerful. It will come as an addon for Blender, if i understand.

We can already see very nice things made with Substance modeler...by the way it has such a clear and intuitive interface and tools that a total neophyte could use them.In any case it will be mostly the developers who will decide, but in the future many more users requests may come..we will see the developments. It doesn't have much to do with the topic...but Sculptris comes to mind. Later sold to Pixologic...(later sold to Maxon) That program was a miracle, among other things it had a clean interface, with few tools, but well 'flowing' with each other. Of course, it was also full of bugs and supported only a few thousand polygons before crashing. Even though it is now an integral part of zbrush and has improved...it's just not the same.

Beautiful models. It is really something ''magical'' to be able at any stage of modeling to move elements, change dimensions etc, all non-destructive. SDF must be very nice to use, and certainly can attract new (and old) users I just wish it was possible...well, I've already said that

It would be a nice addition of course. I don't want to oppose this proposal. Also because things can be hybridized at some point for ultimate benefits that make everyone happy. You were right to propose it; one must have the courage to make the proposals that one thinks are appropriate. However, priorities are to be kept in mind in the programming work, which is slow and laborious (I imagine): if efforts are put into the implementation of the SDF they will not be put into something else. The bottom line is that in my opinion SDFs are not as revolutionary a feature as they appear...although, of course, they have advantages and peculiarities, such as being able to see shapes being created live. For now they rely mostly on Boolean operations. What is needed in 3Dcoat, IMHO? What can it distinguish itself from others with? What can't you easily do with 3Dcoat, Zbrush, and other software born for artistic purposes? Objects composed of curved surfaces! There is nothing that replaces the SubD technique...with its very hard learning curve, the incredible daily slowness in working (it takes 30 minutes to get a topologically perfect bolt! Whereas with voxels, for example, you can do it in 5 minutes). 3DCoat is perhaps the program that comes closest to introducing a new modeling paradigm in the future. Because, now, would only need to modify, expand, improve, and organize much better existing tools. Just think, a program powerful and world-famous as Zbrush, still does not have the ability to let you easily model cars. The car is just one example, there are hundreds of shapes out there that have similar surfaces. So again, my two cents is for the thing that I think is most important for the development and completeness of the software. I want to keep repeating this message, nothing special. Recently artist Anton Tenitsky posted a video of modeling a van. He is very good at it. Yet even though he is amazing with 3DCoat, he always chooses models that pretty easy to deal with (the van is obtained by roughing out a voxel shape by sculpt tools, and then cutting out and add various parts, etc.). It is clear that something fundamental is missing to get all existing types of shapes, with reasonable accuracy and pretty ease.