Mantis

Talking about painting, do you plan to do something like the PTex? It is really elegant and allow to have really huge resolution texture. This in conjunction with you Baking Texture tool could be really powerful, that's like a polypainting but much more powerful, and Mesh resolution independant. And like that you will be prepare when PTex will be massively used after they did it with Bilbo The Hobbit. :lol:

Great. And the good point with this discussion and where I join Alexis, is that you should avoid to quote Zbrush as an example (like Alexis said with the scale fish example). That would be sad to see you sue for these issues. (Ouhhh poetry) Market is not a fair place, so that's best to be as white as possible

Maybe there is no picture to show how good Zbrush is because there is no need to prove it? Lord of the Rings (Trolls, Mumakil...), Pirate of the caribbean (Davy Jones) and much more, who doubt of the power of Zbrush? Plus there are no good picture of Mudbox in Zbrush forum and the inverse is right too .

That's a better solution Andrew Didn't even thought about it.

I made a picture who is more clean and that can represent stretched polygon in a better way. But the first picture is not far from the truth, there are some area of the mesh that become as ugly if you don't have a specific topology like it is pointed out (the ears for example who is the place who drive me crazy the most about this constraint). Here is the picture, but I don't think you can't recognize Zbrush I don't know if it is offensive too. At this stage you can't go further and extrude branch from this without having something incredibly horrible. But Alexis I still have to disagree with your point of view, you totally miss the point. The goal was to show Stretched polygon, and like I said it is not something that doesn't arrive in Zbrush. Try to sculpt an ear on a full head from a sphere, even if it is possible you get stretched polygons and the worst is that these polygone drive your sculpting that's the most annoying part, having to fight with the topology

You got it on object tree, right click on a layer/group and you will see Merge Point Cloud. But I don't think you can use it, at least for me when I tried to import this kind of data I'm only able to choose .obj, and it doesn't fit to scan data file format. I don't know if you have some scan data to use Andrew but you can find some freesample here http://www.cyberware.com/products/scanners/index.html But I'm not used of this kind of model, so I don't know if that's what fit to point cloud data or medecine data.

Had the time to test the new release, and that's so great to see object tree available, but I have to agree with BluEgo the transform tool is clumsy with the transpose line to move object around, I would really appreciate an universal manipulator too. But the Object tree... It's fabulous, wonderful, much more better than Zbrush, being able to have group of object, being able to hide them... Everything I miss with Zbrush. Thank you.

Negativism? Criticism has nothing to do with negativism. We all know how incredible this technology is, but by giving our point of view we are helping Andrew and 3DCoat. I'm sure Andrew know it and we all know how good is Andrew.

I don't know if it is hard to add but I would like to see a gamma and color configuration like you have with Photoshop. It is really important for texturing without breaking the pipeline. Picture extremly change if they are not seen with the right gamma. So a color manager, and being able to import color profile from Photoshop would be greatly appreciated. A sidenote, are you able to export in 16bits? That's a great advantage if you want to keep the maximum information of your texture color, particulary when you are texturing with Pictures. Thanks.

I agreed too Even If I find the Base mesh creation really cool and having this kind of stuff could be really fun, I don't think it is a major feature who is needed for the release. In fact, for production we are using base mesh, and there with voxel it is much more usefull because you can split your mesh in many part. Having several generic ears, hand, even Head and body that you can merge together and refine to do new character really quickly. Some little tools are needed to improve the workflow, like smoothing an area instead of rubbing freneticly a surface with smooth brush. But that's the kind of tool that you can add quickly (at least I think). And yes, the Main feature you have to add is a better Brush engine that could match Mudbox one, who is finer than Zbrush on this field, it's smoother. And being able to go up and down with subdivision. I don't want to sound harsh but I think that the current date is a little bit optimistic, btw Zbrush is the master at releasing buggy features and it still loved (I'm a Zbrush user and quite used of this side ).

The first video you shown ldzywsj is really good. About the beta and alpha stage, I'm curious to know the Roadmap to the release. There are tons of thing to add, and more to refine, and that does not only concern VS. Is it possible to know what you plan to do Andrew, talking about VS, painting and Retopo. Just minded because the release date seems really close to us.

Astonishing! And they are offering their paper by request!

Thanks, so I'll stick with photoshop and Zapplink

Thank you for your answers. Here is the picture of "glowing", you can see that the color on the model seems to glow, I set my light pretty low. An other question, I saw that you can project a photography with Materials feature, but are you able to deform it to fit to your model, afterward and how do you do it? I mean like in this Zbrush tutorial http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=33715 Thanks once again.

Don't want to play the devil's advocate, but I prefer the realtime rendering in Mudbox 2009 than in 3DCoat, talking about non VS sculpting. This greyish look remind me the default normal map in 3DSmax viewport and is quite ugly imho. Btw I prefer 3DCoat than MB2009 but that's a point that could be improved to make 3DCoat shinier.

Thank you Andrew, you answered all my questions. -But for the glowing thing, I don't have any specularity. What is a good lighting setup for 3DCoat? It seems to be related to this. -Can you change the color of your base material? -I tried the jittering setting and that's what I was looking for, but the cursor is shaking, that's quite disturbing. Is there an option to prevent this, or best, to be able to hide the yellow circle while left click is hold down (while painting)? About scattering, in photoshop you got 2 options who are really good, you can choose to scatter along both axe and you can choose the number of scattering (count setting). After looking at photoshop brush preset, I saw that you got 2 option, Jitter and Scatter here are both (full)description from help file.

Hi, I want to use 3DCoat for a texturing project, but I got some questions. -Is there a scattering feature for the airbrush painting tool? -Can you clear the color of a layer without deleting the layer? -My paint seems to glow, when I paint with strenght at 1, did I miss something? -I imported a big mesh in 3DCoat with big mesh feature, but my details seems not as fine as they are in Zbrush, how can I get them as sharp? Thank you.

I'm joining Sonk and all others, I think your proposal is a nonsense, that's not about self censorship that's just about common sense. There are plenty of room in the current stage to allow your imagination to find some crazy tool who would help. And that's not about disturbing Andrew, but right now we are talking about volumetric sculpting (VS) tools even retopologising tools are delayed because of this. So it will just make a lost post, because if 3DCoat will take this in account it will probably be in many months. At the end we are just saving your time And I think that the current field of 3DCoat is large enough to be creative about proposal, there painting tools, Uvs Tools, Retopology Tools, Sculpting tools, all of them can be perfected, so what's the point by making the list longer?

Andrew said he will add sketching tools like ShapeShop, that will rocks and you will have the same kind of worklfow but much more powerful.

Hi David, you can already do this, you can import an .obj by using Merge Tool under Object Tools, and Select mesh. You can choose any .obj and convert it to Voxel. Then you can use retopology tool to get back your Voxel model to any other software, or use To Polygons feature. Hope it helps.

Will you need to install cuda in future release?

Don't underestimate Skynet, Ups I meant Andrew :lol: @Philnolan: That could do the trick but the more you are carving the surface the more you will be close to the backface, and you will still end up with an hole. That's why I thought about this, it's like sculpting in real life, when you want to push your sculpt to give it a shape you don't take clay away, so that should be available. In Zbrush or Mudbox it works like that but that's just because of the way surface sculpting works.

About Brushes Min Thickness: I think it is necessary to get this kind of behaviour, or behing able to set a minimal thickness of your sculpt. When you are reaching this thickness when you sculpt you will push both side if you are using a normal tool (meaning not carve). Sculpting brushes except Carve should not allow you to make hole in the sculpt. Maybe getting a general thickness parameter who drives all the brush and an individual setting would be better, like that you can choose the one you want to carve with by setting its setting to 0. You should push the clay, and if you are sculpting in a thin area instead of making hole when you are close to the backface you should push the surface. Because right now it's quite difficult to sculpt thin area like hear, and personnaly I don't feel confortable with that at all. That's not like traditionnal sculpting, if you want to push clay you're using your fingers, if you want to cut off some clay you're using a tool. Getting a minimal thickness could help with smoothing too, because right now you are able to delete parts of sculpt by smoothing them to max. That's really noticeable on thin cylinder. @NinjaTaco: Agreed, it was already said before but a multiplicator that drive the size of smooth brush could help, there is the same thing in Zbrush.

You're right, this feature need masking to be done before, but I wanted to write it down to don't lose it

Excellent work, nice to see this in 3DCoat!