Psmith

Javis: Here is the rub, currently, for some of us: Steam had this incredible bundle sale for Modo and Mari (Steam Editions), for a total of $227.00. And, although this is an unheard of deal - the Steam version of Modo is 801. You see, many people bought this edition because of price - and, in my case, hopefully to import 3D-Coat PBR textured models into Modo for animation and rendering. I've been somewhat successful in getting an approximation of 3D-Coat's smart materials - as they display and render within 3D-Coat - within Modo - but it is only a rough approximation. I know a rig made specifically for 901 would be quite different than one for 801. Any suggestions? Greg

Arumiat: Have you tried using the Vox Hide tool? It seems to create cleaner edges - and if your desire is to make 2 objects with a visible transition between them - follow this tool with the "Geometry/Object-ify Hidden" command. This combination produces very nice "joins" between voxel objects. Greg Smith

AUTOPO is really the missing link and the prime feature which will raise 3D-Coat above the rest of the competition. I do remember the Siggraph where Andrew introduced this feature - and though we had the tiniest of booths at the show - the crowds were overflowing and blocking the other booths - just to see the video of AUTOPO at work. At that time - it was revolutionary - and the crowds of professionals interested really confirmed that this was the target to aim at. A truly useful version of AUTOPO - the one that can resurface any object with accurate and economical topology will give every studio and every Indie a very good reason to climb onboard. When you couple this one feature with the other powerful and streamlined features of 3D-Coat, most recently the PBR workflow - 3D-Coat is a winner all around. Greg Smith

Jardaroh: The simplest, fastest and most useful way of putting together a kit bashing set is to go to 3D-Coat's "Models" palette, and click the "+" sign to directly add your Modo .obj files to the "Models" library. These shapes can then be added or subtracted from any "Sculpt" mesh that you are working on. Let's say you are working on a "base" model and want to add or subtract your imported models (from Modo) which you have already added to the "Models" library: 1) Click on your model in the "Models" library. 2) You will see your model in the main view surrounded by a manipulator (widget). Scale and Translate this model to desired shape and location. 3) To positively add your model to the base model simply press "Enter or Return". 4) To negatively subtract your model from the base model, hold down "Cntrl" and press "Enter or Return". That's it. Greg Smith

Panupat: It's a good and interesting question. There seems to be a forming trend to model everything a little differently than traditionally has been the case. In former years and decades almost all modeling was done using "solid" and polygon tool sets - a sometimes precise and always time consuming process. Many times, even after modeling objects very carefully, one would have to "retopologize" an underlying "base" mesh to make it ideal for different cases and uses. Recently, with the advent of extremely powerful and flexible voxel and dynamic subdivision modeling methods (I plug 3D-Coat, here) - the emerging trend is leaning toward creating both organic and hard surface models using these tools - since retopology seems always to be a necessity in most cases, anyway - regardless of the tools and methods used to produce a base mesh. A hard surface base mesh can be quickly and easily made using voxels and/or dynamic subdivision for an incredible number of objects of varying complexity. The process is visual and intuitive - relieving the modeler of the nagging task of paying attention to an underlying polygon mesh. You just make stuff. And then you worry about the polygonal topology at a later stage. This allows quick construction of many versions of an object - all from a visual perspective - as an artist would usually prefer to do things. I would have to say further - that 3D-Coat contains the world's most powerful retopology tools - providing a wide variety of methods and techniques for every user's taste and needs. In the case of creating organic models - (focused on economic and practical topology for use in animation) - I will be bold and say that 3D-Coat's Automatic Topology tools (AUTOPO) can produce very practical polygonal meshes in a timely fashion. There will always be "polygonal purists" who insist on absolutely perfect topology for every animated mesh. This, I say, is becoming more and more unnecessary for many animation cases. There have been some extremely powerful and easy "bone binding" algorithms which have been designed with the express purpose of being forgiving to less than perfectly topologized models. For practical animation purposes - where time is of the essence (and, correspondingly, cost is of the essence) - using an automatic retopology method as found in 3D-Coat, along with idealized bone binding methods becomes a very desirable option. Move forward and be bold - experiment with making some objects - both hard surface and organic in nature, using 3D-Coat's tools. Forget about the purists. Focus on getting things done and usable for whatever application you need. Greg Smith

Osvaldogustavo: You are quite welcome. Greg Smith

Sales and the making of profit by those who produce such things - is, of course, one of the motives of such men. Rarely is there a sole purpose and goal of any large undertaking - requiring the participation and cooperation of so many people. Those who are educated regarding the goals co-operate knowingly - and those who are not, co-operate for profit of some kind. And, money is the fuel of all earthly power. The cultivation of cultural "tastes" and tendencies is often the kind of farming these men of power love to indulge in and profit from. Those who are talented and gifted enough to produce the actual elements of content are usually unconcerned with the motives of their masters. And so, they work ever harder to produce what is asked of them - some, for very little profit at all. Your apology is gratefully accepted. Greg Smith

Tony: To say that modern media is THE only source for the worst impulses in mankind would be an error. To say that the manipulation and dominance of certain kinds of modern media are intended to produce a predictable result among the masses of media driven populations would be an accurate analysis. Interactive media (games) is only one form - and becoming a more persistent and effective form for the manipulation and influencing of target Western audiences - trickling down to produce the same effects in less influential national communities. I think you may underestimate the popularity and presence of all forms of violent and "war-driven" media - including games - among the poor in the inner cities throughout the world - and even in the poorest of 3rd world countries. Scores of villagers in the remotest parts of South America can be seen huddled together in primitive collective shelters . . . watching modern action films from the U.S. - on DVD, of course. I read an article a few years ago - that chronicled life in the economically collapsed Argentina (depression http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998–2002_Argentine_great_depression) - especially in the inner cities - where food and clothing were in very scarce supply - that video games were one of the hottest black market items to be had. You also assume too much - stating that I am "so immersed in popular culture" - and then go on to say what I harbor and do not harbor within myself. Comments like these seem poisoned with the seeds of provocation. Greg Smith

Mr. MaMurk: I am really thankful for your very insightful post - and for your courage to voice your observations articulately. I agree with all of your points, actually. The state of the imagination of mankind seems to be existing and operating on a global level. Art is, after all, the expression of one's imagination and perception - sometimes of reality - sometimes of fantasy. Some artists have used their imaginations to depict the reality of the world as they see it - some use their imagination to provide escape from that. Some artists actually hoped to provide a form of "enlightenment" to the mind, the soul. Others seemed to desire to use their art to show their innermost darkness, despair, anxieties, fear and torment. The deepest question, in my opinion, regarding the creation of art - is whether it should serve the purpose of "enlightenment" or the purpose of degradation of the mind, the soul, the spirit. And, what does it mean to enlighten or to degrade. I also believe that since the introduction of modern media - moving pictures, radio, television and now digital interactive "entertainment" - powerful men and groups of men have sought to use this technology to influence and control the minds of the those who consume its products - with specific, intelligent and planned goals - for the kind of content they control and present to their "audiences". In my own case, I was a post WWII child - who, from the earliest age was fed mostly violent media content - through the television - in the late 50's and 60's - that glorified war, the hero, the soldier - The American. I remember, even in elementary school, being shown countless hours of anti-German propaganda - a lot of footage of Hitler's speeches - the devastation of Europe, etc. This was totally common in most schools - even in my really pristine world of Southern California - a place where I never even heard of any actual violent crime. Yet, my exposure to media - the television - kept me awash in images of violence and war and hatred of "our enemies". The other kind of content that the television kept me immersed in was the world of the "Cowboy and Indian". Another form of constant and unending war and graphic violence. Much milder than what we have today - but on a daily basis I watched "the hero" - the Cowboy, relentlessly slaughter both criminals and Indians by the dozen - without even flinching - with no remorse or portrayal of responsibility for their actions. Frontier Justice personified. Among my friends, our favorite toys were war toys and cowboy and Indian toys. I had scores of plastic "army men" - which we slaughtered by the dozen - lighting some of them on fire to simulate the action of the soldier carrying a flame thrower - which we all saw in our favorite war films. Having no actual experience, ourselves - we learned to hate the Germans and the Japanese. In hindsight, now - I can see that this was an attempt by someone to keep my generation - and those who actually fought in WWII - in a state of "enemy awareness" and fear - a perpetual state of war - much like George Orwell portrayed in his novel, "1984". "War is Peace" H. G. Wells also wrote of a future in which war was perpetual and unending - and human annihilation was an inevitability. The total destruction of mankind was the next genre of the media extravaganza that swept the world - starting in the U.S. - and somehow spreading globally - into the imaginations of everyone who consumed these things through this media. Fear and anxiety in the hearts of the many seems to be another goal of the kind of content we have been fed since WWII. Fear of total annihilation - fear of global destruction. And, the enemy "focus" changed from the Germans and the Japanese - to the Soviets. Eventually, the enemy focus really became irrelevant - since either "side" could annihilate every one of us - through a plan or accidental launching of a nuclear device, as portrayed in many films - most humorously in Stanley Kubrik's film - "Doctor Strangelove". Ultimately - people will be screaming for another leader to save us from all these evils that surround us - not just on a national level - since the enemy can be anyone, and come from any place - even outer space. There is much truth in the saying, "You Are What You Eat". Watching and playing and imagining are all forms of psychological "eating" - immersion - through repetition and reinforcement. People are definitely sheep - doing what others do - embracing what the many embrace - following those who have proven themselves most popular - in all forms of living and culture and politics - and art. What we are seeing that has completely flooded the CG airwaves is a result of constant exposure, reinforcement and immersion - a result of the efforts of those who distribute and produce the stories, the films and the games. It's not accidental, in my opinion. The patterns are clearly observable, recognizable and have all of the earmarks of intelligent, human design. A strategy that has worked for almost 100 years, now - is in full swing. If you control the imagination - you control the man. Taken a step further - with the total flooding of the video game marketplace with accurate battlefield simulations - and completely real weapons usage and practice - leading the "gamer" to attain to expert levels of wartime skill . . . the perpetrators of this phenomenon have managed to kill 2 birds with one stone: 1) Desensitize the "player" to the actual horrors of battle. 2) Train, in advance, the largest standing army - (who have a lust for blood and violence) - giving these future soldiers many of the most crucial skills and much of the training they will need for use on the actual battlefield - without spending one thin dime. (These "soldiers" and their enabling parents willingly pay for all these things in advance). In many cases, "the enemy" is not well defined in the "shooter" game. These up and coming "soldiers" have been trained to kill at will - kill randomly, even. They have saved, whatever future enlisting military agencies, many billions of dollars in enlistment training. Where do you think the many skilled Drone operators which are the face of war, tomorrow, have obtained these simulation skills? What we now see in art - CG art - is simply the product of an intelligent indoctrination plan - taking the guise of entertainment - which has subverted the minds of those who so indulge themselves. It's not involuntary - it is an act of the will of the participant. The scope of what we see, regarding the kinds of content found in this scenario, is a definite indication of how many "volunteers" the world actually contains. Greg Smith

Fuzzz: I don't think you have anything to worry about. Andrew and his team have no intention of deviating from their current path - professional application development. I just wanted to point out the current and future trends that the majority of the consuming and creating public seem to be following - and with the trends go the dollars - and after those dollars go the manufacturers of digital everything. Greg Smith

Rebellismo: I was not trying to influence or convince professionals like yourself with the notion that the growing market for devices and compatible software is and will be leaning toward portables - tablets, specifically. People like yourself do not need convincing. My point was really attempting to reveal this growing market of portables vs. laptops (Sony has completely abandoned their laptop lines) and desktops - as it relates to future market share. Portables, which started out as mere consumer devices have now been recognized as a valuable means for producing serious content of all kinds. Musicians - serious musicians - have, for years now - been using iPads for the commercial production of music titles. Some serious 2D and 3D artists have also been using tablets, for a shorter time - to produce serious, commercially aimed art. Autodesk would not be investing in this present and future technology, if they did not see the potential for future profits. They are, in essence, cultivating that market with free products like 123D Sculpt+ and others - understanding that the consumer marketplace is becoming more sophisticated in their desire to be creative developers, as well as passive consumers of 3D content. Tim Sweeney, CEO over at Unreal has invested a substantial amount of money in the form of development resources - aimed specifically at the emerging nVidia line of portable devices. He would not take these steps if he did not believe the investment was a good one. The emerging market of young, amateur developers are all completely tethered to portable devices for everything they do. This trend will not reverse - but it will grow stronger. Their eyesight is still good and accustomed to doing things in a visually compact environment. More than that - nearly everything they do, digitally speaking, is done on portable technology. Those software manufacturers who ignore the trend toward tablet power and price - are ignoring the direction both amateurs and professionals are increasingly following and adopting - and most importantly - these manufacturers are neglecting the future viability of their own enterprises. It is true that a small company like Pilgway lacks the significant resources to start a new product line like the one I am suggesting. A new product line is what I am suggesting, by the way - not a porting of 3D-Coat - as it is now - to a portable device. That, indeed, would be an insane proposition. Voodoo, as you put it. Some software manufacturer - such as AutoDesk - will probably be the first to develop, introduce, promote and SELL such a tablet-based line of serious 3D authoring software titles. In my opinion, this is a tragic statement and proof that little fish are being swallowed by the very big fish - along with their innovations - at an alarming rate. The opportunity for a small company like Pilgway, nevertheless, exists today. Competition is a good catalyst for innovation - and financial success. I'd rather cast my vote for the success of a small software company - than a giant one. If you really want to see the glaring evidence of the shrinking market for professional grade software titles - all you have to do is look at the shrinking budgets for the manufacturers of professional grade hardware. Professionals cannot use the software without the hardware to match. There have been articles - for years now - broadcasting the shrinking profits for professional grade devices - showcasing the makers of both desktop and laptop computers, combined. Look it up and see for yourself. Greg Smith

And, if you want to take Hockney's discoveries and revelations a step further, watch "Tim's Vermeer". This film - produced by Penn and Teller - features their close friend, Tim Jenison (founder of Newtek and inventor of the Video Toaster) as he moves from studying a particular Vermeer painting (The Music Lesson) - to actually reconstructing a close replica of Vermeer's studio, and, through the use of technology that he theorizes Vermeer used in the creation of this masterpiece - actually attempts to recreate "The Music Lesson", using the same technology. The results are astounding - especially if you consider that Tim Jenison is not an artist - nor has he ever painted before in his life. An enjoyable and phenomenal film. Greg Smith

Raul: So happy you made it here! I'm sorry you had to suffer so much to make it - but now you are freer than you ever have been. Greg Smith

Aleksey: It's up to you whether you believe what you read or not. Seems you'd like an argument or something. Be happy . . . or not. The architect interviewed in this article testifies to the utility and sensitivity of the stylus: http://blogs.nvidia....s-directstylus/ I tend to believe what the man says. Also, in the article you linked to in your argument against the performance of the stylus, it also testifies to the usefulness of the Shield's stylus pressure sensitivity (achieved through the processor and software) http://www.slashgear...eview-29338977/ I don't own one, today - but I might pick one up to use in conjunction with the 123D Sculpt+ to Maya LT 2016 pipeline. Greg Smith

It is too early to start marketing such an Android application - but the trend toward tablets, specifically Android tablets is clearly visible. I have read favorable views regarding the Surface Pro 3 - and nearly bought one, myself - but the stylus action seemed pretty laggy to me. It wasn't designed for graphics applications, specifically - and is a more "general" computer. Still, quite nice - though very expensive for a high end model (around $1700). At $300 for such a powerhouse like the nVidia Shield - pressure sensitive stylus included - this also indicates the trend toward powerful and inexpensive tablets - made for 3D rendering and other performance heavy 3D tasks. (Today I see on nVidia's own site, the Shield selling for $199 - sold out, of course) Edit: this price is for the Shield Portable, sorry. Unbelievable! Did I mention it is CUDA specific? Here is a Tech Radar review of this device: http://shield.nvidia.com/store/portable If a specific version of 3D-Coat were designed for Android - eliminating the more technical functions (saving these for the desktop version) - yet retaining the revolutionary functions like voxel sculpting, dynamic subdivision sculpting, AUTOPO and texturing - the present specs for the Shield would be more than adequate for the task. So, if Pilgway wants to arrive near the front of the pack with an Android-specific app, it would need to begin post haste. I do agree with you, Taros - they probably cannot sacrifice the resources to do this, at present. Unfortunate situation. Not much chance to take the lead, here. Just look at what the competition has already produced - 123D Sculpt+ - absolutely amazing for an Android app. And, it seems Autodesk is poised to continue to develop newer and better products for this platform. The big guys win, again?!!! Greg Smith

What beauty, indeed! At such a price, who would hesitate? Of course it is not designed for high end graphics - only 1.3 ghz atom based processor (though quad core). And, I'm just not sure Windows is the most efficient operating system for streamlined tablet-designed apps. Let us know what your Zbrush experience is. Greg Smith

Also, from a development standpoint - a huge application like 3D-Coat requires a very large team (now 13 in number) to properly maintain and advance this professional application. I've been waiting for a bug free 3D-Coat for many years now - and it is still a work in progress. Large development teams are becoming unwieldy in the extremely competitive environment of professional 3D application development. Very expensive, too. When fewer and fewer licenses of professional CG apps are being sold - and fewer and fewer high end desktop workstations are being made, improved and sold - while the number and power of tablets and tablet apps is growing and advancing - requiring much smaller teams to maintain and advance the growing number of software titles - why not consider development for this market as a viable target? Greg Smith

Taros: I'm not really thinking about this tablet option for a professional, like yourself - but rather as a universal platform for developers of all ages. Why does Pilgway need this market? Because the so called "professional market" for 3D applications is shrinking rapidly with the advent and improvement of many high functioning free tools like Blender. There is an enormous and untapped market for young "developers" who much prefer the portability of a tablet - and the tablets are getting faster and more powerful (rivaling many desktop and laptop systems) - much more suitable for 3D asset creation and even tablet based game creation. The Microsoft Surface Pro 3 is far too expensive and is actually much less powerful than this $300 tablet - and cannot handle the processor demands that 3D apps require. I think for any manufacturer of 3D software to survive, they need to seek out and develop for this burgeoning market of tablet users. Even Autodesk realizes this fact and has more than a few serious products designed to be used on tablets. Just go to your local computer super center and see what is happening to innovation for desktop and laptop computers - it is dying a slow death. Sony no longer makes any of these things, so dismal were their sales. They see the future correctly - as do many of the larger hardware manufacturers. An 8" screen is quite a bit larger than any postcards I have seen or purchased - a bit of an exaggeration there, Taros. Yet, an 8" screen and the under one pound weight of the Shield - with high performance stylus seems ideal to me for sculpting with voxels or dynamic subdivision - as well as for Autopo and high end texturing - in any location, whatsoever. So, while such a tablet may not meet your super demands, it can even serve a multitude of purposes for many professional artists - at a very affordable price. Pilgway needs the revenue, believe me. Greg Smith

Aleksey: I'm afraid you are wrong on this point. Here is an entire article which focuses on the behavior of the PRESSURE SENSITIVE nVidia Shield Stylus. Architects testify to its usability. Also, the Shield is much more powerful than either of the tablets you mentioned (even though they could be used with a tablet version of 3D-Coat) - especially for the ideal use of an application like 3D-Coat: http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/02/12/architects-directstylus/ Greg Smith

Just look at the specs and price on this tablet by nVidia: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00LM6KF7O/ref=pe_171880_135492830_em_1p_0_ti#Ask It already runs Unreal Engine at high frame rates (Tim Sweeny endorses it). It comes with a pressure sensitive stylus - and at an astounding price of $299 from Amazon. (I'm not a representative or stock holder). Has all the power needed to run a "Sculpting & Painting" version of 3D-Coat - and such a version could be a first choice among artists and amateurs, alike. What do you think? Has the time finally come? This would open up a new stream of revenue for Pilgway. Greg Smith

Those were the days of the "simple app" - the days when software like 3D-Coat "just worked". How refreshing it was! Greg Smith

Certainly there are more than several ways to skin the texturing cat. But, is that really what we should be talking about? To me, the topic should be "How to Achieve Photo-realistic Texturing Results with the Minimum of Energy and Effort". Houdini has been with us a very long time - and it has always been poised to support the Technical Directors among us. It is probably the best all around 3D application for the technician. 3D-Coat, on the other hand, has tried to strike a balance between the technician and the artist - offering bushels full of technical possibilities and technical variables for the technicians among us to use in their pursuits, as well as a straight forward pipeline for simple designers and artists like me. Results being output compared to effort being input is a ratio worth considering - whether you are a technician or an artist. Of course, there is the aspect of puzzle solving, which technicians consider as part of the challenge and reward of texturing. I think artists tend to simply want acceptable results with the minimum of effort. Looking at the demo posted in this thread - and then, at the complex texturing network being constructed to produce common, everyday texturing results - I'd certainly prefer to use 3D-Coat to achieve a similar result. It requires much less time, effort and is more enjoyable and instant than a more complex solution. What do you think? Greg Smith

No, not yet. I'm afraid the Rat is due for an update using all the new features and tools of 3D-Coat 4.1 and beyond. Maybe soon. Then the Rat will get his choppers. Until then, please enjoy this turntable of the REAL rat that I made by hand: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ei36bkwgipsxoro/HermanTurntable.m4v?dl=0 Greg Smith

If Blender has a primary weakness, it is its "one room" layout. Putting everything in one interface "scene" or room has the disadvantage of requiring too many hidden elements - hiding behind pop-out panels and right click menus (like all the big gun software products provide). Modo suffers from this over-crowding and function hiding, as well. The more complicated and "option rich" a program is - the more choices you require - and the more interface elements you necessarily need. Pretty soon, the idea of a user interface will have almost no meaning. Why not just go back to a computer terminal with a textual command input? (I exaggerate, here, to make a point). In actuality, it is much faster to give a computer textual (abbreviated) commands than to point and click on things. This is why the incredibly "feature rich" application, Blender, works best by using single key, keyboard shortcuts. It's really a regression to the computer terminal and abbreviated textual input paradigm. As Artman noted, you can customize and abbreviate commands - and rearrange the interface in this way, already, with the existing version of 3D-Coat - but this requires a manual construction by the user - which, in turn, de-standardizes the "user interface". In my opinion, everything that deviates from the original premise of the user interface (think Xerox Parc and the mouse) - is a regression to the age of terminals, textual input and the memorization of commands and functions. Greg Smith

3dcal: I hate to beg. Those tutorials have been on the 3DC site for a long time - and I should have heard from a significant number of users by now. That is why I don't know if there is enough demand. Now, if you really feel that more tutorials should be made by me - and you want to put in a plug - just write Stas an email and let him know. He pays for stuff like this to be made by people like me. 3dcsales@gmail.com Thanks for the good review, Greg Smith