Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

V4.1 BETA (experimental 4.1.17D)


Recommended Posts

  • Contributor

guys...did you read his post? he tried it...



 

Its great, but does not give exactly the kind of control I'm looking for.

 

 

 

He does not want a brush based deformation...but  a LATTICE deformation....as shown on his picture.

 

Best suggestion is Beat's,to use external projection editor and use warp lattice in photoshop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yeah, I'm aware of the distortion feature in 3D Coat that distorts images like the liquify filter in Photoshop. It works for many cases, but if you need precise control and need to distort a texture image in a more extreme way (don't know how else to put it) brushing the image into that shape is not optimal.

 

Try to pull a line into a nice, even circle using the distort brush, for example. It might work, but it'll take a long time, and you'll have to do a lot of brushing and pulling to eliminate unwanted distortions because its only possible to transform (move) the elements of the image, not rotate them.

 

Its much easier to use an actual lattice (the liquify filter is not a lattice as I understand it) where you have a limited number of control points that you can move around directly.

 

Its not a big thing, and this lattice distortion can be done outside of 3D Coat easily, but I though it'd be nice to have anyway.

Edited by wilson66
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Try to pull a line into a nice, even circle using the distort brush, for example. It might work, but it'll take a long time, and you'll have to do a lot of brushing and pulling to eliminate unwanted distortions because its only possible to transform (move) the elements of the image, not rotate them.

there is image along spline  tool that is really good to make even circles or closed shapes, i I use it on fabrics with laces,paisley and ropes all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Liquify is a lattice, but it's normally adjusted over more than one point at a time, depending on brush settings.  Beat's suggestion, while that does seem to be the only solution, defeats the point of the feature requested.  For that matter, I could simply have said why bother doing many things in 3D Coat that has been suggested for sculpting when you can do it in another app.  Clearly, that's not the answer to a feature request.

Edited by alvordr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Yeah, cause the option to use edit projection in external software is just for show. I mean, don't use it EVER, it may be helpful.

You're right, it's better to leave people with their problem if a workaround involves another software...

 

This is sad, a while ago we would discuss workflow involving different software sometimes because it was quicker, other times because some software lacked functions others had. Now we're 3dcoat community, more intolerant than zbrush. Cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

A feature request, just because it wasn't important to you, doesn't mean it should get ignored, completely.  My point still stands...if you don't like the smoothing or brush "feel" in 3DC use an external editor and let 3DC stand where it is.  I, for one, don't have the problems you do, because I have little to no need for the SF or LC areas of 3DC...yet those like myself have waited for your requests to get handled.  Relax and let the man have his day.

Edited by alvordr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'm sorry.  You're correct.  I wasn't trying to say that you were ignoring it in that sense, nor was this really aimed at you.  It was to say that we shouldn't ignore a feature request just because it could be handled in another package.  Keep in mind that not everyone has the same software you do, or have the time to do work-arounds, which is usually where feature requests come in.  Thank you for helping him.

Edited by alvordr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Guys, please, I did not want to start any kind of rant here. I just thought lattice deformation (as in the screenshot I have posted) would be a nice feature addition to 3D Coat. If that is not what others here want, so be it. :)

 

Lattice deformation can be done outside of 3D Coat, as well as a number of other things. I can use Sculptris for LC sculpting, ZBrush for vertex painting and auto retopology, Mari and Photoshop for texturing, Modo or Topogun for manual retopology, and still get the work done without starting up 3D Coat in the first place. But to not add a new feature because there is a workaround or there are other programs that can do it instead is just silly in my eyes. The fewer programs we have to use in our workflow the better.

 

But thats just my personal opinion of course. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'll just refrain from continuing this conversation, Beat, but thanks for proving my point.  Wilson, I hope you get the feature you requested.  I know it's on a long list of things Andrew's working.  As much as I can see that improving certain things would help, I still love using 3DC.

Edited by alvordr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

So a workaround for many of the problems you've been addressing lately can be solved by using ZBrush or Mudbox and avoiding any features or fixes....got it :)

I've been having to resort to sending retopo meshes to 3ds Max every time I need to create a SHELL, or if I want to use it's Dot Ring tool. I've had to WORK AROUND this way for a long, long time because the request has gone unheeded. But if this feature qualifies as "low hanging fruit" it might jump to the front of the line....you know ahead of all the other important stuff....like fixing holes and exploding meshes that have been a common experience in this app for a long time, now. And if it's easier, it will jump in front of other peoples long, long, long standing requests. That's how it works....around....here. :D

 

I said this to Stas years ago, about 3D Coat's development. It's more like a frantic race (cause of only one developer), to squash bugs and add features at the same time. Never stopping to make sure each workspace has had time to undergo a thorough inspection and refinement of tools. The Pose Tool is a good example. It's had issues here and there, for a long, long time, and I've had to record and record examples where it's not working right. Even now, Andrew made an adjustment, and it still doesn't work right. So, now I have to take that request and go back to the end of the line all over again. Very, very frustrating.  Instead of getting everything nailed down in one go, one has to file a Mantis report and watch it get buried after a month or so,

 

It's better (kind of like the Brushes in Surface mode have been handled) to get the whole community involved at once and nail down all the issues and requests, in one setting....rather than tending to one issue and hastily moving on to something entirely different...leaving it undone (kind of like Auto-Retopo).

Edited by AbnRanger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

AbnRanger,

 

I hear you.  I agree 100% on the fixes.  I just wouldn't want to dismiss a feature request, simply because it can be done somewhere else.  I found it odd that when I went back to doing what I've been doing in Retopo, I had to change the mirror snap to 100% again..after spending some time wondering why it was broken again.  It wasn't...but I didn't realize the setting had changed, when I loaded the beta 10.0.10  Anyway, I'm waiting as patiently as I can to see what comes.  I don't mind a blend of features and fixes, but if there are fixes that could have been implemented that are over a year old, then I'm left wondering why those cases are still open.  While I look at 3DC, at times, and think about getting frustrated as to why I can't do something, I also think about the time it would take me to do it in another app.  I'm still a fan of 3DC.

Edited by alvordr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I'll just refrain from continuing this conversation, Beat, but thanks for proving my point.  Wilson, I hope you get the feature you requested.  I know it's on a long list of things Andrew's working.  As much as I can see that improving certain things would help, I still love using 3DC.

As with any software, if you want something, YOU HAVE TO GET IN LINE...everyone else has their ticket (Filed Mantis Request). Take a number and wait in line, like every other software and everywhere else in life. In the interim, Beat suggested a means to handle the task by using a feature of 3D Coat......that FEATURE is streamlined interoperability with Photoshop. IT IS A FEATURE. So, if someone suggests a workaround is to use 3D Coat's live interoperability with PS as an alternate means to complete a task (while waiting for said request), why is that not a valid suggestion? That's the entire reason Andrew developed the connection between the two apps, so they together could be used as an extension of each other.

 

It's works very, very well, actually. If I want to use the CURVES adjustment tool or other tools that exists solely in PS, then I can quick jump over, use it and get back in a matter of CTRL + S > ALT + TAB. I personally like the request...as I can see a lot of usage for it, myself (ie., good for scaling reptile scales on a dragon or other type of character). But Beat's suggestion is a good one to use while we wait.

 

Edited by AbnRanger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I think we all agree that the most critical bugs need to be fixed first, before adding in new features. That mesh explosion/corruption bug in the Voxel room is one that stands out for me. I can't speak to what needs work in the other rooms since I mainly sculpt in 3DC. Given the choice, I would rather have a few tools that are really stable and work smoothly, than a lot of cool features that are buggy and unreliable.

 

At it's current price point, 3DC must focus on doing a few things really well. It can't compete, feature for feature with Mari, ZB or MB. I think Andrew needs to decide if he wants to expand 3DC's capabilities. If he does, then he needs to take on more help, raise the price and hope his current user base supports him. I think it's too much for one person to continue to develop an ever expanding program without help. I see 3DC as a sculpting and painting tool for freelance artists and advanced hobbyists (hence the low price). If you need more than the basic tool set of 3DC, then upgrade to ZB, MB or Mari.

Edited by SilverCity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew... he needs to take on more help, raise the price and hope his current user base supports him.

 

Andrew does need help, no doubt about that. Ideally there would be one dev per room so no matter what part of the app a user cares about they know it'll get updates regularly. But realistically it seems 3DC doesn't sell well enough for that to happen. And raising the price could result in even fewer copies being sold offsetting any benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I think we all agree that the most critical bugs need to be fixed first, before adding in new features. That mesh explosion/corruption bug in the Voxel room is one that stands out for me. I can't speak to what needs work in the other rooms since I mainly sculpt in 3DC. Given the choice, I would rather have a few tools that are really stable and work smoothly, than a lot of cool features that are buggy and unreliable.

 

At it's current price point, 3DC must focus on doing a few things really well. It can't compete, feature for feature with Mari, ZB or MB. I think Andrew needs to decide if he wants to expand 3DC's capabilities. If he does, then he needs to take on more help, raise the price and hope his current user base supports him. I think it's too much for one person to continue to develop an ever expanding program without help. I see 3DC as a sculpting and painting tool for freelance artists and advanced hobbyists (hence the low price). If you need more than the basic tool set of 3DC, then upgrade to ZB, MB or Mari.

Basic toolset? Are you kidding? What experience do you have with Mudbox and ZBrush? I own a seat of Mudbox, that I bought since I became a 3D Coat user, and it gathers dust because I prefer to work in 3D Coat. Mudbox doesn't have half the tools/capability 3D Coat does in either sculpting or texture painting, so that tells me you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. It once was better in terms of raw sculpting speed (that gap has largely been closed with V4), and it still has some unique features, but I find that the Surface mode sculpting (apart from some of the holes and explosions that are being worked on) has become FAR more advanced than what I have in Mudbox.

 

ZBrush may still be the gold standard in terms of sculpting, but 3D Coat now presents a legit and major challenge on that front (especially with dynamic tessellation) and is a MUCH more advanced toolset in every other area of the app (except the Auto-Retop part....which Pixologic copied from 3D Coat!). Better, more extensive Modeling and Retopo tools, Texture Painting, UV Editing. ZBrush doesn't even offer Ptex capability. So, when people like yourself, presume that it's a more advanced application than 3D Coat...it's a false presumption. They get that impression based on work artists have done with it. Those same artists were largely comfortable with ZB before 3D Coat ever came along. It had a head start on 3D Coat by several years, and it created this niche...so naturally it's going to have a larger following.

 

In my honest opinion, 3D Coat has overtaken Mudbox as Pixologic's chief competitor. Autodesk has a way of taking a great plugin or piece of software and killing it....slowly. Just ask Softimage owners about that. I discovered it firsthand with my seat of Combustion. I also don't see any other texture painting application out there, apart from Mari, that touches 3D Coat. Mari is $2k plus yearly subscription/maintenance....and it only does texture painting. That's it. It's too narrowly focused and too expensive for most small to medium sized studios.

 

My beef here is not what 3D Coat can't do...but on fixing/refining what it already does....which is a LOT more than it's competitors.

Edited by AbnRanger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Andrew does need help, no doubt about that. Ideally there would be one dev per room so no matter what part of the app a user cares about they know it'll get updates regularly. But realistically it seems 3DC doesn't sell well enough for that to happen. And raising the price could result in even fewer copies being sold offsetting any benefit.

Andrew said it was difficult to hire other programmers because he would end up fixing the bugs of others...so what he really needs is not more help,but clones of himself :). He also talked about making 3DCoat partially open-source at some point but it was hypothetical I think....About raising price:I hardly think that would help imo...it would be really kill 3DC I think. Price is one of the few things that  really get some people onboard that would totally turn to ZB/MB if they were less expensive.

 

What is missing here is rock solid stability (being worked on as we speak) and powerful showcasing..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Andrew said it was difficult to hire other programmers because he would end up fixing the bugs of others...so what he really needs is not more help,but clones of himself :). He also talked about making 3DCoat partially open-source at some point but it was hypothetical I think....About raising price:I hardly think that would help imo...it would be really kill 3DC I think. Price is one of the few things that  really get some people onboard that would totally turn to ZB/MB if they were less expensive.

 

What is missing here is rock solid stability (being worked on as we speak) and powerful showcasing..

It's hard to get the latter until the former is taken care of. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Sorry if I touched a nerve and I stand corrected if my impressions of the other programs were wrong. I don't use MB, so I only know of it from what I have read in the past. I'm mainly coming from the viewpoint of 3D sculpting and, for me, 3DC is great for what I do.

 

My general point was that as a single developer, there is only so much Andrew can do. 3DC has a lot of advanced features, but for me, all those tools and functions need to work and be stable. The Voxel room has improved greatly since I first started using 3DC, so I'm optimistic that the other areas can see those same improvements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew said it was difficult to hire other programmers because he would end up fixing the bugs of others...so what he really needs is not more help,but clones of himself :).

 

Well that's true if the code base between rooms is too intertwined instead of more modular, or if he hired poor programmers (any programmer who needs to rely on others to fix their mistakes shouldn't be hired). Of course, if the reason he said that is because he would hire them in bursts and then stop paying them before they finished fixing any bugs they created to save on funds, that's a whole other deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Well that's true if the code base between rooms is too intertwined instead of more modular, or if he hired poor programmers (any programmer who needs to rely on others to fix their mistakes shouldn't be hired). Of course, if the reason he said that is because he would hire them in bursts and then stop paying them before they finished fixing any bugs they created to save on funds, that's a whole other deal.

No,I think 3DCoat is just pretty complex piece of software....I think he would need to fix bug of even very good programmers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...