Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

V4.1 BETA (experimental 4.1.17D)


Recommended Posts

  • Reputable Contributor

Thank you for quick response.AbnRanger.

This is the movie that i tried it.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ftjgmje1m1a11wc/copy_tool_bug.wmv

 

When I am trying to it,  reference is autopicked.

I would say that looks like a bug, but when I try it on my end, the tool works correctly. Try closing the app > going to the MyDocs/3D Coat V4 directory > delete the OPTIONS.XML file > re-install the latest build. Sometimes that Options.XML file gets buggered up and exhibits bug-like behavior. Sometimes, just closing and re-opening the app will straighten out funky behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I would say that looks like a bug, but when I try it on my end, the tool works correctly. Try closing the app > going to the MyDocs/3D Coat V4 directory > delete the OPTIONS.XML file > re-install the latest build. Sometimes that Options.XML file gets buggered up and exhibits bug-like behavior. Sometimes, just closing and re-opening the app will straighten out funky behavior.

Thank you so much,AbnRanger.!

I did it. And the Tool was recovered.

 

Thank you for keeping me company with my poor English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

If I assign a hotkey to Voxel Room->Transform->Move only gizmo, it gets deleted whenever I assign the same hotkey to Retopo Room->Transform->Move only gizmo. And vice-versa. Weren't we supposed to be able to set same shortcuts in different rooms without them colliding with each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

If I assign a hotkey to Voxel Room->Transform->Move only gizmo, it gets deleted whenever I assign the same hotkey to Retopo Room->Transform->Move only gizmo. And vice-versa. Weren't we supposed to be able to set same shortcuts in different rooms without them colliding with each other?

It's hard coded to the SHIFT key

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Just want to share a screenshot  about using wrinkleClay  :D

11A is not a very good build for Liveclay,its right in the middle of Andrew and Raul new fixes....13A is super stable.

....also posting a screenshot like that without any explanations or ways to reproduce is not constructive beta testing at all...

 

the screenshot show your are using 424 depth value,what are you trying to do?

Wrinkleclay is a very bad brush...I mean compared to CreaseClay...it barely does any wrinkles,

its more a weird pinch brush really..to do wrinkles CreaseClay is a thousand times better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Hi Artman, will your new presets be set as default for the next builds? (Btw, thanks again for making them.)

And is 13A a candidate for the "latest stable build" thread? Seems like we have been in "experimental" mode for a while now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Hi Artman, will your new presets be set as default for the next builds? (Btw, thanks again for making them.)

 

I dont know....Andrew got them. :) Maybe I should update the ones on main site...I'll wait a little bit.

It will all make sense when 4.1 comes out to put everything uptodate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

yeah i know that wrinkle clay is bad, it wasnt a bug report at all, just for amusement about the result... so no need for further exploration/ investigation. in that issue... sorry , should have clarified that.

i was only trying different settings with the brush, to get at least one good wrinkle with that brush or at least to get the idea, why its called wrinkleClay. Btw normally i would use your sharp preset to get wrinkles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Little report.

 

Sculpted A LOT in 13A this week and it feels pretty solid as far as sculpting goes. :)

I did not get any holes this time

(I did not use General Brush or Resample either so maybe last remaining hole issue is related to one of those 2 things.)

Im near 100% sure Resample can generate some issues,so now I use Subdivide tool instead.

 

-I also had issues with Cutoff tool which imo is not stable in surface mode at the moment

(I posted pics previously in this thread)

 

-IIn 13A I  encountered 2 explosions returning from proxy mode (decimated) and I used proxy mode A LOT and it happened only 2 times so it means its pretty stable but they are still conditions where explosions can occur..very hard to reproduce.

post-1195-0-05900500-1389546542_thumb.jp

I dont know exact cause but I attached object prior to explosion.

HairProxy explosion.7z (sorry,its 68mb...I could not go below that)

It is thin surface,probably self-intersecting when using Move brush could be the culprit.or maybe it is because I used Cut off on object before.But  the other explosion happened on a not so thin object.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I am unable to bake an even remotely acceptable normal and displacement maps with 3D Coat with snapping method set to Snap to outer surface and retopo mesh encompassing several VoxTree layers.
 
pocket.jpg
 
Baking those two textures results in ugly, aliased maps. Jagged edges occur always on boundaries of each VoxTree object. At first I thought that it might be something with my retopo mesh, but then I did a lot of tests and it turned out that xNormal, for example, have absolutely no problems with baking (AAx4) on it:
 
xnormal_3dcoat_nmap_comparison.jpg

It's easily reproducible in a simple scene. Just create a sphere and use VoxLayer to create some object that will sit on top of it. Retopologise, set snapping to Snap to outer surface in Baking scan settings, tweak in/out depths (optionally, add some influence spheres) and bake for PPP - either the normal or displacement map. Good luck! :girl_devil:
 
Related post: http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11710&p=104421

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any news from Andrew?

Like what's he up to?

I was in short vacation, but now working at full speed.

I was busy with lasso selection in 3D because it was urgently important for our internal purposes it will be very helpful for everyone.

And we preparing to 4.1, so I am working over stabilization a lot as well. I expect preliminary build within couple of days.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I was in short vacation, but now working at full speed.

I was busy with lasso selection in 3D because it was urgently important for our internal purposes it will be very helpful for everyone.

And we preparing to 4.1, so I am working over stabilization a lot as well. I expect preliminary build within couple of days.

Hello Andrew.

I'm glad to hear this. I hope you had an enjoyable break. :)

 

---

Andrew, apart from the issue with aliased texture edges in NM/Disp bakes I posted above, I'd like to point out another one in the Retopo Room that I find very annoying (to say at least)... <_<

Consider the following scenario.

There are three objects in VoxTree: object_A, object_B, object_C.

Object_A has three children: object_A1, object_A2 and object_A3.

Object_B has four children: object_B1... object_B4.

Object_C has no children.

User creates retopo groups for object_A, B and C. Three in total.

He defines UVs for all three objects. Let's say objects A and C use the same UV set.

Because objects A and B have children, user sets bake snapping to "outer surface". He checks in and out depths for object_A and adjusts them accordingly. He also sets one or two influence spheres to fix local problems with depth. However, he then notices that in/out depth values are not suitable for objects B and C. Also, he doesn't really want to use snapping to outer surface on object_C, but  snap to closest along normal (due to object lacking any children).

So, what he can do now with object_B and C? Insert a couple dozens of influence spheres to fix all depth problems with those two objects? Probably. But this is not only very tedious, but also introduces a lot of mess in the viewport and things start to get out of hand with more than 20 spheres.

This is why I think each retopo group should have its own, individual in/out depth and bake snapping settings.

---

Also, a few words about influence spheres.

Could you please add an option to toggle their visilibity on/off when previewing baking cage in "Bake scan settings" window? I currently have a scene with over 40 of them and its almost impossible to see the in/out depth preview through this crowd.

And by the way. Have you considered adding an option to load an editable cage that could be used as an alternative to influence spheres?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I am unable to bake an even remotely acceptable normal and displacement maps with 3D Coat with snapping method set to Snap to outer surface and retopo mesh encompassing several VoxTree layers.

 

Baking those two textures results in ugly, aliased maps. Jagged edges occur always on boundaries of each VoxTree object. At first I thought that it might be something with my retopo mesh, but then I did a lot of tests and it turned out that xNormal, for example, have absolutely no problems with baking (AAx4) on it:

 

xnormal_3dcoat_nmap_comparison.jpg

It's easily reproducible in a simple scene. Just create a sphere and use VoxLayer to create some object that will sit on top of it. Retopologise, set snapping to Snap to outer surface in Baking scan settings, tweak in/out depths (optionally, add some influence spheres) and bake for PPP - either the normal or displacement map. Good luck! :girl_devil:

 

Related post: http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11710&p=104421

That's why you need to read the Happy Baking guide, to when you should use that mode and when not to. By default, it uses closest along NORMAL. Outer Surface is for when you have more complexity for it to deal with...such as overlapping objects and such. Yours doesn't appear to need that mode and thus you should try the default (closest normal). I haven't had anywhere near the trouble you seem to have. Maybe that will solve it.

 

http://pilgway.com/~greg/HappyBakingGuide.pdf

Edited by AbnRanger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Thank you AbnRanger, but I already read Happy Baking Guide several times. Snap to outer surface is what I need to use here because snap to closest along normal doesn't capture hanging geometry, no matter how big or small both depths are. I tried. The area shown is comprised of three VoxTree objects: tunic, pocket and its flap. They also intersect with each other to a small degree.

If it wasn't the aliasing on edges of the flap and the pocket, it would be fine I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Thank you AbnRanger, but I already read Happy Baking Guide several times. Snap to outer surface is what I need to use here because snap to closest along normal doesn't capture hanging geometry, no matter how big or small both depths are. I tried. The area shown is comprised of three VoxTree objects: tunic, pocket and its flap. They also intersect with each other to a small degree.

If it wasn't the aliasing on edges of the flap and the pocket, it would be fine I guess.

There is a similar situation going on in this video...overlapping objects, and there is a tip on how to deal with it (as best as possible, anyway). Create a blank layer and then right-click > choose Merge visible. I had a bugger of time with it before Andrew mentioned the fact that the verts were probably dipping beneath the outer voxel object. This trick helped solve that issue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we preparing to 4.1, so I am working over stabilization a lot as well. I expect preliminary build within couple of days.

 

Great news! The paint room updates can't come soon enough, what with some major new competition in that area being right around the corner (Substance Painter).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Great news! The paint room updates can't come soon enough, what with some major new competition in that area being right around the corner (Substance Painter).

I agree...I noticed the other day...when someone asked about painting brush alpha's outside of Photoshop. I was going to demonstrate how easily it can be done inside of 3D Coat....but I suddenly realized there is no gradient brush/tool, like you find in PS's tool panel (and for a long, long, long time). I realized for some tasks it could be very necessary...but alas, there is no way that I can think of, to paint a simple gradient. One would have to jump outside of 3D Coat to do this simple task. Very much needed (with radial, linear and repeated gradient modes).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I agree...I noticed the other day...when someone asked about painting brush alpha's outside of Photoshop. I was going to demonstrate how easily it can be done inside of 3D Coat....but I suddenly realized there is no gradient brush/tool, like you find in PS's tool panel (and for a long, long, long time). I realized for some tasks it could be very necessary...but alas, there is no way that I can think of, to paint a simple gradient. One would have to jump outside of 3D Coat to do this simple task. Very much needed (with radial, linear and repeated gradient modes).

 

Actually AbnRanger, there is in fact a gradient brush tool, though very deeply hidden in the paint room. It doesn't have a repeated but it does have both radial (called spherical) and linear gradient. I've used it multiple times in my painting. In order to get there, go to the fill bucket tool, click the Lines mode check box underneath fill with smooth. From there you'll be given some different options such as the aforementioned and then, Pick Point 1 and Pick Point 2, both of which define the area for you to apply the gradient to. Hope this helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Actually AbnRanger, there is in fact a gradient brush tool, though very deeply hidden in the paint room. It doesn't have a repeated but it does have both radial (called spherical) and linear gradient. I've used it multiple times in my painting. In order to get there, go to the fill bucket tool, click the Lines mode check box underneath fill with smooth. From there you'll be given some different options such as the aforementioned and then, Pick Point 1 and Pick Point 2, both of which define the area for you to apply the gradient to. Hope this helps!

Thanks. It occurred to me, just after I posted it that there might be gradient modulation in the Fill tool. Never used it before, but I vaguely recall something about it, now that you mention it. Appreciate the reminder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. It occurred to me, just after I posted it that there might be gradient modulation in the Fill tool. Never used it before, but I vaguely recall something about it, now that you mention it. Appreciate the reminder.

The gradient fill tool is indeed very flexible in 3D-Coat. I like it very much too. I gues it is already there since version 2 or 3. So a very old feature. But I agree, it is a bit hidden in the english version. The german users have it easier to find this feature by the way. I translated it to "gradient mode", but used the german words of course. Maybe someone could tweak this in the english version to make it obvious?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Gradient fills are one thing, but if you want to paint with a gradient, that's another matter.  It's a bit like having Flow % in Photoshop...where the brush dies out or "unloads" as you stroke.  This would be useful for hair, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

There is a similar situation going on in this video...overlapping objects, and there is a tip on how to deal with it (as best as possible, anyway). Create a blank layer and then right-click > choose Merge visible. I had a bugger of time with it before Andrew mentioned the fact that the verts were probably dipping beneath the outer voxel object. This trick helped solve that issue.

The trick shown in the video is very useful, but it's also something I've been practising since I have seen your tutorial for the first time several months ago. :)

I inspected my mesh and I doesn't have any sunken vertices.

 

I've been experimenting a bit with baking today. I made a sample scene with three groups of objects:

- Surface_floatingGeo - containing a sphere and two pieces of floating geometry above its surface. All in surface mode.

- Voxels_floatingGeo - the same set of objects, but in voxel mode.

- Voxels_mergedGeo - objects modified to intersect with the sphere. Everything fused into one solid voxel volume.

Only the last one bakes without aliasing.

But whenever 3DC has to deal with floating geometry it gets lost and produces jagged edges.

 

The only solution to this seems to be what Creator suggested (http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11710&p=104468). - bake to higher resolution and scale down the map in external program.

 

Sample scene: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/os390wus2q2xb84/bakeTest.7z (23 MB)

Everything is set-up and ready to bake.

Edited by ajz3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

The trick shown in the video is very useful, but it's also something I've been practising since I have seen your tutorial for the first time several months ago. :)

I inspected my mesh and I doesn't have any sunken vertices.

 

I've been experimenting a bit with baking today. I made a sample scene with three groups of objects:

- Surface_floatingGeo - containing a sphere and two pieces of floating geometry above its surface. All in surface mode.

- Voxels_floatingGeo - the same set of objects, but in voxel mode.

- Voxels_mergedGeo - objects modified to intersect with the sphere. Everything fused into one solid voxel volume.

Only the last one bakes without aliasing.

But whenever 3DC has to deal with floating geometry it gets lost and produces jagged edges.

 

The only solution to this seems to be what Creator suggested (http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11710&p=104468). - bake to higher resolution and scale down the map in external program.

 

Sample scene: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/os390wus2q2xb84/bakeTest.7z (23 MB)

Everything is set-up and ready to bake.

Yeah...I thought that might be the same type of issue I was having previously. I tried for hours to get a decent result and nothing else worked...but that's just before Andrew added the Zones to the Bake Scan Settings Dialog. That's a good tip about the map size. Will have to keep that in my back pocket. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...