Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

V4.1 BETA (experimental 4.1.17D)


Recommended Posts

  • Contributor

It might be a good idea to create a voting system here on the forum about the most important request a game or CGI developer uses in their pipeline every day/week.

Get the three most requested functions from Mantis. Create choices A, B, C and people can vote and see the immediate results, how many users want A or B or C feature. Then it might be sensible to realize the one request that gets the most vote. The request doesn't have to be a "new feature". Rather a heavily used function in creating CGI in everyday work that is not currently in 3D-Coat or not working the way users would like and people have to go to other software to finish their models.

It's there, no one uses it. On mantis you can upvote at the bottom of the report.

@stry: you can spot symmetrical meshes with the cursor mirrored on the surface, problem is it's a TINY dot that you can easily miss (and that's why you often think you're in sym while you're not)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry im digging the 3DC dev history but... i need enlightenment

i was asking about features that was implemented in early version and then changed :wacko:

i need to know why.

--------------------------------

first is popup tool library:

User only can interact with a tray showing ONE element, the active element. (see image below)

When the user press over the element thumbnail... a windows popup show ALL the elements in the library... ready to be selected.

I found that was implemented in version 2.05 <_<

Why this option was changed ?

MaskMtl.jpg

for my POV will be a radical time saver, and let to optimize the UI layout... why was changed ? :huh:

-----------------------------------

Then i found a second surprise... sliders !

and now are gone...

Mask_where_find.jpg

v2.05 too

source

http://3d-brush-dev....es-part-in.html

why ?

any help is welcome ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Linux version 4.00beta11 64 bit non-cuda..

To begin with switching rooms or tools was never as fast as it was in some of the older builds. The lag appeared to worsen over time as I continued to use the newest beta for linux.

Also there are major problems with the preset system for your brushes at least it is when you create brushes off your LC general brush and save them as a preset brush.

When you create brushes based off the LC General Brush and then create any new brush alphas later, it changes your selected preset brush alphas. It appears that the brush alpha numbering system for brush preset gets messed up.

Deleting alphas will mesh up the Preset brush alphas as well, again this could be just a problem if you have created brushes off the LC general brush. The deleted alphas are not selected for use by any preset brush when deleting them.

The edit curves under the depth also appears not to function correctly. If you adjust the curve, it then becomes the default selection at least when you are using your preset brushes. No matter if you select (default) in the curves panel and update your preset, it still returns to the previous one. This might effect the edit curves under the radius too but I have not checked

Deleted alphas will return when you reopen 3DCoat.

The old problem of opening the brush alpha curve panel to adjust the alpha curve and finding no curve to adjust has returned in some cases as well.

We can name our created alphas using the curve panel but when you reopen the curve panel the name does not appear in the upper right hand corner.

I still can produce holes at times in Surface mode meshes, seldom but they do happen. Also when you swtich to voxel mode from surface mode and start brushing your mesh breaks apart. This also seldom happens and I think it is a memory issue in surface mode. To fix the problem, I undo, return to surface mode and then run clean up memory. I then return to voxel mode and the problem is fixed.

Finally, the preset system was becoming so unworkable and with the other problems that I removed 3DCoat entirely.

Installed a clean version.... Lag is completely gone at this time. Switching rooms and tools is lighting fast.

I will watch and see when the lag returns for making bugs reports. I will have to recreate my preset brushes again based off the General Brush but this time I think I will create all my alphas first and then not add any more alphas till the problem is fixed...

I put this information here in case others run into the same problems and then I will post some bug reports next week...

I am testing a beta version so this is not a complaint but only for your information.

EDIT: I just tested the curves edit panel again without any presets. Same problem, change the curve and there is no way to change it even selecting default will not fix it. It gets stuck on that one setting. You have to select another brush and then return to the previous brush to see what I mean.

Plus I need to watch my spelling, fingers are getting ahead of the brain... or brain ahead of the fingers... :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Looking at that image of 2.05, I'd hazard a guess that they took up too much screen real estate and contributes to clutter. Only Andrew can say for sure. I agree totally that clear and concise sliders are really nice to have and that it's ok to copy how other main-stream programs do it.

Case in point, I've been playing with Mudbox for the past few days and in addition to what carlosa mentioned about it on Mantis, I also like how it implements them visibility-wise in the layers menu. There is the displayed numerical value of course, but also next to that is a small icon. When you click on the icon with the LMB and hold it down, a vertical slider appears. When you let go of the LMB, it disappears again.

And of course there were these associated reports/discussion too in case anyone missed them, since were on the subject:

http://3d-coat.com/m...view.php?id=499 (in case anyone missed it on 932) ;)

http://3d-coat.com/m...view.php?id=500 (a must if sliders do get updated)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Thanks carlosa! I want the value sliders back! I have made the Mantis report two weeks ago about sliders. http://3d-coat.com/m...view.php?id=932

It was a UI design decision when V3 was being released. Make it possible to click anywhere within the text and drag left and right to adjust the values. That is an element prevelant throughout the application. Here is my vote to keep it like it is. I like the idea to right-click the numeric input, to set it to either zero or default value, though.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ty AbnRanger for your reply:

Sliders let to see easily a range

lower valor begin at left... higher valor ends at right

but with actual design... user must try to know which is the range of... -example-

<Specularity Modulator> default is 1 but range can be 0 to 2... ok im at middle

compared to

<Contrast> default is 0 but range can be 0 to 1... oh ok, now im at the lower range

<Brightness> default is 0 but range can be -255 to 255... oh well... Contrast is 0 to 1 and Brightness is -255 to 255 ?

A more clear design can be:

<Specularity Modulator>

<............Contrast............>

<..........Brightness..........>

A slider or ANY alternative graphical design let easily to see which is the range.

We work with images... we need to see to know and understand... :)

slider1.png

-------------------------------------------------------------

And what about When we press one of these buttons then we see appropriate list of the tools for this group

was a UI design decision too ?

Which is your opinion about it ?

ty again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

It was a UI design decision when V3 was being released. Make it possible to click anywhere within the text and drag left and right to adjust the values.

This design is good to navigate but it does not provide information for value range, for example blending:

Depth modulator 0 - 1

Color opacity 0 - 1

Emboss power 0 - 5

Contrast 0 - 1

Brightness 0 - 255

Specular modulator 0 - 2

Specular brightness 0 - 255

Do I have to remember all of these limits? When I see number 0.5 what do I have to think about this value? Is 0.5 big or small? I need to know limits to answer. And when I work with 8k texture I can't move value back and forth to check its limit. This operation takes a lot of time with hirez textures.

PS: Carlosa was faster... :-)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Guys I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Sliders lack precision and if there's anything they're good at, it's only translating the current value into approximate visual percentage feedback. Plus, they take up precious GUI space. I never used them be it in Maya's attribute editor or other software. If I only have a chance to drag left/right with (or without) a modifier key, I always do it. Or, I simply enter a value with a keyboard. And no, I don't remember the maximum possible value of each attribute I tweak because it's like what - one second to type 9999 or drag the mouse far towards the left or right to see the limits? Or just use a common sense. You try it once, two, and you know it by heart. I think Andrew was right dropping them, though I have nothing against their comeback as an UI option of course.

But hey, weren't we supposed to find bugs? :p:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sliders are great like they are, they allow you to quickly get to where you need if you don't need precision. If you do need precision just enter a number. The problem with the old sliders that had a "track" was that they stopped at 100% or 1.0. I remember Andrew actually mentioning this as the reason for the change. The current sliders, which are similar to mini-sliders in LightWave, allow you to go as far as you want (in tools where that makes sense).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'm probably repeating myself, but oh well. In Max you can hold down the ctrl key to make larger changes to the value than normal when dragging, and holding alt while dragging makes very small changes. Right clicking resets the value to zero (though default would be better). I was watching a video about Houdini and they had an interesting way of doing it too. Clicking the value pops up a vertical row of boxes, and in each box is a number you can click and drag which causes the value to change by that amount. The boxes are labeled something like .001 / .01 / .1 / 1 / 10 / 100 / 1000 which I thought was pretty smart.

I honestly don't see why it wouldn't be possible to keep it the way it is now and just add a way to make something akin to a proper slider temporarily visible, like what I described about Mudbox earlier, but maybe more along the lines of the image carlosa posted on Mantis. Now I'm thinking of a fuel gauge which has F at the top of a partially filled bar and E at the bottom. It doesn't even have to be clickable, just easy to read and understand. I like the ability to hold the RMB and drag left/right to change brush size, while up/down changes depth. Maybe this can be expanded upon somehow, with a better graphical representation of a slider with min, max, and current values temporarily displayed near the cursor as the value changes (not just a thin yellow and blue circle to decipher, which fails to represent 101% to 200%). You can already set 3DC to display something above and below the cursor, but that doesn't work very well because it's too distracting when it's always on. But hey, maybe it's a starting point?

Just spit ballin here. Why? Why not? :D

There is a lot of space in the viewport not being used much of the time. You could have graphical representations for any number of things along those borders, either permanently or temporarily. A customizable HUD you can toggle on and off basically. A lot of apps allow the user to see statistics somewhere in the viewport itself, like 3ds Max and Topogun do. They can show the total number of tris, quads, edges, verts, fps and so on all together at once in an unintrusive way, along with how many you have selected of each at any given moment as well. 3D Coat does something similar along the bottom, but it could be much cleaner and less confusing to read (and I am thankful it shows the number of selected edges and vertices now, Andrew!). If you really want to go overboard, make 3DC so configurable, customizable, and skinable that no two installs look or act the same!

Or just add an easy way to reset the value to either zero or default and be done with it. Yeah, we probably should focus more on bugs right now lol. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

lol

take note that atm we are focused to find bugs just to help the V4 release...

this tweaks are good roadmap schedule points just to improve the user experience after it :)

Most have a value of 0-100, so it's very, very easy to guess where you are as you slide back and forth....watching the numeric value change. I personally don't like having a UI full of more clutter than is necessary. A bunch of unnecessary knobs to do that. Not to mention giving it that Poser or Daz UI look. :(

I recall suggesting the way sliders work in Combustion (when the UI was being worked on for V3), and for the most part that is how they work in 3D Coat, now. In the 2nd image, you can see the preliminary UI changes made, before this switch, and you can see how clunky they look. In the 3rd image, this is a mockup I showed on the forum at the time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

It was a UI design decision when V3 was being released. Make it possible to click anywhere within the text and drag left and right to adjust the values. That is an element prevelant throughout the application. Here is my vote to keep it like it is. I like the idea to right-click the numeric input, to set it to either zero or default value, though.

I agree with AbnRanger and cast my vote for the current implementation (with right-click reset).

The way it is now you can also input values that are greater than the slider range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The programmer can experiment with different UI but professionals who constantly work with top notch software from Adobe and Autodesk will prefer software with similar UI. By this reason I don't like ZBrush with its not standard interface and chose Mudbox and 3d-coat. In current state 3d-coat also looks like a programmer's toy with absolutely disorganized menus but I still use it because of some cool features. Regarding sliders I can say that this is a good control and visual informative feature. If you need to use values beyond the range limit you can still enter it as numeric value. For example, here is a slider in Adobe After Effects.

clipboard01ta.jpg

You can see that default range is 0 - 50 but if I RMB click on numeric value and select Edit Value then I have a window where I can adjust range to 0 - 30000. In this case if I open project I can always see the value range and current value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very funny. So what IS the standard in your view?

What Adobe does? What Autodesk does? What The Foundry does? What NewTek does, Luxology or maybe Maxon?

All this developers offers very good solutions and defines the current "industry standards".

Find a good compromise and everyone is pleased. Why not work together and develope nice solutions that fulfill all requirements?

:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The UI isnt that bad, at least it has tooltips that explain some of things, information is compartmentalised into rooms. Its a hell of alot better than Zbrush. You at least have a possibilitie of figuring things out without even looking at the manual in 3DCoat. Zbrush you have no chance of working out where things are or what arcane combination does what without looking at the manual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3d-coat also looks like a programmer's toy with absolutely disorganized menus but I still use it because of some cool features.

I'm starting to feel the same way. A good example is the export function for a retopo mesh. One is in the file menu, with several more located in the retopo menu. Two of the ones located in the retopo room (File menu and Retopo menu) do the exact same thing making one of them redundant. Neither give the user any options either, such as whether to export UV sets as tiles for example. If you want that you have to choose export from the file menu in the paint room, but only if you merge first otherwise it will just output your high poly reference mesh instead. How are users supposed to divine details like that? Trying to do something that should be simple and straightforward, like exporting a low poly retopo mesh that has multiple UV sets along with 16-bit displacement maps, has been anything but. I don't know if it's because of the way 3DC is set up (rooms) or because new features have been slapped on at later dates, but let me tell you exporting bitmaps is just as bad. There are a number of different ways to do it and the end results vary, sometimes wildly, which shouldn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Welcome to the club \o/

Great potential. Lack of organisation. Lack of artists/users to guide the Ui choices. 3dcoat.

This is why people get mad at me when I try to disuade so many dang feature requests. It is a one man show, and frankly...I don't know how in Hades Andrew is able to pull it off. It would be a full-time job just squashing all the bugs and tweaking a some of the current tools. Ooh-Ooh...give me this. O'...and some of that! I've made a number of small suggestions and Andrew loses track of them all (why we need to put them on Mantis), even when he agrees something should be done. I don't guess the requests will ever taper off any. Andrew is going to have to get some help, even though he feels it will slow him down (in the near term it probably will). Maybe this is why the whole scripting addition was added. To help take some of the feature request burden off of him and allow some of the bright minds in the community have a crack at it
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

This is why people get mad at me when I try to disuade so many dang feature requests. It is a one man show, and frankly...I don't know how in Hades Andrew is able to pull it off. It would be a full-time job just squashing all the bugs and tweaking a some of the current tools. Ooh-Ooh...give me this. O'...and some of that! I've made a number of small suggestions and Andrew loses track of them all (why we need to put them on Mantis), even when he agrees something should be done. I don't guess the requests will ever taper off any. Andrew is going to have to get some help, even though he feels it will slow him down (in the near term it probably will). Maybe this is why the whole scripting addition was added. To help take some of the feature request burden off of him and allow some of the bright minds in the community have a crack at it

I get it AbnRanger and completely agree. Problem is we know it's not gonna happen, and the scripting bit may help a bit but if functions are fundamentaly flawed it'll be a bandage on a wooden leg...

And I know people are thinking about "the ravenous wolves in sheeps clothing" bit: I'm not that guy, really, but competition is catching up fast, and in short terms 3dcoat will be at the end of the queue.

I keep repeating myself but I don't want to be a nuisance to Pilgway just warning about what I see. For a loooong time 3dcoat has been my favorite sculpting software because it was freeing me from the horrible zbrush ui and offering me better tools (in theory), I want it to stay like that but it's been a few years now I see progress but no polish, I'm turning my head and see new horizons that are as promising as 3dc was when Andrew started the volumetric sculpting dev, and much more polished because every bit was added with extreme attention at how the pieces were working together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I'm starting to feel the same way. A good example is the export function for a retopo mesh. One is in the file menu, with several more located in the retopo menu. Two of the ones located in the retopo room (File menu and Retopo menu) do the exact same thing making one of them redundant. Neither give the user any options either, such as whether to export UV sets as tiles for example. If you want that you have to choose export from the file menu in the paint room, but only if you merge first otherwise it will just output your high poly reference mesh instead. How are users supposed to divine details like that? Trying to do something that should be simple and straightforward, like exporting a low poly retopo mesh that has multiple UV sets along with 16-bit displacement maps, has been anything but. I don't know if it's because of the way 3DC is set up (rooms) or because new features have been slapped on at later dates, but let me tell you exporting bitmaps is just as bad. There are a number of different ways to do it and the end results vary, sometimes wildly, which shouldn't happen.

I understand what you are saying, but there is redundancy in most ANY application. Take 3ds Max for example....the relatively new "Graphite Modeling Tools." It contains all the old modeling tools/functions as well as the new ones. Their justification....some users want to close the command panel and just use the floating sub panels. I still say that Auto-Retopo should be a major button/section in the Retopo Room, where new users can easily find it...intuitively. Even Andrew agreed with this premise....but nothing has changed in this regard.

Same goes with the 2D Texture Editor. I told Andrew that it is WAY too prominent of a tool, in the Paint Room, to be hidden away in a menu somewhere new users would never find it. He agreed that it should have an icon or toggle in the UI. Nothing has been done in that regard, either. So, it's really just a matter of which fly gets swatted today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

@BeatKitano lol man, right... you made me out a laugh :D

Glad you liked it, but I'm not saying that just for fun.

V3 was supposed to be the volumetric sculpting cycle (started with 3.0), logicaly this should've been the polished, smoothly working version that was promised when the v2 beta cycle started (pre 3.x).

I don't know about you, but I still get the straight line/ voxel blocks sticking out of my models in voxel mode sometimes (and by sometimes I mean OFTEN if I'm brave enough to persevere).

A bug that was already in the first vox dev alphas.

So, either there wasn't enough attention given to that issue (it's just a single example of a looong list) or voxel sculpting is not suited for complex work in this software.

See where I'm getting at ? A feature (major one since it's probably this one which got the attention of the public in the first place !) that was started the previous cycle isn't finished and we started another major one (dynamic tesselation sculpting) in this one which apparently is advanced enough to warrant a release in a few weeks (holes/explosions ?!) and start the ui overhaul cycle. WOW.

I honestly doubt those problems will be fixed before v4 final release, so I think I can doubt the UI overhaul "that makes everything working as smoothly as zbrush" (because if the ui is shit, the process are predictable and working !) will be achieved by 5.x

And again I'm sure in one year time (maybe before) some of us that aren't convinced this will happen, will be where I stand (I'm now standing where AbnRanger was one year ago on some subjects for instance)...

If I had to make a comparison, 3dcoat is a rollercoaster while zbrush is a steam train.

3dcoat makes you go from "awesome" to "aw man, my model is dead I get those weird disconnected patches and can't fix it, and if I import it elsewhere I get an exploded mesh".

Zbrush is "where the hell is that button, oh it's there, that's stupid", ah "it's done almost there !". Slow, clunky but working and paying out it in the long term.

After such a long up and down treatment I don't even want to venture into those neat features that will end up destroying my mesh in a way I can't figure out.

If you get joy from using it and the next 10 minutes cursing because everything went down the drain without having a clue how it happened it's not worth it.

And yeah I know "beta software" problem is you still get that feeling since 3.0 and people are still headbutting against this even if the software is declared "stable"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3d-Brush 2.0

was released in 2008

Zbrush demo version 1.55

was released in 2002

3DMAX

Was released to the public in 1990

Maya -know before like Alias Wavefront in 1984-

v1.0 was released in February 1998

Lightwave

Released at 1990

-----------------------------------------------------------

I understand your feeling, but from my POV, i cant lost the focus about software longevity

ALL the programs listed have bugs. ALL.

And some have historic bugs too (im talking about > $ 3.000.- apps that destroy your work too)

Its impossible to get a software without bugs.

Some developers give free updates, like LWave.

Some subscription like Softimage.

And some inform the bugs was solved in new versions like 3DMax, Maya or Adobe.

v4 is Beta and i dont use it for my daily work...

I suppose your software needs are superior that mines... and -like new user- i dont have knowledge about history talk and feature request.

So from a fresh view... i think that the development time is good,

will be better ? SURE will be

I like to see a faster dev time ? lol yeah

I hope to see Raul back soon and I hope Pilgway hiring a new dev to the team. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...