Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

V4.1 BETA (experimental 4.1.17D)


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I think Phil is having problems with exporting from 3dcoat to lw. This could have been caused because some translation is taking place within 3dcoat that wasn't there in older builds. Translation from app to app and back always have problems so direct one to one attribute matching is the best method. Now 3dcoat is doing some of its processing that lw app doesn't know about.

In any case if 3dcoat can export exactly the same attributes the original lwo file had then its not a problem...if its possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Has anyone tried to put an FBX exported straight from 3D Coat into the Unreal Development Kit (UDK)? I often have to use Autodesk's FBX converter to do this, but then it still lacks smoothing groups and pops a warning when I put it into UDK without them. I've learned not to use 3DC's smoothing groups, as they tend to cause baking problems.

I hope you can see the problem, as I really need/want to be able to export straight from 3DC and use the items in UDK without the extra added to the workflow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think Phil is having problems with exporting from 3dcoat to lw. This could have been caused because some translation is taking place within 3dcoat that wasn't there in older builds. Translation from app to app and back always have problems so direct one to one attribute matching is the best method. Now 3dcoat is doing some of its processing that lw app doesn't know about.

In any case if 3dcoat can export exactly the same attributes the original lwo file had then its not a problem...if its possible.

I fully agree, Currently importing an LWO with skelegons and then exporting it strips the skelegons from the file, so you end up having to have had an older version saved and then combining the 2 if you say want to use 3DC for making UVs and then go back to LW for more modeling etc.

What is in the model should not be altered, unless you alter it in 3DC. But the import fixes did help (not sure if they broke anything else though).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Did anyone at support get my file in regards to a severe viewport slowdown from me? first name's michael, it's a gmail address.

What I do when I upload a file from within 3D Coat, to the 3DC server, is send a quick follow up email to support (support@3d-coat.com)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could that be the cause? Its a dangerous change imo that could cause lw to 3dcoat to lw issues. I don't know why it needs to be gathered to a single uvset.

All changes was related to import of LWo file. The essence of changes:

If there are surfaces that refer same texture (non empty name) then that surfaces will be combined into single UV-set. Othervice you often genning tonns of uv-sets with little piece of the model in each.

Export was unchanged for years. Please help me to identify problem. Could be good to get scene for tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Updated to beta15 (win)

- fixed problem of using spline stroke with small pen radius (there was radius when nothing was drawn)

- fixed problem of seams over UV pieces that are outside of [0..1] UV square

- fixed different problems related to seamlessness of painting

- boolean operations shuld work faster. It is especially related to merging surface volumes. Color information will be correctly transformed. It is recommended to merge small volume->big volume, it will work faster.

- a lot of mantis related problems fixed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Export was unchanged for years. Please help me to identify problem. Could be good to get scene for tests.

I think the problem is that if you change things on import, that alone makes the export different from the original. I'll have to test further.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I used various merging operations in sf mode on pretty heavy file and it is much faster ...like 100x faster..before 3DCoat would just hang forever.

Only issue I noticed is Combine with children do not preserve vertex paint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

All changes was related to import of LWo file. The essence of changes:

If there are surfaces that refer same texture (non empty name) then that surfaces will be combined into single UV-set. Othervice you often genning tonns of uv-sets with little piece of the model in each.

Export was unchanged for years. Please help me to identify problem. Could be good to get scene for tests.

Hypothetically if two lw surface used the same "leather texture" for base texture but the uvmaps of these surfaces are "overlapping" but different named uv sets in lightwave, in 3dcoat when you import the model the uvsets are combined into one uv set and they will be overlapping and one entity, right? Isn't that a problem since in lightwave they are not really overlapping they are totally separate uv sets. I don't like the idea of merging them and re arranging the uvislands automatically in 3dcoat either. Better is wysiwyg. Have to try this though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hey guys, a bit of a negative feedback but bear with me...

I have discovered 3Dcoat quite recently and to my surprise it became a tool I use quite a lot in my pipeline now. Which is great!

Anyways, to the point. I am really getting frustrated and annoyed by the user interface and non standard naming conventions all over the place which makes it incredibly non intuitive. Many features feel like they haven't been revisited for so long i cant help thinking that the application is rotting in many places yet it shines in some other areas. I would love to give more detailed crit to particular areas if it will be taken on board by the devs. Its also the actual website design / branding is pretty poor that is quite off putting and feels very amateur, yet the app itself is quite stunning... I honestly believe that User interface, has to be reworked / improved. 5 different windows (paint, tweak, retopo, uv, voxels, render) are quite annoying to transfer work across as i had to browse through menus trying to figure out how the hell do I transfer mesh from retopo to UVs? I don't want to export it in order to import it back to UV it... It should be within one menu, which leads me back to previous point that UI has to be reworked, Voxels and Tweak menu can be combined as tools are quite the same... Render menu is completely useless, I cant imagine anyone trying to render their models / sculpts in this menu these days... As there are many other much better alternatives. So why keep it rotting there? Perhaps if its improved as zBrush BRP with full ability to control all materials + environment with all advanced effects id consider it...

Anyways, Id love to know what others think on the subject of UI naming conventions, user interaction with it to get 3Dcoat to do what you want, as well as things that are becoming obsolete.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Igor

Some of your points was talked time ago ready in this post.

Its boring to read alllll the 85 pages, i know... but you can try. ;)

Every point was added to Mantis bug tracker like request.

And all the possible changes are scheduled AFTER V4 release.

Regards :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Thanks for your reply, It's reassuring to know that UI improvements are under consideration to be improved.

Your workflow is unclear in your first post. 3DCoat is designed to handle several different kinds of workflows,

Creating your assets in the voxel room first, then retopoing and merging to the paint room

Importing already created models with uv sets into the paintroom for adding normal map and displacement maps or just painting.

Creating low polygon retopo models with uv sets from high polygon non -uv set referenced meshes or just creating uv sets for non uv set reference models.

This is only a partial list so I think some of your confusion stems not from the interface but from not understanding how 3DCoat is arranged for different workflows..

Now this is not to say that some areas can be improved and this has been discussed in length. I do not think that any area is rotting though, some improvements yes but rotting is not quite the word that fits any part of 3DCoat's interface...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I've been saying; ditch the render room

Need to render? buy a $100 render engine or use cycles

Yep, 3DCoat renderer is really only a pre-view renderer unless Andrew at a future date decides to upgrade it. I would rather see a plug-in SDK for rendering, like we have applinks for different programs at the present time. My 2 cents worth there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I will make a detailed reply tomorrow with my impressions. Instead of a rant like earlier.

For what it's worth, you don't transfer your retopo mesh to the UV room. You have the same UV tools integrated in the Retopo workspace. You retopologize > Layout your UV's in the Retopo room/workspace > Merge to Paint Room (to inspect the result and proceed to texture paint, if needed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil you are right

But when you render the same mesh/polypaint in 3DC or in ZBrush... the ZB render shines

to bake/export to another render engine take time, and sometimes we dont have time when is needed to show fast sketches for previz

we work with images, we need a better render

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

This is why I wish Octane Renderer had a plugin for 3D Coat. Not sure they could do it using the AngelScript platform Andrew provided. I think Pilgway could offer it as a bundle for new licenses, or work out a license agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Is it safe to say the render room is the area that needs the most work right now, yet is also the one getting the least attention? I guess the real question is how important it is to users. I tend to avoid it, but I'd love change that. Octane is a great example to follow, either to use as an extension of 3D Coat or to copy in general. Even just getting some good IBL would be a pretty big improvement at this point I think. Whatever the case, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one whose been thinking about this room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem is that if you change things on import, that alone makes the export different from the original. I'll have to test further.

Hypothetically if two lw surface used the same "leather texture" for base texture but the uvmaps of these surfaces are "overlapping" but different named uv sets in lightwave, in 3dcoat when you import the model the uvsets are combined into one uv set and they will be overlapping and one entity, right? Isn't that a problem since in lightwave they are not really overlapping they are totally separate uv sets. I don't like the idea of merging them and re arranging the uvislands automatically in 3dcoat either. Better is wysiwyg. Have to try this though.

Exactly, if you have polys that are shared on multiple UV maps, it should absolutely stay that way. To top that off, there is no way to paint on these kind of polygons. But I do have a solution, I will email it directly to you, Andrew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
But when you render the same mesh/polypaint in 3DC or in ZBrush... the ZB render shines

I prefer the 3dcoat render room. Much more real to me. A good preview. Indeed, a fake fast sss effect could be helpful. SSS tends to eat crisp details sometimes, it's good to know before it's too late. (the BPR shines but it's also a big lier. Most of these fantastic crisp Z details will be lost under a decent GI, sss renderer). Never faced that similar difficulties with the 3dc renderer. After all, 3dc renderer is capable to render small scenes too. Zb BPR can't do this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its true... bpr is a liar you got the point

i only ask for:

- Fake fast SSS

- Shader Mix/Add option (multishader)

- Render Passes

- Better light manipulation/creation (a 3 light point set in Sculpt Room)

- Realtime render option in Sculpt Room

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

note:

For fast previz i use marmoset,

but export for any external render is not an option when you need to show a 19M mesh painted in Surface Mode

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

i would rather see the devs invest time improving 3dcoat's UI, UV's, texture painting, sculpting and retopo than have them waste any time in a render engine.

they should worry (if at all) about the render room in version 6+. i personally would just forget about it. its not going to add any real value to the package.

you can add lots of pretty shiny features that are going to make some enthusiasts happy, or,

you can focus on what matters and make a really solid software thats going to be used in the pipeline of a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...