Jump to content
3DCoat Forums
Andrew Shpagin

V4.1 BETA (experimental 4.1.17D)

Recommended Posts

--Bumps revealed after smoothing? (caused by some islands of higly subdivided mesh compared to arounds)

 

 I think that's the nastiest issue as you can see in screenshots...some of those highly subdivided islands seem very unhealthy and have no purpose as they are not really associated to real details...they almost look like accidents along the tessellation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

--TubeClay decimating? will check asap

 

Yes, is not a bug, is actually an intended behaviour. With previous approach in TubeClay it was fairly easy to get stretched triangles, Now is fixed so some edge collapsing is expected. Ive tried to faily upload some pictures about this :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumps revealed after smoothing

 

please artman, in what tools you get them especifically? I see they may happen with your sci-fi preset based on GC , is any other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It happens also mostly with Liveclay brush.(sci-fi are based on Liveclay brush not General)

 

but also with Creaseclay,TubeClay.InflateClay  to a lesser extent.

Probably even other brushes I haven't  tested yet.

 

I posted pictures with creaseclay 2 post ago...here is picture again.

post-1195-0-37005700-1387355819_thumb.jp

You can see its much less subdivided than issue with generalbrush or Liveclay brush but its still unhealthy spot that serve no purpose, it looks a lot like the other images so its probably same issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where you see how removestretching shines. Simpler but effective and clean :)

but still....you use Creaseclay in all your sculpts :p:

 

(I REALLY tried making a pseudo damstandard/sharp preset using removestretching but its impossible..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artman, one thing...from your presets I see many of them are "scared" of using smooth values, and have subdecimal values, but in general, for every tool where dynamic tesselation is involved smooth values should be always big, is almost mandatory to keep good topology...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artman, one thing...from your presets I see many of them are "scared" of using smooth values, and have subdecimal values, but in general, for every tool where dynamic tesselation is involved smooth values should be always big, is almost mandatory to keep good topology...

well...subdecimal...maximum is 1.0 :rofl: ...it cannot be bigger than 1.

If you say it is better to set higher values I will crank all presets to 1, I have no problem with that.

Reason it is so low is because in much older builds smoothing was blurring previous strokes when they were too close to each other.now it does not seem like an issue anymore so I'll crank it...

 

(if I remember correctly :))... in my tests I tried higher smoothing  values and higher subv smoothing (1.0) and it did not seems to prevent the weird spots shown in pictures...anyway,I'll try agin when I get home in 3 hours...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artman, one thing...from your presets I see many of them are "scared" of using smooth values, and have subdecimal values, but in general, for every tool where dynamic tesselation is involved smooth values should be always big, is almost mandatory to keep good topology...

 

It helps for sure, but, I've a comment to make on this: for certain brush this is a problem. It's ok if you're using general brushes like clay or clay like brushes, flatten or even snakeclay. Problem is with certain brushes like wrinkle/crease, which by definition are "tight, hard" brushes. Adding too much smoothing kill the effect.

 

@Artman:

 

I use creaseclay because there's no pinching/extruding equivalent using removestretching, otherwise I wouldn't bother with liveclay at all. To be perfectly honest, creaseclay is probably one of the few brushes to make sense in liveclay mode (you may want to have the big picture and still make sharp/high definition creases).

 

Remove stretching is by far the best approach, if I would make analogies:

 

Removestretching is the same as using fine tool for sculpting clay: you get closer to your sculpt and work with small movements, you achieve what you want.

Liveclay is working with a magnifier: you are indeed making details, but you still depend on your magnifier to make subtle changes, and you have to pay attention to the size of your knife.

 

It's the same tech under the hood, but some brushes are making sense in removestretching more than liveclay mode, and vice-versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artman, one thing...from your presets I see many of them are "scared" of using smooth values, and have subdecimal values, but in general, for every tool where dynamic tesselation is involved smooth values should be always big, is almost mandatory to keep good topology...

I went again on Male bust and cranked smoothing values to 1.0 using creaseclay and topology is definitely a lot nicer.

So Creaseclay is ok...just need a little boost in subd at higher detail values.

 

Issue is still present in Liveclay base brush though.

Liveclay brush does not have a smoothing slider??! :blink: so i cannot set any values there

(I think it had one in ancient builds..strange)

post-1195-0-50494500-1387376391_thumb.jp

 

but some brushes see below Inflateclay (not general...real default Inflateclay)

generate really awful topology even with high smoothing values (detail 3.0 smoothing:0.9)

post-1195-0-44965000-1387376656_thumb.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use creaseclay because there's no pinching/extruding equivalent using removestretching, otherwise I wouldn't bother with liveclay at all. To be perfectly honest, creaseclay is probably one of the few brushes to make sense in liveclay mode (you may want to have the big picture and still make sharp/high definition creases).

 

I agree with Jose Conseco that sometimes Removestrtching does not add enough subdivison. Not anybody like you want to pinch over every single of their strokes. :) Also he said he sometimes have to use a smaller brush radius with RS just to gives the surface an increase in subdivison,lately i found myself doing this more and more and I find it a little absurd. It would be cool if Removestrtching had a higher subdivison mode user could trigger from time to time.For example on Default male bust Rapid2 with RS will efficiently Remove all stretching but it will also preserve all the roughness and the imperfections in the strokes due to how lowpoly the male bust is ...its in times like this that I would like RS to produce cleaner,sharper more subdivided strokes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding topology islands, yes, I found the culprit and is solved now, it was caused by split criterium (not split algorithm) so I make it better and splitting should never go crazy in tiny areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding topology islands, yes, I found the culprit and is solved now, it was caused by split criterium (not split algorithm) so I make it better and splitting should never go crazy in tiny areas.

great news!! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Also he said he sometimes have to use a smaller brush radius with RS just to gives the surface an increase in subdivison,lately i found myself doing this more and more and I find it a little absurd.

 

What ? RS works with the zoom level, the radius doesn't affect subdivision.

 

What the hell ? It wasn't working like that earlier... only zoom determined subdivision  !

 

If this is the way it is now, I'm forced to agree with the merging of RS and liveclay here... That's stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ? RS works with the zoom level, the radius doesn't affect subdivision.

sorry but no....(I just tried it without zooming)

 

Big radius- barely no subd happened

small radius - heavy tessaltion happened

 

I did not zoom AT ALL. :)

 

Blender's Dyntopo works using zooming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I just noticed... it wasn't like that before. Before only zooming allowed you to add smaller tris... It was logical ! What's the point now, it's liveclay without a slider...:/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I just noticed... it wasn't like that before. Before only zooming allowed you to add smaller tris... It was logical ! What's the point now, it's liveclay without a slider...:/

 

Anyway I think its better because if Im doing fine details it does not mean that I want to zoom in.

Sometimes its better to view bigger portion of the sculpt even if you are doing fine details...

I dont want to have my nose stuck in every wrinkles Im doing just to get some subdivision.

Im just doing fine details...I should be able to sculpt at any distance from camera and not be forced to zoom in.

This is one of the things I hate about Blender dyntopo (but some people like that way better)

 

it is what RS is...adaptive Liveclay without a slider..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but it was, maybe I just never noticed it was changed (almost certain in fact), but at some point only zooming changed subdiv.

I would never had this debate with Abn_Ranger if this wasn't the case (at least it still was in my mind).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but it was, maybe I just never noticed it was changed (almost certain in fact), but at some point only zooming changed subdiv.

I would never had this debate with Abn_Ranger if this wasn't the case (at least it still was in my mind).

maybe...

 

But i haven't heard you complaining about this lately so it must not be that bad considering all the nice sculpts you've been doing :)

 

Personally,everytime I try Dyntopo I go back to 3DCoat just because of this...this is what reallife sculptors do

(changing view distance while sculpting)

Fine details=Having my face stuck on the mesh is absurd imo...sometimes you still need to see the bigger forms even  when doing fine details...

 

But if you are using a small radius there is a 90% chance you are trying to do something fine...THAT is logical...not camera distance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't complain, it's just that I just noticed and now understand JoseConseco and Abn_Ranger, if the radius is taken into account in the tesselation then there's no difference with liveclay, in fact it's an amputated liveclay since you don't get to change the amount of detail.

 

So the question is: remove radius tesselation, or merge lc and rs and call it a day.

I personally would prefer to have it the way it was but at this point it's a bit stupid to keep it "in between".

 

 

Personally,everytime I try Dyntopo I go back to 3DCoat just because of this...this is what reallife sculptors do

(changing view distance while sculpting)

Fine details=Having my face stuck on the mesh is absurd imo...sometimes you still need to see the bigger forms even  when doing fine details...

 

But if you are using a small radius there is a 90% chance you are trying to do something fine...THAT is logical...not camera distance...

 

 

That's exactly why I think the two should coexist (if RS is view dependant only), RS offers in most situation a very real sculpt feeling, while in other situation (detail stamping and creasing for instance) liveclay is a better solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't complain, it's just that I just noticed and now understand JoseConseco and Abn_Ranger, if the radius is taken into account in the tesselation then there's no difference with liveclay, in fact it's an amputated liveclay since you don't get to change the amount of detail.

 

well its lets not say amputated...more :simplified...it provides you with just enough subd to keep you sculpting forever...its like a LC nobrainer.

but of course it would be better if users had a way to somehow increase the strength of subd..

 

I personally would prefer to have it the way it was but at this point it's a bit stupid to keep it "in between".

 

Why?Dont you never do sharp details at medium distance from camera? Your recent sculpt really dont seem to suffer from this method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

well its lets not say amputated...more :simplified...it provides you with just enough subd to keep you sculpting forever...its like a LC nobrainer.

but of course it would be better if users add a way to somehow increase the strength of subd..

Yep, I agree in regard to the way it currently works.

 

Why?Dont you never do sharp details at medium distance from camera? Your recent sculpt really dont seem to suffer from new method.

 

That's the thing: no. At medium distance I do the medium shapes. If I want sharp details, I go up close, to make sure they are the way I want them. Besides crease clay (the only brush I would use at medium distance for "sharp" details) only pinch so much to call it "sharp" ^^

 

To me, sharp means "pinched". Otherwise it's just "shapes", bigger or smaller with more or less angularity. The only reason (to me at least) to go with sharp detail at a distance, is for stamping, and for that liveclay is perfect (hence the coexistence of RS and LC).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yep, I agree in regard to the way it currently works.

 

 

That's the thing: no. At medium distance I do the medium shapes. If I want sharp details, I go up close, to make sure they are the way I want them. Besides crease clay (the only brush I would use at medium distance for "sharp" details) only pinch so much to call it "sharp" ^^

 

To me, sharp means "pinched". Otherwise it's just "shapes", bigger or smaller with more or less angularity.

 

Well using Rapid for example...at mid distance adding a lump of clay on the cheek bones of a character's face....

Do you really want to zoom in under the eye of your character just so the lump of clay you are adding is not an awfully lowres staircased stroke...

I prefer being able to add that stroke while seeing the whole face of my chracter and to know that just because the brush radius is smaller that lump of clay will feel like clay and not like a  screenshot taken out of a tetris game...

 

The thing is other method FORCE you to zoom in.

While with radius method you can zoom in if you want to...nothing stops you.

Proof is you didnt even notice it was that way. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well using Rapid for example...at mid distance adding a lump of clay on the cheek bones of a character's face....

Do you really want to zoom in under the eye of your character just so the lump of clay you are adding is not an awfully lowres staircased stroke...

I prefer being able to add that stroke while seeing the whole face of my chracter and to know that just because the brush radius is smaller that lump of clay will feel like clay and not like a  screenshot taken out of a tetris game...

It's a question of sculpting habit. But I take my stroke as I would take my sculpting division in zbrush: broader lower res shapes toward higher res surface details. So I don't need to zoom to add lumps, I add them at a reasonable distance, I don't care if they look low res, If I need more definition (thus more details otherwise no point), then I zoom to add that.

That's why I don't like liveclay btw, I can't know for sure how much tesselation I'll add because it's directly linked to the radius. I can be much more progressive with RS than liveclay. If I want to be progressive with LC I need to start with a very low detail value, and it's an handicap when working up close (toward finer details) cause now I need to crank that value up.

 

 

The thing is other method FORCE you to zoom in.

While with radius method you can zoom in if you want to...nothing stops you.

Proof is you didnt even notice it was that way.  :)

 

 

It doesn't force you if you always worked with your distance relative to your detail like you would do with a real sculpt.

As for not noticing: RS is reliable, it's why I don't bother with the wireframe to spot issues :) Besides as I always "played" with the zoom I never noticed it added even more res with my radius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a question of sculpting habit. But I take my stroke as I would take my sculpting division in zbrush: broader lower res shapes toward higher res surface details. So I don't need to zoom to add lumps, I add them at a reasonable distance, I don't care if they look low res, If I need more definition (thus more details otherwise no point), then I zoom to add that.

more definition does not mean necessary more details...it also means cleaner surface.

In zbrush  going higher in subd takes care of getting rid of the coarseness but  in 3Dcoat its really difficult to do that

(smooth brush really does not help there...)

Im sorry but I want my strokes done at midistance from camera to not be crappy. :)

Current method does not take anything away from you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×