3D-Coat 3.0 ALPHA

[tree321]

Updated to V35.

Changes:

1) Transpose tool

2) Auto-simplification in "To polygones"

3) Bugfixes

OSX version comes tomorrow

Thanks for your work on transpose Andrew.I know it's the first release, but can you add increase\ decrease falloff and also add to and remove from selection.

Looking good so far.Thanks again.

PS:My model seems to get very "HOT" when using transpose.Any chance of adding a fan option?Just kidding

[akira]

FUN!

[Fierys]

V35 crashes when I click volumetric sculpting icon. I have sent the bug report.

[3dioot]

Thanks for the new version Andrew.

Im a little dissapointed to see there is no masking/freezing. When i said it was hard if not impossible to test transpose without masking being available i wasnt kidding. This "hybrid" where you baked "gradient mask", "circular mask" and "spherical mask" into tranpose is fun for playing but it doesnt cut the mustard when you really want to work with it. Try bending fingers in a hand and you will see how you are unable to tweak a single finger. I know masking/freezing is planned but really; imho you should have waited with transpose till masking was done since they are so much intertwined. How do you see true masking working with the "inbuild selection" of transpose? A selection in a selection? Doesnt sound like a logical or preferable workflow to me.

In general it doesnt seem like any thought has gone (yet) into how sculptors would actually use this tool. The gizmo's turn it into a terrible mess.

Ive made a quick sketch showing a few things. First you have your object. Then you use masking (nothing to do with transpose yet) to mask of everything except the part of the sculpt you want to influence. With good masking tools this should be a breeze. Then you finally draw on transpose. You dont need to choose line, circle or sphere because the selection allready happened by painting the mask. This is really important because now you will use the transpose tool to do TWO major things. First point defines the origin of the transform and the second the direction.

On the bottom row ive sketched out how this works. Notice with rotate how you have TWO possible transforms. The first one (#1) is nothing but a rotation in screen space around the origin (its like clicking on the white circle with the transform gizmo). The second one is TWIST. Notice how twist is dependant on the transform line you drew! This is why you CANNOT combine selection AND transpose in one tool like you have done now!

Scale is exactly the same thing. The first transform is a uniform scale towards the origin. The second transform is a non uniform scale. You can use this to flatten things by scaling over one axis. Notice again how this is dependant on the transpose line you drew! Non uniform scale literally take the transpose line as the axis to scale along. This kind of direct control over scaling is absolutely needed. When your sculpting you never end up having stuff aligned to world axis and it would be insane to have to rotate the gizmo correctly just to perform a non uniform scale!

Move is a bit on its own since you can argue you want both options available. Movement in screenspace (which is what ive drawn) and movement along world axis. I think screenspace would suffice but thats a personal opinion. An option could be added to have a transform gizmo available for move only for the people that really want it although i think noone would miss it.

--------

Notice how ive specifically not drawn gizmo's for the different transforms that scale and rotate have. Both the scale and rotate transpose line would need specific markers/gizmo's (not the current general ones). I have several idea's but this is something that you GUI designer probably (hopefully) is really good at. In general a transpose line needs to support these things:

- startpoint able to be grabbed and moved

- endpoint able to be grabbed and moved

- transform 1 (for scale rotate and move)

- transform 2 (for scale and rotate)

It should be clear what is what and it should be easy to grab and manipulate. Also, the current ability to mix transforms is a really bad workflow choice. Transpose scale, move and rotate are seperate tools. Which needs to be able to be accesed seperately so you can also hotkey them seperately. You cant hotkey check buttons for which transforms are enabled..... These are things to think about.

After the usual barrage of critic i have to say that what you can do with the current version of transpose looks smooth and works well.

3dioot

[Bancho]

I changed other mode, but remained mark of the red.

3.00ALPHA-35(DX)

WinXP Pro sp2 32bit

Dual-Xeon3G HT

3G Ram

RadeonX1950

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

http://www.k2.dion.ne.jp/~output/c/3d-coat.html

[splodge]

Well done with the Transpose, Andrew! It's really easy and obvious to use!

[Bancho]

And some area did not selected in Line-mode.

3.00ALPHA-35(DX)

WinXP Pro sp2 32bit

Dual-Xeon3G HT

3G Ram

RadeonX1950

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

http://www.k2.dion.ne.jp/~output/c/3d-coat.html

[splodge]

. Try bending fingers in a hand and you will see how you are unable to tweak a single finger.

I just rapidly created the fingers of a hand with the Sphere tool and I could easily bend each finger.

I personally prefer not to have to mask my model.

[Mantis]

I tried transpose and It works fine even if it is pretty basic, it miss some control but you did a great job on it.

And for the masking, I prefer to have an other way to control transpose than a simple rip of Zbrush function.

The current solution works fine for me, and I was also able to move fingers.

The problem is that it is not really accurate, sometime when I try to select a finger from the base it select a second finger, but if I start my line farther from the base it works fine.

What you end up is pretty good, and 3dioot got some great idea too, it only have to be a bit more polished.

For renderdemon:

The 3 fonctions works like that, from what I seen:

-Line tool, click and drag to determine the fallof of your transpose, it will select all the part from your first point.

-Ring too, click and drag, and it will select your model with the lenght of your line in a Ring fashion.

-Sphere, same as before but with a Spherical selection.

I got some problem with the auto simplification tool, trying to do it with a value of 1 and I didn't got all my model in polygons, I got big part of it who were not transformed.

An other thing, I don't know if you can call your posing tool transpose, because it's already how Zbrush call their tool, maybe you can have some trouble with that.

[akira]

Thanks for the new version Andrew.

Im a little dissapointed to see there is no masking/freezing. When i said it was hard if not impossible to test transpose without masking being available i wasnt kidding. This "hybrid" where you baked "gradient mask", "circular mask" and "spherical mask" into tranpose is fun for playing but it doesnt cut the mustard when you really want to work with it. Try bending fingers in a hand and you will see how you are unable to tweak a single finger. I know masking/freezing is planned but really; imho you should have waited with transpose till masking was done since they are so much intertwined. How do you see true masking working with the "inbuild selection" of transpose? A selection in a selection? Doesnt sound like a logical or preferable workflow to me.

In general it doesnt seem like any thought has gone (yet) into how sculptors would actually use this tool. The gizmo's turn it into a terrible mess.

Ive made a quick sketch showing a few things. First you have your object. Then you use masking (nothing to do with transpose yet) to mask of everything except the part of the sculpt you want to influence. With good masking tools this should be a breeze. Then you finally draw on transpose. You dont need to choose line, circle or sphere because the selection allready happened by painting the mask. This is really important because now you will use the transpose tool to do TWO major things. First point defines the origin of the transform and the second the direction.

On the bottom row ive sketched out how this works. Notice with rotate how you have TWO possible transforms. The first one (#1) is nothing but a rotation in screen space around the origin (its like clicking on the white circle with the transform gizmo). The second one is TWIST. Notice how twist is dependant on the transform line you drew! This is why you CANNOT combine selection AND transpose in one tool like you have done now!

Scale is exactly the same thing. The first transform is a uniform scale towards the origin. The second transform is a non uniform scale. You can use this to flatten things by scaling over one axis. Notice again how this is dependant on the transpose line you drew! Non uniform scale literally take the transpose line as the axis to scale along. This kind of direct control over scaling is absolutely needed. When your sculpting you never end up having stuff aligned to world axis and it would be insane to have to rotate the gizmo correctly just to perform a non uniform scale!

Move is a bit on its own since you can argue you want both options available. Movement in screenspace (which is what ive drawn) and movement along world axis. I think screenspace would suffice but thats a personal opinion. An option could be added to have a transform gizmo available for move only for the people that really want it although i think noone would miss it.

--------

Notice how ive specifically not drawn gizmo's for the different transforms that scale and rotate have. Both the scale and rotate transpose line would need specific markers/gizmo's (not the current general ones). I have several idea's but this is something that you GUI designer probably (hopefully) is really good at. In general a transpose line needs to support these things:

- startpoint able to be grabbed and moved

- endpoint able to be grabbed and moved

- transform 1 (for scale rotate and move)

- transform 2 (for scale and rotate)

It should be clear what is what and it should be easy to grab and manipulate. Also, the current ability to mix transforms is a really bad workflow choice. Transpose scale, move and rotate are seperate tools. Which needs to be able to be accesed seperately so you can also hotkey them seperately. You cant hotkey check buttons for which transforms are enabled..... These are things to think about.

After the usual barrage of critic i have to say that what you can do with the current version of transpose looks smooth and works well.

3dioot

Agree with your ideas, but hey relax buddy.

Will you be dissapointed to a new born baby who cannot talk?

akira.

[3dioot]

@ splodge

Seems there is a distance based falloff based on surface integrated in transpose. I didnt know that and its -very- cool (i so hope this gets into masking also). It seems to not be totally reliable though. However this is only with the line selection. Does not seem to work with sphere? If the sphere volume is bigger then one finger it will still select the finger next to it which ofcourse is a problem. It also seems you can "build" upon your selection with line by drawing a line from a non selected area on your model towards the allready selected area and then it will add the new selection to it instead of replacing the old selection with the new. Its very hit and miss though (lots of bugs; ill try to report some when i figure out how to recreate them).

However, even with transpose selection working a 100%, there are still some problems.

1) since the selection is baked into transpose i CANNOT define a different axis for transpose then the line i need to draw to create my selection

2) being able to use good masks allows you to do alot of very cool stuff. It makes roughing out volumes very fast and pleasant.

3dioot

PS

Andrew maybe its nice to give a little insight into transpose? What features it has like the adding to selection thingie which i found by accident?

PS

@ Akira

Thanks for the support and the "hush".

[splodge]

2) being able to use good masks allows you to do alot of very cool stuff. It makes roughing out volumes very fast and pleasant.

Oh I agree. I think masks are great. I''m just not convinced they're a necessity for Transpose though.

Still, I suppose when/if Andrew adds masks then it'll be logical that the transpose tool would be programmed to recognize them.

[splodge]

After creating a mesh with 'To Polygones', where is the mesh stored?

How do I display the mesh for painting or saving?. I switch into painting mode and the high poly mesh is still visible.

[3dioot]

I tried transpose and It works fine even if it is pretty basic, it miss some control but you did a great job on it.

And for the masking, I prefer to have an other way to control transpose than a simple rip of Zbrush function.

Just wanted to say its not about ripping of zbrush or random program x functions. Its about creating something that works equal or better then whats allready out there. Currently masking is the best, most detailed and flexible solution to selecting that i know of. There is nothing that beats the flexibility or control of a handpainted mask.

That said it might not be neccesary for basic transpose functionality. Just like splodge says that he is happy to use transpose with the inbuild selections. I can imagine it being faster then being forced to "paint" a mask first (although not much; but every bit counts).

So then masks are just a nice option to use with transpose for creative solutions and faster sculpting. I could live with that.

However the mere fact that selection is inbuild in transpose (even if it were only an option to not have to use masks) still brings some problems:

1) it directly disables the ability of transpose to define an axis (which for me is a big deal)

2) when masking gets implemented it will get confusing since you get the "selection in a selection" idea. Its overlapping functionality in different tools. I dont think thats beneficial to program clarity or workflow. I have less problems with that though. I could learn to deal with quirks (zbrush is widely praised despite its quirks). Number 1 is the real problem for me.

3dioot

[Mantis]

The actual solution is pretty good, it's like a mask but instead of masking it is creating an influence automaticly.

You're right being able to paint your influence is the best way to control it, and that's what it miss for the moment.

And I agree that the gizmo is quite disturbing.

I think that the actual solution is like a painted influence, it seems more obvious thant using mask for this purpose. It's quite similar visualy but I think that's what fit the best for this tool.

You got influence for posing tool and mask for other thing.

I really like how the influence is painted, the fact that it is shape dependant vs topology dependant like in Zbrush (even if it is obvious for 3DCoat).

Sometime their topological mask behave strangly and I think the current method of drawing influence is more powerful than the topological mask.

What could be nice is to have different color to represent power of influence. Like you have with soft selections in traditionnal software to help you seeing it better .

See image below:

And yes you are right 3dioot, having the ability to paint influence and place your pivot is really important, and will help to improve this tool.

But for a first step that's pretty good.

[3dioot]

"I think that the actual solution is like a painted influence, it seems more obvious thant using mask for this purpose. It's quite similar visualy but I think that's what fit the best for this tool.

You got influence for posing tool and mask for other thing.

I really like how the influence is painted, the fact that it is shape dependant vs topology dependant like in Zbrush (even if it is obvious for 3DCoat).

Sometime their topological mask behave strangly and I think the current method of drawing influence is more powerful than the topological mask."

Interesting how you so clearly seperate "painted influence" and masking. Doesnt "painted influence" give you a selection, in other words; the equivalent of a mask, in the end?

This is something i mentioned before but perhaps was not really clear in. Id really like "painted influence" to be able to play a big part in masking too. As you said you get something that will act a bit like zbruhs's topological masking only alot better! Its like Andrew implemented a smart version of an edge length limitation or something. Its really very nice. :lol:

The question is; if you implement "painted influence" in the masking features (which i really hope Andrew does) why would you still want to have it in transpose? Especially since it would "free up" transpose to use the two points to define the transform axis.

Not only will you get rid of double functionality; you will actually benefit from it too.

3dioot

[adrianr01]

I like it, definitly something we can work with, vs zbrush i like its symplicity, its fast

a couple suggestions

- the transform point should be the point where you start dragging transform line, like bending at the joint, when using short line the transform seems too far from beginning point..

- i would like to go in a transpose state, where the brush circle is disabled, all the lines of the transform gizmo and the brush lines are making it chaotic

- hardness is based on how far you draw the line, thats nice, but maybe an adjustment option should be implemented so you can harden of soften the falloff, maybe like resizing the brush method (right click hold), could be used if you are in transpose state,

at some point reposition of the transform gizmo could be needed, maybe a button that hovers above the gizmo "reposition" or in menu, you click button then click place and gizmo centers on that place,

wel thats it.. for now, thank you andrew for great work, happy to be on the coat train :P

ps: on the mask discussion, i would call it a selected area, im for it, it could just fallof to the point where there is more geometry, then pick positon of gizmo

maybe different transpose mode, lasso select, or selected area

[tree321]

O.k I figured out how to add to and remove from selection as well as inverse selection.(transpose tool)

Add to selection-Drag from open area to selected area

Remove from selection-Drag from within selected area to within selected area going from open area boundary towards main selection

Inverse selection- Drag from selected area to open area.My only problem is gizmo getting in the way.

Hope this makes sense.Here's a video: http://www.screencast.com/users/tree321/fo...31-4aa3361bd359

[akira]

I just discovered that the sphere tool, with Cubic interpolation on, used with the 'draw with curve' stroke mode is great : you can draw smooth curves

Cool! Thanks for the tip, it's much easier to make curves that way.

akira.

[Mantis]

3dioot, influence and mask are pretty much the same thing, but they are still different.

With influence you paint what you want to be deformed, and with masking you are masking what you don't want to be deformed.

For me the first method seems the most logical for posing, maybe that's just a matter of taste, but it's like painting skin weight.

And even more it will be different from Zbrush, maybe that's just me but I'm not sure that it is wise to call it same way as Zbrush did and do it the same way aswell.

It seems tricky to just inverse the way you do it but that is what is done for years, and I think that it is transpose from Zbrush who is the real trick.

But yes the tool used for painting influence can help to paint mask.

And for the transform axis you just have to redefine the way of making it.

Like that even if masking and painting influence got the same feature (they are the same thing by essence, that's just about painting a selection area like you said) masking is replaced by painted influence in posing mode.

[3dioot]

3dioot, influence and mask are pretty much the same thing, but they are still different.

With influence you paint what you want to be deformed, and with masking you are masking what you don't want to be deformed.

For me the first method seems the most logical for posing, maybe that's just a matter of taste, but it's like painting skin weight.

And even more it will be different from Zbrush, maybe that's just me but I'm not sure that it is wise to call it same way as Zbrush did and do it the same way aswell.

It seems tricky to just inverse the way you do it but that is what is done for years, and I think that it is transpose from Zbrush who is the real trick.

But yes the tool used for painting influence can help to paint mask.

And for the transform axis you just have to redefine the way of making it.

Like that even if masking and painting influence got the same feature (they are the same thing by essence, that's just about painting a selection area like you said) masking is replaced by painted influence in posing mode.

This is just a quickie since i have to go to work.

"With influence you paint what you want to be deformed, and with masking you are masking what you don't want to be deformed."

Does that really matter at all? Doesnt every selection method (wether its objects in 3dsmax, pixels in photoshop or weights when skinning) have a way to inverse or subtract from the selection? Doesnt skin painting allow you to remove weight? So the only difference would be wether you start by adding or by subtracting. That could be as easy as a setting. Most people use sculpting within zbrush where it raises normally and indents when you hold the modifier key. But there is an option to change it so that you indent by default and the modifier key makes it add instead. The same choice could easily be implemented in masking. For that being the only difference in approach between masking and "influence painting" is so non significant that it pales in comparison to the benefits you would get to unify selection under masking.

Sure zbrush uses tricks. So does 3dcoat. Only clay is the real deal. Tricks are the way to get things done in 3d programs.

"And for the transform axis you just have to redefine the way of making it."

That is easily said. Do you have ideas how to? Can you draw a little process sketch where you can see the steps? I didnt draw my idea's out for nothing. Its a check for myself too to see wether what i want is even possible or wether i missed something. Im curious to see your solution.

One final note. In your last comment you said you "have to redefine the way of making it". If you dont do that with your first initial two points you get a seperate step. Now reverse that thought. How is adding an extra step any different then having "painted influence" as part of masking (which could start by adding positive on a masked sculpt if you so prefer) and then having transpose as a tool on its own? Its not like i didnt think this through.

3dioot

[Mantis]

I don't see where is the problem to have 2 differents display for masking and influence.

Plus I think it can help.

For example, you masked your model with a "special" pattern that you want to use to sculpt, but at the same time just saw that your pose doesn't fit well.

You go in posing mode, and you tweak your pose. In posing mode Mask are not displayed (for the sake of clarity) and you have to paint influence independantly of your mask, when you got the desire pose you can go back to your sculpt and continue to use your mask without having to redrawn it

You have 2 differents display even if the method to paint them is the same, but each one get their own task.

And for the transform axis the only flaw I can see is that you can't redefine the pivot point, if you can move the Pivot point that will do the job.

A point I want to clarify, I am just expressing my point of view because I think it will help 3DCoat in the end (not having the joy to read me, but having to expose each point of view), I'm sure I am not totally right and I don't try to convince everyone nor you, that I got the best solution, I'm just exposing my point of view to help to find a good way to do a posing tool.

I think that's the real strenght of 3DCoat, letting everyone come in and express their ideas.

So don't take it too personnally

[Andrew Shpagin]

Adding possibility to edit mask manually is very easy. I will add is very soon. There is no problem. But how should look "gismo" is a big question. Now I will remain standart gizmo until there will not be better idea.

[Andrew Shpagin]

OSX version uploaded.

[Andrew Shpagin]

Btw, I forgot to mention - now every tool has own preset - own radius/depth/alpha

[Andrew Shpagin]

I have idea. What if something like that

- move pivot

- move selection

- uniform scale

- axe rotation

- bending

- forward scaling

- move second pivot

[TOXE]

OSX version uploaded.

:lol: :lol:

-TOXE

[Deadman21]

:lol: :lol:

-TOXE

Ill see that and raise you :) :)

[Deadman21]

I have idea. What if something like that

- move pivot

- move selection

- uniform scale

- axe rotation

- bending

- forward scaling

- move second pivot

Thats an interesting idea Im assuming that would be a floating palate?

I kinda like the manipulators we have now the only complaint is that the orientation changes depending on how you make your selections. Would it be possible to have some way to reorient the manipulators as needed?

[Andrew Shpagin]

While compiling OSX version we have found an interesting bug that caused crashes on not very new video cards. So new version for Win will work defenitely more stable on PC-s that had problem with running 3DC.

About manipulator - idea is that it will be stretched between two points inspace. You will be able to move pivots or transpose using icons.