3D-Coat 3.0 ALPHA

[Andrew Shpagin]

Im confused by this focus on polygon (surface) tools. I see how fast they are which i find a real coding achievement on your part. But can you please explain to me why you would want to choose mesh sculpting operations on a "limited" polygon surface with a conversion back to voxels over true voxel operations? You choose for a way that degrades sculpting smoothness for no good reason that i can see. And eventhough its very fast there is still a delay on conversion. The gum brush i could understand to a certain degree (super hf detail is hard(er) to do in voxels) but clay?!

It is very big temptation to use surface operations because it can give huge boost in speed of edit. But it will be good only if convertiong to voxels will be fully instant. In this case I can call it "voxel" operation and you will not see difference. Also some operations like flattern, clay or rake in ZB are shamelessly easy over surface, they are very hard to implement in voxels, in terms of speed and algorithm. Also, why do you think, interpolated pen trajectory is not still implemented? Only because it leads to 2x-3x speed falling. So I am seeking right way how to make all in one - speed + smooth trajectory. Surface+instant converting can give required result.

And what is core differennce between surface and voxel operations? No difference if they are converted to voxels quickly. For examle "Move" is purely surface operation by it's technology but is placed to voxel operations because it looks like voxel operation.

Why didnt you spend the time on improving the voxel frankenstein clay brush? Make the scrape brush react on pressure better? Give it more options so it can act like a true voxel flatten if we want to, or even better, give us a seperate voxel flatten? Improve brush handling in general (facetting strokes, strokes burying into surface, pressure sens smoothing)? Improve the voxel pinch brush?

Imporiving is not only question of efforts of time spent but also of physical limitations. Purely voxel operations are slower because they must handle much bigger arrays of information. So I am seeking for some mixed way to solve all-in-one. Also it is question of "big & genial" idea how to do something. There is no sense to beat the wall without such idea - it will be lost time. I have some ideas in my ammo, I will check them soon.

And last update took 2 weeks only because of 3.5 days was spent on "dead" idea how to do. But it is normal way of development.

[Andrew Shpagin]

Change logs from 47-56:

Edit: added 47

Thank you!

[Andrew Shpagin]

Andrew,now 3dc has at least three styles of Manipulators,why don't unify them?

I like the style in primitives tool.

I will unify, but it requires some time.

[Andrew Shpagin]

I second this. Please!

Monday.

[polyxo]

I will unify, but it requires some time.

Andrew,

please also note that most primitives-manipulators don't work in orthographic views.

[3dioot]

It is very big temptation to use surface operations because it can give huge boost in speed of edit. But it will be good only if convertiong to voxels will be fully instant. In this case I can call it "voxel" operation and you will not see difference. Also some operations like flattern, clay or rake in ZB are shamelessly easy over surface, they are very hard to implement in voxels, in terms of speed and algorithm. Also, why do you think, interpolated pen trajectory is not still implemented? Only because it leads to 2x-3x speed falling. So I am seeking right way how to make all in one - speed + smooth trajectory. Surface+instant converting can give required result.

Yes it will be only good if converting to voxels will be fully instant. That is a very big if. If you are talking about speed improvements whats the use if i have to buy a superfast system to have the conversion take place without lagging? There are ways to deal with "heavy" strokes. I can make my brushsize smaller, zoom in, hide stuff, stroke slower. How can i compensate for conversion lag?

I also noticed something else. Im not certain if this is what causes it but here goes. I am correct in saying the surface mesh is an approximation of the voxel sculpt right? Its optimal for showing the shape thats allready there. This means its not optimal for mesh sculpting. When you mesh sculpt (like you do in zb and mb) you work on a subdivided mesh. A mesh that is -finer- then it needs to be to show its current form because you will need that extra segmentation for the forms you will be sculpting. You can clearly see this when you use the surface clay. The stroke looks incredibly ugly, then when its converted to voxels it looks smoother. This because the uniform resolution in voxels is smoother then the displacement that is generated from the surface mesh. If this is the way you want to do this you should at least take this into account so mesh sculpting becomes as smooth as voxel sculpting. Currently when you cross over to a surface tool your essentially sacrificing detail in comparison to what you could have sculpted in voxel.

In summary; there should be no visible difference to your sculpt in between the moment you made the stroke with surface clay and the final result when its converted to voxels. They should look 100% the same and nothing less. And ofcourse the "resolution" should feel the same instead of having the feeling that you are now working on a lower res sculpt then when you did using voxel tools.

As far as the brushes you mention them being shamelessly easy in zb. I find that a bit of a bold statement. Just yesterday i spend a fair amount of time sculpting in 3dcoat. I was annoyed with strokes and feel of the brushes. So i wondered to myself wether zb was really that much smoother or wether that was just in my memory? I fired it up and experimented a bit. And it really is (alot) smoother. Before voxel sculpting 3dcoat allready had surface sculpting (which if i remember correctly actualy works differently segmentating the mesh the moment you sculpt?). I tried it (back then and today) and im sorry to say but it wasnt/isnt up there with zb or mb. Before voxel sculpting 3dcoat was know for its painting and NOT for its sculpting. If you want to make that way of sculpting the toolbox for voxel sculpting there is alot to be done. Interpolated pen trajectory being hard or not. Its part of the surface based packages and working well for them. A brush/tool is a not a stand alone thing. Ill take the fact that you made a statement about zb brushes as being easy as a good thing because at least your aiming high quality wise. But if you think that your surface clay is anywhere near the smooth experience of the zb clay (or any other of its sculpting tools really) its time to open zb again and go check for yourself.

And what is core differennce between surface and voxel operations? No difference if they are converted to voxels quickly. For examle "Move" is purely surface operation by it's technology but is placed to voxel operations because it looks like voxel operation.

Imporiving is not only question of efforts of time spent but also of physical limitations. Purely voxel operations are slower because they must handle much bigger arrays of information. So I am seeking for some mixed way to solve all-in-one. Also it is question of "big & genial" idea how to do something. There is no sense to beat the wall without such idea - it will be lost time. I have some ideas in my ammo, I will check them soon.

And last update took 2 weeks only because of 3.5 days was spent on "dead" idea how to do. But it is normal way of development.

I hope there is none to the user (move being a nice example). As i pointed out above though, the surface clay is anything BUT transparant to the user. Conversion takes time and the result changes during the conversion. And would a tool like scrape truly be possible as a mesh brush? Not to say a mix of voxel and surface tools cant work but its a nice example of the opposite.

Im glad you are tackling the brushes/trajectory/speed. Eventhough i thought we were past the whole realtime conversion idea which imho has problems. Then again im not the smart coder so..

All in all Im curious about your new ideas, hopefully they will lift the sculpting in 3dcoat to a higher level.

Also; thanks for explaining a bit on this.

JW

[Andrew Shpagin]

Yes it will be only good if converting to voxels will be fully instant. That is a very big if. If you are talking about speed improvements whats the use if i have to buy a superfast system to have the conversion take place without lagging? There are ways to deal with "heavy" strokes. I can make my brushsize smaller, zoom in, hide stuff, stroke slower. How can i compensate for conversion lag?

In general it can be done instantly. Now the algirithm is used:

- after finishing of stroke part of object is copied to separate process (thread) and different processor is busy with task of voxelisation. You are moving brush at this time to make next stroke and there is no lag.

- after finishing process of voxeling result is copied to main thread data. The only visible lag is copying and storing Undo data.

- If copying was done before you started new stroke, you will not see any lag but 10-100 ms lag of copying to main thread.

- if you have started stroke before system was able to voxelate previous, voxelisation is canceled until next pause between strokes.

So, generally if voxelisation can be done 2x of 3x faster and copyint process will not take more then 10-20 ms converting will be absolutely instant.

I also noticed something else. Im not certain if this is what causes it but here goes. I am correct in saying the surface mesh is an approximation of the voxel sculpt right? Its optimal for showing the shape thats allready there. This means its not optimal for mesh sculpting. When you mesh sculpt (like you do in zb and mb) you work on a subdivided mesh. A mesh that is -finer- then it needs to be to show its current form because you will need that extra segmentation for the forms you will be sculpting. You can clearly see this when you use the surface clay. The stroke looks incredibly ugly, then when its converted to voxels it looks smoother. This because the uniform resolution in voxels is smoother then the displacement that is generated from the surface mesh. If this is the way you want to do this you should at least take this into account so mesh sculpting becomes as smooth as voxel sculpting. Currently when you cross over to a surface tool your essentially sacrificing detail in comparison to what you could have sculpted in voxel.

In summary; there should be no visible difference to your sculpt in between the moment you made the stroke with surface clay and the final result when its converted to voxels. They should look 100% the same and nothing less. And ofcourse the "resolution" should feel the same instead of having the feeling that you are now working on a lower res sculpt then when you did using voxel tools.

Density of voxels on plane and polygones are the same (maybe dencity of triangles is slightly more because of marching cubes). The only difference is that normals in surface mode look more sharply so there is visual difference. Essential difference is visible only if you will use some high-frequence brush (like random dots)

As far as the brushes you mention them being shamelessly easy in zb.

I mean only that for me like for programmer it is very easy to make clay, rake, flattern for surface but very difficult for voxels. "Shamelessness" is only used like "shamelessly easy for programmer".

[philnolan3d]

I have tried, but uhable to reproduce it... How?

I didn't do anything special, brushed over a spot, then brushed over it again.

Recently I have read on one of forums that this problem may be caused by problematic NVidia chips... Try google: nvidia black screen of death

This is interesting and could be it, but I'm not sure. It seems that all of these people either have their computer crash or their monitor turns off and stays that way so they are forced to shut down. Mine doesn't do either of those things, but maybe because I'm on Vista and it is better at recovering from things like that. This has only happened in 3DC and before it was only once in a while, only this latest update makes it happen every minute or so. I have rebooted my computer over night so i will try again, maybe that helped.

[artman]

Just to add my opinion on present 3DC brushes:

I can honestly say I currently reached a comfort zone where I can

sculpt anything in 3DC with same quality as I would

have gotten from Zb(I'll prove it soon).

Personally I barely use surface tools (even Move) but I tried the new clay

brush and I like it a lot,but only for laying base shape.

Airbrush in voxel brushes is my favorite bruhes of all ,including Zb,mb2009,3DC

with the sharp pen it becomes frightening.

Just to be clear I understand scrape is really not flexible and works bad with large brushes,

and other bruhes need improvements I just mean I don't feel any wall restraining me from doing any kind of detaisl in 3DC.

And also let's not forget how powerful the bruhes set became in such sort time.

I think people should test brushes based

on wanted results instead of previous Zb or Mb experiences.

You'll be in for a nice surprise.

By testing I also mean not taking necessary the obvious way,

experimenting to achieve the wanted result using brushes

or alphas you wouldn't have thought of.

As far as performance goes I'm having a nice fluid experience (with vox brushes)

up to 9-11 mil polys and I have a very old dual with 4gb ram from which Dell steal 1gb for paranormal activities.

I use large brushes earlier in the process but I never see it as a problem.

I would like a Fill brush that actually fill (Andrew....please test Mudbox2009 fill brush)

but beside that I get a sculpting experience that is very first class to me.

I don't feel sculpting in an alpha either.

Anyway 3dCoat bruhes are evolving fast and Andrew isn't 80years old so I'm not worried at all.

[tree321]

There is no doubt that the better the sculpting capabilities of 3d-coat are the better the art will be.This will translate

into a better experience for the artist as well as an increase in sales of 3d-coat.An artist really wants to concentrate on

creating good works of art intuitively without too much concern on the work flow.I for one like to find myself in the alpha

or theta mind state when creating.When my left brain hemisphere has to get involved too much it interrupts creativity.

I understand there are limitations to all modeling software out there, some are good for hard surface modeling as well as

sculpting, some are better at doing finer level sculpting details such as zbrush and mudbox.I find 3d-coat excels at laying

out ideas in an intuitive fashion, similar to sculpting in clay, but lags behind in sculpting intricate details at the level of

zbrush or mudbox, although on a good machine quite acceptable.But I do recall reading Andrews post on developing voxel

sculpting early on and he stated it was not the job of voxels to get the fine details of say a zbrush...that would be the job

of displacement sculpting which is what quadrangulation of voxels allows.Personally I prefer to stay in voxels. It really

comes down to how close and sharp can you get an engraved or extruded line next to another.This means increased resolution in

voxels which consumes system resources.

If 3d-coat gets to the level of detail and smooth flowing brush experience as zbrush\mudbox, I'm convinced 3d-coat will be

the tool of choice for 3d creativity.It's already my first choice.But I agree with 3dioot that brushes need to be

smoother,and more refined.Some of the brushes are close.

An analogy would be driving a car on an unpaved bumpy road opposed to a paved one.Right now it's hard to keep the car going

straight and not hit ruts.Someone posted a mouse stabilizer program awhile back that was used to control mouse movement, but

it was a demo and I never got it working right,it seems we need something like this in coat.Using soft stroke with spacing

helps but is not the overall answer.

I sense a great deal of passion in the tone of 3dioots posts and am convinced he wants this program to be all it's capable of

being, as I'm sure we all do.I admire and am entertained by his "child like" boldness in stating his opinions on the

development process and how to make 3d-coat better.As harsh as his words may seem sometimes, Andrew, I know he speaks them

with conviction and intent on progressing 3d-coat to the highest level possible.I think he would make a great sports coach,

hehe.

It must be hard for a developer such as yourself Andrew to write this program on the fly ,as it were, with everyone putting

in there request for this and that and at the same time being creative yourself .I know what it's like to work on a sculpture

commission and have the client scrutinize every step of the way, but in the end I realize it is all about pleasing the

client.That way he will pay me in the end and we both get rewarded.Me with food for the body,him with food for the soul.

I really see Andrew as a type of artist creating something from virtually nothing, similar to what a sculptor or painter does,

but his media happens to be math and science.Collectively ,we,with you as the programmer, and us as the users of the program

create art.So I feel as if you are as much a part of the the art that is created in 3d-coat as is the user of the program

creating the actual art itself.We must therefore think as one when developing 3d-coat so that we can achieve the ultimate

goal of art itself.

Programmer and artist need to harmonize as one as in a great chorus all singing together .If the people like the music they

will surely listen.

If I were to use sculpture as an analogy as to the progress of 3d-coat I would say at this point it like a work of art that

just needs to be refined and detailed more to bring out the full potential within it.Go back over every aspect of the program

and refine what is already there, making it the best work possible at this time.The masterpiece can come later,4.0,5.0 etc.

There are obviously physical and mental limitations to all forms of creativity, including software development,so one cannot

expect perfection in such a relatively short time frame.But I for one applaud the efforts made so far with 3d-coat and am

anxious to see what the future brings.Work towards perfection even if it's an impossible goal.

To all the artist, be patient as I believe 3d-coat will allow you to create and express what visions lie within

yourselves,like the growth of a tree ,it just takes time.

...for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.Philippians 2:13

[3dioot]

In general it can be done instantly. Now the algirithm is used:

- after finishing of stroke part of object is copied to separate process (thread) and different processor is busy with task of voxelisation. You are moving brush at this time to make next stroke and there is no lag.

- after finishing process of voxeling result is copied to main thread data. The only visible lag is copying and storing Undo data.

- If copying was done before you started new stroke, you will not see any lag but 10-100 ms lag of copying to main thread.

- if you have started stroke before system was able to voxelate previous, voxelisation is canceled until next pause between strokes.

So, generally if voxelisation can be done 2x of 3x faster and copyint process will not take more then 10-20 ms converting will be absolutely instant.

All i can say is I really hope you can turn it into an instantaneous process.

Density of voxels on plane and polygones are the same (maybe dencity of triangles is slightly more because of marching cubes). The only difference is that normals in surface mode look more sharply so there is visual difference. Essential difference is visible only if you will use some high-frequence brush (like random dots)

I mean only that for me like for programmer it is very easy to make clay, rake, flattern for surface but very difficult for voxels. "Shamelessness" is only used like "shamelessly easy for programmer".

Now you make it sound like displacing a surface and the adding or removing of voxels is the same thing. Its not.

Displacing a mesh surface is limited by the topology of that surface. You can see this with surface clay. You can see the edges. I understand your explanation on normals. And that probably explains the "pop" that happens during conversion. But the point is that with a true voxel tool like extrude your sculpted stroke will not show any tesselation; it will be perfect and only limited by voxel resolution. In other words. If i make a very strong stroke with a voxel tool or a very shallow stroke they will both have the same quality which is only limited by voxel resolution (which is in 3d and "solid"). Now if i make a strong and a shallow stroke with a surface tool the strong stroke will suffer a much higher tesselation then the shallow stroke (the resolution differs according to the amount of displacement). In other words, the mesh surface limits the quality of the stroke before it gets converted to voxels. I have talked in the past about smoothnes in the tools. This may sound contradicting to what i said before. But there IS a smoothness with voxel tools that mesh based tools dont have. (im deliberately setting aside trajectory smoothing and the like for the moment). The reason is because they dont deform; they add and subtract. And believe it or not; you can feel and see that.

Now that is what i meant before about matching resolution between voxel and surface. A mesh based stroke on a surface generated from voxels is NOT of the same quality as a true voxel stroke on that same voxel volume. And i have no idea's how to fix it.

Also wasnt gum created for projecting hf stamps?

I didnt misunderstand what you meant with "shamelessly easy". I hope you are 100% right. Ill see it in future updates.

JW

[Routb3d]

Thank you Andrew. This program you have made is a blessing.

Thanks.

IC

[erklaerbar]

Im no exactly sure what you guys are discussing I think the new surface tools are nice .

Of course Zbrush sculpting is much smoother, its the king of sculpting after all. I still prefer to use ZB for details as well as overall sulpting, nevertheless I find the foundation that Andrew laid absolutely impressive. I agree that doing high level details in voxels is quite expensive in terms of PC power. However up to middle resolution its a dream to use. Only thing I realized is that operations are not multithreaded. Its a bit a shame to see your PC going to knee while only 25% of CPU power is used, I guess that this will be done under finetuning, or are these processes that cant be split?

The only other thing that kills me is the fact that my 8 GB RAM are by far not enough

[amcmahon]

I haven't messed with any of the shader stuff yet and was wondering how you change/apply shaders? I didn't see anything in 3DC to do this and I'm sure it's right under my nose.

[bisenberger]

I haven't messed with any of the shader stuff yet and was wondering how you change/apply shaders? I didn't see anything in 3DC to do this and I'm sure it's right under my nose.

At the top of the Volumetric sculpting tool panel it says Shaders there is a triangle to the right of this, click on it an it wll list the shaders.

[kay_Eva]

Just to add my opinion on present 3DC brushes:

I can honestly say I currently reached a comfort zone where I can

sculpt anything in 3DC with same quality as I would

have gotten from Zb(I'll prove it soon).

Personally I barely use surface tools (even Move) but I tried the new clay

brush and I like it a lot,but only for laying base shape.

Airbrush in voxel brushes is my favorite bruhes of all ,including Zb,mb2009,3DC

with the sharp pen it becomes frightening.

Just to be clear I understand scrape is really not flexible and works bad with large brushes,

and other bruhes need improvements I just mean I don't feel any wall restraining me from doing any kind of detaisl in 3DC.

And also let's not forget how powerful the bruhes set became in such sort time.

I think people should test brushes based

on wanted results instead of previous Zb or Mb experiences.

You'll be in for a nice surprise.

By testing I also mean not taking necessary the obvious way,

experimenting to achieve the wanted result using brushes

or alphas you wouldn't have thought of.

As far as performance goes I'm having a nice fluid experience (with vox brushes)

up to 9-11 mil polys and I have a very old dual with 4gb ram from which Dell steal 1gb for paranormal activities.

I use large brushes earlier in the process but I never see it as a problem.

I would like a Fill brush that actually fill (Andrew....please test Mudbox2009 fill brush)

but beside that I get a sculpting experience that is very first class to me.

I don't feel sculpting in an alpha either.

Anyway 3dCoat bruhes are evolving fast and Andrew isn't 80years old so I'm not worried at all.

Thanks for the tip about the airbrush! I'd already found it was cool for texture brushes, but I hadn't used it for more than stamping, thinking that clay and build were the ones I should use. I guess there is no brush you *have* to use for a particular task, but thanks to your input I tried using airbrush and I think airbrush is the brush for me. I think maybe the name is a bit misleading. Maybe it should become the default voxel brush. And you could call it an "expressions" brush. :lol:

I had some concerns too with the feel of voxel sculpts and using the airbrush addresses a lot of them if not all of them.

[amcmahon]

At the top of the Volumetric sculpting tool panel it says Shaders there is a triangle to the right of this, click on it an it wll list the shaders.

Ah, I was trying to find a way to use them in the regular portion of the program and not in vox sculpt. Thanks. Any plans to add shaders to the regular paint program Andrew?

[tree321]

At the top of the Volumetric sculpting tool panel it says Shaders there is a triangle to the right of this, click on it an it wll list the shaders.

Also in the voxtree if you right click there is a per object selection.

[bisenberger]

Also in the voxtree if you right click there is a per object selection.

Super cool! there is stuff tucked away all over the place. Thanks

[artman]

Thanks for the tip about the airbrush! I'd already found it was cool for texture brushes, but I hadn't used it for more than stamping, thinking that clay and build were the ones I should use. I guess there is no brush you *have* to use for a particular task, but thanks to your input I tried using airbrush and I think airbrush is the brush for me. I think maybe the name is a bit misleading. Maybe it should become the default voxel brush. And you could call it an "expressions" brush. :lol:

I had some concerns too with the feel of voxel sculpts and using the airbrush addresses a lot of them if not all of them.

It rocks isn't it !!

here are other things you might like(but maybe not at all)

-I don't like move brush so I use extrude with the soft pen instead(pen no.6)

and soft stroke on at default value of 8.

-wrinkles n' folds(for hres 500 000 and +) :

extrude brush with sharp pen (pen no.4) and soft stroke on at a value of 500.

(what is annoying is you can't tone it down to let's say 492 because as soon

as you touch the slider 3DCoat automatically bring it back to the 50 max.)

and the more I use it the more I discover the new clay brush with a hard pen (no.1)

and soft stroke on is pretty much doing what I'm expecting from a very efficient flatten

brush even if it's not really it's name or function.The conversion to voxel

isn't an invisible operation at all on my computer but I didn't found it to be a problem.

[Andrew Shpagin]

OSX ALPHA 56 uploaded!

[TOXE]

OSX ALPHA 56 uploaded!

This week starts in the best way

have a nice day

-TOXE

[tree321]

Just to clarify my previous post so as not to be misconstrued.I am very pleased with the brushes in 3d-coat as they stand now, so please do not tamper with them too much, if at all.Maybe work on scrape, it has a tendency to jump around a bit.But I don't need it too much anyway so no big deal.

I would prefer you spend more time on the manipulators at this time then get bogged down by brush refinement.

I am quite content with the level of detail and quality I am able to achieve at this point in the game.

If this were clay sculpting I wouldn't hesitate to cast these in bronze.With that said my biggest request at this point would be finishes.I am looking forward to voxel painting.Although at this point I think I'm more interested in more shaders because I want to create more of a polychrome bronze look.Now when I was doing bronzes I could achieve a wide range of patina finishes such as silver, gold, blues etc.That's where I'm headed.The new shaders you provided are awesome and I am using them in 3 new pieces I will post shortly.It would be great it there was more control over the shaders though such as specularity, color, and control over veins in marble and grain size in stones.Not an immediate request, just saying.

So just to reiterate, I am very content with the current state of the brushes with the exception of scrape.No big deal.

Always excited about new updates, it just keeps getting better!

Keep on thinking free.

[TOXE]

Hi Andrew,

ALPHA 56 OSX crashes when i try to quadrangulate and object (both quadrangulate and quadrangulate and paint):-(

-TOXE

[tree321]

Just noticed that the increase brush in version 55 and 56 DX64 and GL doesn't seem to be working.There is very little effect on the sculpt.Version 54 works as expected.

[Andrew Shpagin]

Hi Andrew,

ALPHA 56 OSX crashes when i try to quadrangulate and object (both quadrangulate and quadrangulate and paint):-(

-TOXE

I will check & fix it soon.

[tree321]

Quick reference for the current shaders.

As the shader tree grows it would be nice to have a preview as shown.Although I think it may be necessary to have a larger separate window similar to the shader picture with all the shaders in view.You decide.

[lc8b105]

Quick reference for the current shaders.

As the shader tree grows it would be nice to have a preview as shown.Although I think it may be necessary to have a larger separate window similar to the shader picture with all the shaders in view.You decide.

Wow thanks tree321!

I think we need similar preview images in 3DC's GUI.

[tree321]

Alpha 56DX64-Alpha brushes flip 180.GL version is ok.

[Andrew Shpagin]

Hi Andrew,

ALPHA 56 OSX crashes when i try to quadrangulate and object (both quadrangulate and quadrangulate and paint):-(

-TOXE

I have tested it, it works well on my side... Is it possible that you have used Gum brush on massive part and then pressed quadrangulate?

Try open object and quadrangulate without brushing.