3D-Coat 3.0 ALPHA

[splodge]

Well, my vote is for the Silo-esque manipulator. I've done up a version as an object (attached)

if it's of any use (seperate sub-objects with colored materials assigned). If a hotkey ('shift') is used for

constraining, then the manipulator on the right would become visible.

I agree that screen-space rotation is handy and should be kept...option to turn on/off for those

that don't want/need it would be good.

Oh yes, I'm feeling it!!

with the option to turn off 'screen space rotation' I would sleep with yours.

[wailingmonkey]

edited for illustration (doesn't really bother me where the screen-space rotate ring

goes, but your suggestion of placing screen-space move is good)

Note: bluish color is just the background showing thru a semi-transparent white.

As for indication on what constrained plane, the 'boxes' could be stretched slightly

along 1 axis to indicate which direction is intended...I don't find too much confusion

with it in Silo once a small amount of usage becomes logical habit. <shrugs>

Also, it's pretty obvious what can be manipulated when 1 axis won't work.

[splodge]

[3dioot]

As for indication on what constrained plane, the 'boxes' could be stretched slightly

along 1 axis to indicate which direction is intended...I don't find too much confusion

with it in Silo once a small amount of usage becomes logical habit. <shrugs>

Also, it's pretty obvious what can be manipulated when 1 axis won't work.

What i meant was not for the default gizmo. That one is perfect as you made it.

Its for the one that you get when you press shift. The scaling over a plane symbols is perfect (the squashed boxes). Id just like to see the arrows squashed too (in fact just like the scale symbol only with triangle instead of cube) so you can see from them also that you can now move in a plane instead of over a single axis. So the difference between them is clear.

So for what you call "constrained" it looks like this:

(excuse the rough mockup)

GrtZ

JW

[jedwards]

The silo manipulator is a bad design. I use that app every day for 8+ hours and it's like it was designed just for the sake of being different. I love its toolset, and prefer it for modeling over anything else, but visually, the manipulator handles don't make sense. You don't put a Y rotation handle on an X axis transform handle and then color it red when Y axis transform color is green. This is why rings around the manipulator were created for controlling rotation. The ring flows around the axis it controls rotation for, AND is color coded to that axis. Function is implied immediately both through the form, placement and color. You can also grab it from a much broader area in the viewport as opposed to a tiny handle crammed in with the other 2 transform handles (too much clutter imo). This is also why screen rotation is represented by a ring around the whole manipulator in other apps that use them - it is more consistent with the other rotation rings, and is easier to grab which pretty much all other 3d apps do barring a few exceptions not worth noting. Even though I like the screen space rotation ring in silo it doesn't make sense because it is not consistent with the single axis rotation handles. I don't know why it was 'borrowed' for use with the silo manipulator when by design it is not consistent with the handles they chose to use for controlling rotation.

Same goes for the planar transforms. Placement along one axis when the handle represents 2 axes AND color coding it to just one axis is also visually, not right. Design wise, it makes no sense. There is a disconnect between the representation and the function. This is where apps like max actually get it right. As much as I don't like modeling in max, I do think the way it represents planar transforms is better than what I'm seeing here. Visually, you have a plane handle that stretches between the 2 axes it represents, immediately implying planar behavior. Color coding is neutral as well (just like with uniform scale, or screen space), which is easier to associate with planar manipulation behavior than red, green or blue. The only handles that make sense in the silo manipulator are the single axis scale and move handles because their shape, placement and color coding all imply their purpose. Ultimately for me though, planar transforms just aren't as important. I pretty much never do planar scaling, not in all the years I've been modeling, and rarely do planar movements. Not if I have easy access to screenspace transforms. I do not miss planar handles at all when they are not available to me in some apps. In terms of their importance vs the visual clutter they add to a manipulator I could do without them and not even blink.

Also, I'm a big fan of the blender approach as well (as a keyboard alternative to the manipulator). Hit a key to transform, then hit another if you want to constrain the transform. I'd be more likely to use this method for a lot of my transforms if it were available, as I've grown rather fond of its simplicity in blender. In fact, I even prefer blender's manipulator, 1. because it adheres to the same standard as others, and uses rotation rings, but also, because I can toggle the display of all the transform types on and off for it as I like. If I don't want scaling I can turn it off leaving just rotation and movement handles visible. Combined with its keyboard controls this makes for an awesome way to personalize it to your liking.

The ideas I have liked so far here have been to add the center area for screen translation (must have) around the uniform scale handle and the planar constraint toggle (because I can keep them hidden and probably never use them). While I like the way max implements planar handles, I don't like how it is all mouse-over activated. I'd much prefer to toggle their visibility when I want to use them, but in terms of location and visual representation I think they are a better approach to take than what I've seen so far.

.02

[wailingmonkey]

with all of that .02 cents you could have already shared a mock-up picture of your

ideal setup by now...

:P

[3dioot]

In other words you want this > post

Center cube uniform scale

Inside small white circle screen move (which i love just as you)

And you want to keep the outer white circle for screen rotate instead of using the smaller inner white which limits screen move

As only addition the Plane manipulators that i added that do both scale and move (see post).

I have to say i used to use planar move ALOT when polymodelling right along with screen move. I almost never move single axis unless im really "placing" objects. When i model and move vertices or whatever its pretty much always planar or screen.

Personally im not really a fan of rings. They are clearer to read ill admit. But im just not a fan. I always have to twist the view to make certain i pick the right one cause it seems i have a knack to select the wrong one on first click. Also they bring alot of "noise" to the manipulator.

I understand what you write about the color etc. Its what i wrote in my previous post where its weird to position a planar control ON a single axis and give it the color of that axis. The big advantage is that eventhough it may not make 100% theoretical sense is that its very practical spacewise and probably (dangerous assumption here) easy enough to get used to.

GrtZ

JW

PS

Thinking about it i see silo's axis's for the manipulator are all black. I dont mind them having the appropriate colors (id appreciate it in fact). And we can always choose to have the rotation controls colored acording to their respective axis.

[splodge]

It's looking like all our preferences are just too varied. and we're all clearly quite passionate about our manipulators. So I suggest we have several versions to choose from.

This is all assuming they're not too time consuming to code. As it's poor Andrew that has to do all the damn coding.

[psyborgue]

It's looking like all our preferences are just too varied. and we're all clearly quite passionate about our manipulators. So I suggest we have several versions to choose from.

^^^ THIS

page after page of manipulator discussion... lol.. please god make it stop!

[3dioot]

Yes and no. I think we should have an excellent gizmo to start with. Not a horrible hybrid that you have to tweak to get something usefull. Im all for options that allow you to change it widely (in fact even max's gizmo has a lot of options). I think thats a dream though since andrew didnt even facilitate different hotkey possibilities for things like brush size and strength or alternative viewport navigation options. So lets try to make it the best it is and THEN try to convince andrew to implent a healthy amount of options for the gizmo.

With that said. How about this James? I know it doesnt solve your main argument (which is valid) but maybe this is a practical way "around" it making the most of the advantages of each different method.

I increased the rotation controls in size and clarity. They should be easier to click on, are colorcoded and hopefully their shape is more distinct now and fitting for what they do. I also colored the axis. Now that i see it i find it quite colorful; i could do with black axis but its a mood point for me (not important for me).

Tadaah:

Let us know what you think.

And with that said.. I could live with rings.

So far what i really like is the toggle idea with shift and the uniform scale, screen move and screen rotate in the center.

JW

PS

Psybourge this discussion is happening over the weekend. Andrew is away and not coding every suggestion we type out. Hopefully on monday there will be a few nice options presented and Andrew can choose. Or he can read and decide what he thinks is right based on feedback from alot of people. I find this a FAR more useful discussion then the endless talk about cloth and all the bugs it introduced. Im certain the final implementation will be easy and fast for Andrew. Also you have an interesting portfolio with the 3dcards that you can flip over.

[psyborgue]

I find this a FAR more useful discussion then the endless talk about cloth and all the bugs it introduced

LOL. I disagree. I'd pay Andrew extra if he put in the "send to retopo" option I suggested a few pages back. That is one feature I could really use. and I feel could be very useful. It would make manual retopo or quadrangulation unnecessary with cloth. It's probably a simple change to make too.

To me... i'm not too picky about manipulators.

I was skeptical about cloth being useful at all at first, but I can see it having a lot of merit in a voxel enviornment after experimenting with it.

[3dioot]

Oh dont worry. I didnt mean there arent far more usefull things for Andrew to work on. But the order in which he decides to develop 3dcoat is regretfully not for us to decide. Now he's asking for feedback on manip's so he's getting them. Trust me i have a whole list of things im dying for Andrew to tackle. /shrug

About cloth; sure it opens some creative ways to do things but in light of the release this quarter and the current state of the alpha i cant look at the development of this "feature" in a positive way. Its just another gimmick that steals Andrews development time. Even if it was fast to implement it rained bugs about it last week and there is also the thing of adding too much crap into 3dcoat and turning it into bloatware. But i digress.

JW

[psyborgue]

Also you have an interesting portfolio with the 3dcards that you can flip over.

Thanks. It's tiltviewer (for Ozio) which is a plugin for joomla. Neat thing is it takes it's feed directly from a flikr photofeed, so as I update my respective flikr categories, the portfolio automatically updates (speaking of which, I should add some recent 3d coat work).

[psyborgue]

About cloth; sure it opens some creative ways to do things but in light of the release this quarter and the current state of the alpha i cant look at the development of this "feature" in a positive way. Its just another gimmick that steals Andrews development time. Even if it was fast to implement it rained bugs about it last week and there is also the thing of adding too much crap into 3dcoat and turning it into bloatware. But i digress.

Well. Dynamics can be used for a lot more than just the obvious. A variation of cloth could be used , for example to shrink various tubes such onto voxel sculptures to be used as retopo meshes (similarly to blender's shrinkwrap modifier). This would allow nice, clean topology to be wrapped around complex objects. I'm happy that cloth is added in because I can see it leading in some very interesting directions.

Ever checked out pelt-mapping? Many implementations use soft-body dynamics to stretch out the object... and that's UV mapping. I imagine the code he's added in can be reused in all sorts of interesting places.

[3dioot]

Lets just say i feel that if features arent directly related to either the improvements in painting that were promised or core features of voxel sculpting i think Andrew is hurting himself and his program by investing time in them at this point. Especially if he really wants to release it this quarter. But really i shouldnt think about it this way since i cant influence it anyway. I can just point out some bugs, suggest some things and give feedback if he asks for it (which i and others did for the manipulators).

Im of to bed now.

Good night!

JW

PS

Jedwards Im happy you seem to like this. Im fine with agreeing to disagree on things but i find it more fun and challenging to try and come up with something we all like and that will appeal to new people. Colored handles noted. Im fine with them.

[jedwards]

Hey 3dioot,

I think that would work for me. Perhaps my post seemed a bit too strong... Just wanted to make it clear where I stand in terms of all the designs and ideas floating around. It's true, my preference leans toward the more boring, but standard manipulator look, but I say why mess with something that others put a lot of effort into already when we have bigger things to worry about. =]

We do need a manipulator though and that's why we're all here talking about it I suppose.

I like your revision. I didn't make it clear in my first post that obviously I'm still 'ok' with the silo manipulator... I've been using it for so many years, I must be, right? =D

But I should have stated that simply proper color coding the rotation handles would easily improve it imo, as your illustration shows and without a lot of fuss. My preference is for rings, but I could live with what you propose in those last images too. And as I mentioned I do like the idea of planar toggles. You've got a simple and functional design and I think that is a good enough start for this.

Should also add I prefer the colored axis handles too over black or transparent. Much easier to read.

[psyborgue]

Seperately from what i personally want from 3dcoats voxel sculpting there is only ONE first introduction for voxel sculpting to the world. One first impression. Its coming this quarter (according to Andrew). And trust me; noone will be going wow over a cloth sim that everybody allready has and played with a thousand times in their main package (3dcoat is a support package after all; paint and sculpting)

You make some very good points, but I would point out that none of those applications use cloth simulation in sculpting. Say if i'm making a jacket or something for a game character... it's a lot easier to simulate cloth than it is to sculpt in the folds, etc. It' is probably time for a feature freeze, though. I agree.

[psyborgue]

I've been using it for so many years, I must be, right? =D

And i've been using Blender which uses keyboard shortcuts and/or mouse gestures to initiate such operations. I think you're all nuts with your primitive manipulators! :P Blender didn't even get cursed with manipulators until you people started whining about the lack of one... now I have this thing (*spit*) with arrows on my screen and it just gets in the way!

[Deadman21]

I just want to state that the cloth feature has quickly become one of the most valuable parts of 3d-coat. Its cool to create cloth but I have found that it is also invaluable for hard surface modeling. I have found that by using the retopo feature in combination with cloth it is incredibly easy to create nice hard (and flat) surfaces. By simply creating the surface in retopo, give it some extrusion, then in cloth (not using the simulation) subdivide then create the voxel, boom you have a nice hard surface. Its cool that the shapes can be positive or negative.

Some examples:

[philnolan3d]

I'd pay Andrew extra if he...

Shhh! don't give him any ideas! :P

And i've been using Blender which uses keyboard shortcuts and/or mouse gestures to initiate such operations. I think you're all nuts with your primitive manipulators! :P Blender didn't even get cursed with manipulators until you people started whining about the lack of one... now I have this thing (*spit*) with arrows on my screen and it just gets in the way!

I find it hilarious that someone actually likes the Blender way of interface design. :lol:

I just want to state that the cloth feature has quickly become one of the most valuable parts of 3d-coat. Its cool to create cloth but I have found that it is also invaluable for hard surface modeling. I have found that by using the retopo feature in combination with cloth it is incredibly easy to create nice hard (and flat) surfaces. By simply creating the surface in retopo, give it some extrusion, then in cloth (not using the simulation) subdivide then create the voxel, boom you have a nice hard surface. Its cool that the shapes can be positive or negative.

I'd love to see a more in depth tutorial of this.

[artman]

Just wanted to add a comment to this already big thread.

I was sculpting in 3DCoat yesterday and I realised at one point,I didn't felt I was working in an alpha at all.

There was not bugs interfering with any of my actions,I could sculpt with as much ease I could ask for,all my brushes giving exactly the effects intended (...I had to adapt and invent a little for this to manifest(forgetting ZB and MB;find new paths ect..)also I felt I had much more air to breathe than is zbrush,cloning ,cutting and merging...I felt like I was working in photoshop but in complete 3D...very good sensation,very high polycounts also

Also anytime I had a wacky idea to try, the final result would be exactly what I envisioned would work...

but my wacky ideas are generally just simple sequence of actions...If I was able to record actions like PS and Zb ..it would be frightening,

What I mean is I would freekin pay 200$ for alpha60...anytime!

I'll post results soon.

Not really a constructive comment but I couln't resist expriming.

[Nemoid_]

Actually , as manipulator i like better a traditional one , with rings.

The one posted, with cube, small part of ring , and arrow seems to be great visually, but picking up the ring for rotation with your mouse arrow rapidly, would not be so easy. you'll end up picking cube or arrow, whatever instead what you wanted to, cause they're simply too near each other.

I'm not the best fan of manipulators actually.

A part from free move/translation that allows you not to click into a precise point, they usually force you to click into a very precise point in order to manipulate elements

I tend to use manipulators only when they're needed, otherwise i make em disappear. and often when modelling in 3d apps i tend to work with traditional quad view or i switch to single ortho views if needed (this gives me a better grasp of distances between elements)

but that's just me. :lol:

so, manipulator i'd like to see is with rings, not very thick nor 3d fashioned, translucent if possible, but most important you can scale it on the fly though a key/mouse combination, just similar to a brush in ZB or 3d coat so that it will fit your needs,depending what you're manipulating

Possibility to toggle the different transformation widgets and even more important, option to set it as invisible if it clutters your viewport/workflow.

Sometimes manipulators get in the way. period. :lol:

[3dioot]

I just want to state that the cloth feature has quickly become one of the most valuable parts of 3d-coat. Its cool to create cloth but I have found that it is also invaluable for hard surface modeling. I have found that by using the retopo feature in combination with cloth it is incredibly easy to create nice hard (and flat) surfaces. By simply creating the surface in retopo, give it some extrusion, then in cloth (not using the simulation) subdivide then create the voxel, boom you have a nice hard surface. Its cool that the shapes can be positive or negative.

If 3dcoat had quality masking and/or freezing you wouldnt have to resort to using cloth for creating hard surface details like that. You would have a faster, cleaner method which would also be more flexible.

@artman

Ive seen various comments like yours every time critisism is given on the state of the alpha and i wonder why. I sculpt myself in 3dcoat and im loving it. The base technology (voxels) gives such an amount of freedom over the topology restrained polygon sculpting of zb/mb. Its this base technology that makes 3dcoat my current choice.

This however doesnt mean the program is "perfect" and should be left as is even if you make such bold statements as wanting to shell $200 for the way it is now. As ive written before and removed because this discussion really wont lead us anywhere, 3dcoat has superior tech compared to mb/zb. However it will fail if it doesnt develop to its full potential while its competitors did develop to their full potential (with inferior tech). Im not looking for a zb/mb clone; im looking for something that will enable me to do the same, with the same ease and quite possibly alot more since voxel opens up the road to new tools.

GrtZ

JW

[Nemoid_]

I tend to agree.

it is clear that 3D coat is potentially far superior to ZB and Mudbox.

IMO , it simply has to become faster, and as smooth as it can be within voxel technology it uses.

Also, painting is a strong area to make work as smooth as possible especially with low poly.

3D coat right now has painting , voxel sculpting, good retopo, quadrangulation features, cloth and much more.

If Andrew will reach coupling this with a good and clean UI taking care about workflow, and be as smooth as possible in what its implemented, the app will have a HUGE success.

Not too worried , tho. Andrew knows his way, UI is in the works and we can wait even a bit more if its required for 3.0 to be released and being a real bomb within the market.

Another thing to consider is that, Andrew develops with such a fast pace, that even if when 3.0 is released Q1 it isn't at 100% but 90% it will become better so rapidly people will not be upset at all.

@Andrew

another thing: think you noticed Newtek is making that CORE thing (which i hope they'll do well)

so, since it seems it will be very opened, a smooth workflow 3d coat/CORE would be really awesome !

Maybe also you could even find some form of agreement with Newtek too.

If 3dcoat had quality masking and/or freezing you wouldnt have to resort to using cloth for creating hard surface details like that. You would have a faster, cleaner method which would also be more flexible.

@artman

Ive seen various comments like yours every time critisism is given on the state of the alpha and i wonder why. I sculpt myself in 3dcoat and im loving it. The base technology (voxels) gives such an amount of freedom over the topology restrained polygon sculpting of zb/mb. Its this base technology that makes 3dcoat my current choice.

This however doesnt mean the program is "perfect" and should be left as is even if you make such bold statements as wanting to shell $200 for the way it is now. As ive written before and removed because this discussion really wont lead us anywhere, 3dcoat has superior tech compared to mb/zb. However it will fail if it doesnt develop to its full potential while its competitors did develop to their full potential (with inferior tech). Im not looking for a zb/mb clone; im looking for something that will enable me to do the same, with the same ease and quite possibly alot more since voxel opens up the road to new tools.

GrtZ

JW

[artman]

Im not looking for a zb/mb clone; im looking for something that will enable me to do the same, with the same ease and quite possibly alot more since voxel opens up the road to new tools.

I reached that point.It's probably because I've always used only 2or3 brushes in my workflow.

whether they be MB2009 or ZB3.1...Everything in my head now can be made with accuracy to my vision in 3DC.

(I also probably have easy to make visions)

But what you describe in that sentence is word for word what I feel I'm experiencing in 3dC alpha right now...as for the

me paying 200$ for it means...:that "if" for unknown reasons the devellopement of the software would stop at this very second I would still

pay 200$ for it in it's actual state for commercial usage for the simple reason that I now CANNOT WORK WITHOUT IT.

It is not a choice ,it is a reality.

I opened zbrush last week and I was paralysed.Literaly.

All my artistic reflexes needs basic Photoshop features..like clone,merge,cut,delete,paste ect...

It is not a choice from me ,it is natural.

Otherwise I hit a wall very fast.

I would like to say :I need this brush to behave like that and this or that to be more like this but

I get all the details I want done with ease and beside a fill brush that really fills and subobject symmetry planes when using retopo there is nothing paralysing

me ,that would stop me from acheiving a vision I mean.

At this point I'm not even annoyed by anything while working.l tend to limit myself to some sort of safe comfort sphere and establish my workflow in that range..I"m not a very good artist so it is probably why.

@artman

Ive seen various comments like yours every time critisism is given on the state of the alpha and i wonder why. I sculpt myself in 3dcoat and im loving it. The base technology (voxels) gives such an amount of freedom over the topology restrained polygon sculpting of zb/mb. Its this base technology that makes 3dcoat my current choice.

This however doesnt mean the program is "perfect" and should be left as is even if you make such bold statements as wanting to shell $200 for the way it is now. As ive written before and removed because this discussion really wont lead us anywhere, 3dcoat has superior tech compared to mb/zb. However it will fail if it doesnt develop to its full potential while its competitors did develop to their full potential (with inferior tech). Im not looking for a zb/mb clone; im looking for something that will enable me to do the same, with the same ease and quite possibly alot more since voxel opens up the road to new tools.

This is why you being here making all those constructive feebacks and requests allow me to spend my time sculpting and experimenting

and not bothering and having fun.I know it is not very helpful but this is the way I work:when something doesn't work I use something else instead.

I've been doing this in zb a lot (when dealing with bugs and quirks) and I'm aware it is not a good way to approach a software for creating improvements.

Again,this is why you are here I guess...So thank you for your energy it is much rest for me.

[Andrew Shpagin]

That both

look well.

The only not obvious things - how to swithch between constrained/free mode (hotkey SHIFT is not obvious). And I planned to use SHIFT for discrete motion/rotation.

Is there any chance to put together all - switches world/local, constrained/axial.

Other problem - screen space rotation circle seems to be too small for precise rotation.

Maybe use this

http://www.wailingmonkey.com/images/3dcoat/manipulator.jpg

and place switches around big circle:

[kay_Eva]

occasionally the circular brush indicator disappears and doesn't reappear until I restart my computer, am I doing something wrong =)

thanks

[tree321]

Keep in mind this manip. from Hexagon I use it all the time without problems.To me it's better than Silo or others I've use.Of course modify it as you wish.

There are a lot of good ideas posted here so I'll just let you guys discuss this more while I get back to sculpting.

[3dioot]

Im not a fan of putting toggles on the gizmo itself. I never liked that you did that for transpose either. (in fact i hate it and still want you to make the seperate transforms directly available through hotkeys)

I dont see the need to cram everyting on one manip. Using shift to toggle is a very clean solution. Make a toggle for incremental rotation, move and scale near the same spot where your going to show coordinates (wherever that may end up going in the final ui).

The reason for this is simple. When i model i switch between single axis and dual axis all the time. When i want fixed increments for my transforms i toggle it on or off once or twice during a session. The simple fact of frequency of use allready dictates the solution. Im pretty certain that almost everyone (even the people that dont do much transforms over planes) switch between planar and axial transforms a lot more then they switch between incremented and non incremented transforms.

Same goes for the global/local toggle. Just make a button for it and dont stick it to the gizmo.

JW

[kay_Eva]

Im not a fan of putting toggles on the gizmo itself. I never liked that you did that for transpose either. (in fact i hate it and still want you to make the seperate transforms directly available through hotkeys)

I dont see the need to cram everyting on one manip. Using shift to toggle is a very clean solution. Make a toggle for incremental rotation, move and scale near the same spot where your going to show coordinates (wherever that may end up going in the final ui).

The reason for this is simple. When i model i switch between single axis and dual axis all the time. When i want fixed increments for my transforms i toggle it on or off once or twice during a session. The simple fact of frequency of use allready dictates the solution. Im pretty certain that almost everyone (even the people that dont do much transforms over planes) switch between planar and axial transforms a lot more then they switch between incremented and non incremented transforms.

Same goes for the global/local toggle. Just make a button for it and dont stick it to the gizmo.

JW

disagree I love Hexagon manipulator