Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

3DCoat Wishlist


Carlosan
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Contributor

Merging is not entirely "final". A possible workaround is to save your mesh in the retopo room and if, after merging to PPP, a return to voxels is needed, the saved mesh can be massaged onto the revised sculpt in the Retopo using the saved mesh. Just delete the old Object in the Paint room. This is my intention for using a saved facial mesh to use on different faces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Ok gotcha, but this unfortunately breaks workflow considerably :( The tools are powerful no doubt, but the flexibility of returning to your Voxel room sculpt will be rendered moot since this way is a very final.

Art Directors, clients and such can be known for wide sweeping changes even if the sculpt was stamped as 'final'. Can you imagine going this route to be then told adjustments need to be made to the final sculpt? I might be ok with working around this since I'm testing the viability of 3DC in a production environment, but my colleagues... not so much :\

 

This is really unfortunate since I know it'll be awhile yet until Andrew gets to sculpting layers in the voxel room, but imho it should take precedence over most things considering a lot of the program is very functional. Don't get me wrong I can understand the difficulty of adding sculpting layers to a dynamic tessellated environment, but it really is a must. Like I mentioned earlier, even a way to 'morph' back to your original would suffice for now.

Yeah, as Tony said, you're not stuck once you have your low poly model in the Paint Room. You have the TWEAK room to make some basic Transform edits (MOVE/SCALE/ROTATE)...including soft/gradient selections and some basic sculpting tools. But you could also take the (image-based sculpting) work you did in the Paint Room, and export it (with displacement applied to a highly subdivided version of the model). If you have your voxel model still in the voxel room, you could elect to clear/delete all the layers and merge the one that came from the Paint Room. If you had any textures on that model, 3D Coat will bake the color from image maps onto the vertices of the Voxel Model.

 

You may still have your Retopo mesh in the Retopo Room, so all subsequent changes could be baked to that mesh. Plus, there is a feature in 3D Coat that "Conforms Retopo Mesh" to the Voxel model when you use tools like MOVE, TRANSFORM, and POSE...to make large scale adjustments.

 

Granted, 3D Coat isn't really set up, currently, to efficiently to move back and forth between workspaces like this. I have asked Andrew about streamlining the process of sending assets back and forth with as little fuss as possible, but it's another one of those things that goes on the TO DO list and who knows when it will be visited.

 

I think we should consider some kind of a voting system here on the forums, for feature requests. Because there are SO many good and long-standing requests that get passed over in favor of new ones, which I've never even seen on here or on Mantis.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Here is the video covering the "Conform Retopo Mesh" feature. It was renamed since this video was recorded, to make it easier for a new user to determine what it does. This is a good way to go back and make necessary changes to both the Voxel object and Retopo mesh simultaneously.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

No use, as long as Andrew is mostly alone on this, making long goal like those is a fantasy.

As long as Andrew doesn't freeze the software, and take the time to make it user friendly by reviewing every tool and their use in a cohesive and practical manner, we will have up and downs in the use of the software, just like stusutcliffe is currently experiencing (and many more before him)...

Oh and I'm absolutely convinced that as long as he doesn't have an artist on board (as in working with pilgway as an employee or consultant) to guide him in the "how and what" we'll keep falling into pitfalls, andrew does wonder in the tech, but he's not using the tool as we all do collectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

i agree 100% with you beat.
but maybe thats exactly why an organized list of necessary tweaks made by artists using 3d coat on sevaral diferent workflows would be a valuable asset for andrew.
right now 3d coat has so much potential but it really lacks coherence and user friendliness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Problem is, even if we did such a thing, Andrew has a limited time to do the changes, he needs to fix TONS of more pressing bugs every week. We tried to adress quite a large amount of issues regarding usability (we were 4-3), we even have a private forum section which hasn't seen a single real message (meaning not me trying to get people to react with stupid emoji's) since august 2012, and not even a third of what was suggested has been adressed.

I'm not pointing fingers, I know Andrew has a lot on his plate. In fact too much to even consider a collaborative roadmap/pointers of what the users desire.

Just look at mantis, if Taros doesn't remove v 4.x bug reports (he recently opened 4.1 project) I'm sure you can find 2011 (maybe even earlier) bug reports here.

 

He needs help, not remote help, on site, direct help. Most of the time if you kick something to Andrew he either see the immediate need for action and things get moving quickly or he doesn't see the real benefit, and you can talk for a long time before he decide to do something, most of the time not exactly what you need in fact, because he doesn't see what make users tick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Problem is, even if we did such a thing, Andrew has a limited time to do the changes, he needs to fix TONS of more pressing bugs every week. We tried to adress quite a large amount of issues regarding usability (we were 4-3), we even have a private forum section which hasn't seen a single real message (meaning not me trying to get people to react with stupid emoji's) since august 2012, and not even a third of what was suggested has been adressed.

I'm not pointing fingers, I know Andrew has a lot on his plate. In fact too much to even consider a collaborative roadmap/pointers of what the users desire.

Just look at mantis, if Taros doesn't remove v 4.x bug reports (he recently opened 4.1 project) I'm sure you can find 2011 (maybe even earlier) bug reports here.

 

He needs help, not remote help, on site, direct help. Most of the time if you kick something to Andrew he either see the immediate need for action and things get moving quickly or he doesn't see the real benefit, and you can talk for a long time before he decide to do something, most of the time not exactly what you need in fact, because he doesn't see what make users tick.

I think it's because he tends to go for the low-hanging fruit, rather than tackle the more substantial changes that should be given higher priority. So, long-standing requests like REAL Sculpt layers in the Voxel room or addressing the slow-as-frozen-molasses sliders in the Paint Room...or a Shell/Thickness tool in the Retopo Room....tend to get tabled in favor of smaller and more recent, individual requests (that aren't even mentioned on the forums or Mantis). And Beat, even if Andrew had an "artist" on staff...their requests/suggestions would get buried in the avalanche of smaller, easier to do requests.

 

Sculpt layers are CRITICAL....utterly critical, to attract more and more good artists from the ZBrush and Mudbox communities. What's ironic is that 3D Coat had Sculpt layers before the Voxel Room was ever introduced. But it involves image-based layers in the Paint Room. There should have been an effort to carry this functionality over to the Voxel Room early on. Having to do without them in the Voxel Room is tantamount to having to paint/edit images in Photoshop, all on one layer. It's highly restrictive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I think it's because he tends to go for the low-hanging fruit, rather than tackle the more substantial changes that should be given higher priority. So, long-standing requests like REAL Sculpt layers in the Voxel room or addressing the slow-as-frozen-molasses sliders in the Paint Room...or a Shell/Thickness tool in the Retopo Room....tend to get tabled in favor of smaller and more recent, individual requests (that aren't even mentioned on the forums or Mantis). And Beat, even if Andrew had an "artist" on staff...their requests/suggestions would get buried in the avalanche of smaller, easier to do requests.

 

Sculpt layers are CRITICAL....utterly critical, to attract more and more good artists from the ZBrush and Mudbox communities. What's ironic is that 3D Coat had Sculpt layers before the Voxel Room was ever introduced. But it involves image-based layers in the Paint Room. There should have been an effort to carry this functionality over to the Voxel Room early on. Having to do without them in the Voxel Room is tantamount to having to paint/edit images in Photoshop, all on one layer. It's highly restrictive.

 

Ok, so I wasn't imagining things :/ I didn't say it because I don't want to be all negative and plain annoying, but that's what I've been thinking for a while now.

When you ask for a change, if Andrew adress it, most of the time he gets it wrong, or "half", because he doesn't want to make the right change which would take time but would benefit the entire app (if it was thoughtout as a whole vs single tool doing single things)...

Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Ok, so I wasn't imagining things :/ I didn't say it because I don't want to be all negative and plain annoying, but that's what I've been thinking for a while now.

When you ask for a change, if Andrew adress it, most of the time he gets it wrong, or "half", because he doesn't want to make the right change which would take time but would benefit the entire app (if it was thoughtout as a whole vs single tool doing single things)...

Sad.

I've taken the time to even screen record WHY a feature is sorely needed or how much it would benefit the average user...plus, how it is implemented in other applications (for reference)...all to make it easier for Andrew. This includes detailed Mantis listings for them, to make sure it's recorded systematically. Nothing. I've bumped the Mantis requests several times....nothing. But new icons for the Primitives Tool Options panel is URGENT. A SHELL/THICKNESS tool in the Retopo Room...that can wait a few more years, until we get tired of asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I know. Exactly the same here. Spent days to make detailed reports on usability and tweak/changes sometimes trivial (as in easy to make) but which could benefit greatly to the overall experience, and the same: nothing.

He needs someone else on board, to at least do what he doesn't want to do... Raul is kinda doing that, even if looking at recent Raul news, he seems to be attached to very minor and not urgent things...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I know. Exactly the same here. Spent days to make detailed reports on usability and tweak/changes sometimes trivial (as in easy to make) but which could benefit greatly to the overall experience, and the same: nothing.

He needs someone else on board, to at least do what he doesn't want to do... Raul is kinda doing that, even if looking at recent Raul news, he seems to be attached to very minor and not urgent things...

Yep. I like a bunch of your ideas...especially the consolidation of the tool-related options into the...well...TOOL OPTIONS...panel. Including the E-Panel being moved into a section of it. An artist on staff would do no more good as their input would get shelved as it is today. Their has to be a request priority system in place (based on usefulness, length of time the userbase has waited, and number of users who requested or supported the request) and relatively strict adherence to it...regardless of how easy it is to implement. But that will never happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Their has to be a request priority system in place (based on usefulness, length of time the userbase has waited, and number of users who requested or supported the request) and relatively strict adherence to it...regardless of how easy it is to implement. But that will never happen.

I hope we are proven wrong, but so far it's been very true, sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I've taken the time to even screen record WHY a feature is sorely needed or how much it would benefit the average user...plus, how it is implemented in other applications (for reference)...all to make it easier for Andrew. This includes detailed Mantis listings for them, to make sure it's recorded systematically. Nothing. I've bumped the Mantis requests several times....nothing. But new icons for the Primitives Tool Options panel is URGENT. A SHELL/THICKNESS tool in the Retopo Room...that can wait a few more years, until we get tired of asking.

One example of the "half" done thing. The new Quick Access menu:

 

-The icon mode were initialy pitched as multisize and even text only to accomodate all users wishes. We noticed it was huge, so the multi-size was needed (btw I saw some users complain about the menu appearing at mouse coordinate, I agree it's annoying, but because THIS MENU IS effin' huge, with multisize icon it would be no biggie...) . No Luck.

-The rectangular shape was fighting against the paint room circular mode (wich imo is better because it flow more naturaly, the user needing very little mouse displacement to access the tools (radius concept), we asked for unification. No luck.

-The customization component was pitched as "zbrush like", type first letter of the tool you want, and type the second one if there's an ambiguity (just like zbrush), instead Andrew went with his own section concept and sub-keys which don't make any sense (why NUMBERS  and ALPHABETICAL ORDER LETTERS ?! at this point you're quicker just assigning your own shortcuts to the tools themselves !) and the 0-9 custom top tools (which are probably too far away from the ctrl-alt-shift keys to be used extensively). No luck.

 

We discussed about all of this, times and times again, no way to make Andrew realize the whole key system he had created was pretty much stupid and only needed a few adjustments to work. No luck.

 

That's the user input in a nutshell: you either get a functional system after TONS of nagging request, or you get an half-there thing which no one uses because it's convoluted or doesn't make much sense.

This is also pretty much what 60% of requests are about: some user ask for something he thinks will be useful, in the spur of the moment, to only forget about it because he didn't get what he initialy asked for, and no one elses uses it, only adding to the codebase and creating code holes and resulting in bugs all around the software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

One example of the "half" done thing. The new Quick Access menu:

 

-The icon mode were initialy pitched as multisize and even text only to accomodate all users wishes. We noticed it was huge, so the multi-size was needed (btw I saw some users complain about the menu appearing at mouse coordinate, I agree it's annoying, but because THIS MENU IS effin' huge, with multisize icon it would be no biggie...) . No Luck.

-The rectangular shape was fighting against the paint room circular mode (wich imo is better because it flow more naturaly, the user needing very little mouse displacement to access the tools (radius concept), we asked for unification. No luck.

-The customization component was pitched as "zbrush like", type first letter of the tool you want, and type the second one if there's an ambiguity (just like zbrush), instead Andrew went with his own section concept and sub-keys which don't make any sense (why NUMBERS  and ALPHABETICAL ORDER LETTERS ?! at this point you're quicker just assigning your own shortcuts to the tools themselves !) and the 0-9 custom top tools (which are probably too far away from the ctrl-alt-shift keys to be used extensively). No luck.

 

We discussed about all of this, times and times again, no way to make Andrew realize the whole key system he had created was pretty much stupid and only needed a few adjustments to work. No luck.

 

That's the user input in a nutshell: you either get a functional system after TONS of nagging request, or you get an half-there thing which no one uses because it's convoluted or doesn't make much sense.

This is also pretty much what 60% of requests are about: some user ask for something he thinks will be useful, in the spur of the moment, to only forget about it because he didn't get what he initialy asked for, and no one elses uses it, only adding to the codebase and creating code holes and resulting in bugs all around the software.

This is why I suggested a long time ago, that Andrew take a systematic approach. Go room by room and announce a block of time for Beta testers to offer their input + feature requests, in effort to refine the tools and UI there. Andrew said that wouldn't work. I understand he has to work bugfixing in as well....but this whole pattern of jumping around from one feature here and another there, is doing more harm than good. Why? Cause by the time users can report bugs and offer input, Andrew's moved on to something else. But heck, what do I know. I've only been using this software for about 6+yrs

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Hug bro, hug :)

LOL. :D Seriously, though...I think it would help keep him from being pulled in 4 dozen different directions. When people keep emailing requests, he can send an auto-response to post their requests on Mantis + mention what Room he is working on during the current block of time. This way he can stay nice and focused on one area at a time...even if it takes 6months or more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from my pov

 

Andrew work over specif areas at time

Raul have a task designed

 

At this moment he is performing Paint Room improvements.

Every day he is reading a wall text of code.

 

May be... to suggest/push modifications, tweaks, features to Paint Room in this moment help him to focus in only one area. The area where he is working actually: PRoom

 

In dont know if -in middle of development daily brain storm- ask about another room 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Problem is, example again:

 

He added folder groups to layers, added that little arrow, nice, never occured to him to do the same for voxtree... You can say things about one room, it may be changed, but the whole picture stay the same: one tool, one use, no cohesiveness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Carlosan changed the title to 3DCoat Wishlist
  • Carlosan pinned this topic
  • Carlosan unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...