Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Feature requests


Recommended Posts

"SuperSmoother" for Sphere Tool

All of the improvements to the "Sphere" tool are very useful and predictable. The same is true for the double-sided "2D Paint" tool. I think many people will begin the "roughing" process using one or both of these tools. I can think of 2 important improvements for the "Sphere" tool that will make it even more useful and popular:

As a separate tool or enabled with the "Shift" key, provide a very fast, (very strong, uniform action), "Smoother" that would act like the "Fill" tool, (only much stronger/faster) for filling in the "join" area between connected spheres. I kind of "fillet" tool. It would be especially functional for mouse users who "stack" spheres of increasing or decreasing size to make the rough version of what the imagined shape will be. Using spheres to make organic shapes is a natural choice, the only problem being the filling in of gaps or joins.

In addition, when making something like a torso, from a front or side view, having the ability to "center" each successive sphere directly above, below, or to the side of the existing sphere, (parallel to the view plane), would eliminate the need for starting the center part of a character with "Symmetry" turned on, (which often is hard to use because of the doubling action that happens when a sphere is created slightly off center to the line of symmetry). If a modifier key were held down while clicking to place each successive sphere, thus centering it, or placing it centered at 90 degree rotation intervals, would help make quick work of that frequently used method of torso construction, both for erect characters or quadruped postured

characters.

Even providing a "snap to center" setting for the "symmetry" function would not be as practical as this method would be.

Thanks, Andrew, for ever improving 3D-Coat

Psmith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sphere Tool "Sphere Extrusion":

Actually the current range of sphere extrusion is too large.

Here is a little drawing to try to explain.

post-783-1223985357_thumb.jpg

The first drawing show the actual extrusion range.

You can draw far above the surface and far under the surface, I can't think of any situation where you could need this.

The second drawing represent the efficient range. The first circle is at 0 and the second is at 100%.

If you go further than the middle of the sphere you got an area who is not necessary, represented by the green cross hatch in the third drawing.

An other feature who could be nice to add chunk of clay on a surface would be to be able to squash the sphere.

Having to possiblity to extrude the sphere from a surface from its normal would be nice to.

I think that taking the normal who is directly under the cursor and an average of the normal covered by the brush radius is necessary because if you are sculpting on a rough shape getting only the normal under the center of the cursor could lead to unpredictable result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Very very minor bug here with 3-00 Alpha28

I bind my G hotkey to toggle 3D Grid. but with the volumetric sculpting activated it won't allow me to use it. giving an error window saying 'The operation is not undoable. To continue? yes/no'

Try it and see. in main app bind G key to View > Show 3D - grid. Then activate Volumetric sculpting and try to toggle the grid with the G key.

very minor as I said, but G is a key I universally use to toggle grid across all the apps I use.

p.s. just realised this is in the wrong thread, was meant for bugzz. sorry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Would it be possible to change the behaviour of the 'clear' button so that it *doesn't* switch to the merge tool automatically - rather, it just returns to the previously selected tool. I find myself sculpting from 'thin air' quite often now, and I don't need it to switch to the merge tool automatically while I'm doodling with sphere and using clear to start over if it goes badly :)

I've always found it quite confusing / disorientating that it jumps to the merge tool and to me it doesn't seem like you'd want this behaviour 100% of the time any more - with many of the tools able to begin sculpting from "thin air", it's possibly more confusing to guide a new user into thinking they 'have to' use merge, rather than forcing them to go and find a tool they want from the broad range of alternative starting options

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Translation Widgets (or Widgetless) Transformation of "Objects"

When sculpting with voxels, when does geometry become an "object"?

It would be quite useful to select a "grouping" of geometry, define it as an "object", and then translate it, either with a widget, or without one, (this is my preference). Blender has a very nice "gestural" translation system that saves a lot of time, once you get used to it. The Blender developers only added translation widgets when they received enough requests from users to justify adding them. I suppose if 3D-Coat will support visual translation of geometry, widgets will be required. I just ask that there always will remain the option to "turn them off".

Widgetless translation could default to moving the "object" in the plane of the screen.

Psmith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Movable Symmetry Plane

I know this is a difficult request to implement. In order to properly align a symmetry plane, arbitrarily, the user must possess the means of finding an "object's" center - and on all axes, simultaneously. No easy task.

It might be easier to have a control that automatically moves any defined "object" to the exact center of "world" space, thus aligning it with the existing "default" symmetry plane. It brings into play the idea of "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

When we begin sculpting "out of thin air" it is difficult to do so at the exact center of the universe. Yet, on the other hand, if you don't have a way to begin sculpting symmetrically, any attempt to center your "object" along the plane of symmetry, after the fact, will result in an object that is not exactly centered.

Everyone has probably experienced trying to begin sculpting with the default symmetry plane activated, and seen the "doubling" effect that takes place when moving to either side of the plane, not placing things exactly on center. Perhaps a center "snapping" system would solve this problem, and a person could simply always begin sculpting at the "world" center.

Psmith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Movable Symmetry Plane

I know this is a difficult request to implement. In order to properly align a symmetry plane, arbitrarily, the user must possess the means of finding an "object's" center - and on all axes, simultaneously. No easy task.

It might be easier to have a control that automatically moves any defined "object" to the exact center of "world" space, thus aligning it with the existing "default" symmetry plane. It brings into play the idea of "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

When we begin sculpting "out of thin air" it is difficult to do so at the exact center of the universe. Yet, on the other hand, if you don't have a way to begin sculpting symmetrically, any attempt to center your "object" along the plane of symmetry, after the fact, will result in an object that is not exactly centered.

Everyone has probably experienced trying to begin sculpting with the default symmetry plane activated, and seen the "doubling" effect that takes place when moving to either side of the plane, not placing things exactly on center. Perhaps a center "snapping" system would solve this problem, and a person could simply always begin sculpting at the "world" center.

Psmith

Hi, I'm not saying this completely solves your problem, and I may have misunderstood your request - but did you know that holding the TAB key allows you to slide the symmetry plane?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David:

No, I really missed that one. Thanks for enlightening me. I'll have to experiment some, but I doubt that this will solve the "doubling" problem when starting to model with symmetry activated, regardless of where, in space, the symmetry plane is set.

So, in light of this discovery, I suppose I ought to rephrase my request to something like:

"Symmetry Center Snapping", and then reference exactly what I mean, pointing to my previous post. And, to expand on this request a little, providing snapping rotation points at 45 or 90 degrees from "vertical" would be really a nice addition, as well. This option could be enabled with modifier key(s).

Psmith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Object" Creation and Transformation

I just wanted to add a little more explanation for why we might need this functionality:

Currently, to make an assemblage of items into a larger "whole", one must "merge" objects, one by one. After being merged, the translation widget becomes available until you translate that object into voxels. At this point, the merged object is "frozen" into the scene.

Now, if you are talking about being able to translate new and original voxel parts or objects, the process becomes quite cumbersome, requiring the user to, first, convert to "polygones", (which should be spelled "polygons"), export the converted polygonal mesh as it is, or retopologize it and then export it - then re-enter "voxel" mode, and, finally, go through the "merge" routine as one would with a non-native mesh. A fair amount of work.

I make wooden clocks for a living, and use 3D for both "roughing out" a clock concept, and then using this model as a template to produce an accurate CAD drawing for the CNC cutting of the wooden gears and frame parts. You might realize how valuable a tool like 3D-Coat would be for "mocking up" a close representation of what a client might be getting, both from the standpoint of overall form and final sculpting and texturing of the wooden parts for a realistic presentation to clients. (I am waiting with baited breath for the ability to paint directly on the voxel form, since I don't need to export the sculpture anywhere else).

So, for the case of assembling actual clock "parts", the ability to efficiently move them around relative to one another becomes, for me, a necessity. I can see 3D-Coat advancing to the stage where it will be accurate enough to produce models which are suitable for reproduction on an inexpensive "Rapid Prototyping 3D Printer". Of course, this is some distance away from the present, but Andrew has demonstrated that he has the abilities to "make real" almost any concept, so maybe not that distant.

So you can see more clearly why this would be important to someone like me, here is a picture of one of my wooden clocks:

post-962-1224166719_thumb.jpg

Psmith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I dont think anyone would argue the need for basic scene management and multiple voxel/polygon sculpts in the same scene. :D

At the moment i agree its really cumbersome to use the merge and subtracting possibilities that are so unique to voxel sculpting. In fact you have to do two conversions that both degrade the original sculpt to make it happen; voxels>polygons>export>import>polygons>voxels.

The technology used for digital sculpting in zbrush and mudbox discourages to assemble a sculpture in parts. Even in Zbrush where there is a tool to "blend" seperate parts together you still have to be careful what you do not to brake the illusion of the model being one. In real life (and when looked at from a pure logic viewpoint) it makes a lot of sense to assemble your model in parts. Even a face can be looked at as a bunch of simple primitives. 3dcoat's voxel sculpting will really shine in the possibilities it brings here. In fact i would go so far as to say it will really change the workflow for digital sculpting merely by having the possibility to truly merge and subtract. Personally im really looking forward to having this implemented (smoothly). Ill be patient though. First perfect hiding function. Then maybe masking? Then maybe scene management? (oh yeah; i wanted better brushes too) ^_^ Im certain well get it Psmith. Its much to necessary and awesome not to be implemented.

3dioot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Save File at time of Crash (and Unexpected Crash Recovery File load option upon next startup)

Was working for about 1 and 1/2 hours on a volume sculpt and suddenly a large section of triangles

became invisible, I went to undo, and got a crash without a crash log file. Understandably, I should have

been working with autosave on (I will from now on), but I've had so few crashes with 3dC that I hadn't

enabled it (and I didn't want to fill up my harddrive with large files too quickly--laptops just don't seem

to have enough space ;) ).

With XSI there is *usually* the ability to save the working file when a crash occurs, and if I recall correctly,

it will also autosave the file and prompt the user the next time XSI is opened to load the auto-saved

recovery file.

Could something like this be added to 3dCoat?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Save File at time of Crash (and Unexpected Crash Recovery File load option upon next startup)

Was working for about 1 and 1/2 hours on a volume sculpt and suddenly a large section of triangles

became invisible, I went to undo, and got a crash without a crash log file. Understandably, I should have

been working with autosave on (I will from now on), but I've had so few crashes with 3dC that I hadn't

enabled it (and I didn't want to fill up my harddrive with large files too quickly--laptops just don't seem

to have enough space ;) ).

With XSI there is *usually* the ability to save the working file when a crash occurs, and if I recall correctly,

it will also autosave the file and prompt the user the next time XSI is opened to load the auto-saved

recovery file.

Could something like this be added to 3dCoat?

Thanks.

Are you using V30? There is so possibility. Before V30 3DC was not able to save work after crash, but V30 should do this work.

About autosave - vox sculpt 3B files take 4-5 bytes per polygon, they are not big, saving is almost instant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Indeed, Andrew, I was using a freshly installed Alpha-v.30.

I looked around for a savefile or a directory in either the UserData or main folders but couldn't

see if there was a backup file. Also, all of my undo files got erased (I'm guessing this is by design

after each shutdown of 3dC because I looked in there before 'ok-ing' out of the error dialog and it

was 746mb worth of undos). I also looked at the crash logs to see if it had been logged, but came

up with no notation of the crash. Upon re-start, no prompting to load crashed file (but I wasn't expecting

it based on previous use with the alpha versions). <shrugs>

Good to know you've added some implementation of crash recovery though ... perhaps I managed to crash

it too hard somehow. :blink::)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

A post from Arkanis answered here - as I found that most of my answer is a feature request :). Some of my wishes from earlier posts appear here too with some more in detail explanations...

I have a question for the users of 3D Coat around :

What is your usual workflow ?

1) Sculpt, then detail, then paint (color, etc.)

2) Sculpt and paint at the same time

3) Neither of those (please explain)

I just want to add some workflow proposals which could prove very valuable for Industrial-Design or Architectural work. Here, in contrast to character modeling in most cases super detailed surface features aren't required.

Also it is not important to create a Retopo mesh with an accent on behaviour in animations. But it would be very interesting to be able to quickly add some randomization on an existing texture which has been added in the

Source package already (with simple texure projections). Further on voxel techniques could be very valuable because playfully checking out different geometry detail solutions is typically impossible in

production geared 3D-programs.

Retopo for light weight rendering and proper animation isn't required. However Retopo could be useful for other purposes: Nurbs - conversion from quad meshes. While this traditionally was no serious option, meanwhile Tsplines

do a good job on this. Modelers with a technical background mostly aren't interested to create high frequency detail with tiny crincles on meshes with millions and millions of polygons.

However they also work with such HiRes (Tri) meshes which are typically created by 3D-scanners. Traditionally the workflow here was to 3D-scan an existing precision object (say a spare part of a vintage-car) and to

accurately reverse-engineer the input-mesh with an engineering package. The output is directly producable but does not allow for drastic form changes - no problem in this case. But what if the powerful means of 3D scanning

is used in a different way? When the designer defines the rough shape, 3D scans it and wants to work over this 3D-template?

Then it is a pain have a restricting Nurbs model on screen. It would be much more powerful to go on sculpting with digital clay and to convert to Nurbs at given time. This could happen in 3rd party programs with Tsplines

or with typical Reverse-Engineering tools. If procedural brushes were added to 3DC which could e.g. relatively precisely mimic precision features in clay (say a 5mm fillet) even those features could get retrieved by those

programs which can also recognize those at the to be reproduced part of a vinatage car.

Desired workflow 01:

Import medium density Mesh from Nurbs-Modeller (Mix of Quad and Tri-mesh)

Texture with typical projection types (Box, Cylinder etc...) randomize with

additional paintstrokes - work without caring about UV's at all, send back to Nurbs

package to Render (single frames).

Desired workflow 02:

Export voxel data as HiRes mesh, open in Nurbs precision modeller, create Trim curves

projected curves and Points on Top of mesh. Send points and curves back to 3DCoat in

a popular format, appy these on voxel model (For trimming, input for curve-tool, input for

Voxel surface creation á la Archipelis. Points could be used to array/align geometry-elements

precisely.) I believe that such a workflow made far more sense than adding a lot of CAD-style

curve tools to 3DCoat. It should also be possible to import a HiRes mesh natively created

in a CAD-package including curves and points. The most powerful combination would of course

be file-linking. Features in a Nurbs package were updated and got refreshed by reloading the

relevant bits to 3DC.

Desired workflow 03:

Import of HiRes Scanmesh or Pointcloud-data:

Conversion to clay, Symmetrizing, Detailing, Painting, Retopo.

Export to Nurbs package, Conversion to Nurbs via Tsplines

Apply Texture maps on Low Res Mesh or Tsplines Model for Rendering,

Prototyping with Tsplines/Nurbs-model.

Holger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Was you asked to save your work after crash?

I don't believe I was prompted to save, and the error message was different than

messages I'd gotten in the past (sorry, should have taken a screenshot). I was a

little irritated at loosing what I'd done so I was madly searching to save it out and

sadly not thinking about screenshots. :(

Anyhow, if I can duplicate it I'll do better at giving you more to go on...but again,

glad to hear you've worked up some means to recover crashed files (other than

periodic auto-saves).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seperate volume objects in one scene

I don't know if this was already written here.

I wish to have the possibility to sculpt on more then one object in the szene. In this case I could sculpt a figure that have a body and seperate armor, clothes or objects. The advantage is, that those object would not flow in other (like metaballs). Hope you know what I mean. Another example is to create a mouth and the teeth are separate own objects.

To control the objects they should lie on layers or something similar.

Be creative

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew, do you think it's a good idea to have coloured voxels brushes? Maybe it's possible to create a colour map while sculpting.

*sigh* I typed a long whole paragraph, then my comp. crashed before I could post it. Anyway, I was saying there's been a big discussion on this not too long ago. In a nutshell the problem is that the geometry gets rewritten with every brush stroke so any color painting you do would constantly be destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

What I would like to see is a volumetric flatten brush,and a claytube brush(like Zbrush).

Claytube imho is the best brush zbrush has,it allow giving feeling and personality on the sculpting,3dcoat volumetric sculpting is becoming really good,imho needs some artistic brush(like claytube)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Scrape does a pretty good job of this. I've also figured out that if you click the right spot with 2D paint (while holding Ctrl) it can do a pretty good job of scraping off the bumps and leaving the valleys. it's takes a little trial and error to get the selection point and brush size right, but once you've got it it does a good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...