Jump to content
3DCoat Forums
AbnRanger

Trello Vote: Bercon (Procedural) Maps

Recommended Posts

Please add your vote for the addition of Bercon Procedural maps to be added throughout 3D Coat (while Andrew is working on a PBR material system...it could/would be an invaluable component of it)...

1) Fill tool (Noise Patterns)

2) Noise tool in Sculpt Room

3) General Clay (Noise Patterns

4) PBR's Material system, under procedural maps

http://3d-coat.com/mantis/view.php?id=1649

 

 

https://trello.com/c/BgbsyDSK/294-please-add-open-source-bercon-maps

 

BeconMaps_Main.jpg

 

http://www.ylilammi.com/2013/09/berconmaps/

 

Using Bercon maps in the Noise Generator (Sculpt Room) could make procedural rock/stone/tile creation in 3D Coat an absolute breeze

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...maybe it would also be helpful to e-mail Andrew (support@3d-coat.com) asking for him to add these Noise/Procedural maps as part of his PBR work. Why? I doubt he is looking at either Mantis or Trello during this process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Don!

I'm sorry, but I don't get you. You were against integration of Houdini Engine into 3D Coat in this thread: http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=16522&hl=%2Bhoudini+%2Bengine, and yet you want a 3DS Max procedural mapping (noise generator?) plug-in to be implemented into 3D Coat?

 

If Houdini Engine was integrated into 3D Coat, in those 4 minutes which this guy from the video has spent on making a single rock, you could have generated n-number of different looking rocks using a Houdini Digital Asset. Be it 10 or 10 million of random rocks. And with Houdini Engine you can make it possible. What's even better, is that you could change their appearance with but a simple slider. Or maybe you want vertex colours of those rocks a little bit darker at the bottom? No problem, just adjust the slider or ramp. Is Bercon capable of doing it?

 

Houdini Engine is not only about animation or dynamics. It's also about procedural modelling. And this would benefit 3D-Coat a lot.

 

The only thing I can think of that speaks for your request, is that in order to create HDAs (for commercial use) you either need to own a Houdini license, or rely on 3rd party assets (free or paid) from sites like Orbolt. But considering how cheap Houdini Indie license is for freelancers and tiny studios that make below $100,000 of annual income, I fail to see what Bercon would have to offer that would surpass the capabilities of HE. It is simply not as flexible as HE is.

 

Don, what I think, is that you want a plug-in, that you are familiar with, to be implemented into 3D-Coat, and at the same time you negate newer solutions that offer much greater procedural freedom, only because it's in your unknown zone. You should really give Houdini a try to see what it is capable of and how HE could improve 3D-Coat if implemented correctly.

 

I've been learning Houdini for about a month now, and while I'm still in, what I think is, a crawling stage, I can already tell that this is one of the most powerful and flexible programs I've ever had a contact with. And now, when SideFX released their Houdini Engine that can utilise Houdini's power and it makes that power available to other software, I think integration of it with 3D Coat should AT LEAST be considered.

 

I believe it's only a matter of time that Pixologic will discover and accept Houdini Engine as yet another way of creating digital (procedural!) content. And I wouldn't like to see ZBrush getting an upper hand over 3D-Coat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Don!

I'm sorry, but I don't get you. You were against integration of Houdini Engine into 3D Coat in this thread: http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=16522&hl=%2Bhoudini+%2Bengine, and yet you want a 3DS Max procedural mapping (noise generator?) plug-in to be implemented into 3D Coat?

 

If Houdini Engine was integrated into 3D Coat, in those 4 minutes which this guy from the video has spent on making a single rock, you could have generated n-number of different looking rocks using a Houdini Digital Asset. Be it 10 or 10 million of random rocks. And with Houdini Engine you can make it possible. What's even better, is that you could change their appearance with but a simple slider. Or maybe you want vertex colours of those rocks a little bit darker at the bottom? No problem, just adjust the slider or ramp. Is Bercon capable of doing it?

 

Houdini Engine is not only about animation or dynamics. It's also about procedural modelling. And this would benefit 3D-Coat a lot.

 

The only thing I can think of that speaks for your request, is that in order to create HDAs (for commercial use) you either need to own a Houdini license, or rely on 3rd party assets (free or paid) from sites like Orbolt. But considering how cheap Houdini Indie license is for freelancers and tiny studios that make below $100,000 of annual income, I fail to see what Bercon would have to offer that would surpass the capabilities of HE. It is simply not as flexible as HE is.

 

Don, what I think, is that you want a plug-in, that you are familiar with, to be implemented into 3D-Coat, and at the same time you negate newer solutions that offer much greater procedural freedom, only because it's in your unknown zone. You should really give Houdini a try to see what it is capable of and how HE could improve 3D-Coat if implemented correctly.

 

I've been learning Houdini for about a month now, and while I'm still in, what I think is, a crawling stage, I can already tell that this is one of the most powerful and flexible programs I've ever had a contact with. And now, when SideFX released their Houdini Engine that can utilise Houdini's power and it makes that power available to other software, I think integration of it with 3D Coat should AT LEAST be considered.

 

I believe it's only a matter of time that Pixologic will discover and accept Houdini Engine as yet another way of creating digital (procedural!) content. And I wouldn't like to see ZBrush getting an upper hand over 3D-Coat.

Apples and Oranges comparison. Chalk and Cheddar. Just because the word "Procedural" is used, it doesn't put maps in the same conversation with Houdini ENGINE. No comparison between the two, whatsoever.There are already procedural maps/noise types in 3D Coat. This would just make the selection more extensive.

 

What's more is, HE would still cost the user $$$...even for the Indie version. Adding a free Open Source map library to what 3D Coat already has...does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are taking this too personal. I have Houdini Apprentice installed on my PC, and like what the Indie version offers. In fact I can't wait to see how HE will impact 3ds Max. Might make a great alternative to paying $900 for either PhoenixFD or FumeFX. But for 3D Coat, maybe you can enlighten us on what exactly HE would be able to do. It's purpose seems to be further down the pipeline from where 3D Coat fits. But it's just my view. I don't call the shots or have any say in the development decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, because you disagree with my view about Houdini Engine, you won't vote for a more extensive selection of procedural noises? Why? It's just a library of maps. Nobody has to learn an entire app (like Houdini), to use a few dozen extra maps...and it certainly wouldn't take the amount of development time and effort to add them. HE would appeal to a very, very, very small percentage of the userbase, whereas adding some more procedural maps to the current selection would benefit every single user.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another point about HE. I don't think it's very clear, yet what exactly one can do with it inside their own 3D app (except Maya, maybe). They are supposedly working on the 3ds Max version, and I have no idea how it will be implemented and what the extent of it's capabilities will be, inside Max. It looks like little more than just another Applink. You build the asset(s) in Houdini and send it to the app for further details/texture painting. Since there is already a Houdini applink for 3D Coat, why would a Houdini user not be able to take advantage of the procedural power in Houdini and use the Applink to import it into 3D Coat? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a procedural noise generator is very needed.

 

not as plugin but as internal 3DC filter development

 

the deal is to make it usable at paint room without destroy the baked NM

Apply over nm, color, specular, glow, cavity,... any maps

and best deal... to use procedural maps as paint alphas -eXbrushes-

... yes, paint with procedural maps- respecting layer masks (first we need finished the development of layers mask directly on the layer itself)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. No thanks to a plugin. Andrew already has something in the works anyway for something similar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. No thanks to a plugin. Andrew already has something in the works anyway for something similar.

It's a plugin for 3ds Max, that just places those maps in the materials library. So, nobody is talking about a plugin, here. Just adding the library of maps to what 3D Coat currently offers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if they are maps, why not just save them out and import them yourself? It's pretty easy to do.

 

The whole point of procedurals is that they are not images, but can be changed with a simple parameter or more, and be completely different, and generated by computation. What you're now saying doesn't jive with what a procedural is.

 

 

 

EDIT: Anyway, I like what Andrew has in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if they are maps, why not just save them out and import them yourself? It's pretty easy to do.

 

The whole point of procedurals is that they are not images, but can be changed with a simple parameter or more, and be completely different, and generated by computation. What you're now saying doesn't jive with what a procedural is.

 

 

 

EDIT: Anyway, I like what Andrew has in mind.

Procedural maps are not simple image maps. I already talked to Andrew about this multiple times, and the last time he said to send him the link. So, maybe it's part of what he has planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see in the video in the 1st post (1:57 mark), the Map browser in 3ds Max has numerous types of maps. Not all maps are simple bitmaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Dons basic idea to get better procedural texture support in 3D-Coat. You have my vote Don.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Dons basic idea to get better procedural texture support in 3D-Coat. You have my vote Don.

:)

 

Absolutely. Procedurals in 3DC are a must, and from what Andrew mentioned to me a while back, is that it's in the cards. That said, any kind of plugin is not going to get any vote from me. Built in = Yes. Plugin = No.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. Procedurals in 3DC are a must, and from what Andrew mentioned to me a while back, is that it's in the cards. That said, any kind of plugin is not going to get any vote from me. Built in = Yes. Plugin = No.

Once more.....it is NOT a plugin for 3D Coat. It was just implemented that way for 3ds Max. The developer made the whole thing OpenSource, providing the source code and libraries. Andrew can implement it however he chooses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about to use procedural maps to make alphas -eXbrushes- ?

 

was talked too ?

 

ty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about to use procedural maps to make alphas -eXbrushes- ?

 

was talked too ?

 

ty

That would be something like the Noise types used in the "General-Clay" brush. Would be some spicy awesome sauce if that could be done throughout 3D Coat. :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the best implementation of procedural materials goes to Cheetah3D, hands down.  It's been in there for years and looks amazing on its own renderer.  Granted, that's not the same thing as post-projection painting/stamping in procedurals...so it's not quite the same thing.

Edited by alvordr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i suggested to build a texture and stencil generator in a fashion of the almost unknown texture generator app. the awesome thing about that app is that what ever u create is tileable. in my oppinion a very powerful app, which unfortunately is a little outdated. i always use it to make my stencils. u can even export the normal map from it. Bercon maps... hm why not... but i would prefer that texture stencil generator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×