Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

V4.5 BETA (experimental)


Recommended Posts

  • Reputable Contributor

It ain't perfect (will require some cleanup work), and it took quite a bit of trial and error, but I finally was able to get a decent result on a head mesh. I know 3D Coat doesn't like many guides, but fewer wasn't helping much. I also cranked up the "Capture Detail" amount to .7

 

 

143608388332.jpg143608485064.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

It also seems to deliver MUCH better results by NOT using the DECIMATE option. But man, is it slow when you don't. We're talking about going to the grocery store and run some errands while it calculates, slow. Wish CUDA (6.5) could be utilized for the calculations and used on the Pose tool, if possible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks really nice. We have compared the routines with zRemesher and it seems to be normal today to wait for good results. I am not waiting longer than 2 minutes with my settings and am pleased with the results for now. Even if it would need 10 minutes, it's faster than retopo a complex model by hand.

What are your times Don? Can you post your settings please? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

We have compared the routines with zRemesher and it seems to be normal today to wait for good results. I am not waiting longer than 2 minutes with my settings and am pleased with the results for now. Even if it would need 10 minutes, it's faster than retopo a complex model by hand.

What are your times Don? Can you post your settings please? :)

You can see the settings, here. If I check DECIMATE it is fast (1-2minutes), but the result is very unsatisfactory. But after unchecking that, it took over an hour to calculate, but the result was well within the acceptable/decent range, as you can see. Still plenty of cleanup, but I was surprised. In fact, I was pretty much ready to give up on head meshes and never even bother to attempt them again. But, at least I know it's workable now...just takes some Jedi Mind tricks and a bit of work to get there.

 

Overall, on complex models, like character/creature heads/faces....I'd much rather use the Strokes tool to sketch all the topology > ENTER and be done with it. Much faster than having to make guides anyway and have to jump through so many hoops to get a decent, but not great, result. On secondary objects, I think it is certainly worth using. Just not there yet with more complex objects. It still really struggles in the outer eye region and creates extra geometry that isn't even necessary. You can see what I mean from the chin area, on the example above

143609218622.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the feedback. Now I know what you mean. I had the same experience with the calculation times. I thought 3Dcoat crashed and never waited all the time. Instead I searched for a better/faster setting. You seem to have more patience. :)

 

I agree with you. The Auropo routine is currently nice for all static objects or secondary assets that are not in focus.
My experience is that zRemesher is still a bit better when remeshing characters. The polyflow is better there but not perfect too. Serious artists still retopo their models by hand too.

But we are at a very good point in 3dcoat. Let us wait. Maybe Andrew has some ideas to improve it more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Taros

 

Can i ask a little question ?

 

talking about zremesher routines
- Adaptive size defines a vertex ratio based on the curvature of the mesh.
- To maintain the original mesh shape, ZR may need to increase the topology density in cer­tain areas or produce triangles rather than quad polygons.

 
Zremesher really produce triangles in certain areas ?

 

if yes:

Could 3DC autotopo routines do the same -create triangles- to maintain the original mesh shape ?

 

ty in advance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Taros

 

Can i ask a little question ?

 

talking about zremesher routines

- Adaptive size defines a vertex ratio based on the curvature of the mesh.

- To maintain the original mesh shape, ZR may need to increase the topology density in cer­tain areas or produce triangles rather than quad polygons.

 

Zremesher really produce triangles in certain areas ?

 

if yes:

Could 3DC autotopo routines do the same -create triangles- to maintain the original mesh shape ?

 

ty in advance

I guess it is depending on the high poly template. We have not found any tris in our zR meshes until now.

What I observe is a better overall polyflow. There are some situations, especially in hands where 3D Coat does a much better job. But in faces or elements like ears zRemesher is really good from scratch. I mean without any helper guides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmmm...

 

let me ask one more

 

overall polyflow... how crease angle option affect it ?

 

Its possible to analyze the curvature -vertex ratio- of the model, before to perform the routine to generate the edgeflow ?

 

ty very much for your time, very appreciated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmmm...

 

let me ask one more

 

overall polyflow... how crease angle option affect it ?

 

Its possible to analyze the curvature -vertex ratio- of the model, before to perform the routine to generate the edgeflow ?

 

ty very much for your time, very appreciated

No there is no way to analyse it before for the artist. You can set density and guides but zBrush decide itself where more or less polys are generated. But it does it good. 3D Coat does a bit better job sometimes in this field. But as I said: The flow in 3D Coat is not always good for animation. Especially in low poly models.

 

In my eyes both tools are good for secondary models like furniture and or staues. Everything you don't need to animate.

 

We haven't made hardcore tests in zBrush because you don't need them in zRemesher in my opinion. I can ask my friend who is doing the tests for me for making some more. But the zRemesher models were always good.

 

I am preparing a big 3D Coat only autopo test. My new results are very good and I don't need zRemesher anymore... Its in progress and I will publish it in my blog soon.

There are some few rules in 3D Coat. If you know them, you will get very nice and satisfactory results in a good time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

In the meantime I've made more tests and I think I have very good settings for the current version. Try this, it works well for low poly models too:

Capture details: 50% (The higher your Poly count, the higher details can be. But try it careful and start always at 50%)

Auto density influence modifier: 1

Voxelize Before Quadrangulation: on

Voxelized object poly count: Start at 50% of your high resolution model in rounded thousands. My max value was 3.000 when the mesh began to get worse. My mesh has 5.8 million polys and a value of 2.000 was the best one.

 

Decimate if above: on

Decimate model value: 100

 

Smooth resulting mesh: off

 

No density set needed. No guides needed.

I got really impressive results with this settings.

 

 

 

 

 

Exact same settings only with 10,000 polys.

 

eiuBM8y.jpg

This took about an hour to run through.

 

I'm going to have to try this with Voxelize before Quadrangulation 

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I believe that the best method for retopology would be a combination of manual and automatic retopology. It could be called "semi-automatic retopo".

For example, we could create some poly rings and/or poly stars to dictate exact desired edgeflow, and then we could use Raul's new Fill Holes algorithm (in the Retopo Room) to fill in the rest of the polygons automatically.

Essentially Raul's Fill Holes algorithm could be improved to act like a very advanced Bridge Tool, and it would figure out how to make all the necessary connections between the poly rings that we have already established manually on the surface.

I think the problem with the current automatic retopology function is that there is a lack of exact control where edges and polygons will end up. If we could first be allowed to create a simple "frame" on the mesh (for the important polygons), then it would be nice to let 3D-Coat fill in the rest of the "inbetween" polygons for us automatically.

The new Semi-Automatic Retopo algorithm would therefore be a combination of the Fill Holes Retopo Tool and the existing Autopo Tool. It would require a manual setup of a polygon enclosing frame and then we could run the algorithm to fill in the rest for us.

Imagine drawing a ring of polygons around the joining area between an arm and a torso, another ring around the waist, a final ring around the neck, then run the Semiautopo routine by clicking on the torso area, and the algorithm would fill in the entire torso area for you by bridging everything between your three established poly rings, keeping their exact placement and number of polygons intact.

After all, the hardest part of retopology is figuring out how to correctly connect patches of polygons on a surface (by reducing/increasing the number of edges from one patch to another, or altering the flow direction between patches with stars). If those complicated connections could be automated for us then that would save a lot of our time and effort.

I believe having manual, semi-automatic control would be better than changing settings in a fully automatic retopo wizard and running it over and over again, hoping you will eventually get a decent result.

Doesn't anyone else want a fast semi-automatic retopology tool/workflow option like that in 3D-Coat? I think the existing Fill Holes Tool and existing Autopo could be altered/tweaked a bit to make it a reality.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Andrew worked on auto retopo but it still needs more time put into the new routine... A few days work or a week's worth is not enough.Of course I have no real information on the time spent accept from the twitter postings and know that you need some days to flesh it out.

 

I commend Andrew for advancing the routine as he said he would after 4.5 was released. This part of 3DC is a very important feature and helps new users to get acceptable results. Also it would speed up static object rendering... Spending enough development time on it is very important and is a great selling point of the software. 

 

Painting density seems to have no effect or still is buggy... 

 

I am impressed with the results at times but still it crashes sometimes, density painting is buggy and sometimes the routine still will produce strange results depending upon the model... 

 

I hope Andrew will not put the new auto retopo routine on the backburner as the former auto retopo routine languished for a very long time, way to long in my opinion...

Edited by digman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Andrew worked on auto retopo but it still needs more time put into the new routine... A few days work or a week's worth is not enough.Of course I have no real information on the time spent accept from the twitter postings and know that you need some days to flesh it out.

 

I commend Andrew for advancing the routine as he said he would after 4.5 was released. This part of 3DC is a very important feature and helps new users to get acceptable results. Also it would speed up static object rendering... Spending enough development time on it is very important and is a great selling point of the software. 

 

Painting density seems to have no effect or still is buggy... 

 

I am impressed with the results at times but still it crashes sometimes, density painting is buggy and sometimes the routine still will produce strange results depending upon the model... 

 

I hope Andrew will not put the new auto retopo routine on the backburner as the former auto retopo routine languished for a very long time, way to long in my opinion...

I think simply using CUDA (or OpenCL...so anybody can reap the benefits) to do the calculations could help a LOT. There seemed to be a world of difference by turning OFF Decimate and Voxelize. It takes forever, but somehow it goes from problematic to pretty decent...that is, on a complex object like a head of a character/creature

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

Painting density seems to have no effect or still is buggy... 

 

I am impressed with the results at times but still it crashes sometimes, density painting is buggy and sometimes the routine still will produce strange results depending upon the model... 

...

Interesting. I've never had this problems. Density works fine with my settings. Are you able to show the model?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exact same settings only with 10,000 polys.

eiuBM8y.jpg

This took about an hour to run through.

I'm going to have to try this with Voxelize before Quadrangulation

Test the 5 star settings in my recent test I've published on my blog. The result should actually be much better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that the best method for retopology would be a combination of manual and automatic retopology. It could be called "semi-automatic retopo".

For example, we could create some poly rings and/or poly stars to dictate exact desired edgeflow, and then we could use Raul's new Fill Holes algorithm (in the Retopo Room) to fill in the rest of the polygons automatically.

Essentially Raul's Fill Holes algorithm could be improved to act like a very advanced Bridge Tool, and it would figure out how to make all the necessary connections between the poly rings that we have already established manually on the surface.

I think the problem with the current automatic retopology function is that there is a lack of exact control where edges and polygons will end up. If we could first be allowed to create a simple "frame" on the mesh (for the important polygons), then it would be nice to let 3D-Coat fill in the rest of the "inbetween" polygons for us automatically.

The new Semi-Automatic Retopo algorithm would therefore be a combination of the Fill Holes Retopo Tool and the existing Autopo Tool. It would require a manual setup of a polygon enclosing frame and then we could run the algorithm to fill in the rest for us.

Imagine drawing a ring of polygons around the joining area between an arm and a torso, another ring around the waist, a final ring around the neck, then run the Semiautopo routine by clicking on the torso area, and the algorithm would fill in the entire torso area for you by bridging everything between your three established poly rings, keeping their exact placement and number of polygons intact.

After all, the hardest part of retopology is figuring out how to correctly connect patches of polygons on a surface (by reducing/increasing the number of edges from one patch to another, or altering the flow direction between patches with stars). If those complicated connections could be automated for us then that would save a lot of our time and effort.

I believe having manual, semi-automatic control would be better than changing settings in a fully automatic retopo wizard and running it over and over again, hoping you will eventually get a decent result.

Doesn't anyone else want a fast semi-automatic retopology tool/workflow option like that in 3D-Coat? I think the existing Fill Holes Tool and existing Autopo could be altered/tweaked a bit to make it a reality.

Your ideas are like a deja vu for me. Andrew got a concept I worked out that fulfills your needs. I can't say when or if it will be implemented but Andrew and Raul liked my ideas. So let us be surprised... ;)
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Your ideas are like a deja vu for me. Andrew got a concept I worked out that fulfills your needs. I can't say when or if it will be implemented but Andrew and Raul liked my ideas. So let us be surprised... ;)

Wow! Really? I wrote that long post and I thought that probably everybody would just ignore it, think I was being crazy, and it would be forgotten quickly...but it is great to hear that other people are thinking about the problems of retopo in the same way that I am!

Hopefully Andrew and Raul will build a tool like that for us!

Honestly I think it might actually be easier for them to make a super Bridge Tool for intelligently autofilling user-defined sections of a mesh, instead of trying to make the current autopo algorithm perfect for covering an entire mesh all at once. Autofilling smaller parts would be faster at least.

In any case, thank you for giving me hope Taros!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Oh, and another idea I had:

It might even be good enough if Andrew just made a tool which auto-detected sharp edges and automatically put a spline along those edges, then the user could more easily use the Stroke Tool to manually finish the retopo of a hard surface object. What makes hard surface manual retopo difficult is putting the strokes exactly along those sharp edges. If the strokes were put there for you automatically, then finishing the manual retopo wouldn't be as difficult.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Andrew realise my ideas, then it should work much easier and with more control than you think... My ideas are not all the same like yours, but leads into the very same direction. :) I am very hopeful too. Autopo is not all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Test the 5 star settings in my recent test I've published on my blog. The result should actually be much better

 

 

 

I just tried it; 2 minute  computational time instead of over an hour and far fewer artifacts to clean up by hand, Negligible in fact. And this was done from the surface mode, not the voxel mode.

 

ZlSK3Zy.jpg

 

J5iSWdf.jpg

 

 

Very nice, thanks.

Edited by L'Ancien Regime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just tried it; 2 minute  computational time instead of over an hour and far fewer artifacts to clean up by hand, Negligible in fact. And this was done from the surface mode, not the voxel mode.

 

ZlSK3Zy.jpg

 

J5iSWdf.jpg

 

 

Very nice, thanks.

Looks good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

OK, the routine is night and day difference compared to the old one. I will still play the devil's advocate though. I just do not want this new routine to get pushed to the back burner like the other one did. The problems of the old routine gave a lot of new users headaches and for me I just stopped using it... 

Now this new routine needs to be tested by many users in the open beta with different models over time and Andrew would need to continue to update and fix the problems that arise with the new auto retopo routine till it is rock solid...

 

1st picture is with no manual painted density.

2nd picture is manual painted density set to (6). There is no difference in the amount of polygon placed on the face area. I had painted the face from the top of forehead including the horns to the jaw line and the ears as well.

Last picture shows a double auto retopo mesh created. I had adjusted the x symmetry plane in the sculpt room as it was slightly off on the model using global space in the symmetry plane toolbox. The routine appears to remember the old location of the x symmetry plane and it created a double retopo mesh. This needs to work correctly.

 

I am using your settings Taros plus this is a brand new clean install of Windows 4.5.04, 64 bit. I completed wiped the older beta version from the hard drive in all areas. 

post-518-0-21947300-1436199940_thumb.jpg

post-518-0-91400000-1436199954_thumb.jpg

post-518-0-65924600-1436199968_thumb.jpg

Edited by digman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, the routine is night and day difference compared to the old one. I will still play the devil's advocate though. I just do not want this new routine to get pushed to the back burner like the other one did. The problems of the old routine gave a lot of new users headaches and for me I just stopped using it... 

Now this new routine needs to be tested by many users in the open beta with different models over time and Andrew would need to continue to update and fix the problems that arise with the new auto retopo routine till it is rock solid...

 

1st picture is with no manual painted density.

2nd picture is manual painted density set to (6). There is no difference in the amount of polygon placed on the face area. I had painted the face from the top of forehead including the horns to the jaw line and the ears as well.

Last picture shows a double auto retopo mesh created. I had adjusted the x symmetry plane in the sculpt room as it was slightly off on the model using global space in the symmetry plane toolbox. The routine appears to remember the old location of the x symmetry plane and it created a double retopo mesh. This needs to work correctly.

 

I am using your settings Taros plus this is a brand new clean install of Windows 4.5.04, 64 bit. I completed wiped the older beta version from the hard drive in all areas. 

Density:

After reading your post I started a new test. 1st without setting a density value and later with a value of 2. Later then a density value of 6. The first changed value seems to stay permanently. Yes, this seems to be a bug. So I can confirm this. Changing density is not possible after you have set it once.

 

Symmetry:

Can't reproduce this. I've changed the symmetry posiiton twice and had no problems here. The Autopo routine always worked like expected and used the new symmetry position for the retopo. Are you shure your model is really symmetrical?

Is the virtual mirror mode off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

@taros... The model was imported with symmetry off centered. Used 3dc to correct it in the sculpt room using the pick option in the symmetry tool panel. Then I copied one side to the other to make sure the x axis was dead centered.

I very seldom use virtual symmetry and it was turned off.

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...