Jump to content
3DCoat Forums
Andrew Shpagin

V4.5 BETA (experimental)

Recommended Posts

Panorama position is not stored with Camera Shortcut

 

is it ok ? :huh:

 

optimization on load times

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, I know it's first pass but changing panoramas takes way too long. Previewing the meshes under different lighting condition is very important in pbr and having to wait so long to load another panorama is a bit annoying.

Would love to see an optimization on load times when more important matters are handled.

For comparison it takes about 40 seconds on 3dc while it's almost instant in toolbag, maybe the panoramas in 3dc would benefit from a low res mode (as in alternative files, not lowering the current one, higher res has its use for highly reflective objects) ?

In toolbag they're significantly less detailed.

I may cache panoramas and may do that if you used some panorama already it will switch instantly.

But first calculation will be long anyway. It takes so much time because I need to callculate light scattering globally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caching would be fine too. I don't care much if it takes longer to load initialy if it allows me to preview under different light pretty quickly afterwards.

 

In the meantime, is reducing the size of the panoramas a workaround ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you see a good example.

All the basecolors are created with Filllayers. You see, it is non destructive and very easy to use.

 

After spending a bit more time talking to the guys at Allegorithmic, there's a bit of info that is important to keep track of. That bit is that whats being done in Substance Painter is vector based. From this I do not believe they can ever get the same kind of painterly feel one would get with 3d coat, and why I woudlnt want 3d coat to give up that feeling to copy Painter on that aspect. I would better and more artistic painting ability over dynamic texture generation.

 

 

Andrew is focusing on the Paint Room for features at the moment, as he did with the Sculpt Room for a very long time. I fairly certain next up that the UV and Retopo Rooms will get some love (because we direly need better UV support, such as multiple tiles visible and editable in the exact UV map it was imported with, and not torn to their own UV maps, half-measure work around).

 

Out of curiosity does he just work on one room at a time, or rather does each update focus around one particular aspect of 3DC? If so does this mean that other aspects of 3DC  generally remain untouched, like sculpting...uvs..ect? Finally, just an opinion here though still new to 3D Coat, I would hope some focus could be used to refining and streamlining the UI bit (would be easier to sell as well). By this I mean general layout, polish, context sensitivity and unifaction of similar or common UI functions, sliders and over all presentation.

Edited by RabenWulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One last thing that Paint Room, or maybe more adequately - Sculpt Room,  needs, is the ability to sculpt while vertex-painting colour, glossiness and metalness at the same time.

Painting over baked Paint Room maps is always destructive. In case of severe changes to the model, you're toasted.

 

One more thing. A bug report that I have not yet filed on Mantis:

If you import a model that has vertex colour information (which currently is read from an MTL file in case of OBJ import, instead from vertex colour attributes), then no paint layer is created for that layer(!). Meaning, no adjustments can be made to it. You can't duplicate that layer or do anything with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- It seems like the option to send a screen-projected screenshot of a model to Photoshop for "handpainted" diffuse projection painting has been removed - I could only manage to send the regular textures/UVs to Photoshop. Maybe there is some kind of incompatibility between that workflow and the new PBR painting tools ?

 

This is actually one of my favorite features in the paint room when doing classic hand painted textures.

I don't see why PBR would be an issue? Just have an options box that lets the user select which map type(s) are projected, and have special layer groups for each one (seeing as how 3DC supports that now) if multiple are projected at once.

Personally though I'm happy so long as it can still be used to do old school work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PolyHertz : exactly ! "Edit projections in external editor" is pretty much the one feature that justifies 3DCoat for me. And of course the newly added PBR workflow with smart conditional materials is another great addition.

 

And I agree, in theory I don't see any incompatibility between the PBR workflow and "Edit projections in external editor", but still something must have happened here since both the menu entry and the ctrl-alt-P shortcut are missing in 4.5. Maybe there is still some issues to work out regarding the layering of exported PSDs if the scene contains any of the new PBR information ?

 

At the end of the day, the two systems should really be able to work with each other. The conditional material parameters (like cavity, convexity and direction) would be extremely useful for "old school" handpainted texturing ; and the PBR workflow would benefit from being compatible with Edit projections since there are times when surface details are just easier (and faster !) to paint in Photoshop on a screenshot than straight on the model.

Edited by pior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more notes on 4.5beta8 :

 

- On overall interface responsiveness

This is something that I brought up way back in the day (version 2 maybe ?) and I feel like it would be worth mentioning again. Basically, despite its very impressive set of features 3DCoat seems to still have some problems when it comes to UI behavior. This is without a doubt a minor point, but it does affect the "feel" of the program for lack of a better word. Here is a video attempting to show the issue, comparing the menu behavior of 3DCoat with the menu behavior of the most basic Windows program I could think of, Notepad. The video was recorded at 60fps for clarity.

 

Pay attention to the way the 3DCoat dropdown menus do not follow the mouse, and the way they close if the mouse is away from them when for a certain amount of time when they actually shouldn't. There is probably more to it than that, but I feel like these two seemingly small details illustrate the issue well.

 

 

This behavior is probably the price to pay for using a unified UI API for cross-platform release, and to be fair other software packages suffer from similar symptoms (Zbrush being the obvious). But it might be worth looking into this just for the sake of making the program feel less "glitchy". The help area flashing very fast at the bottom of the interface is another example of that.

 

- On brush preview

There needs to be an option to disable the white ghosted brush preview. I know that it disappears while painting, but it is still a hindrance when one is just about to lay a brush stroke as it tends to hide parts of the area being worked on.

 

2015-01-2504_57_32-LDshoulderPBR0013b_-3

 

I hope this helps ! Despite these issues, 4.5 is shaping up to be a truly fantastic release :)

Edited by pior
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- On brush preview

There needs to be an option to disable the white ghosted brush preview. I know that it disappears while painting, but it is still a hindrance when one is just about to lay a brush stroke as it tends to hide parts of the area being worked on.

 

You can disable this in preferences :) .  I dont understand how anybody can sculpt with this on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After spending a bit more time talking to the guys at Allegorithmic, there's a bit of info that is important to keep track of. That bit is that whats being done in Substance Painter is vector based. From this I do not believe they can ever get the same kind of painterly feel one would get with 3d coat, and why I woudlnt want 3d coat to give up that feeling to copy Painter on that aspect. I would better and more artistic painting ability over dynamic texture generation.

 

I dont like the painting in Painter, 3d Coat is much more handy, thats true.

But if you want to change some colors on your model, it is always a trial and error until you get what you want or need.

And i think Filllayers would be good start to work more in a non destictive way.

 

I was hoping Andrew could give some feedback on it, if it would be possible to create something like Filllayers for 3d coat.

But, maybe i should create some requests if he wont answers.

Edited by Malo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont like the painting in Painter, 3d Coat is much more handy, thats true.

But if you want to change some colors on your model, it is always a trial and error until you get what you want or need.

And i think Filllayers would be good start to work more in a non destictive way.

 

I was hoping Andrew could give some feedback on it, if it would be possible to create something like Filllayers for 3d coat.

But, maybe i should create some requests if he wont answers.

 

I would love to have fill layers with masking to paint specific materials to specific part (and that would solve the problem I mentioned earlier: not being able to remember which materials were used) and make quick adjustments to colour and such too.

 

Now the trial and error part is biased, the problem doesn't really lie with how 3dc does things but more how quickly it does them.

I mean, the preview tickbox on basic functions like "brightness, saturation, hue" is terrible.

It's so slow that you're forced to work in such a sluggish way it indeed becomes trial and error.

 

I don't know about you but I would love to have a general optimization pass done on the paint room at some point.

The ao calculation take forever, minor color adjustment are painfull to do due to preview needing another calculation etc.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats exaclty what i mean, with trial and error.

Sure it is possible to change the color, normal, roughness and metalness but it is not realy comfortable.

 

Anyway.

Could anybody confirm that the Filloptions in the PBR Material uses Cube Projection if you set it to UV Mapping.

Looks like the UV-Mapping option gets ignored.

Edited by Malo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to have fill layers with masking to paint specific materials to specific part (and that would solve the problem I mentioned earlier: not being able to remember which materials were used) and make quick adjustments to colour and such too.

 

Now the trial and error part is biased, the problem doesn't really lie with how 3dc does things but more how quickly it does them.

I mean, the preview tickbox on basic functions like "brightness, saturation, hue" is terrible.

It's so slow that you're forced to work in such a sluggish way it indeed becomes trial and error.

 

I don't know about you but I would love to have a general optimization pass done on the paint room at some point.

The ao calculation take forever, minor color adjustment are painfull to do due to preview needing another calculation etc.

 

 

IMHO, this is where 3DC starts to fall flat in the paint room, right now. Mari, dDo (thanks to using PS) and other tools have the benefit of lots of optimization and clear dedication to making the tools faster and bug squashing. It's neat having these features in 3DC, but if they are slow as molasses, people will be turned off by it. For example, I textured a portable generator with PBR materials in 3DC, it has one UV map, with 4 tiles, 2k textures... And it was slow as sap on a freezing cold day. It was not fun to use. It's been improved a little, but it needs a lot more.

 

I can't say it enough. Optimization, fix/enhance existing tools and work flows, squash bugs and follow some industry standards for UV map I/O.

 

I'm not trying to sound ungrateful Andrew, I love the PBR materials! They are necessary in a growing competitive market. But stability and performance are features too. Don't forget about them. :)

Edited by Javis
Fixed typo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, this is where 3DC starts to fall flat in the paint room, right now. Mari, dDo (thanks to using PS) and other tools have the benefit of lots of optimization and clear dedication to making the tools faster and bug squashing. It's neat having these features in 3DC, but if they are slow as molasses, people will be turned off by it. For example, I textured a portable generator with PBR materials in 3DC, it has one UV map, with 4 tiles, 2k textures... And it was slow as sap on a freezing cold day. It was not fun to use. It's been improved a little, but it needs a lot more.

 

I can't say it enough. Optimization, fix/enhance existing tools and work flows, squash bugs and follow some industry standards for UV map I/O.

 

I'm not trying to sound ungrateful Andrew, I love the PBR materials! They are necessary in a growing competitive market. But stability and performance are features too. Don't forget about them. :)

+1. Been banging the drum about performance for ages. Especially the sliders (Opacity, Glossiness, Depth in Layer Panel....and sliders in Adjustment Panels). They are so slow, you just CANNOT use them. Imagine if your car ran as rough and non-responsive as the slider adjustments in the Paint Room. It's painful. I even showed this to Andrew multiple times.

 

Maybe move to DX11 (we've been stuck on DX9 since the Dinosaurs roamed the earth) and OpenGL 4 and shift the load from the CPU to the GPU, using these? Pretty sure that's what Mudbox does, and it's wicked fast.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could make a Feature Request but I'd first like to hear everyone's thoughts on this:

 

How do you feel about the current mask functionality, do you think it's adequate? Personally, I'd like it to work like Photoshop, having a b/w mask on a layer that you can paint on (and visualise on the model!).

It's clearer, and it's compatible with Photoshop.

Clip layers don't really do it for me (they serve a different purpose).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could make a Feature Request but I'd first like to hear everyone's thoughts on this:

 

How do you feel about the current mask functionality, do you think it's adequate? Personally, I'd like it to work like Photoshop, having a b/w mask on a layer that you can paint on (and visualise on the model!).

It's clearer, and it's compatible with Photoshop.

Clip layers don't really do it for me (they serve a different purpose).

 

I think the majority of people would like regular layer masks. I was expecting it after axial symmetry was added (remember the poll?), but seems like Andrew forgot about it. :(

Edited by PolyHertz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could make a Feature Request but I'd first like to hear everyone's thoughts on this:

 

How do you feel about the current mask functionality, do you think it's adequate? Personally, I'd like it to work like Photoshop, having a b/w mask on a layer that you can paint on (and visualise on the model!).

It's clearer, and it's compatible with Photoshop.

Clip layers don't really do it for me (they serve a different purpose).

Well,they dont serve a different purpose....they have the exact same purpose.

Also you can paint and visualise clip masks on your model...I dont understand ,it seems you are implying we can't.

The only things that are different is they are 1) held on a different layer...(advantage of this is you can mask multiple layers at once using only one mask and any change on the mask will affect all linked layers...regardless of any stacking) 2)they are not compatible with PS.

 

I too think it would be better if they we're held on the same layer even if we would loose advantage mentioned above ,its still better from an organisational point of view i think and its probably the first step too for compatibility with PS. Also Substance Painter works that way too.

But since Im really not hindered by the current implementation Im not gonna push for this to happen (but won't bother if it does)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could make a Feature Request but I'd first like to hear everyone's thoughts on this:

 

How do you feel about the current mask functionality, do you think it's adequate? Personally, I'd like it to work like Photoshop, having a b/w mask on a layer that you can paint on (and visualise on the model!).

It's clearer, and it's compatible with Photoshop.

Clip layers don't really do it for me (they serve a different purpose).

 

 

- View Channels will make a nice addition

let to select,paint,adjust opacity by channel,

or add/erase transparency

post-10142-0-26286000-1422203007_thumb.j

 

- Create a new channel. As Gimp -as example- 

post-10142-0-75549600-1422203678_thumb.j

 

- Add a layer mask: allows non destructive editing of transparency

post-10142-0-24077400-1422203443_thumb.j

Any alpha channel mask could be selected by different layers

 

Any layer mask will be apply over the layer, or the alpha can be used as selection

post-10142-0-02117000-1422203544_thumb.j

 

i think that will be a very nice feature: +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I have tried to get excited about PBR and waiting in the background to see how people react.  I downloaded a few recent updates, but just can't get into it.  I love the idea of getting more realistic results on the fly, but I find it too cumbersome to simply pick up.  Maybe I'm not being fair and need to spend more time with it, which will undoubtedly make it more useful and fun for me, but I'm just not there.  What I think would help is improving the UI and process of the PBR functionality.  That may be considered for a later time or not all, but it's my hope that we can get something in place that doesn't require going through more than a few videos to really pick up.  Plus, I do realize this is in it's infant stages and still in beta.

 

For what it's worth, I do think the concept is great, and I'm hoping that this is all just me.  It's hard to go from Cheetah3D's implementation of materials to Max, Maya, Mudbox, ZBrush, or 3D Coat, etc. and not feel that everything else is just lacking...granted there's no good painting ability in Cheetah3D and it's not an apples to apples comparison.

 

I'm striving to come up with feedback that's more concrete to give some idea of how to progress, but I'm struggling with that, too....it's like I can't put my finger on some of this, without overhauling the whole system, which I know is neither realistic or desirable.  If I can be more clear about it, in the future, I'll list some ideas to be considered.

Edited by alvordr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RabenWulf, on 04 Jan 2015 - 6:02 PM, said:snapback.png

PBR painting is great so far, but I am starting to be concerned (still as a new user of sorts) that some how one of the biggest pulls for grabbing 3d coat is going to be lost in the process.

I am specifically referring to that hand painted "blizzard" style of texture painting that 3d Coat has in part become known for. Quite a few Blizzard artist use 3d coat for just that. With the current PBR setup I cannot find a way to have the old diffuse/spec shader enabled. This means when painting black values you get light grey because of the PBR, nor will you get accurate representation of the texture itself. Am I missing something?

If its completely gone in with the push to add PBR, then could it be perhaps added in the same way one would toggle voxels with surface (pbr vs non-pbr), or just have a separate room for it?

Andrew's answer to RabenWult question "This is known problem and 4.5. will not be released without solving this."

 

@alvordr... I hope this means that there will be upon loading 3DC the ability to choose the PBR style or the older style of working. I enjoy PBR very much and am glad Andrew is developing it but not everything in 3D needs PBR hence the need to swtich between both modes.

Edited by digman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RabenWulf, on 04 Jan 2015 - 6:02 PM, said:snapback.png

Andrew's answer to RabenWult question "This is known problem and 4.5. will not be released without solving this."

 

@alvordr... I hope this means that there will be upon loading 3DC the ability to choose the PBR style or the older style of working. I enjoy PBR very much and am glad Andrew is developing it but not everything in 3D needs PBR hence the need to swtich between both modes.

its already there, choose 'compatibility shader' from list in view menu.

(desc:This shader is maximally compatible with 4.1 and earlier.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,they dont serve a different purpose....they have the exact same purpose.

I don't agree. I use Clipping masks in Photoshop to make sure a layer never goes outside of another layer, but here's what's important: Every layer being clipped can then *still* have its own non-destructive alpha!

And then if it's in a group, *that* can also have its own alpha. Not to mention the Blend-If settings every layer has, which are amazing!

 

And to add a mask currently, we need to add a layer, paint on it, set its visibility to 0%, go into another layer's settings, select the layer you want to use as mask (which are now listed in reverse following order!), and then select your original layer again if you want to paint on it again.

Edited by Mighty Pea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×