Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

3DCoat 4.7 (BETA testing thread)


Recommended Posts

Bug:

Changing color of attached materials does not refresh model/material preview in smart material library. Old color value stay when editing by using RMB on smart material library slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

This is not crucial but would it be possible also to put "Treat Retopo Objects as Paint Objects"  selection and deselection in the Popup bake panel. Of course keep it in the preferences menu as well. 

The panel box made a little higher in height and maybe placed under " Treat materials as separate textures"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This video begins the demonstration of the Texture Baking process in 3D Coat. Explaining in general terms, how the process typically works, including Sequential Texture Baking 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/05/2017 at 11:17 AM, Frimasson said:

new bug : :in the paint room, when i merge down a layer that has a 'replace depth' value, the 'replace depth' effect is not keeped.
Same bug with a layer folder

 

I found that this bug occur only when the depth opacity of the layer to be merged is 100
I found a kind of workaround

Edited by Frimasson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Found a possible bug in 4.7.29, it might have been in the program for awhile or a new one. When I export a normal map layer if I have two UV sets named the exact same thing it overwrites one of them. It is an east fix to go to the UV tab and rename one of the sets but a user may not realize what is wrong and get the wrong exported maps. EDIT: This actually appears to happen when exporting any texture map, tried it with ambient occlusion map too.

Repro Steps:

1) Create 2 UV sets named the exact same thing on a model (can be 2 separate models) in UV room

2) In paint room add normal detail to both of the UV sets (make the normal detail distinct enough to tell the difference between the two

3) Export both normal maps

4) Observe the normal map detail is overwritten on one of the files

 

 

Edited by Mystical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
47 minutes ago, Tony Nemo said:

The UV maps were probably named "Default".

Nope, in this case I had two named 'red dot'

and one of my red dot UV's sets overwrote the other red dot UV set normals/occlusion when exporting. Even if I tried to export a single map one would still overwrite the other it appeared. I had to rename the set or delete that object with the same set name to fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

3d coat 4.7.29 win 64 and  3d coat 4.5.40
Sculpt room / Surface mode
Bug with the bridge tool
The bridge tool works with the probe method, but not with the Mote carlo, or the min angle method
You can reproduce this bug by bridging 2 cube or spheres primitives

I've also got an issue with copy and merge (with booleans) 2 objects with around 10 millions polys, in surface mode
3d coat freeze 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 5/18/2017 at 9:32 PM, Frimasson said:

3d coat 4.7.29 win 64 and  3d coat 4.5.40
Sculpt room / Surface mode
Bug with the bridge tool
The bridge tool works with the probe method, but not with the Mote carlo, or the min angle method
You can reproduce this bug by bridging 2 cube or spheres primitives

I've also got an issue with copy and merge (with booleans) 2 objects with around 10 millions polys, in surface mode
3d coat freeze 
 

I am working lately with over 25 Million and here Merging and Copying work just fine, but it takes rather long. So maybe it could be a performance issue?

If I may add if I go over 10 Million It will start forgetting the undo and it will only let you go back 2-3 times then you're stuck. Maybe it is just on my behalf idk...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor
On 5/18/2017 at 0:32 PM, Frimasson said:

 

I've also got an issue with copy and merge (with booleans) 2 objects with around 10 millions polys, in surface mode
3d coat freeze 
 

Works much better in Voxels, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Two features I have been desiring of late is these two.

Folders for The Preset tool panel.  Reasons for, the more complex or varied your use of 3DC becomes, you need more varied user created brushes or tools.

The current Preset tool panel can become quite cluttered. Yes you can clear out all the presets and load one that just has what you need atm but that is not very efficient. 

Adding folders to the Preset tool panel would help greatly in keeping your created brushes and tool in categories.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next request. To be able to shift select several layers at once to delete or move. 

The above is always based upon the current development cycle.  Adding the two items requested at some point as time allows would be much appreciated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
10 hours ago, digman said:

Two features I have been desiring of late is these two.

Folders for The Preset tool panel.  Reasons for, the more complex or varied your use of 3DC becomes, you need more varied user created brushes or tools.

The current Preset tool panel can become quite cluttered. Yes you can clear out all the presets and load one that just has what you need atm but that is not very efficient. 

Adding folders to the Preset tool panel would help greatly in keeping your created brushes and tool in categories.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next request. To be able to shift select several layers at once to delete or move. 

The above is always based upon the current development cycle.  Adding the two items requested at some point as time allows would be much appreciated.

+1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

+ 1 to these requests.

I would add a more robust SMOOTH option while painting high resolution textures. It's useless on 4k+ to use the shift while painting.

Don't know if its system constrained but it have to be a way of smooth high resolution textures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
11 hours ago, dimitribastos said:

+ 1 to these requests.

I would add a more robust SMOOTH option while painting high resolution textures. It's useless on 4k+ to use the shift while painting.

Don't know if its system constrained but it have to be a way of smooth high resolution textures.

That and SMOOTH SELECTION in the Pose tool. It is practically useless. We really need a GROW/SHRINK selection and a very robust Smooth Selection, to make the Pose tool more user friendly. It's a bigger hassle than it needs to be, currently.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

That and SMOOTH SELECTION in the Pose tool. It is practically useless. We really need a GROW/SHRINK selection and a very robust Smooth Selection, to make the Pose tool more user friendly. It's a bigger hassle than it needs to be, currently.

I really agree!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I'm working on creatures sculpting for an advertising, in surface sculpting mode.
At some point, the director asked to add body parts (wings) 
I had to possibilities :
1 / To convert the mode to voxels, do booleans, then reconvert to polygons.
Even with a 160 000 000 voxels/poly models, a lot of fine details were lost
2 / try to  merge new parts with booleans
I have repetitive issues with merge booleans in 3dcoat. The bridge tool dosen't worked well either in this case.
I ended to do the boolean in blender with a 22 million poly model
Is it possible to have a more robust or permissive boolean in 3d Coat, that worked even ii a have to fix some holes, or mesh issues ? It is the main bottleneck in my workflow

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
6 hours ago, Frimasson said:

I'm working on creatures sculpting for an advertising, in surface sculpting mode.
At some point, the director asked to add body parts (wings) 
I had to possibilities :
1 / To convert the mode to voxels, do booleans, then reconvert to polygons.
Even with a 160 000 000 voxels/poly models, a lot of fine details were lost
2 / try to  merge new parts with booleans
I have repetitive issues with merge booleans in 3dcoat. The bridge tool dosen't worked well either in this case.
I ended to do the boolean in blender with a 22 million poly model
Is it possible to have a more robust or permissive boolean in 3d Coat, that worked even ii a have to fix some holes, or mesh issues ? It is the main bottleneck in my workflow

Thanks

I would try to use the SPLIT tool to split apart into a separate layer, just the area where you need to merge parts, that way the boolean is a bit more simplified for Surface mode, or switching to Voxel mode doesn't undo your LiveClay work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
18 hours ago, Frimasson said:

1 / To convert the mode to voxels, do booleans, then reconvert to polygons.
Even with a 160 000 000 voxels/poly models, a lot of fine details were lost
 

same issue I meet often, maybe a solution could be if 3D Coat could detect, when switching back from voxels to surface, which areas of voxels were not changed and use the original surface for these areas

Slow quality loss from switching is always an issue, also in the other direction, when working in surface mode for a while, and then going back to voxels.

Only when using Surface tools in voxel mode everything is fine, these functions keep the original voxels.

Edited by ray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
On 5/31/2017 at 1:03 AM, Frimasson said:

I'm working on creatures sculpting for an advertising, in surface sculpting mode.
At some point, the director asked to add body parts (wings) 
I had to possibilities :
1 / To convert the mode to voxels, do booleans, then reconvert to polygons.
Even with a 160 000 000 voxels/poly models, a lot of fine details were lost
2 / try to  merge new parts with booleans
I have repetitive issues with merge booleans in 3dcoat. The bridge tool dosen't worked well either in this case.
I ended to do the boolean in blender with a 22 million poly model
Is it possible to have a more robust or permissive boolean in 3d Coat, that worked even ii a have to fix some holes, or mesh issues ? It is the main bottleneck in my workflow

Thanks

I tested AbnRanger's method and it does work, just like mine below maybe not in all cases but our answers are only to help with your problem the best we know how. Future improvements like a re-projection feature, we would all love to have.

The below is once you have all your revisions done and approved by the art director. You got the sign off on it.

 The method is not worry about doing a real boolean. I do not know how many layers you have so the example will be only two and assume you only want one retopo mesh and one retopo object layer.

In this example I am not using Names Correspondence as I have only one retopo object layer. Once you know if you can use this method then, I think you can figure out to use it with Names Correspondence.  

Clone a copy of the body and wing layer. Now hide the other layer two original layers, then merge visible with no true booleans. Convert this to voxels, you do not need all the super high detail here as this becomes object you to do your retopo mesh over, a more simplified version.

Once you have competed your retopo mesh,hide the simplified version and unhide the two original layers.

Do all the stuff for baking to the paint room, etc etc.

Once in the paint room paint out on the normal map any occlusion errors where the wing meets the body. This can be done in 3DC or Photoshop.

Now the above is a simple object being only two layers but it can be done on more complex objects. The retopo mesh where the wing and body meets needs to be real clean to be paint out any occlusion errors in the paint room or photoshop in a easy fashion.

I would test this method on some simple objects at first to get a feel of it.

I would love to see a re-projection of detail feature in 3DC. Where we can have a lower mesh and then re-project the high details to it from one or all layers. Maybe the transition area would need up some clean but that would be ok.

Will the above work out in all cases, I can not say but I have used it with success.

merge.jpg

Edited by digman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
19 hours ago, ray said:

same issue I meet often, maybe a solution could be if 3D Coat could detect, when switching back from voxels to surface, which areas of voxels were not changed and use the original surface for these areas

Slow quality loss from switching is always an issue, also in the other direction, when working in surface mode for a while, and then going back to voxels.

Only when using Surface tools in voxel mode everything is fine, these functions keep the original voxels.


I nailed the problem, and try to find a quick way to fix it in 3d coat
Actually, i open the mesh in Zbrush, create auto groups by topology continuity, split the loose groups and delete them, closes holes, and re-export the model in 3dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

when the boolean fail, most of the time, hole appear around the intersection
thantk for the advice, digman :)

 

In summary : closing holes in 3dc dosen't fix the problem and takes hours

A projection tool could be a nioe addition
A mirror tool to mirror only part of a model, could be a nioe addition too

hole.jpg

Edited by Frimasson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
On 6/2/2017 at 5:33 AM, Carlosan said:

There is a request ticket open about this issue, please feel free to add a +1. Thx

0002188: mesh booleans fail way too often.

Yes, a reworking of the surface mode boolean operation is much needed. 

I can merge surface layers into one layer without booleans. Export the model and use two other programs to do the boolean operations with success.

ZCore--- import into ZCore, switch to dynamesh with enough resolution to capture the details. The boolean operation is successful. Switch back to regular polygons and I can export this model back to 3DC.

MeshMixer--- Turn to solid and the boolean operation is successful. Export back to 3DC again.,

Having a more robust boolean operation would save us the extra steps.

Edited by digman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...