Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Users, @Andrew Shpagin and developers of 3D-Coat .... Being sincere ... What do you think?


Rygaard
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Contributor
1 hour ago, Falconius said:

I should use shortcuts more but the space bar menu is just so easy, and I don't have to move my hand away from its usual 'wsad' hover point. :)  Also I haven't hit my stride with what brushes I prefer exactly, still working out my workflow I guess, so the topbar does actually change a bit.  Pose is a permanent feature as is scratches 2, but for instance I also have "reconstruct" in there, which can now be done away with because of that video showing the various smooth capabilities, and indeed I have "smooth" in there but it can also go because it's on shift anyways and I've never clicked on it in the top bar position.  You are right I should think about what I have in there a bit more carefully and its arrangement putting my top tools in 1-5 would be wiser than my current approach.

I understand what you mean!

Do you know what's beautiful in 3D-Coat?
Is that you do not have a workflow set!
According to your project, you will have a different workflow that will best suit your goal.
Over time, even with different workflows that you can use, you will have your main tools and features at the touch of your finger.
I used the ZB ...
And honestly, until I figured out what I could do in 3D-Coat took a while. Once you've figured out, things will get easier and you'll surely have the tools you like the most.
Since you like "wsad" :) , you can create 1 to 5 shortcut keys and further increase your shortcut keys by using 1 to 5 + shift combination (for other tools). Do not forget to anabolize your shortcuts using the "quick access" of the space bar with more tools that you may find useful in your work!

Another tip, would you create tool presets (both in Voxels and Surface mode) and leave the brushes completely the way you like them and still have something interesting in that which is:
If you work in Voxels mode and select a preset made for Surface mode, 3D-Coat will automatically switch from Voxels Mode to Surface without you having to go to TreeVoxels and press the voxels button to surface. Just like Surface for Voxels.

I hope I have helped you in some way ( I know it was not too much... but) and that you can help me suggest tools and features that will further enhance our 3D-Coat work! The important thing is not to let the ideas disappear but to register them here!

Even though Andrew is very busy, but in the future, maybe he will see these suggestions and develop them..... in the future! :yahoo:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

There is a feature I miss so much at the time of sculpting.
When I use the Move tool (or other brushes) on regions of one surface of the mesh is glued to the other surface and I want to move only a certain part of the mesh, the 3D-coat ends up moving the entire mesh that is within the size of the brush.

I know I could use the Freeze tool to prevent the mesh from moving together, but there are very specific regions that when you work it is almost impossible to select the desired area with the Freeze tool.
For example, when the mouth of a character is almost closed, the eyelids closed, fingers too close to each other, the arm near the trunk are some examples that if you try to use the Freeze tool is a mission almost impossible, besides of being very laborious, you end up spending a lot of time trying to select the area.

And of course you could use the Surface hide tool or Pose Tool which also has the same difficulty as the Freeze tool.

I would like to suggest that in the Move tool (as for other brushes) there was the possibility of the user configuring something like a falloff or some configuration that the user could configure a distance value that the tool could influence the mesh, according to topology between the distance from one surface to the other the brush would not affect the area.

I think this would make our work a lot easier, because several times I try to move (or use another brush) only a certain area of the mesh surface and the tool ends up moving the entire area adding areas that I would not like to change.
Just registering a suggestion before I forget ... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
7 hours ago, Sorda said:

Add the ability to create brushes using asymmetrical curves. You are welcome. This allows you to create alpha textures in seconds, without wasting time on the dull export of the mesh and its subsequent baking. And more often look into the branch of bugs.

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
7 hours ago, Sorda said:

Add the ability to create brushes using asymmetrical curves. You are welcome. This allows you to create alpha textures in seconds, without wasting time on the dull export of the mesh and its subsequent baking. And more often look into the branch of bugs.

Another option is to use LOAD SHAPE to create a 3D object and use the 3D Brush creation technique above, to create any kind of brush you want.

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Oh no, just see how the curves work in Blender. There you can create a profile of any shape with a curve, and already this profile can be started along the desired curve. Everything is interactive, changing on the fly. You want a square profile, you want a round one, whatever you like, and at the same time there are changes. The movie about creating alpha from the model is the decade before, when we were just learning to create films like Godzilla.
Poking in an uncomfortable way (namely the creation of a profile), supposedly it is, use it - this is not something that will attract new users to the 3D coat. But if the developers are simply LAZER, so tell me, and I will lag behind this question, forget about the 3d coat and I will use alternative products. Because I asked about creating alpha profiles directly from the editor of curve brushes, I wrote about three months ago, the only answer I received was just now. 

other half.PNG

 

 

I'm sorry if I seemed rude to you. But it seems that only in this way something is shifted for the better.

 

This RELEASE video relates to what I wrote about alpha textures, but it shows the advantage of creating a profile for a curve - from another curve. The plinth (or anything else) from this clip can be changed interactively. I can try a bunch of options right on the fly, without a tedious and NON-EXTREME export model, when I move this or that chamfer, or groove, a couple of centimeters to the side. 

Edited by Dmitry Bedrik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

@AbnRanger I thought @Sorda was referring to the 2 methods you demonstrated in the videos.

I may be wrong, but I think @Sorda was trying to say something similar to Surface Noise that exists in ZB.
If this is the case, we can do in a limited way that is in the use of Live Clay brushes with the Noise option enabled.
After you enable this Noise option, you will have to configure Noise Amplitude, Noise Scale, Type of Noise, Level of Details, and Merge Action to your liking.
Do not forget to increase the value of Detail and Level of Details so that the resolution of brush effects is clearer! :)

I hope I have helped in some way...
image.thumb.png.b6bd60a9e18798d78d0ba6dff04b52e7.png

-----------------------------------
Taking advantage of this subject.


I wish somehow we had something similar, non-destructive, and that you applied the desired effect any time you wanted (those effects would be generated or created from a texture map) similar to ZB's Surface Noise.

I know we can use Stencils with the Cube Mapping option, but honestly it's not the same thing that happens in Surface Noise, which shows in real time how the surface of the mesh will change when you want to apply it to the surface.
In the case of using Stencils you have to guess the depth value you would like to use on the surface and the size of the texture when you think it is ideal, sometimes you have to resize it again.

Of course the use of Stencil has its positive side that you can use in conjunction with the Freeze tool and have a great control of how you can change the surface of the mesh. I Love Stencils That's a Powerful Tool!

But I would like to see something similar to Surface Noise within 3D-Coat, it would be essential for anyone who arrives in the modeling detailing process.

One more suggestion to be registered here and not be forgotten! Who knows someday we'll have something like this ... :)

Edited by Rygaard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Rygaard said:

There is a feature I miss so much at the time of sculpting.
When I use the Move tool (or other brushes) on regions of one surface of the mesh is glued to the other surface and I want to move only a certain part of the mesh, the 3D-coat ends up moving the entire mesh that is within the size of the brush.

I know I could use the Freeze tool to prevent the mesh from moving together, but there are very specific regions that when you work it is almost impossible to select the desired area with the Freeze tool.
For example, when the mouth of a character is almost closed, the eyelids closed, fingers too close to each other, the arm near the trunk are some examples that if you try to use the Freeze tool is a mission almost impossible, besides of being very laborious, you end up spending a lot of time trying to select the area.

And of course you could use the Surface hide tool or Pose Tool which also has the same difficulty as the Freeze tool.

I would like to suggest that in the Move tool (as for other brushes) there was the possibility of the user configuring something like a falloff or some configuration that the user could configure a distance value that the tool could influence the mesh, according to topology between the distance from one surface to the other the brush would not affect the area.

I think this would make our work a lot easier, because several times I try to move (or use another brush) only a certain area of the mesh surface and the tool ends up moving the entire area adding areas that I would not like to change.
Just registering a suggestion before I forget ... ;)

I was running into this exact same issue on Friday trying to sculpt detail onto the mouth of a bust.  This also causes problems around the ears but you can usually get by, but the mouth, no, it's so difficult.  Maybe if there was a "select connected" option on the freeze brush and move brush it would help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
3 hours ago, Sorda said:

Oh no, just see how the curves work in Blender. There you can create a profile of any shape with a curve, and already this profile can be started along the desired curve. Everything is interactive, changing on the fly. You want a square profile, you want a round one, whatever you like, and at the same time there are changes. The movie about creating alpha from the model is the decade before, when we were just learning to create films like Godzilla.
Poking in an uncomfortable way (namely the creation of a profile), supposedly it is, use it - this is not something that will attract new users to the 3D coat. But if the developers are simply LAZER, so tell me, and I will lag behind this question, forget about the 3d coat and I will use alternative products. Because I asked about creating alpha profiles directly from the editor of curve brushes, I wrote about three months ago, the only answer I received was just now. 

other half.PNG

 

 

I'm sorry if I seemed rude to you. But it seems that only in this way something is shifted for the better.

 

This RELEASE video relates to what I wrote about alpha textures, but it shows the advantage of creating a profile for a curve - from another curve. The plinth (or anything else) from this clip can be changed interactively. I can try a bunch of options right on the fly, without a tedious and NON-EXTREME export model, when I move this or that chamfer, or groove, a couple of centimeters to the side. 

The developers are usually so busy developing, they don't spend hardly any time on the forums. This is a place where contributors and other users help each other. Andrew may chime in from time to time, but not often. He has a lot on his plate, right now. You can email support (support@3dcoat.com), but Andrew is chin deep in Sculpt Layers and the new Curves. You might have more success if try and ask for something like this once he has sculpt layers largely done. I tried to ask for some very small and needed changes and he was like "I can't do that right now. I'm really busy on Sculpt Layers." Which is a good thing, IMO, cause I've been trying to get Sculpt layers for years.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Hey everyone!

Another important feature that I wish very much in 3D-Coat existed would be the possibility that users could create groups of polygons like what happens in Facegroups functionality of the Autodesk Meshmixer program.

I think this functionality is essential and important to all of us who work on 3D-Coat.

I found a video on youtube with a brief explanation of Facegroups within Autodesk Meshmixer. Unfortunately, I have not found a video with a more in-depth explanation about Facegroups ...

Another great suggestion to stay registered here and who knows in the future we have this functionality! :)
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
  • Contributor

Hey everyone,

I know that Andrew and the developers of 3D-Coat are very busy developing Sculpt Layers and other great features.
Even so, in recent days, I've been testing 3D-Coat to see if I could use 3D-Coat in the same way I used other programs and honestly I missed the many essential and important features that facilitate and improve my work and also I believe everyone who uses 3D-Coat.
I'm not just talking about my creativity, but the ease and speed that I would have in the development of my projects. I believe that most users of 3D-Coat will also share the same thinking and feeling that I have.

In my humble opinion, these features could not be missing in 3D-Coat, because they are of extreme importance in modeling or sculpting so that artists could do more creative, effective and productive work. These features would completely change the way all 3D-Coat users work for the better.
I will be very honest with all of you regarding my opinions and experiences with the program. So the features and tools I'd like to suggest come from programs that I have knowledge such as Autodesk Meshmixer, Blender, and sometimes ZBrush.

I know some people will say that they would not need these tools and features in 3D-Coat, that it's all really great how the program works or even these people will think that if I wanted to use those features and tools I would continue using the others programs to perform any operation that I do not have in 3D-Coat.
With all my respect for everyone in the community, I do not think this kind of thinking could be part of our community. We need to come together so that good things can come.
I believe that developing things that can facilitate and further improve our work is always welcome, positive and essential. Because one day these same people will need to use the same tools and features that I'm suggesting here and will benefit from it too if developed. That's why it's very important to be together and we're open to any suggestions and ideas that make 3D-Coat shine and have more success.

Another important thing to mention is that with the use of many different programs on the same project, it always ends up having some kind of problem during the project and if it was possible to use the minimum of programs during a project, I believe it would be the most appropriate and sensible so that no unpleasant problems occur during the project. And at the same time your computer (memory, video card and etc) would thank you very much.

I believe that Andrew and the developers of 3D-Coat aims to always improve the program more and more to a level of excellence in quality through tools and fantastic features that make a difference in any job.
So with that in mind, I'd like to suggest that there could be a transition of how 3D-Coat currently works with its tools and features for important implementations that would become the working foundation for any 3D-Coat tools and functionality.
What I would like to say is that Andrew and the developers could add the Polygon Selection Mode and Polygons Group in the Sculpt Room, whose functionality would become the basis for other tools and features that would be essential in 3D-Coat.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Suggestion: Selection Polygons & Polygons Group:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Selection Polygons and Polygons Group would open avenues for optimization, solidification and improvement of the tools that already exist and new tools that would be developed in 3D-Coat. With the possible implementation of Polygon Selections in the Sculpt Room, 3D-Coat would take a very important step in directing tools and functionalities focused on polygon modeling and also for essential sculpture-related functions.

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

I made 4 videos where I try to explain as best I can about these suggestions that could be implemented in 3D-Coat.

I'd like to make it clear, once again, that the suggestions I'm trying to suggest to all of you are coming from the Autodesk Meshmixer, Blender, and Zbrush programs.
Therefore, in the explanations of the videos I used as a support material the manuals of the programs and thus be as comprehensive as possible the tools and functionalities that I try to demonstrate.

Unfortunately for my lack of time, I could not suggest something more original or simulate something more personalized about possible ideas.
I apologize for this, because I would not want to get an idea of exactly copying the features and tools of other programs.
What I've tried to do is just demonstrate what I miss in regards to tools and features that are not yet present in 3d-Coat and who knows with that I'll be able to inspire Andrew and the developers in developing the implementations of tools and features yet better than I showed for 3D-Coat.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 ---> Suggestion: Selection Polygons in 3D-Coat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This video, I would like to suggest the implementation of Selection of Polygons in the 3d-coat Sculpt Room.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 ---> Suggestion: Refining Polygons Selections in 3D-Coat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This video does not contain audio!
In this video, I'd like to suggest two features that would serve to refine the polygon selections in the 3D-Coat Sculpt room.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 ---> Suggestion: Polygons Groups in 3D-Coat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This video, I would like to suggest the implementation of Polygons Group in the 3d-coat Sculpt Room. I'll try to talk about the main features of this essential functionality that would change and improve everyone's work.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 ---> Suggestion: Creation Polygons Groups in 3D-Coat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This video, I would like to suggest the implementation of Polygons Group in the 3d-coat Sculpt Room. I'll try to talk about how you could create Polygons Group in different ways within 3D-Coat Sculpt Room.

I hope to have helped in some positive way and in case you like what I did, please send an email to Andrew (support@3dcoat.com) referring to what I did, asking him for these implementations and if anyone does not like anyway, ask Andrew for these implementations because you would benefit as well if Andrew develops these suggestions!
Everyone stay in peace!
See you next time!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor
45 minutes ago, Carlosan said:

Hi.

To get better results, I suggest you send the email.

Hi @Carlosan

I already sent email to support (Andrew) with the videos.... :)

Please, if anyone likes the Selection of polygons and Polygons groups in Sculpt Room... I ask you...  also send email to support, asking Andrew to add these features in 3D-Coat in the future.

thank you

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
On 6/28/2018 at 8:06 AM, Rygaard said:

Hi @Carlosan

I already sent email to support (Andrew) with the videos.... :)

Please, if anyone likes the Selection of polygons and Polygons groups in Sculpt Room... I ask you...  also send email to support, asking Andrew to add these features in 3D-Coat in the future.

thank you

You already have this functionality in 3D Coat, although it works across 2 different workspaces. Personally, I'm ok with it not being assembled into one toolset in the Sculpt workspace, for the time being, as I think there are many more useful requests waiting to be fulfilled. 

One could actually create "Polygroups" in the Sculpt Room with Freeze masks > STORE SELECTION > LOAD SELECTION.

If you want them to be color-coded, hit the hotkey you assign to the Paint tab > Paint with color the desired Polygroup(s) > Name the paint layer(s) accordingly. Now you have effectively "Tagged" that region/section of the model with Vertex Paint and stored on a Paint Layer.

How would you be able to choose and work on the the painted section? Using the Magic Wand to create a Freeze selection from it. Invert the Freeze selection > hit your hotkey to immediately move back to the Sculpt Workspace and use whatever manipulation tool you want. This includes using the Freeze selection with tools like Vox Extrude or Vox Layer.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor
14 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

You already have this functionality in 3D Coat, although it works across 2 different workspaces.

I respect your opinion, but this time, I will have to disagree with you my friend... :(We do not have selection of polygons and polygons group in the Sculpt Room.

Before making a video suggesting something, I try to use some technique that can do the job. If it is something very complicated or even non-existent, then I try to make a video about it.

I have tested on both the latest versions of 3D-Coat and in previous versions: GL and DX.
-------------------------------

1) The first technique you suggested does not work if you change the mesh in some way.

I have previously tested this same technique that you suggested about:

One could actually create "Polygroups" in the Sculpt Room with Freeze masks > STORE SELECTION > LOAD SELECTION. "

This technique only works if you do not change the mesh.
So far, every time I've tried to load the selection with the "load selection - Freeze" option, with me the saved selection always comes with some sort of error, not loading properly the freeze selection I had made.

 -1- I made the selection with Freeze and Store Freezing State.

 -2- I chose the Restore Freezing State option to confirm that the selection I saved would return correctly and I had confirmation that the selection loaded correctly.

 -3- I chose Unfreeze all to have no more selection in the mesh.

 -4- Without any selection on the mesh, with the Move Brush (without using Streching Remove option), I moved the polygons with a simple move forward.

 -5- After I changed the mesh, I chose the Restore Freezing State option and the selection loaded completely wrong.

So in the area I just moved the polygons, where I should have the freeze selection, it just did not show up as it should have appeared.

The selection I've saved is useless, since 3D-Coat can no longer see the selection of the freeze when I change the mesh in any way, either by simple changes, using Remove Streching or Live Clay Brushes.

As you can see in the video, I used only a Move brush and it did not work. Then I tried using my Clay Brush with the option of Remove Stretching enabled and as you can see in the video also did not work.

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

2) In relation to using the painting technique, this would be the most effective to simulate something more or less similar to Polygons Group.

But let's be honest now, besides being anything intuitive to a 3D-Coat user, this technique is very laborious to be done and also to be used later...
The user has to take several steps, change rooms and lose focus on what is working... and at the same time slow to what could be simple and quick to create and use.

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

I think with the implementation of Selection of Polygons and Polygons group in 3D-Coat, these 2 features would become basic functions for any Modeling operation and important functions related to sculpture.

You could have a sense of what I'm talking about when I demonstrate in the 4 videos I've done. I know the videos are not very good (I do not have much time to do, but I worked hard to do.), I tried to do my best demonstrating something that could be very important for all of us in our work in Modeling and Sculpture.

I tried to get the 2 worlds that are still missing in the Sculpt Room:
In Modeling: I think in Zbrush it's called ZModeler and Important sculpting functions that could be done as well.

I just want to help see a 3D-Coat even better than it already is!

Note: I would like to thank everyone for participating, suggesting and that together we can make a difference so that great things happen. ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
1 hour ago, Rygaard said:

I respect your opinion, but this time, I will have to disagree with you my friend... :(We do not have selection of polygons and polygons group in the Sculpt Room.

Before making a video suggesting something, I try to use some technique that can do the job. If it is something very complicated or even non-existent, then I try to make a video about it.

I have tested on both the latest versions of 3D-Coat and in previous versions: GL and DX.
-------------------------------

1) The first technique you suggested does not work if you change the mesh in some way.

I have previously tested this same technique that you suggested about:

One could actually create "Polygroups" in the Sculpt Room with Freeze masks > STORE SELECTION > LOAD SELECTION. "

This technique only works if you do not change the mesh.
So far, every time I've tried to load the selection with the "load selection - Freeze" option, with me the saved selection always comes with some sort of error, not loading properly the freeze selection I had made.

 -1- I made the selection with Freeze and Store Freezing State.

 -2- I chose the Restore Freezing State option to confirm that the selection I saved would return correctly and I had confirmation that the selection loaded correctly.

 -3- I chose Unfreeze all to have no more selection in the mesh.

 -4- Without any selection on the mesh, with the Move Brush (without using Streching Remove option), I moved the polygons with a simple move forward.

 -5- After I changed the mesh, I chose the Restore Freezing State option and the selection loaded completely wrong.

So in the area I just moved the polygons, where I should have the freeze selection, it just did not show up as it should have appeared.

The selection I've saved is useless, since 3D-Coat can no longer see the selection of the freeze when I change the mesh in any way, either by simple changes, using Remove Streching or Live Clay Brushes.

As you can see in the video, I used only a Move brush and it did not work. Then I tried using my Clay Brush with the option of Remove Stretching enabled and as you can see in the video also did not work.

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

2) In relation to using the painting technique, this would be the most effective to simulate something more or less similar to Polygons Group.

But let's be honest now, besides being anything intuitive to a 3D-Coat user, this technique is very laborious to be done and also to be used later...
The user has to take several steps, change rooms and lose focus on what is working... and at the same time slow to what could be simple and quick to create and use.

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

I think with the implementation of Selection of Polygons and Polygons group in 3D-Coat, these 2 features would become basic functions for any Modeling operation and important functions related to sculpture.

You could have a sense of what I'm talking about when I demonstrate in the 4 videos I've done. I know the videos are not very good (I do not have much time to do, but I worked hard to do.), I tried to do my best demonstrating something that could be very important for all of us in our work in Modeling and Sculpture.

I tried to get the 2 worlds that are still missing in the Sculpt Room:
In Modeling: I think in Zbrush it's called ZModeler and Important sculpting functions that could be done as well.

I just want to help see a 3D-Coat even better than it already is!

Note: I would like to thank everyone for participating, suggesting and that together we can make a difference so that great things happen. ;)

 

How are you going to store polygroups in ZBrush and make changes to the mesh, too? You cannot create polygroups > apply Sculptric pro edits and keep your polygroups intact, either. You can sculpt, transform and use the Pose tool with the method I mentioned. Using dynamic tessellation will naturally mess up your polygroups...not just in 3D Coat, but in ZB, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

After doing a quick test, Andrew needs to fix the Freeze Selection, as it should not lose the selection even after you sculpt or deform. However, if you paint your selection in the paint room, it does preserve the paint even after deforming the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor
1 hour ago, AbnRanger said:

How are you going to store polygroups in ZBrush and make changes to the mesh, too? You cannot create polygroups > apply Sculptric pro edits and keep your polygroups intact, either. You can sculpt, transform and use the Pose tool with the method I mentioned. Using dynamic tessellation will naturally mess up your polygroups...not just in 3D Coat, but in ZB, too.

The purpose of Polygroups is to give you permanently a selection of polygons in an organized way regardless of what you can do in the mesh.

At the moment, I'm not using the latest version of ZBrush to talk about dynamic tessellation over the mesh with the Polygroups built into it.I really would not know how to comment on the Sculptric pro edits...

I usually use the version of Zbrush 4R7.
In Zbrush 4R7, when you create Polygroups, you can move the mesh with the Move Brush, and the Polygroups still respect as much as possible the changes that the mesh has suffered.
Of course, the polygons groups did not look perfect or identical the way they were created (because the mesh was changed), but they remained as faithful as possible and would not happen with the errors that happened with Freeze as I demonstrated in the video.

The same thing will happen if you use DynaMesh in Zbrush.
The polygroups remained almost in the same format as they were created. Of course, if you moved the mesh, the Polygroups also moved or modified according to the changes.
Even if you are changing the resolution of Dynamesh to more or less the Polygroups have still tried to remain with the format that was created.

 

1 hour ago, AbnRanger said:

After doing a quick test, Andrew needs to fix the Freeze Selection, as it should not lose the selection even after you sculpt or deform.

I'm glad you did this little test and found that there is a problem and Andrew needs to fix Freeze Selection ... Thanks for that! :)
Andrew needs to review Restore Freeze even when the mesh is modified so that those strange errors do not appear in the mesh that happened when the user loads the selection  when the user needs it.

 

1 hour ago, AbnRanger said:

However, if you paint your selection in the paint room, it does preserve the paint even after deforming the area.

I agree with you that when you use the Paint technique ... Oh yes! It behaves exactly the way I would like to happen with this functionality. ;)

In this technique, it does not matter if you use dynamic tesselation or make severe modifications to the mesh, because the Paint will remain faithful to the format it was created.
Of course, the painting will change according to the mesh changes in the same way I explained above with the ZBrush operation ...

I'll be honest with you, I think the behavior of this painting technique works even better than what happens at Zbrush. Because in 3D-Coat the paint remains more intact in the mesh regardless of what might happen.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me but are mixing two different tools concepts. Each of them need their own development because they are 2 different work systems. Both processes can have automatic creation options.

- Grouping.

- Masking (Freeze).

 

Polygroups are groups of polygons that we can define to identify the different parts of our mesh.

A mask is an area of your model that is ‘shielded’ from sculpting, painting, etc.

 

Masked areas are not simply on/off. Instead, they can be unmasked, partially masked to some degree, or fully masked or blurred. The effect that operations such as sculpting have on masked areas of a model depends on the intensity of the mask at each point.

Groups of polygons areas are simply on/off operations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
4 hours ago, Carlosan said:

Excuse me but are mixing two different tools concepts. Each of them need their own development because they are 2 different work systems. Both processes can have automatic creation options.

- Grouping.

- Masking (Freeze).

 

Polygroups are groups of polygons that we can define to identify the different parts of our mesh.

A mask is an area of your model that is ‘shielded’ from sculpting, painting, etc.

 

Masked areas are not simply on/off. Instead, they can be unmasked, partially masked to some degree, or fully masked or blurred. The effect that operations such as sculpting have on masked areas of a model depends on the intensity of the mask at each point.

Groups of polygons areas are simply on/off operations.

Yes, but my point was to use what we have in 3D Coat, currently, to emulate the POLYGROUPS feature set in ZB. If the freeze selection > store and load option was working properly (the freeze selection STORE should remain even if the mesh was deformed at some point after saving the selection), then that would be one way. But the Paint Layer > Magic Wand (to select) technique is probably the best way to emulate Polygroups functionality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Imagine if we had Polygons Selections and Polygons group that I suggested and I tried to demonstrate in the videos I did in the Sculpt Room.

Because of these 2 great features above, we would have precise, controlled and fast Modeling in a similar way to what happens in the ZBrush Zmodeler, directly in the 3D-Coat Sculpt Room.
All the tools and functions we already have in the Retopo Room could be implemented and depending even further improving so that we can use them in the Sculpt Room in a similar way to the Zbrush ZModeler.

Another thing I think is important is that with Polygons Selections and Polygons Group many essential and important related features for the sculpting we could have.
In one of the videos I demonstrated on any brush (Move or Sculpting) it would only affect the Polygons Group that the user would be manipulating, the user would have full control over the polygons and regardless of the Brush size would not allow other parts of the mesh surface to be changed. And also the control of the format on Polygons group that would not change much or would not change anything, even with changes in the surface of the mesh that the user would do.

With Polygons Selections and Polygons group, these 2 main features would become the working basis for all 3D-Coat tools, brushes, or functionalities. Users would have complete control over the mesh and would not be dependent on the Freeze tool (which becomes sometimes unstable because the freeze format is changing a lot and sometimes bugs happen).
And best of all, even for my lack of programming knowledge, Andrew could develop great features, features and tools just because of these possible implementations that would become the basis of the program.
I'll try to make another video demonstrating this.

I can see that Andrew tries to implement through the ExtrudeFaces tool and other tools a great attempt to do modeling directly in the Sculpt Room (and of course for the user to use the tool the mode of polygon selection is through Freeze).

Therefore, since there is this intention of Modeling directly in the Sculpt Room and Polygon Selections through the Freeze tool, then I ask a question:

Would not it be better to have the Polygons Selections and Polygons Group implemented in the Sculpt Room?
I'm not talking about copying the things I demonstrated through Autodesk Meshmixer, but something similar or even better!

I think everyone could realize how much Polygons Selections and Polygons Group would be vital for everything in 3D-Coat. It would be a very important step in the development of 3D-Coat for modeling, sculpture and essential functions for the program. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Contributor

Reprojecting details from one mesh to another mesh with completely different topology:

Hey everyone,
It's been a while since I suggested some tool for 3D-Coat. So.... :) 

I believe that many users, like me, have arrived at a stage of sculpture, in the Surface (Sculpt room) mode, where we detail the mesh and for some reason we have to reproject all the details that took too long to be made in another mesh.

How to do this procedure?
Many people would say that we could convert the mesh to voxels mode and use the Copy tool or other tools to simulate this projection of details from one mesh to another.

I agree that these techniques could work, but for you to switch to Voxels, there is a problem, we all know that we will have to enter a value of 1.0 trillion polygons so that the mesh converted to Voxel can have all those details exactly the same as of the mesh when in Surface mode.
Another problem is that if we were working with an open mesh, imagine working with half a head and no polygons behind. In this situation, when we tried to convert to Voxels the mesh would explode or there would be some defect in converting to Voxels. To avoid this, we know that we would need to use the Shell tool and then convert to Voxels using trillions polygons again.

At this point, I ask everyone ... and if for some reason we could not convert the mesh to voxels?
How could we project all the details of one mesh to another mesh with different topology while in Surface mode?

Some users might suggest some techniques.

Maybe using tools like Clone and Vox Layer, but unfortunately, it would not work very well because when you were to merge a layer with the vox layer or Clone, 3D-Coat would not allow this Boolean procedure because one mesh intersects the other (in surface mode).
To avoid this, we would have to erase all the polygons in the area where intersession happens, merge layers, and if there is no error in Boolean operation, we would have to somehow use some technique to bridge the mesh to the other.

So, I ask, what if we were working on a mesh for 3D printing?
After the part is detailed and you have the Keys to fit between parts?
In this situation, we know that we have to be exact, we can not change the mesh and if we could we would have to change almost nothing.

What I do know is that unfortunately at this point we have no way out of our problem or some technique with tools or functions inside the Surface (Sculpt Room) mode.

Therefore, I would very much like to suggest some tools in Surface Mode, where we could perform the projection of details between different meshes. This process is very important for various types of jobs.

I could have made a video to show this process of transferring detail between meshes, but I found a video that already demonstrates all the tools that would be needed to make this process:

0:26 - 1:18 minutes - Explaining the process.

1:18 - 1:42 minutes - Using Project All (With the default tool settings)

1:43 - 1:53 minutes - result of not having been efficient.

1:54 - 2:02 minutes - Reason for not having been efficient

2:03 - 2:39 minutes - Controlling the projection with the Slide Distance value. (almost perfect result)

2:40 - 2:49 minutes - Reason to still have some defects in the projection.

2:50 - 2:55 minutes - Return to mesh at the initial time.

2:56 - 3:20 minutes - Before retaking the projection, use and explanation of the Store Morth target tool

3:21 - 3:34 minutes - Remaining the projection process

3:35 - 3:39 minutes - Procedure for preparing the mesh where errors occurred in the projection

4:00 - 4:43 minutes - Morph Brush: Explanation and use of the tool

4:43 - 6:05 minutes - Manual process with Clay brush to help the mesh projection

6:06 - 6:25 minutes - Almost perfect result.

6:26 - 7:28 minutes - Limiting the projection to some areas with the use of Masks.


In 3D-coat, we have the Copy Brush found in Voxels mode.

I'd like to suggest that we could have in Surface mode a Project All tool and we could also have Copy Brush to perfect some mistakes (if the project process did not work 100%) or project what the user would like with Copy Brush.
In 3D-Coat, this project all could respect the Freeze areas and so would not project any details in those areas.
The Store Morph Target technique could be replaced by Clip Mask (if Andrew added Clip Mask to Sculpt Layers) or some other tool that would mimic this function.

I know Andrew is busy with so many things to be done, but I hope someday we could have these great tools in Surface Mode which is one of the most important Modes within the Sculpt Room. :)
What do you guys think about that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I have asked for and hope we at least, get a Sym Copy Brush, that let's us brush copy from one side of the symmetry plane...similar to how the Clone Stamp tool works in the Paint Room. There are times where I do not want to have to Sym Copy the entire mesh. Just some portions of it. A projection tool and/or brush would be a welcome addition, too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

It's great that you've talked about one of the tools that exist in the Paint Room like the Clone Tool. I'm glad of it ...

I agree with you and to be honest ...

I would very much appreciate that if it were possible most of the tools and functions that exist in Paint Room, that Andrew could somehow create or duplicate these tools and functions from Paint Room to Surface mode (sculpt Room).
I think it is a fantastic and essentials features that would increase our power to create and manipulate the meshes, that is, we would have great possibilities in Surface Mode.
Surface mode would become even more powerful and unique!

I'm wondering what Surface Mode would be like with Project All tool, Copy Brush, and the other tools that exist in Paint Room would be duplicated for Surface Mode (Sculpt Room) ... It would just be perfect!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor
4 hours ago, Rygaard said:

It's great that you've talked about one of the tools that exist in the Paint Room like the Clone Tool. I'm glad of it ...

I agree with you and to be honest ...

I would very much appreciate that if it were possible most of the tools and functions that exist in Paint Room, that Andrew could somehow create or duplicate these tools and functions from Paint Room to Surface mode (sculpt Room).
I think it is a fantastic and essentials features that would increase our power to create and manipulate the meshes, that is, we would have great possibilities in Surface Mode.
Surface mode would become even more powerful and unique!

I'm wondering what Surface Mode would be like with Project All tool, Copy Brush, and the other tools that exist in Paint Room would be duplicated for Surface Mode (Sculpt Room) ... It would just be perfect!

I agree. We need both the Erase and the Magnification/Reduction equivalents in the Sculpt Workspace, so the user can stay in that environment as long as they want or need to, without having to constantly switch back and forth between the two workspaces, just to use these common functions for Sculpt Layers. We also need a CONDITIONS Droplist appear in the Sculpt workspace when the Freeze tool is active

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor
1 hour ago, AbnRanger said:

I agree. We need both the Erase and the Magnification/Reduction equivalents in the Sculpt Workspace, so the user can stay in that environment as long as they want or need to, without having to constantly switch back and forth between the two workspaces, just to use these common functions for Sculpt Layers. We also need a CONDITIONS Droplist appear in the Sculpt workspace when the Freeze tool is active 

Certainly! We need to stay in the same room as much as possible.

I have tried several techniques inside the Surface mode in Sculpt Room and I have been encountering many difficulties.

For example, a production focused on 3d printing.

I've been missing a number of tools in which I could manipulate, change, and repair meshes inside the Sculpt Room (especially in Surface mode).

I've been insisting a lot on surface mode because that's where most of our production will be made. At no time I am leaving aside the Voxels mode which is very important as well, but is more focused on the early part of a production, such as in volume creation.

In surface mode, we have fantastic tools and functions that specialize in the refinement and detailing of the mesh. And the most important is the implementation of Sculpt Layers that Andrew is developing that is in the beta version (If in the beta the sculpt layers is very good, I imagine when it is completely stable and compatible with other functions and tools of 3D-Coat. In my opinion, it will be the best Sculpt Layer system within all programs).

Unfortunately, as I was saying above, in Surface mode there are very important tools and functions missing so we can manipulate and repair the mesh, as in the following situations:

- A tool is missing that can close large holes or all the holes in the mesh, as in Zbrush with theirs Close Holes tool.
I know there are the Close holes and Fill Holes tools in the 3d-coat, but for some cases both tools do not work.
For example, you can try the following experiment.
Select the Vox Layer tool, with the rectangular selection, select only half of the skull bust, set the tool to Create as Surface, layer offset = 0 and thickness = 0.

With the mesh generated, in surface mode, try to close the back of the bust (which has no polygons). You can try using the tools I have said (Close Holes and Fill Holes) that 3d-Coat will not close the mesh with polygons.
After that, go to the Geometry / Close Holes menu ... and nothing will happen, because 3D-Coat warns that the mesh has no holes.

image.thumb.png.cb1b787e8fea280ca75516c0310c9d41.png

To close this hole, I figured we could go to the Retopo Room and create the back with polygons, import that back of the reto to the same layer in the surface mode, but we'd have two problems. 1) If there is any intersession between the meshes 3d-coat will not merge between the meshes. 2) If the mesh happens to be merged in the same layer, we still have the problem of bridging the two surfaces.

There may be other methods for performing a simple operation of closing a mesh surface, even if that hole is somewhat complicated to close.
But, currently, it is a painful procedure to be done to perform a Close holes within the surface mode.

- Tools are missing in Surface mode as the tools that we have inside the Retopo Room, so that we can repair and make modeling with the edges or polygons of the meshes that are in the Surface Mode and also an Bridge tool between Edges.

- Projection of details and shapes Within Surface mode, it would be very important the tools that I already talked about as project all, Copy tool and something similar to Morph target.

- The tools and functions that exist in the Paint Room could be duplicated into the Surface Room:
. Height Adjustment Tool (MAGNIFICATION E REDUCTION)
. Clone Tool
. Transform / Copy Tool
. Copy / Paste Tool
. Spline Image Tool
. Eraser Tool    
. CONDITIONS Droplist could also be present in Surface Mode - Freeze Brush.
. Different Freeze types that exist in the menu: Toggle Freeze View and other functions.

. VERY IMPORTANT: Clip Mask Layers for Sculpt Layers

- Another very important function that Andrew could change is the following:
When we are in Surface mode and we press the Enter key, we define the amount of polygons so 3D-Coat can perform the procedure of transforming the mesh into Voxels and return to Surface Mode.
Instead, why does not the function accomplish something similar to what happens in Zbrush dynamesh?
Please allow me to explain, when the user sculpted shapes and details using Dynamesh and the user needs to perform that redo mesh procedure with another dynamesh and even setting the amount of polygons in the dynamesh settings, Zbrush generates a mesh where all the shapes and details still remain in the mesh.
Of course if the user has defined a lower number of polygons the program will not generate something where the details will stay in the mesh, but it will do everything to make the mesh as close as possible to the mesh at the beginning of the process.
In 3D-coat, if we press ENTER, we need to define trillions of polygons so that the mesh remains with the same details as before pressing the ENTER key. The problem with this is that if you had a mesh with a reasonable amount of polygons, you will have a very heavy polygon mesh.
I do not know how Andrew could change this, but if he could generate another program code so that the mesh does not have to do this Voxels / Surface procedure, re-evaluating the mesh to fix problems and at the same time it would be more important to keep the details already made by the user, would be fantastic.

- I also miss functions with Polygroup and different types of polygon selections that exist in Meshmixer. In fact, I did videos explaining and detailing these functions.

- Function to be activated in the Move Tool and Pose Tool to restrict the influence of the brush area between two surfaces in a more topological way. For example, you try to close the eyes or mouth of a character without affecting the entire surrounding region. I also explained this in the video.

I know there are many suggestions, but I think these tools and features mentioned above would make the 3d-coat surface mode become a real power and could not be missing in 3d-coat (surface mode).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I would like to make a correction on the Close Holes in Surface, Close Hole and Fill Hole tools in 3D-Coat (surface mode). The method I did using Vox Layer to generate an open mesh behind the bust, actually the tool does not generate a hollow mesh (no polygons in the back) ... I said it wrong and I apologize for my mistake! In fact, Vox Layer generates a mesh with a very thin thickness. Therefore, 3D-Coat shows a warning that the mesh has no holes and that is why the Close Holes in Surface, Fill Hole and close holes tools were not "working" as they should be. Again, apologies for my mistake.

I generated a new mesh and with the Poly Remove tool, I erased the back faces of the bust and so I got a mesh without volumes and without polygons in the back. I used again the 3 tools to be able to close the hole behind the bust and they have resulted in the following image:

image.thumb.png.be8c0c5ce113da4f5ecf04b34225ceaa.png

As you can see the result was not exactly what I wanted. Maybe, I'm not sure how to properly use the 3 tools to get the result I'd really like, but the tools worked.
I wish the result would be a better surface.

Now, I took the same mesh for Meshmixer and Blender programs. The result as you can see is the way I would expect to close the hole in the mesh. The meshmixer closed the hole creating a dense mesh, but with better quality. In blender, I just used the Fill tool, I did not bother closing the hole with quality in the mesh. I believe there is a better tool for having a much better quality result.
In my opinion and conclusion, I wish 3d-Coat would have closed the hole in the same quality as meshmixer gave me.

image.thumb.png.7c5866173da8263b630c6031edbd704a.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I was thinking about the function of the ENTER key in Surface (sculpt room) mode.

We all know that when we are in Surface mode sculpting or modeling, if there is a problem with the mesh, press the ENTER key and a window will appear asking the amount of polygons for the user to inform 3D-COat so that it can do internally a programming code that will convert the mesh to voxels and will return the new mesh to the Surface mode in seconds. It is the same as the user was in VoxTree, click on the icon to go to Voxels mode and then click on the icon to return to the Surface mode.

That said, when we are in Surface mode, we know that when we go to Voxels mode (pressing the ENTER key or VoxTree icon) we will have to enter a trillion polygon value so we do not lose the details we already sculpted in the surface mode . In case you have a super pc everything is ok, but if you have a medium pc, it is difficult to work with trillions of polygons just to keep the detail work of the sculpture you have done in surface mode. And after returning to Surface Mode, you will have to reduce the amount of trillion polygons in order to be able to re-sculpt again and be careful not to lose detail in the mesh during this process.

I think working in this way does not make much sense, has no efficiency and the pc ends up being slow and with great chances of 3d-coat to stop working.
You may also think that converting the mesh to voxels and then returning to surface mode can fix a problem mesh.
But this does not always happen, I did a test where I used the Inflate and the Pinch Brushes to cause serious damage to the object and to make the mesh exploded inside. When the user saw the mesh externally it seemed that everything was ok, but inside the mesh was in trouble. So I thought converting the mesh to voxels (ENTER key) all my problems would be fixed but unfortunately that was not what happened. Internally, there were still problems with the mesh and I had to manually repair using Reconstruction Brush and even though I was taking great care not to affect the surrounding areas, I ended up affecting those areas and I had to sculpt the area region to fix the procedure caused by Reconstruction Brush.

So I thought, since we are in surface mode, why instead of 3d-coat converting the mesh into voxels (ENTER key), could 3d-coat generate a new mesh through another type of routine?

Please, allow me to explain my suggestion to you better.
What I would like to suggest would be a more Surface Mode oriented code, something very similar when you choose the process to do AUTOPO -> Instant Meshes (auto), and instead of generating polygons for the Retopo Room, this code would generate a new mesh with the amount of polygons desired by the user.
This new mesh would fix any problems or errors in the mesh (such as holes, intersections and other types of errors) and the best thing is that this new mesh could still remain as much as possible the details already sculpted in the mesh by the user.

This process would still be the same as the users are accustomed to doing.
We would press Enter, we would inform the amount of polygons, but the result would be the generation of a new mesh more efficient, light, fixing possible errors in the meshes and with the details still remained (according to the quantity of polygons of course).
image.thumb.png.b7b79fea3f473f3a1af85ea91cd2f89c.png

Of course, if the user wants to convert to voxels he can do this manually through voxtree.

That way, we would have the 2 worlds in our hands, meshes generated for Surface mode (Instant Meshes type) and meshes generated by Voxels mode. That way, would increase the amount of techniques or methods applied in the sculpture, would increase productivity and efficiency for users.

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...