Jump to content
3DCoat Forums
Rygaard

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

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

Recently, I saw the release of zbrush 2018.
In addition to fantastic new tools and enhancements, they finally put something very similar to 3D-Coat's live clay.

First, I want to say that I love 3D-Coat, I bought the license even though I was a Zbrush user. When I saw 3D-Coat, I fell in love with the unique features offered by 3D-Coat (voxels, live clay and several unique program tools) that even the powerful Zbrush did not have.

I may be wrong, but over time, I noticed that the Zbrush releases were very similar tools to what 3D-Coat had already had for a long time.

When I started to do my work on 3D-Coat, I realized the difference of the brushes when I tried to sculpt 3D-Coat that did not have the same feeling I had in Zbrush (even many users complained about the same thing). Until there appeared brushes that supposedly would be similar to the Zbrush (Artman's brushes).
I did not give up 3D-Coat and I started doing some tests trying to find ideal settings, and I started to love the way I sculpted 3D-Coat.

So, I came to use 3D-Coat as my MAIN sculpting and texturing program and because I really like and care about 3D-Coat, I would humbly like to appeal to @Andrew Shpagin and the fantastic developers of 3D-Coat that, please, begin to improvise and add tools to the Sculpt Room.
I know that such tools are complex to make, but because I believe so much in 3D-Coat I would very much like to see the System of layers in the Sculpt Room, Morph tools and Reprojection of details from one mesh to the other, Noise system maker, Possibility of baker of displacement map directly in the mesh (without having to export the mesh and import the mesh again), Better tools of modifiers like inflate, bend and etc, Possibility to create groups of polygons so that we can isolate and work with them at the moment we want (like polygroups). A Falloff tool or topology in the brush moves and in the other brushes so we can sculpt or move without affecting areas around the sculpture point (eg opening or closing mouth or eyes). A better integration of masks with Paint Room, because if you have a mesh with many polygons and take to the Paint room is very slow the procedure of making masks or improvise tools of the Paint Room in the Sculpt Room for the procedure to be done quickly. Improvements in the detail of the surface of the mesh, because when using an alpha the mesh gets the detailing with effect of few polygons (it is different when doing the same procedure in the zbrush, getting better). Functionalities for better control of imported alphas. As well as other tools and features that many users ask to be made in 3D-Coat.

I hope you do not criticize me for asking Zbrush tools and features for 3D-Coat because I can only see 3D-Coat enhancements on Zbrush.
If they do not mind putting very similar 3D-Coat tools on their system, why not implement tools similar to theirs in 3D-Coat?

Sometimes I think that tools like Copy Clay (from Surface mode), which is a fantastic tool type (which is having problems with recent versions of 3D-Coat), was created and left out. Just like other tools.

For a long time I have been waiting for tools and features that I have already mentioned above and never appear. I get very sad and discouraged by this.
Once again, I know that it's complicated to develop such functionalities and I know of the effort of the developers to do what is 3D-Coat that we all know. I really congratulate you for creating this fantastic program and I love it, but please read my requests with love, because I would like to see 3D-Coat shining more than it shines nowadays!

Before anyone tells me to ask for these features in the ordering section session, to send email to the support or something, I noticed that it does not help much, because many things are already in those places and they stayed there.

I hope everyone will ask to @Andrew Shpagin and developers for new features and tools, as well as improvements to existing tools. Because I do not want to hear from many artists who make videos on youtube that 3D-Coat is not good at sculpting and detailing how Zbrush is.

I would like to see many good things in the next version of 3D-Coat. It will be possible @Andrew Shpagin and developers?

For those who want to see a preview of ZBRUSH 2018 on youtube, you'll understand what I felt when I saw so many things being released and improved by them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYsTuP5giPE

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

ZBrush have long time developing one area: Sculpt.

Or -another example- Substance Painter have long time developing one area: Paint.

3DC is a multiuse application that specializes in several areas, PBR painting, sculpt, retopology, 3D print... Due to that and the diversity of the developments it is difficult to compete with other software that only develops in one aspect of the realization.

Many of us sometimes think: "Application X has this, so 3DC must have it, too".

What the developers primarily need like to know is HOW you intend to use the feature. This is the most important part.

Developers cant start working on any feature unless they know why it is useful and how it is exactly used. Even better, once they know how it’s used, can start thinking about what else can do to make the workflow even more fluid.

Hope this help to your idea.

Best

CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carlosan said:

Hi

ZBrush have long time developing one area: Sculpt.

Or -another example- Substance Painter have long time developing one area: Paint.

3DC is a multiuse application that specializes in several areas, PBR painting, sculpt, retopology, 3D print... Due to that and the diversity of the developments it is difficult to compete with other software that only develops in one aspect of the realization.

Many of us sometimes think: "Application X has this, so 3DC must have it, too".

What the developers primarily need like to know is HOW you intend to use the feature. This is the most important part.

Developers cant start working on any feature unless they know why it is useful and how it is exactly used. Even better, once they know how it’s used, can start thinking about what else we can do to make the workflow even more fluid.

Hope this help to your idea.

Best

CA.

Hi,
I'll see the link you gave me how to help!

I know that these programs you mentioned already have a lot of development time and are specific to each area.
As well as, I know that 3D-Coat is made from several programs like yourself said (Paint, sculpt, retopology and etc.) and making the development of 3D-Coat more difficult.

I am here trying to help and pass on to developers in the 3D-Coat sculpture area, we need features that other programs already exist that will considerably improve the way the artist will perform their creations. I think the 3D-Coat Sculpture area is one of the strongest areas of the program, so I know that 3D-Coat is able to have these features (I hope so).

I'm going to talk briefly about the first feature I asked for was the Layers System.
We know that in a production, we are subject to approvals and with this, there are modifications in a project. After finishing a project, usually changes happen in the project and with the implementation of the layer system, we, artists, we can change what was done without doing a destructive procedure, that is, we can have total control of the project without having to waste time remaking all over again as requested by a superior. Today, 3D-Coat is a destructive system in sculpture.

I believe all the features and tools I've spoken about are extremely important and vital in a production. I know that many users of 3D-Coat look forward to it and have already explained why they have it, because it will definitely make it easier for create freedom for the creation of the artists like in ZBrush.

I know that with the increase of these features 3D-Coat will take a very important step, causing many artists to join the program.

Do not get me wrong, but sometimes developers because they are programmers do not see that some features are important to the artists, but from their point of view they do not need such functionalities.

Everything I said is for the success of 3D-Coat.

And I'm sorry if I mentioned other programs, but there's no way I can not see and ask for something that does not already exist in other programs like Zbrush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for discerning with you, but one of the strongest areas of the program is retopology room.

No ZB or SP cant compite with 3DC in that area. And is where 3dcoat is best known and used.

Another very common use is reconstruction of meshes created by photogrammetry.

Not only games and simulation is the potential market of 3d coat but also architecture, medicine, industrial design ... the list is extensive.

Today, 3D-Coat is a destructive system in sculpture. I agree but today by today the workflow is the problem is not software.

You talk about ZB, can you please tell me which is the common workflow you use in ZB to avoid that destructive system in sculpture.

Any change to the software required by the community has always been listened to and carried out, respecting the list of all priorities.

It is true that the sculpture area needs refinement. The big challenge for 3dcoat at this time is to maintain a level of realization tools that is balanced in all aspects of the creation from start to finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Carlosan said:

Sorry for discerning with you, but one of the strongest areas of the program is retopology room.

No ZB or SP cant compite with 3DC in that area. And is where 3dcoat is best known and used.

Another very common use is reconstruction of meshes created by photogrammetry.

Not only games and simulation is the potential market of 3d coat but also architecture, medicine, industrial design ... the list is extensive.

Today, 3D-Coat is a destructive system in sculpture. I agree but today by today the workflow is the problem is not software.

You talk about ZB, can you please tell me which is the common workflow you use in ZB to avoid that destructive system in sculpture.

Any change to the software required by the community has always been listened to and carried out, respecting the list of all priorities.

It is true that the sculpture area needs refinement. The big challenge for 3dcoat at this time is to maintain a level of realization tools that is balanced in all aspects of the creation from start to finish.

All right, my friend, no problem.
I believe this discussion is very good and important for the understanding and development of our 3D-Coat!

I'll look at the links you gave me!

Certainly, I agree with you that 3D-Coat has several highlights as in retopology, as well as in rebuilding meshes.
Also, the other day, I tended to rebuild a mesh created by photogrammetry and to my surprise, I was amazed how 3D-Coat shone and I ended up smiling a lot because what 3D-Coat was able to do made me think that ZB was far behind in this type of procedure. 3D-Coat was really fantastic! A very pleasant surprise!

I understand the challenge that developers have to face in order to have the balance between all the areas that the program has.

I use 3D-Coat for sculpting and texturizing. I know that with the implementation of the features and tools I have already mentioned it would be of great benefit to all artists from different areas (3d Printer, games, animations and etc). As an example, let's talk about a project for 3D printing, where in the final sculpture should contain in the mesh all the details physically in the mesh.

In this project (but could also be for any 3d production):
1) The layer system would be very important. The artist could create a new layer for his sculpture base (if you want to work this way), the next layer could do the details like wrinkles, the other skin layer, the next pores and so on. With this, the artist can (if there is an opacity slide) have total control over the mesh, mixing the layers together and decide how much stronger or weaker a layer will influence the mesh. And of course, if you needed to change something that the supervisor asked for, it would be much easier. It would not be a destructive process.
Something similar to what we already have in the Paint Room layer system.
Something FANTASTIC that could be added in these layers would be the possibility to use masks to further refine what was done in the layer (Functionality that also already exists in the layer system of the Paint Room). And if not ask a lot the possibility of creating and group folders for the layers.
In short, I believe the layering system that already exists in PAINT ROOM would be PERFECT if it were in the Sculpt Room. Imagine the system that already exists in Paint Room existed also in the Sculpt room, the production of any project would limit the creativity of the artist, the sky would be the limit!

2) The system similar to the Morph target that exists in ZB in conjunction with the Morph brush would be very important as well. Where you could create a sort of mesh snapshot at that time before any changes, then make desired changes and be able to have control with the Morph brush of how you want the detail to appear in the mesh. With this system, you could also notice, through a slide that changes from the state that created the snapshot to the mesh carved afterwards, the deformations that happen when you fold a leg, arm and trunk of a character and thus be able to repair a possible stretching or deformation of the mesh. This system of Morph Target and Morph brush could be used in conjunction with the layer system I mentioned above (1).

3) A system Reprojection of details between one mesh and another. I know that 3D-Coat does not use an organized mesh to sculpt on it until the end of the project. Today, we carve out a mesh of triangles (voxels, live clay, and remove strech) to make retopology after. But at some point in the project, I would like to redesign all of my details that have been made into an unorganized mesh for an organized mesh without having to bake the Paint Room or if there is a mesh or file problem we need to get the detail of this mesh and transfer it to another mesh that is free of problems.

3) We need a Noise Maker system for detailing the meshes with the generation of different types of texture patterns and also with the possibility of placing a texture map created by the artist with a preview of how the mesh will look before accepting the made physically there. I do not know if it would be interesting to use Sculpt Room shaders to be able to make this kind of Noise Maker system.

4) A Bake Displacement Map system directly in the mesh in the Sculpt Room.
Actually, this is very important if you make the texture of displacement map in another external program or in the 3D-Coat itself where you need to have all the details of the displacement map in the mesh to continue the detailing process in the sculpture or to the Decimate process for 3D printing. In this system, you could have an Preview along with a displacement map force slide before pushing a button to bake the mesh.
Currently I know we can import the displacement into a mesh organized in the Paint Room and export the mesh in three different amounts of polygons to carry out the bake of the displacement in the mesh and only after performing this procedure you can import into the Sculpt Room . Another procedure, instead of exporting the mesh, is to go to the bake menu and click the paint button Room -> Sculpt Room, but I noticed that the details are not presented correctly, that is, the details do not get good resolution when we see the your result in the Sculpt Room.

5) Better modifier tools, because currently, in my opinion the Warp tool is not very intuitive and difficult to control. I do not know if it is because of lack of knowledge on my part or if the tool is complicated to manipulate to have the expected result. As well as other types of modifiers that would further facilitate sculpture.

6) System of creation of Groups of Polygons. Very, very important even for those who sculpt knows how important this functionality is, where we can define an area of polygons in which we can change the mesh whenever we want, as well as hide other polygons other than this group of created polygons. This type of polygon creation and selection system exists in ZB and Meshmixer. No doubt that this functionality greatly facilitates the work of the artist.

7) A Falloff tool or topology in the brush moves and in the other brushes so we can sculpt or move without affecting areas around the sculpture point (eg opening or closing mouth or eyes). It is horrible for you to sculpt a certain area and change undesirable areas around the sculpted area.
This tool could be used in conjunction with the above-mentioned polygon group creation and selection system (6).

8) Improve the peformance of the masking system. When a sculpture of thousands of polygons is taken to the Paint Room, the system is currently slow with the creation of masks in the Paint Room. Could you have the same Paint Room masking system in the Sculpt Room for better masking performance?
Another important thing in the system with the Freeze brush in surface mode is that when I save a mask and try to recover this saved mask, it usually does not appear the same way I saved it. I believe this is caused by changing the mesh made later with the Live CLay brushes or with the Remove Streching option activated in the brush, then when you try to load the mask after the changes, it does not have the result you would expect to have.

9) Regarding the detailing of the surface of the mesh, I do not know if it is me who is not knowing to detail the surface or if it is something that I have to do different, because currently, when I try to detail on the surface of the mesh using Alphas brush or the Stencil system, the result is a mesh with an effect of lack of quality, as if I did not have enough polygons to have a quality that I would like to have in the sculpture. I do not know if it would fit an improvement in 3D-Coat in this sense or if it happens only with me. Because when I do the same procedure in ZB I get the quality I desire in the refinement of the mesh.

10) We could have a better system with alphas, where we can better control the behavior of alphas, something that exists in ZB. In ZB, we can control how much the alpha will deform the surface by controlling and hiding the quad or oval shape of the brush and also a possible alpha smoothing without having to take Photoshop over to apply a Gaussian Blur. As well as alpha repetition control (tileable).

I believe these are the main features that pop up in my head right now, I know we have many other necessary features as well that other users have already asked and explained how much would be valuable during the production process.

I hope I have managed to explain even a little summary of how much we need these features and helped developers to look more lovingly on these improvements that are needed in the 3D-Coat.

I have a lot of hope that one day I will have these features in 3D-Coat!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Rygaard and have been trying to lobby Andrew to give more attention to the Sculpt Room. In terms of Sculpting, ZBrush really has not add that much functionality in the last 7-10yrs. They set the standard high and no one has bothered to try and reach it. In the mean time, they have added a lot of the functionality that made 3D Coat unique, including Auto-Retopo, Polymodeling tools in the Retopo Room, and and now LiveClay functionality via the Sculptris mode, in ZB 2018.

The reality of the matter is that Andrew really isn't that far from ZB in terms of sculpting prowess. Just look at the number of Surface mode brushes and the Presets that come by default. When I use some of the common ZB brushes like Clay or ClayBuildup, they are nice and smooth. But when I turn and try the equivalent brushes in 3D Coat, they too are very smooth and responsive. The Pinch Brush is very nice, as is Crease-Clay. But, a lot of ZB users who have tried 3D Coat notice that it doesn't have Sculpt Layers and they just go back to using ZBrush exclusively. I've asked for this repeatedly over the past 4-5yrs, to no avail.

It is disappointing to see ZBrush come out with a number of large scale improvements in each release and yes, they are cherry picking from 3D Coat's basket of goodies, while Andrew doesn't reciprocate and focus on matching their strengths. He does so, to some degree, regarding Substance Painter, but not ZBrush. Not since Artman worked with him on many of the brushes leading up to the  4.1 release. I told Stas that Andrew really should stop with all the small features for a while and work on some BIG features that people have been asking for, for years.

He has let people who are not long-time users or contributors on here, get in his ear and convince him he should release a scaled down 3D Print version, and now a very, very limited 3D Coat Mod tool. This has has gobbled up all the development time that should have otherwise gone into Sculpt Layers, and a revamped Layer Mask system in the Paint Workspace. Other developers have matched many of the Retopo room's tools and improved upon them significantly. Not much attention has been given to that workspace either. If they aren't improved soon, then 3D Coat won't be able to hang it's hat on Retopo tools, either. I've seen some really nice versions of the Strokes tool, including a Blender addon and now in Houdini. They give you much more control over the loops once they have been added, and more control over the number of rings/segments are added.

Maybe, Rygaard, you can record something like Andrew Price did a few years back, where he lobbied for improvements to the Blender UI, and it got Ton's attention.

One thing I know is that if Andrew puts his mind to something, he can usually come up with a brilliant solution. But he prefers to work on a lot of small feature additions (low-hanging fruit) as opposed to larger scale, more substantial ones. And then, he often gets distracted by a constant flow of requests that we never see on here or on Mantis....many of which jump ahead of the line, in front of feature requests most of us have been patiently waiting on for years and years. That really should change. IMO, there should be a group of regular contributors/users, who, at regular intervals, vote on upcoming feature additions, and those get priority.

I'm seeing more and more long time users/contributors sort of disappear from this community, and much of that is probably because their input isn't being heeded and their/our requests go unfulfilled. If Andrew took 6mos to 1yr of focused development in the Sculpt workspace, he could seriously give Pixologic a run for it's money, as a production-level sculpting application. That would be a game-changer and make waves in the industry. I told Stas that, recently, but my opinion doesn't carry much weight. So, others will have to email Andrew (support@3DCoat.com) and let their voices be heard in this regard.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AbnRanger I got tired of being quiet and seeing what we had (3D-Coat) appearing gradually in the Zbrush, but in an improved way. And the funniest thing is that when they introduced these features to the audience, everyone applauded and heard an "ohhhh" from this audience. I did not understand anything because this "ohhhh" I had done previously with 3D-Coat. Will understand!

I agree with AbnRanger that 3D-Coat is not far from the ZB no. No way! (Soon, I hope I can share my sculptures with everyone in our fantastic community.)
I was used to using ZBrush and when I started testing 3D-Coat I noticed a certain difference in the smoothness and softness of ZBrush brushes compared to 3D-Coat.
I confess that I was a little disappointed with 3D-Coat, but after the 3D-Coat team, I believe they reshaped the brushes and to my surprise I was amazed by the 3D-Coat Brushes, the possibility of making the Presets and reaching an excellent level in the sculptures. Of course, it is necessary to add and strengthen with new features and controls to the 3D-coat Brushes system.
I'll be very honest with everyone here in the community. I was very reluctant to use 3D-Coat because of the lack of the Layers system in the Sculpt Room and other important features that I used in ZBrush, really this is a huge barrier for other artists to see 3D-Coat and so stay in ZBrush! I've seen many years of 3D-Coat users begging for 3D-Coat developers to add the Layers system and others features and nothing really happened!

AbnRanger, of course, you share with me the same kind of feeling that I have to be disappointed to see every ZBrush release every improvement as you said it already existed in 3D-Coat and us 3D-Coat users just sitting and watching all in a quiet way. It really makes me very sad. I understand that Andrew and his team did a great job in the Paint Room trying to balance things with the Substance Painter. But I do not settle for seeing the Sculpt Room, please do not get me wrong, a little abandoned. I see in 3D-Coat a real strength and jewel in relation to sculpture. I feel it is a real waste not to strengthen the Sculpt Room, because for me the Sculpt Room is fantastic and unique in 3D-Coat with many possibilities to leave the world open-mouthed!
I ask Andrew to have a different view of the Sculpt Room and that we need all the great features I've listed above for yesterday. Please, Andrew, listen to us! We need to be at the same level or better than at ZBrush. I believe this can happen, I believe in the work of 3D-Coat developers who are more than qualified to make it happen.

I did not quite understand it when I saw the 3D Print version and the 3D Coat Mod. Then I realized that they were light versions of what we already had with 3D-Coat. I agree that the time it took to develop these versions could have been used to develop the great features we always ask for, as well as to improve the tools we already have in 3D-Coat in the Sculpt Room, Retopo Room and etc.

Sure enough, AbnRanger, I remember that episode that Andrew Price did. I admire his courage to have shouted to the world how things could be better and of course caught the attention of everyone! That's exactly what we need here in 3D-Coat!

I completely agree with you AbnRanger! Andrew and his staff are fantastic!
We need to put order and priorities. We need users with a more artistic view and in this way present and suggest the great features that are necessary, as well as improvements in the tools that 3D-Coat already has, thus strengthening 3d-coat, making it more stable! It is vitally important that we are listened to so that we can ensure the success of 3D-Coat. Actually, we need to take a turnaround and rethink the things that currently happen in 3D-Coat. We can not let 3D-Coat get behind ZBrush! Do not criticize me for it!

I believe that people are tired of asking and realize that they are not seen or heard! That way they give up, disappear and migrate to another program!
I ask everyone, what would a website do to make requests for features and explain how useful it would be if they actually let go?
One thing I realize is that the ZBrush community is heard in some way and its developers end up directing development to what the artists need. Even they are proud to say that!

If Andrew, listen to us and heed our appeals, I have no doubt that a true revolution would happen! I would venture to say that 3D-Coat would be on the same level as ZBrush or even better than ZBrush in the area of sculpture and production.

AbnRanger, I humbly tell you that you should have a lot of weight in your opinions among developers and in the community. I respect you very much and being very sincere with you, many features of 3D-Coat I could only learn through the videos that you do on youtube, because there are not many tutorials explaining techniques and functioning of 3D-Coat unlike the ZBrush that you can learn in an instant.

I ask the 3D-Coat community to bond even more and strengthen as never before. Only then, who knows, Andrew and other developers, will be able to listen to us and give us what we need and why we need it.
I still believe we can be listened to and attended to ...
We have the responsibility to make 3d-Coat become better!
Let's get organized even more!

AbnRanger, I know it's a complicated question, but what can we do?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is, record a video showing the shortcomings and post it on Youtube > send it to Andrew (support@3DCoat.com). Make sure to ask viewers who agree, to also send emails requesting it. Maybe, if Andrew's email box blows up, it might get some action going in that direction? I've tried and tried and tried and tried. I think it all comes back to the "Low-Hanging Fruit" vs the more difficult and time-consuming tasks, which will provide more benefit to more users, in the end.

I'm about to record a video showing how to leverage the Paint Layers in 3D Coat, as Sculpt Layers (it's a work-around, but it can be effective), and will ask people to flood Andrew's email box regarding Sculpt Layers in the Sculpt workspace. He already knows my position on it, but needs to hear it from more and more users. Too many small, and less important features keep taking priority over it, and it obviously has me quite frustrated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....this sort of reminds me of a similar problem over 6-7yrs ago. When switching from Voxel Mode to Surface Mode, back then, it used to take a LONG time for 3D Coat to calculate it. Sometimes several seconds to several minutes. In some cases, it would calculate indefinitely, even to the point that I would just go run some errands, or go to bed, hoping it would get finished by the time I woke up. Yeah...it literally was THAT bad. I had to raise a pretty big stink on here (squeaky wheel gets the grease) before Andrew would do something about it. It was a horrible problem, and it was largely because it was single-threaded. Once Andrew made it multi-threaded, the problem went away. It also led to an overhaul of the brush engine throughout the app, to make them multi-threaded as well. 

I think Sculpt Layers is a big challenge that Andrew wants to avoid. That or he keeps getting distracted by smaller scale, easier to do, requests, and he doesn't realize how frustrating that is for those of us who have been waiting and waiting and waiting for this and a few other major features (ie. revamped Layer Masks). I suggested that he make an announcement on this forum and his Twitter that he planned to dedicate the next 6-12months strictly in the Sculpt workspace and more specifically on a great implementation of Sculpt Layers (with some type of masking functionality). In that announcement, I would ask that feature requests be limited to this area, only, and that all others wait until the task is complete.

If Andrew focused on the Sculpt room for the next 6-12months, V5 would be one hell of an Upgrade. His best work comes on large scale features, even though he may not enjoy it much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

All I can say is, record a video showing the shortcomings and post it on Youtube > send it to Andrew (support@3DCoat.com). Make sure to ask viewers who agree, to also send emails requesting it. Maybe, if Andrew's email box blows up, it might get some action going in that direction? I've tried and tried and tried and tried. I think it all comes back to the "Low-Hanging Fruit" vs the more difficult and time-consuming tasks, which will provide more benefit to more users, in the end.

I'm about to record a video showing how to leverage the Paint Layers in 3D Coat, as Sculpt Layers (it's a work-around, but it can be effective), and will ask people to flood Andrew's email box regarding Sculpt Layers in the Sculpt workspace. He already knows my position on it, but needs to hear it from more and more users. Too many small, and less important features keep taking priority over it, and it obviously has me quite frustrated.

Although, I am not a person to make videos I do not use such programs), I will try to do my best by recording a video and explaining everything right. I'm going to ask the viewers, if they agree with us, to help us send emails to Andrew asking for the features that ultimately will only benefit us all for sure!

Yesterday, I was doing a montage on Krita (in a basic and rough way), putting the Paint Room Layers system in the Sculpt Room area. In fact, I had already suggested this possible solution.
You will see that together we will follow this long-awaited revolution in 3D-Coat. Andrew will not turn his back on us and he'll end up listening to us.
Andrew will not make us more frustrated. (I want to believe it!)

4 hours ago, AbnRanger said:

....this sort of reminds me of a similar problem over 6-7yrs ago. When switching from Voxel Mode to Surface Mode, back then, it used to take a LONG time for 3D Coat to calculate it. Sometimes several seconds to several minutes. In some cases, it would calculate indefinitely, even to the point that I would just go run some errands, or go to bed, hoping it would get finished by the time I woke up. Yeah...it literally was THAT bad. I had to raise a pretty big stink on here (squeaky wheel gets the grease) before Andrew would do something about it. It was a horrible problem, and it was largely because it was single-threaded. Once Andrew made it multi-threaded, the problem went away. It also led to an overhaul of the brush engine throughout the app, to make them multi-threaded as well. 

I think Sculpt Layers is a big challenge that Andrew wants to avoid. That or he keeps getting distracted by smaller scale, easier to do, requests, and he doesn't realize how frustrating that is for those of us who have been waiting and waiting and waiting for this and a few other major features (ie. revamped Layer Masks). I suggested that he make an announcement on this forum and his Twitter that he planned to dedicate the next 6-12months strictly in the Sculpt workspace and more specifically on a great implementation of Sculpt Layers (with some type of masking functionality). In that announcement, I would ask that feature requests be limited to this area, only, and that all others wait until the task is complete.

If Andrew focused on the Sculpt room for the next 6-12months, V5 would be one hell of an Upgrade. His best work comes on large scale features, even though he may not enjoy it much.

I believe that when things need to be done or redone, you can not let go! It should solve the problem. As in the example you spoke about the multi-threaded in the transition of the sculpting modes (Voxel -> Surface -> Voxel) and the brush engine system.

I agree with you that the layers system is a great challenge, as well as other features that Andrew wants to avoid. Of course, the simplest requests will be given priority.
We must insist and show Andrew how important and great features must have prioprity to be made for yesterday! Avoiding this eternal frustration from us 3D-Coat artists just watch the other competing developers give their audience what they want. And today we stand in the eternal waiting!

I agree again with you that if Andrew spent his time developing the Sculpt Room with the features we have already mentioned in this post the next version of 3D-Coat would be epic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I might be missing the big deal here, sculpt layers? Perhaps I don't know ZB enough to compare. What is it exactly that you want to be able to do that we currently cannot (or requires a big workaround?)

For me, 3dc is pretty awesome but it's the little nit-picky issues that drag it down for me. Like how there's a different icon for "Transform" in the retopo room, and also that it doesn't work if you put it in one of the 1-9 quick-access slots. Or how some numerical fields I can click-drag to change them, but others require me to input a number manually and hit return. The UI and overall user experience of some tools like Warp or axial symmetry honestly just put me off using them.

These are the sorts of things that I would consider huge, when using the software and its current tools feels as easy as can be, then I'm all for more features. But for now, it's not a lack of any major feature that stops me from doing my job, it's poor UI/interaction design or little bugs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Gary Dave said:

I think I might be missing the big deal here, sculpt layers? Perhaps I don't know ZB enough to compare. What is it exactly that you want to be able to do that we currently cannot (or requires a big workaround?)

For me, 3dc is pretty awesome but it's the little nit-picky issues that drag it down for me. Like how there's a different icon for "Transform" in the retopo room, and also that it doesn't work if you put it in one of the 1-9 quick-access slots. Or how some numerical fields I can click-drag to change them, but others require me to input a number manually and hit return. The UI and overall user experience of some tools like Warp or axial symmetry honestly just put me off using them.

These are the sorts of things that I would consider huge, when using the software and its current tools feels as easy as can be, then I'm all for more features. But for now, it's not a lack of any major feature that stops me from doing my job, it's poor UI/interaction design or little bugs.

 

Sculpt layers exist in ZB and Mudbox....even in Modo and C4D. Just not 3DCoat. I think part of the problem is, Andrew is a programmer, so unless he can see the benefit in something, he is not inclined to do it. That is understandable, given the flood of feature requests and bugfix reports. But, when the core developers are artists, first and foremost, they understand the need for things like Sculpt Layers.

Sculpt layers are like Photoshop layers in the sense that, on the same image, you can apply multiple layers so that you can manipulate or edit one, without disturbing the others. Or you can go back and make changes in a less destructive way. Right now, you have a hierarchy tree rather than true layers. For example, if you have a head mesh, separated from the body mesh, you would probably want one layer for bumps, another layer for wrinkles, and maybe another layer for pores. Perhaps more than one layer for pores, if you are aiming for really high levels of detail.

For the Body, you would probably want a similar number of layers for similar details. IMO, this is the one last obstacle before 3D Coat's sculpting can be viewed to be relatively comparable to ZB's. That and a lack of a more full-featured noise generator. I've asked Andrew to add the OpenSource Bercon (procedural maps) to the Noise tool in the Sculpt workspace, as well as the FILL tool. He said it's not as easy as copying and pasting. I know that, but degree of difficulty shouldn't nullify it.

The things you mentioned are pretty much bugs or just general fixes. Make sure to send Andrew an email listing these issues. He tends to go through some little issues like that fairly quickly. As for the Transform "icon" I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you talking about the GIZMO? And what is different between it and the one in the Sculpt workspace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AbnRanger said:

As for the Transform "icon" I'm not sure I understand what you mean

Different icons for me:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3ca0v1nh9g3p0j/transform.jpg?dl=0

Left = sculpt, Right = retopo.

And yeah, general fixes for sure, but there's a lot of them. Too many little things for me to do a video on, I don't have the time for that unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you need to do a video for the fixes. Just a list that you can send to Andrew when you have the time. As for the icons, I see what you are saying. My guess is that he thought it was important enough to distinguish Retopo Transform from Sculpt transform, but I see your point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Gary Dave said:

These are the sorts of things that I would consider huge, when using the software and its current tools feels as easy as can be, then I'm all for more features. But for now, it's not a lack of any major feature that stops me from doing my job, it's poor UI/interaction design or little bugs.

 

Well, at least be happy you're not a Mac user. We have no loading bar at all, so I have to guess if 3DC is working or frozen, incremental rendering is broken, CUDA acceleration is not a thing, renderman has never worked...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all the work  around and small things not there that slowly snowball up to just getting aggravated . Just want a version that  everything works . All these not important enough things to fix or should say adjust to better suit . I see it all the time this does not work so go to this new version which fixes that but has a new different problem else where. Where is the go to version where everything works. (not just stable ).I do not get why one does not fix ,what is there now to its best . Keep getting the mini movie of the next great thing added in I shake my head and see all the things that need to be fixed 1st before that next great thing is added in which in turn breaks a whole list of things to not be working then they get fixed back to where they where . progress yes but  that  list of things  is still there. Just Branch 1 version of a working version with fine tuning things and have a 2nd version of the next big thing and all  of its  good enough it is in there here is the work around for it . It does not matter as like others I will just move on to invest my time in  other software .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ballistic_Tension said:

It is all the work  around and small things not there that slowly snowball up to just getting aggravated . Just want a version that  everything works . All these not important enough things to fix or should say adjust to better suit . I see it all the time this does not work so go to this new version which fixes that but has a new different problem else where. Where is the go to version where everything works. (not just stable ).I do not get why one does not fix ,what is there now to its best . Keep getting the mini movie of the next great thing added in I shake my head and see all the things that need to be fixed 1st before that next great thing is added in which in turn breaks a whole list of things to not be working then they get fixed back to where they where . progress yes but  that  list of things  is still there. Just Branch 1 version of a working version with fine tuning things and have a 2nd version of the next big thing and all  of its  good enough it is in there here is the work around for it . It does not matter as like others I will just move on to invest my time in  other software .

If you email Andrew (support@3dcoat.com) an itemized list of the things that you find wrong, he is usually pretty responsive. Just don't send a long letter, because he's always pressed for time. Shorter messages with a list of things that need to get fixed, will often get addressed. If he doesn't fix some of them, please follow up later and ask him to remember to address those as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I do agree things that need to be fixed are important. The more we use a software the more we noticed bugs. I use 3DC a lot myself and yes you can get frustrated times.

3DC is not alone in things that need to be fixed. In Mudbox in last two recent builds of 2018 there have been 115 fixes. I would imagine if I used Mud box a lot those would be frustrating as well. Some had been in Mudbox a long time prior to the 2018 release.

I bet some things got broken in the last build, plus other bugs will be reported.

I know very active Max and Maya users who get frustrated about the bugs in those two well known software packages.  

I am not saying we should have a stiff upper lip and ignore bugs, just keep plugging away at mentioning them.  This is what I do, I mentioned about "Painting Density" for almost a year. 

I think Andrew would look at it and on his end it would work, which it would do at times, so he would move on to something else. A user would mention about Painting Density and I would again bring it up. 

Finally Andrew found the problem. It was not an easy find. 

Edited by digman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@digman is correct! We all know that in every program there are things to be fixed. There are bugs in every program. Just like, unfortunately frustrations exist! I have no doubt that all these bugs should be fixed so that the program can be as stable as possible.

But at the same time, fixing these bugs can not be an excuse for the program to stop being developed.

In my humble opinion, we really need the great features like Sculpt Layers and others tools I've already cited and explained about here in this post to facilitate and improve our production and further liberating our creativity. After all, we are artists!
We can not stay behind the competing programs.

The development of 3D-Coat (great features) should be done in parallel with the repair of the errors, making the program more stable and better!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew Always try to fix all that was reported. It is always his first priority.

But 3DC is supercomplex, and some issues needs more time that others to be resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sculpt layers would be nice, but to me it's not essential.  What would be amazing is to have Liveclay functionality while using voxels. I saw that this was in development (can't remember where...either the trello page or twitter) some time ago, but have't heard anything about lately.  Getting rid of the having to manage your resolution in voxel mode would be huge.  I don't know if this is currently being worked on at all, but I can dream. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nobackup said:

sculpt layers would be nice, but to me it's not essential.  What would be amazing is to have Liveclay functionality while using voxels. I saw that this was in development (can't remember where...either the trello page or twitter) some time ago, but have't heard anything about lately.  Getting rid of the having to manage your resolution in voxel mode would be huge.  I don't know if this is currently being worked on at all, but I can dream. 

I respect your opinion, but I do believe for most people who use 3D-Coat, the Sculpt Layers system is extremely important to any workflow as previously explained.
Maybe, depending on how you use 3D-Coat is not essential and need not, but for me, in my work, it would be extremely essential and fundamental ...

By what I understand about the Voxels and when I use the Voxels ...
Voxels was not developed for the purpose of having live clay. It was made so that we can quickly create the Volume of the mesh we need without worrying about any kind of mesh topology. Once you have the volume of your mesh, yes yes comes into play, all the various tools of Surface Mode, such as Live Clay to control, detail and refine your mesh as you wish.

In my opinion it would not make much sense to have Live Clay in the Voxels. I do not see any advantages and improvements in workflow that way.
As I have an open mind for enhancements into 3D-Coat, it might be of some use to manage the resolution on the Voxels ...
Maybe a Reduce or decimate brush for the voxels?!
But even so, all the Surface Mode tools are at your disposal so you can completely manage your mesh and at any time return to the Voxels!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please it is very important that everyone send me PM with the list of bugs found.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×