Contributor Rygaard Posted March 20, 2019 Contributor Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 Hi everyone, I'm creating this topic that may be one of the most important topics for 3D-Coat and maybe controversial. Currently, 3D-Coat has Rooms that allow the execution of a certain task like Sculpt, Paint, Retopo, UVs, Render and etc. 3D-coat acts as if it were different and independent programs in one. This way the problems and confusions in relation to the 3D-Coat workflow begin. I was already a new user of 3D-Coat and at that time I was completely confused the way the program behaved with a Mesh. Why did a mesh appear in a Room and was not present in the other Room? It was as if I used different programs and at the same time did not communicate with each other or that there was no compatibility. I kept wondering how this was possible if I'm using the same program? I had so many questions and doubts about 3D-Coat that I could not understand. The time has passed and I think that new users and even some users who use the program for a certain time still have doubts, can not understand how 3D-Coat works and at certain moments are frustrated. This separation of Rooms also gave rise to the separation of users within our community who use 3D-Coat. I've seen people saying that it was not interesting for them to have certain functionality or tools because they simply did not use that Room. An example of this is people who use ZBrush and then use 3D-Coat to do reptology (perhaps UVs or Painting) and those same people would not be interested in developing and implementing tools in the Sculpt Room. The reason for this is the simple thought that ZBrush offers all those features and will only use 3D-Coat for a certain workflow complement. Again, I repeat, people are free to use the program as best they please. I have nothing against these people. But what does that mean? This means that there will always be one room more developed than the other because people who use one room more than the other will want improvement in that room. It does not matter if a particular room is left undeveloped. This becomes an arm-twist among the users of 3D-Coat and not a union in favor of a strong program as a whole. In my opinion, it would be very important for 3D-Coat to change the direction of its development. This change would be in relation to the workflow and structure of the program. I know it would be difficult, but the solution would be the merging of all Rooms, allowing a single mesh being worked through the whole program without having problems of communication between the Rooms and their respective tools and features. So instead of working in Rooms, 3D-Coat would have Layouts or Menu Sets that could even be customized by users according to their work or task. This merging of Rooms would allow a fluid and interactive workflow between the "Rooms" or better said Layouts. This type of workflow would be the kind of workflow that any user would expect when using a program because it would facilitate usability, efficiency, interactivity and at the same time we could have all the tools, functionalities, and future modifiers (similar to Blender / 3DS-Max have) and addons working together in a harmonious way and that would result in a powerful workflow. Imagine all the tools working in favor of a single Mesh, the freedom that users would have to perform any kind of worklow they wanted and in the end would be a job of extreme quality. This merger would open new and great possibilities for tools and functionalities without breaking the workflow and the most important would be the attention of new users. In my opinion, 3D-Coat is fantastic, but it does not see its potential. What do you think about this merger? Leave here your thoughts, suggestions and opinions on the subject. Thank you. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.