You did just now yes, but... it's confusing. You're saying this: The point being, I'm trying to paint into the mask, not the layer! Am I misunderstanding you? I want to paint into the mask, and on some layers (and only some), it tells me 'you're attempting to paint over an invisible layer'. Which, yes... I am, it's a mask, it's not directly visible!

I answered you in a letter

source... Export .obj from Daz Studio Set to Base Resolution By double clicking the name or clicking the arrow to the left of it. if you export at a higher resolution, you will not be able to import the morph back in, unless you’re a Daz PA. Load Genesis 3 into a new scene and select it. Open the Parameters tab. Expand the Genesis 3 Parameters Select the General Property Group Under Resolution Level, select “Base” from the dropdown menu Configure deformations to export If you see any other morphs dialed in under the Currently Used section, set them to 0 as well, or you will need to reverse them out later (I explain how in Part 3 of this Learning Path). *Important*   If you plan on selling or redistributing the morphs you create in anyway (whether for free, or for profit) you must reverse out any morphs you have dialed in when you export out the figure (I’ll explain how in the ZBrush to Daz Studio section of this tutorial), except for certain merchant resources. Check their individual license agreements (please note, most merchant resources don’t allow redistribution for free, only for profit). If you’re planning on using them only for personal projects, you can export any combination of morphs you would like and use as a starting point for your sculpting. Just remember, you won’t be able to sell them or give them away! With the Genesis 3 figure still selected, within the Parameters tab, click Currently Used Set both the Mouth Realism HD and Navel Morphs to 0. Export as .obj Now that the Resolution Level has been set to “Base” and you configured your morphs, you’re ready to export. I like to create a dedicated project folder for each of my projects and keep all related filed organized within that folder. Make sure to use the correct scale. The settings to the right are what I typically use for creating morphs (you may need to change the scale depending on the modeling application you plan on using, 1 unit = 1 cm or 100%). Go to File > Export… or click the export button on the UI. Select where you would like to export the file to Set the Save as Type to “Wavefront Object (*.obj)” Give the file a name. Click the Save button. Configure your export settings in the window that pops up. Click Accept.

You need to import the mesh on Paint room  Selecting Lock Normals at import Then tweak the mesh 

Hi, I would like to modify clothes in 3DCoat and reuse them in Daz3D. I have requested help from the Daz3D community about the issue I’m facing and I created this post: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/693336/pjcm-poses-using-3dcoat-software#latest To help me, someone answered and asked me this: “When you import / export OBJ in 3DCoat, are there any settings related to keeping vertex order?” Can someone check the workflow I’m using and tell me what is wrong with it? Thank you

For the sake of starting a discussion about it: Deleting a layer that's clipped by another also deletes the clip layer. This seems crazy to me, especially in light of the absense of any visual indicator (as there is in Photoshop). I don't think this should ever happen, especially when the layer being deleted isn't even the clip layer itself, it's a layer _referencing_ the clip layer. This is a recipe for disaster, there should never be silent deletion of data that wasn't specifically requested. my email also had a second bugreport in it, namely that I regularly get the message ' 'you're attempting to paint over an invisible layer when attempting to paint on a (visible) layer's mask. This also happened in the file I sent you, and should hopefully be reproducable on your end in order to fix it.

A separate fee for the CAD room will be $75-150. The price will depend on the type of geometric kernel. And you won't have to endure its presence if you don't want to fork out the fee. 

The developer working on this (Alexander) does not work in the Paint, UV, Sculpt (normally) or the Render Workspaces. Pilgway sees the popularity of upstart new CAD modeling app, Plasticity, and sees an opportunity to offer similar functionality inside 3DCoat because there are already many NURBS tools and NURBS like tools for Polymesh generation. Andrew is the main developer for those workspaces and tasked Alexander to work on the Retopo/Modeling/CAD-NURBS tools. Therefore, if you have a problem with the functionality in those fore-mentioned workspaces, send an email to support@pilgway.com which Andrew typically receives. You are communicating directly with him when you send a bug report or request to that email. Here, you are generally just speaking to other members and the forum monitor. Andrew chimes in from time to time, but emails to support is the direct pipeline of communication with him.

I don't see any conflict either nor do I see having different modeling tools as being separate entities either. They will all work in concert just as they do in Houdini. You can make a Nurbs model, voxelize it with OpenVDB  for modifications in that form then polygonalize it back and forth as part of a seamless workflow. But now instead of a bunch of very expensive programs and time consuming file transfers it'll all happen in one very inexpensive program.  You're already making sculptures in voxels with OpenVDB then adding minute details in Surface Mode then retopologizing it by hand or automatically and then using that for extracting displacement or normal maps and then painting the UV maps. Adding a NURBS/BREP system just gives you another toolset to add to that.  And that is artistic as hell. Imagine using Move or Pose or Bend tools in Voxels on a modern auto design, or a piece of jewelry,  surface mode it for added details and then modifying parts and details with NURBS. How is that not "artistic"? Maybe the Pre Raphaelites or Sympolists would disapprove but Daniel Simon would approve I think.  I just hope there's plans in Gorbatovsky's project for making two adjacent surfaces or splines to make them match tangentially

Sculpt Room is developed by @Andrew Shpagin Modeling/CAD is developed by @Gorbatovsky They are two areas of development with different times and that do not interfere with each other. I don't see any conflict.

Sorry about the earlier post, I was a linux noob and didn't understand Nvidia's Wayland issues at the time. Anyway, I hope that the next version has better compatibility with other distros. I've been having the same issues with the file browser crashing the program in EndeavourOS. Had no luck with DistroBox, it told me to install the (presumably Autodesk?) FBX SDK, only for the container to not recognize it once I did. Guess I'll use WINE until the new version comes out...

I for once agree with this here. The Sculpt Room and especially Paint Room Room still have basics missing other software has for decades as standards, and you guys stack another separate Room after putting so much development effort already into the modeling room. Of course whatever developers decide, it's their thing. But my suspicion is they are not really lead by professional users needs anymore, but by "wouldn't it be cool if" hobbyists wishlists of strange sorts. And what that should lead to seems strange to me as a passionate user of this software for primarily making art and game art, privately and professionally, and who ditched Substance Painter and Zbrush as a leap of faith in favor of 3D Coat. Sculpting and Painting is such a strong suite of 3D Coat and should not be neglected in favor of piling up more foreign features imo. Artistic users screaming for years and years what is still missing there to make it professionally/Industry compatible. I predict no one or very few tech fetish people will use 3D Coat for CAD. 3D Coat is an ART tool. Voxel Modeling is already capable to create shapes like these, especially with live booleans. Is it precise? No. Does it need to be to make art? No. Users do not chose 3D Coat for dry precision work. Users chose 3D Coat to make art. I can not understand why 3D Coat doesn't play upon it's strength in which it is unique in the industry: A godsent 3D software fusing 3d Concepting and Production for artists at its core. Better to polish that and iron out the kinks, to be more widely adapted, and integrated as a tool into pipelines, so all users, and the hard working devs, can benefit. Not focusing on experiments enjoying people, or people who like to bend the software to their very private dreams of wanting to get something that costs thousands of dollars in other software for cheap. I see e.g. something as crucial as non destructive Adjustments being off the table, but a CAD room is being worked on. Very strange decision to me.

no ... i know what they all are , its just anything is implemented like cad modelling or poly modelling the ui and workflow is confusing and i end up wasting so much time when it could be made alot better .   thats why i think any cad room or modelling room is pointless until they have a proper workflow

I answered your letter yesterday. And today I wrote the answer.

When you really get into modeling stuff problems arise, technical problems. Different modeling technologies grew up for some very specific reasons, to solve unavoidable problems.  Using voxels provides a very intuitive clay emulation, smoke emulation,  but it's not very good for complex and precise bevels and chamfers for example. It's perfect for organic creatures, but for mechanical stuff it's like putting trousers on an elephant. Polygons with quads are great for game models and UV mapping for texture painting but have a lot of drawbacks, like jaggies and out of control polygon counts. NURBS are great for aerodynamic surfaces and mechanical surfaces and avoid the drawbacks of coarse polygons but are terrible for organic creatures SubD is a compromise between NURBS and Polygonal modeling, excellent for rapid 3d sketching to be then retopoed with NURBS for a perfect finish? There's some very good reasons why Alias is still a big deal and why they added SubD to their unsurpassed NURBS toolset. BREP is perfect for solid mechanical objects, like machine parts esp if you want to do physical simulations of shear and weight for volume of materials in an object, and also provide intuitive rapid bevels chamfers and booleans When you're working on a project based on real world situations you're going to need all these toolsets (and more!) at one point or another. How convenient will it be to have all of them in one application so that you can smoothly go back and forth between them in one program with a seamless workflow? The only program that fully embodies all these technologies currently is Geomagic with Freeform. (by the way Freeform Ghost of MIT was the first computer sculpt program but it never took off because it required a haptic device that cost $6000 to  $24000) My proposal to 3D Coat was to do something very similar but at low cost.    

no bug was mentioned , however a cad room discussion was opened and i was entering the discussion with my opinion on cad modelling