PDA

View Full Version : Painting directly onto 3d models



planarsurface
03-03-2014, 11:27 AM
Hi

i already posted this question in the 3DCoat forum.
It seems like 3DC is not suitable for this task. (if any software is able to do it)

I modeled the attached house scene in lightwave. Now i want to texture it without having to unfold the whole model. I guess it's a real pain. :)
120561
Is there any programme that lets me paint directly onto the 3d model? Importing painting exporting rendering.
What about MARI, substance designer, mudbox ... any experiences?

Or is it generally required to have a uv map BEFORE you can paint onto it?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

cresshead
03-03-2014, 11:43 AM
other than ptex or poly paint in zbrush you'll have to give whatever host app some idea of how to make your pixels 'stick' to any given surface...
for some of that model you don't HAVE to unwrap it you could use planar projecttion or box and they would be mostly okay i guess.

uv projection and un wrapping tools vary in use/ease of use quite a bit so don't be put off completely if your first encounter with this tool type is not a great time spent.

meatycheesyboy
03-03-2014, 12:36 PM
I don't have any experience with 3D Coat but it allows you to paint directly on a model doesn't it? If you can deal with the model directly and not have to paint on the flat map then couldn't you just do an Atlas unwrap on the whole thing to get a quick UV map?

*edit* Please excuse me if the info above is incorrect, I have no experience with 3d Coat.

Kevbarnes
03-03-2014, 12:45 PM
uv mapping will give you most control over texture, diffuse shading, bump etc.

but you could try using weight maps to control surface attributes. you could have just one surface for the whole house but 'section' it up using separate
weight maps made in modeler.

planarsurface
03-03-2014, 12:54 PM
Maybe after 12 years of working with lightwave, it's time to face the abysses of creating proper uv maps for complex objects. Any recommendations?

planarsurface
03-03-2014, 01:00 PM
uv mapping will give you most control over texture, diffuse shading, bump etc.


yes ... i know. Until now i got on very well with the implemented projection methods, at least for models with much simpler geometry.
I'll try the weight map method too. Thanks

UnCommonGrafx
03-03-2014, 02:16 PM
UVs, all the way. Unfold in 3DCoat, too, as its not too shabby a tool.

Tranimatronic
03-03-2014, 02:58 PM
substance dedigner/painter
http://www.allegorithmic.com/products/substance-designer-4
mari if you are going to do a LOT - its EXPENSIVE though.
http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/mari/
You CAN get nice results from uvUnwrap / polypaint in zBrush
For each of these you will have to UV....

nice model by the way... :thumbsup:

bobakabob
03-03-2014, 03:02 PM
Zbrush is brilliant for painting on models directly. It has many options for creating uv maps which are essential if you're painting on objects and moving between programs. I used to find them a pain but it's now almost fun. You can use uv master which gives you more manual control. GUV tiles is literally flicking a switch (the only disadvantage is you can only paint on a GUV texture map in ZB as it looks like a scrambled jigsaw in Photoshop - not so big a problem as paint tools in ZB are superb). Another option is to create 'parts' in LW which will import as polygroups in ZB. You can then create a uv map from polygroups which unwraps your model in a way that makes sense if you also want to paint in Photoshop. Btw, think of pinning a texture - such as an interchangeable jpeg image - to a computer generated uv map.

Tranimatronic
03-03-2014, 03:25 PM
Another option is to create 'parts' in LW which will import as polygroups in ZB.

Didnt know that. That is SUPER useful. Thanks!

Doctor49152
03-03-2014, 03:25 PM
If you have 3D Coat then use it instead of looking at other apps. 3D Coat support for LW files is superb! And it UV Creation tools are rather easy.

Once you have the UVs created (manually or in 3D Coat) and model saved you can also import the model into Photoshop Extended and paint directly on the models surface that way as well. On older versions of PS it was rather slow. But not too bad on the newer ones.

Waves of light
03-03-2014, 03:58 PM
If you want to be able to paint that model in 3DCoat, you will have to create UVs and unwrap them to be able to then paint directly on the model. This is something I've done a lot of using just Lightwave and using both Lightwave and 3DCoat.

The following text is taken from another thread re UV unwrapping methods:

We have the following in LW at the moment:
Standard UV Unwrap - Planar, Cylindrical, Spherical, Atlas
ABF UV Unwrap - Uses Edges to create seems, so if you make a mistake or clear selection, can be a pain. Even if you save your Edge selection as a set, to reproduce the selections, you need to go to Points Statistics (W) and select your saved sets from the dropdown, but because this selects and displays the saved points, you then need to use Select Edges to get back to where you were. Also, undo whilst using Edge selection and Select Path (used to connect edges between two selected edges) doesn't undo correctly.

Here's a quick youtube tut I did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcopW7cl-_0

Third party plugins I know of and use:

PLG tools:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/nif-hp/index2_english.htm

I have used plg_Make_UV_Edit in the past
RMB and LMB are used to select edges or points (in PLGs point mode) middle mouse button is used to extend Edge/Point selection (same as Select Path in LW). You can save edge selections, but you have to do this manually, there is now incremental save function. I believe it uses LSCM for unwrapping.

plg_Straighten_UV has come in handy too, allowing you to align/straighten a selection of points in your map.


Other software I use:

3DCoat - It allows you to Mark Seams, Edge Loops, UV Path to create your seams/edges. It has Auto seams, Unwrap, Pack UVs, PackUV2, Auto Scale. An you can unwrap using ABF, Planar or LSCM. You can also select UV islands, scale, move and manipulate. You can copy one UV island and paste it over another (useful time saver if you have mirrored parts). It also has a tweak function, which is the same as LW Tweak function, but for UV maps (so Verts, Edges, Faces and Island can be manipulated).

It also works directly with lwo files and you can export your painted texture maps back and forth between PS (so you can use more of the paint functions within PS) - which is the method I used to create these pieces:

120575 120569

120567 120568

120570 120571 120572

120573 120574

Even with your house/model, you might be able to get away with just a plain Atlas map creation, into 3DC, Pack UVs and Auto Scale and paint away in the paint room (similar to the guillotine above). I can see the roof tiles might cause you a problem, but that's about it.

Cheers,

Ricky.

geo_n
03-03-2014, 07:01 PM
Hi

i already posted this question in the 3DCoat forum.
It seems like 3DC is not suitable for this task. (if any software is able to do it)

I modeled the attached house scene in lightwave. Now i want to texture it without having to unfold the whole model. I guess it's a real pain. :)
120561
Is there any programme that lets me paint directly onto the 3d model? Importing – painting – exporting – rendering.
What about MARI, substance designer, mudbox ... any experiences?

Or is it generally required to have a uv map BEFORE you can paint onto it?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Just atlas map it in modeller or auto-uv in 3dcoat and then paint away. You don't really paint directly in mari its more projection type workflow.

planarsurface
03-03-2014, 11:30 PM
Thank you all for your hints and insights. A lot of ways to go now.
I'll try all of them the next days too see which gives the best result.

As lightwave users, would you prefer 3DCoat over ZBrush?

CaptainMarlowe
03-04-2014, 12:09 AM
Hi. I use 3D-coat all time long for UV-unwrapping and painting. It is very straightforward to use with lightwave. I wouldn't compare with ZBrush, which I don't use, but I do think, like many others, I guess, that 3D-Coat offers a very good value for its price. Yet, I'm still on V3 and didn't upgrade to V4, although it seems to be a very nice upgrade.
Substance painter will soon enter in beta and could be a game changer, although it won't be fully operational until some months, I guess.

http://www.allegorithmic.com/products/substance-painter

Waves of light
03-04-2014, 01:26 AM
Substance painter does look good.

Surrealist.
03-04-2014, 03:36 AM
Zbrush- polypaint resolution is based on polygon resolution. So you'd turn sm off and divide for something like a house. May not be the best option.

Mudobox is a great painting tool. It also supports PTex. You can then convert that to a map that you bake to the UV.

Personally I prefer a good sensible UV unwrap. Usually I start from either seams or atlas and tweak. I take each bit of geometry and try and treat it as it's own problem. If multiple parts are connected - example a cylinder shape sticking out of a plane shape, I will disconnect the cylinder with a seam. Just some basic tips.

I personally also prefer Mudbox painting on a proper UV mapped object. I like the Mudbox paint layers, how they are set up. It feels like a better integration with PS than Zbrush. Also exports to PS pretty well.

safetyman
03-04-2014, 05:58 AM
3D-Coat would probably be the way to go if you have it. I've been using Blender, which has excellent UV tools, as well as texture painting (either directly on the model or the UVs -- or both at the same time), and vertex painting. For the texture painting, it has brushes, projection painting, bump map painting, and a lot more.

Luc_Feri
03-04-2014, 09:00 AM
Substance painter does look good.

There is to be an early access beta for purchase on the Steam store this coming thursday. Very interesting. :D

Luc_Feri
03-04-2014, 09:03 AM
Some good suggestions here. 3D Coat does a decent job of automapping when you use the option to import a model to UV and paint. I went through some of these kind of pains when I was new to 3D a year or two back, but there is no hiding really from having to create UV maps for a lot of stuff.

Sometimes even Atlas mapping works for tiled texturing as long as the uv shells are packed and orientated and are equal in proportions.

Sensei
03-04-2014, 01:22 PM
Have you seen AutoUpdateImages?
http://autoupdateimages.trueart.eu

You can paint .psd image in Photoshop on 1st monitor and see rendered result on 2nd monitor in LightWave VPR fully rendered.

speismonqui
03-04-2014, 03:51 PM
maybe I'm way off but how about Maxon bodypaint?:


Say hello to hassle-free texturing that lets you quickly paint highly detailed textures directly on your 3D objects.


Compared to 2D painting, perhaps the most exciting feature BodyPaint 3D offers is projection painting. This powerful mode eliminates the need to spend hours creating perfect UV maps. You simply paint what you would like to see on your 3D model, apply the projection and then BodyPaint 3D will quickly adjust your painting so it fits your UVs perfectly - even if there are differing UV sizes and seems.

Surrealist.
03-05-2014, 09:46 PM
Well, they are talking about the same process. You don't have to paint on the texture in 2D. The problem with this workflow in any application is it then limits you to not being able to work properly in 2D centric applications as well as a 3D paint tool. So the best thing to do is to always work with a sensible 2D UV Layout. For most projects I do I am dealing with 2D textures in one form or another and even further tweaking in a 2D program. Often I will 3D paint a very sketchy outline of what I want. Take for example texturing a race car with stripes and decals. Although you could do a lot of this work in 3D, you have far more control with precision lines and strips in a 2D app. So I could use the 3D sketch as a guide and use vector based tools to make precision lines in 2D. You can also create maps in a 2D app to use as masking like old school air brush techniques in the 3D paint tool. Mudbox is practically seamless for this workflow. Sometimes projecting a decal in 3D is better. Some times it works to position it in a 2D app. A combination of both. For something like a building with a lot of flat surfaces you can simply map a lot of that in 2D, take it in to a 3D app and paint on top of that in another layer and just go back and forth like that depending on what you want to do. Then when it comes to making other maps like baking AO or creating Normal maps. It always works out better to have good UVs. And working with something like dDo for example is very 2D/UV centric. You have to have good UVs. Much of my work now consists of using dDo photoshop and Mudbox. So I think overall you are better off with all options available.

jwiede
03-05-2014, 10:38 PM
There's also the product that used to be called RealityPaint, I believe it's now called Blacksmith3D or such once again (it was called that before RealityPaint as well). I have a license and it actually does a pretty decent job, though can be a bit idiosyncratic at times. http://www.blacksmith3d.com

AbnRanger
03-06-2014, 07:28 AM
Thank you all for your hints and insights. A lot of ways to go now.
I'll try all of them the next days too see which gives the best result.

As lightwave users, would you prefer 3DCoat over ZBrush?3D Coat has so many ways of handling this task. As Geo_n stated, upon import, in the dialog box, toward the top, there is an option to KEEP UV's (if you have any) or AUTO-UV (3D Coat does a basic Atlas Unfold of your UV's for you). You could also choose FILE > IMPORT > IMPORT TO PTEX (this is also an option, directly within LW, using the 3D Coat Applink plugin). No UV's needed. You can paint straightaway, and when you export back to LW, 3D Coat generates a standard UV map that can be read by any rendering engine.

The downside to Ptex is that you pretty much are stuck painting directly on the model. The way the technology works is it treats every polygon as a UV island, and it packs them into the UV space in a non-discernible manner. So the arrangement is a mess, visually. Although, the upside is, it allows you to use every single pixel of the UV space...none wasted. If you are going to texture paint only in the 3D Viewport, Ptex makes a lot of sense. If you know you want to utilize the 2D Texture Editor and/or Photoshop, too, then Ptex is not the right solution.

Andrew has just devised a new Unfolding algorithm that is even better than LSCM or ABF++, and the seam selection has always been the best in the business, imho. You can select entire loops in a single click or use a very flexible "Point to Point" selection mode. Once you've selected all your seams just hit the UNWRAP button and it packs everything in for you. I've not seen a faster or easier UV layout toolset anywhere. So, I'd always suggest laying out your UV's there, rather than try to skirt around it. It might take 5-10min to prep a decently complex model. But it's worth it.

As for comparisons to ZB. As objectively as I can state it, ZBrush makes sense if you've already been using it for years, and you are accustomed to certain brushes and workflows. But as of 3DC V4, I honestly feel it's overtaken Mudbox as a high-end sculpting application, and stands as ZBrushes closest competitor. Much of that is because MB is an Autodesk product. If they had kept developing the sculpting tools as much as Andrew has, they could have stayed a strong No.2. But the sheer number of tools/brushes and options for them, are considerably more extensive, now in 3DC than Mudbox.

ZBrush remains the gold standard in pure sculpting terms, and a lot of past criticism of 3D Coat's sculpting tools were its performance and brush feel (not measuring up to those two). Some of the community members with extensive experience in ZB have been working continuously with Andrew over the past year or so, to bring the brush feel and behavior up to the same level, if not better (in some cases). If you are a MB or ZB artist, and tried the latest builds of 3D Coat, you'd be blown away how good it has become. The performance is right on par with Mudbox and ZB (I have a seat of MB 2012, so I can make a direct comparison), IMHO. And neither of those apps offer Dynamic (localized) Subdivision. I firmly believe that is the future of digital sculpting.

Andrew uses Intel's TBB (thread building blocks) library for multi-threading and it makes a huge difference if you are using an i7...especially the 6core variety. So, it's legitimately in the same conversation as ZB, in terms of sculpting, but any objective person who knows both apps intimately would concede that 3D Coat is more extensive and feature-rich than ZBrush (and MB) in the other application categories (UV Editing, Retopology, and Texture Painting). The lone exception is ZBrush's latest update to it's Auto-Retopology algorithm. It seems to do a cleaner job, straightaway, without much fussing around with settings and guides. Andrew did a lot of recent work in that area, too...and there is a marked improvement, there....but still not quite as nice as Z-Remesher.

sadkkf
03-07-2014, 02:49 PM
3D Coat has so many ways of handling this task. As Geo_n stated, upon import, in the dialog box, toward the top, there is an option to KEEP UV's (if you have any) or AUTO-UV (3D Coat does a basic Atlas Unfold of your UV's for you). You could also choose FILE > IMPORT > IMPORT TO PTEX (this is also an option, directly within LW, using the 3D Coat Applink plugin). No UV's needed. You can paint straightaway, and when you export back to LW, 3D Coat generates a standard UV map that can be read by any rendering engine.

The downside to Ptex is that you pretty much are stuck painting directly on the model. The way the technology works is it treats every polygon as a UV island, and it packs them into the UV space in a non-discernible manner. So the arrangement is a mess, visually. Although, the upside is, it allows you to use every single pixel of the UV space...none wasted. If you are going to texture paint only in the 3D Viewport, Ptex makes a lot of sense. If you know you want to utilize the 2D Texture Editor and/or Photoshop, too, then Ptex is not the right solution.

Andrew has just devised a new Unfolding algorithm that is even better than LSCM or ABF++, and the seam selection has always been the best in the business, imho. You can select entire loops in a single click or use a very flexible "Point to Point" selection mode. Once you've selected all your seams just hit the UNWRAP button and it packs everything in for you. I've not seen a faster or easier UV layout toolset anywhere. So, I'd always suggest laying out your UV's there, rather than try to skirt around it. It might take 5-10min to prep a decently complex model. But it's worth it.

As for comparisons to ZB. As objectively as I can state it, ZBrush makes sense if you've already been using it for years, and you are accustomed to certain brushes and workflows. But as of 3DC V4, I honestly feel it's overtaken Mudbox as a high-end sculpting application, and stands as ZBrushes closest competitor. Much of that is because MB is an Autodesk product. If they had kept developing the sculpting tools as much as Andrew has, they could have stayed a strong No.2. But the sheer number of tools/brushes and options for them, are considerably more extensive, now in 3DC than Mudbox.

ZBrush remains the gold standard in pure sculpting terms, and a lot of past criticism of 3D Coat's sculpting tools were its performance and brush feel (not measuring up to those two). Some of the community members with extensive experience in ZB have been working continuously with Andrew over the past year or so, to bring the brush feel and behavior up to the same level, if not better (in some cases). If you are a MB or ZB artist, and tried the latest builds of 3D Coat, you'd be blown away how good it has become. The performance is right on par with Mudbox and ZB (I have a seat of MB 2012, so I can make a direct comparison), IMHO. And neither of those apps offer Dynamic (localized) Subdivision. I firmly believe that is the future of digital sculpting.

Andrew uses Intel's TBB (thread building blocks) library for multi-threading and it makes a huge difference if you are using an i7...especially the 6core variety. So, it's legitimately in the same conversation as ZB, in terms of sculpting, but any objective person who knows both apps intimately would concede that 3D Coat is more extensive and feature-rich than ZBrush (and MB) in the other application categories (UV Editing, Retopology, and Texture Painting). The lone exception is ZBrush's latest update to it's Auto-Retopology algorithm. It seems to do a cleaner job, straightaway, without much fussing around with settings and guides. Andrew did a lot of recent work in that area, too...and there is a marked improvement, there....but still not quite as nice as Z-Remesher.


This is all very interesting to me as well. I've been strongly considering ZB knowing it's a kind of standard, but 3DC's price point is compelling. Not to be a jerk, but 3DC's "voice" is a bit of a turn off for me.

I'm also curious about upgrades. Seems like ZB owners can upgrade free for a lifetime. Does anyone have any input on that? Maybe not free forever, but for a long time is the impression I'm getting. That would negate 3DC's price point after a while.

Waves of light
03-07-2014, 03:09 PM
This is all very interesting to me as well. I've been strongly considering ZB knowing it's a kind of standard, but 3DC's price point is compelling. Not to be a jerk, but 3DC's "voice" is a bit of a turn off for me.

I'm also curious about upgrades. Seems like ZB owners can upgrade free for a lifetime. Does anyone have any input on that? Maybe not free forever, but for a long time is the impression I'm getting. That would negate 3DC's price point after a while.

I wouldn't worry too much about 'the voice' part - that's just them asking that people don't use the product for evil things, based on their beliefs. Take it, or leave it.

3DCoat's pricing is better than ZB... initially and probably for a couple of years (given the cost of upgrades). Also, Andrew and the dev team are constantly developing 3DC, to which you get instant access to the updates. However, I'm under the impression that once you buy ZBrush, you don't pay for upgrades.

I also know a lot of 3DC users that use both ZBrush and 3DC in their pipeline, not preferring one over the other, but getting the best out of both packages.

I just find 3DC easier to use and navigate, but I haven't looked at ZB for ages.

spherical
03-07-2014, 07:47 PM
However, I'm under the impression that once you buy ZBrush, you don't pay for upgrades.

It was an early adopter promotion. I don't think that the upgrade deal is an on-going thing for purchases made now. Looked all over the website and found nada on the subject. That said, I am a happy early adopter.

CaptainMarlowe
03-07-2014, 08:45 PM
Substance painter beta is launched. I am testing 3d-coat v4 in parallel to make up my mind wether I should upgrade to 3DC V4 or wait for substance painter. Allthough painting with particles is fun, for the moment I think I will upgrade my 3D-Coat licence. V4 has a lot of pretty neat enhancements. At the same time, Substance Painter only export to 2k textures in a single UV-map, which is a big no-no for me.

Waves of light
03-09-2014, 04:59 AM
It was an early adopter promotion. I don't think that the upgrade deal is an on-going thing for purchases made now. Looked all over the website and found nada on the subject. That said, I am a happy early adopter.

Ok, that makes more sense.


Substance painter beta is launched. I am testing 3d-coat v4 in parallel to make up my mind wether I should upgrade to 3DC V4 or wait for substance painter. Allthough painting with particles is fun, for the moment I think I will upgrade my 3D-Coat licence. V4 has a lot of pretty neat enhancements. At the same time, Substance Painter only export to 2k textures in a single UV-map, which is a big no-no for me.

Thanks for letting us know about the 2K limit, that's really not good enough. I know there are a few artists out there using 3DCoat for UVs, base textures and then exporting the textures to dDo - http://quixel.se/ddo/ - which is similar to Substance Painter, in some areas.

Oh and I think 3DCoat is 30 day free trial and even after your trial has expired, you can still use the software, but save and export are turned off.

hrgiger
03-09-2014, 05:37 AM
And neither of those apps offer Dynamic (localized) Subdivision. I firmly believe that is the future of digital sculpting.



Zbrush can do local subdivision as part of Zremesher.

jhinrichs
03-09-2014, 06:39 AM
Substance painter beta is launched. I am testing 3d-coat v4 in parallel to make up my mind wether I should upgrade to 3DC V4 or wait for substance painter. Allthough painting with particles is fun, for the moment I think I will upgrade my 3D-Coat licence. V4 has a lot of pretty neat enhancements. At the same time, Substance Painter only export to 2k textures in a single UV-map, which is a big no-no for me.

About Substance Painter, Wes McDermott says:

"4k support is coming and we are targeting 8K as well. I can say 4K will be there for version 1.0. Custom shader support is coming as well. Also multi-material painting is coming and will work like Substance Designer. You won't have to break the mesh up to paint on it. "

Here's the thread:

http://community.thefoundry.co.uk/discussion/topic.aspx?f=4&t=85509

I picked the beta up on Steam. $75 bucks is hard to beat when (Also from Wes...)

"...you can purchase beta on Steam which will grant you a free upgrade to the commercial version when it's released. You will also get a standalone license as well."

jhinrichs
03-09-2014, 07:08 AM
To make sure I wasn't misquoting I read a bit further, here's a bit more about the future licensing of Substance Painter:

"The paid beta on Steam is for non-commercial. You will receive a stand alone key, once the full version is released. As with our other tools, the non-commercial license allows you to create and sell assets on the Workshop for any Steam game. At this time, we don't intend to have a commercial version of Substance Painter on Steam as we do with Substance Designer. However, there will be an upgrade path for the standalone version you'll receive through Steam to the commercial version on our website once the final version is released.

We will also do a pre-order for the commercial license so you'll be able to use the beta version for commercial purpose if needed. This should be available mid April. The non-commercial version can only be purchased on Steam at this time. Everyone will receive a standalone key sometime in April whe the non commercial version is available on our website. At this time, people will also be able to preo-order the commercial license and the upgrade to the commercial license. "



So for $75 bucks you get a non-commercial license on release. According the to FAQ at Allegorithmic, the upgrade from non-commercial to commercial will be an additional $441. Allegorithmic defines "commercial" as "We authorize the use of the non-commercial version of Substance Painter for any commercial project, as long as it doesn't generate more than $10 000 per year. "

CaptainMarlowe
03-09-2014, 11:55 AM
I had these informations on their website, except for the 8K goal, which is much better (but it seems not in the V1.0 scope). This said, I often work on complex objects, with 1 or 2 8K textures or 3-4 4K, sometimes more. With substance painter, I would have break the object on several different sub-objects with one UV-map per object. In 3D-Coat, I can paint on several 8K textures on the go, the only limit being basically the GPU. So 149 $ (granted I doubt I will generate more than 10000$ revenue per year before a very long time, which is a very nice option from Allegorithmic, IMHO) just for particle painting seems to me a bit overpriced. I have more value, for the moment, in upgrading 3D-Coat V3 to V4. BUT, I have no doubt that substance painter has the potential for becoming a real game changer.

AbnRanger
03-09-2014, 03:14 PM
Zbrush can do local subdivision as part of Zremesher.Z-Remesher is the equivalent to Auto-Retopo in 3D Coat. Apples and Oranges. ZB does not have localized subdivision during the sculpting process

hrgiger
03-09-2014, 03:23 PM
Z-Remesher is the equivalent to Auto-Retopo in 3D Coat. Apples and Oranges. ZB does not have localized subdivision during the sculpting process

I havent' seen yet a huge need for it necessarily either. Dynamesh is a concept creation tool, not for sculpting hi detail finishing. For that, you can add in more detail in areas where you need it during the retopo(zremesher) stage. I mean, I could see it being useful but I guess I'd have to see it work to say.