PDA

View Full Version : 3D COAT 4.5 Released



chikega
05-28-2015, 02:28 PM
http://3d-coat.com/3d-coat-45/


https://youtu.be/SE3mXkQ55O4

Cageman
05-28-2015, 03:13 PM
Looks cool.

I have not been paying attention to any sculpting tool in years. What I do know though is that more and more modeling work are done in those apps, and I guess it will continue to grow. I remember a time when ZBrush was mostly used for organic modeling. Nowdays, where I work, it is used for everything.

What is the difference now between 3D Coat and ZBrush? Can you do things showed here in ZBrush as well (the shading looks very good I have to say).

chikega
05-28-2015, 03:49 PM
Well, the main difference is that 3dCoat has a voxel-based sculpting mode as where Zbrush does not. 3dcoat has surface-based sculpting too which is what Zbrush is essentially, a surface-based sculptor. 3dcoat also has dynamic tesselation which you see in Sculptris or even Blender3d. Zbrush does not have dynamic tesselation. But one disadvantage that 3dcoat has compared to Zbrush is that you're unable to step down to lower subdivision levels to modify a simpler "cage" of the model. In Zbrush, you can simply step up and down and sculpt on various subdivision levels of the mesh. I would have to say that the Zremesher algorithm is second to none for creating nice polygonal flow automagically. When we get into the arena of retopology, 3dcoat has a more approachable toolset. Well, in fact, 3dcoat, in general, is much more approachable to the traditionally trained 3d artist. the widgets used to manipulate the geometry or mesh is more akin to what you would see in a traditional 3d application. Zbrush is very non-traditional and takes some getting used to .. unless it's your first 3d app, then you just don't know any better. Or you're just not limited by your traditional approach. As far as painting, I prefer 3dcoat. It actually has layers just like Photoshop and when you're in the painting tab, the keyboard shortcuts are very similar to Photoshop. I haven't had a chance to try hard surface modeling in the latest ZB. But it appears that it's mainly a hard surface "sketcher". It's a great way to knock out some stellar hard surface models quickly where precision is not important.

Essentially, I like both apps for different reasons.

eon5
05-28-2015, 08:57 PM
3D-Coat 4.5 is officially released! Free for current 4.xx owners!
128387

Main new features include Physically Based Rendering (PBR) and new Smart PBR Materials.

New layer groups with Photoshop compatibility.
New Symmetry options that are supported by all tools.
Seamless painting over multiple UV meshes.
HDR panorama support with lighting.

Here are some Smart Material examples:
128388

Check out the new features video!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE3mXkQ55O4

Full information is at the link below.
http://3d-coat.com/3d-coat-45/[/QUOTE]

lightscape
05-28-2015, 10:39 PM
Beautiful viewport!

The upgrade for people on v3

"From May 28, 2015 till June 15, 2015 we offer a special launch discount of 45$"

After that I think its back to 79$

Lewis
05-29-2015, 12:32 AM
loooking great, it has some very nice retopology tools aslo.

meshpig
05-29-2015, 01:10 AM
Mac version too ...awesome!

djwaterman
05-29-2015, 06:28 AM
I own ZBrush but I'm envious of what I see.

mummyman
05-29-2015, 10:15 AM
Zbrush is very confusing at times. Especially if you don't use it all the time.

seghier
05-29-2015, 11:08 AM
very nice software
i tried the lightwave plugin but didn't work

Reco
05-29-2015, 11:50 AM
I have played with it for the last few hours, and I am totally amazed. The preset materials looks extremely good, and easy to use
Well to play with it in 3D Coat is one thing, to use it another. Does anybody have an idea how to use the generated maps in "current" Lightwave?

Reco

Markc
05-29-2015, 12:09 PM
The quick and easy way is to just export the LW model with textures.
Open it in LW, voila.

Alternatively export the maps you want and apply them to individual channels in Layout.

Reco
05-29-2015, 12:26 PM
The quick and easy way is to just export the LW model with textures.
Open it in LW, voila.

Alternatively export the maps you want and apply them to individual channels in Layout.


I know how to export, but Lightwave does not have the Roughness and Metalness channels.


Reco

Surrealist.
05-29-2015, 01:03 PM
Really they are just grey scale maps. Generally I just experiment with them on different channels until I get a map that is looking like what I want. You can use the same map on multiple channels for example.

Here is a good write up on PBR

https://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/pbr-theory

This may help with ideas as to what to do with the maps.

I just treat it as any other map on a channel. You won't get instantly the same effect but with some experimentation you can get acceptable results.

Alternately I am not sure how it works in 3D Coat but you may have the option to export last gen Diffuse Spec and Normal maps.

Reco
05-29-2015, 01:27 PM
Thank you for your answer and link Surrealist.
Spec,color and normal works fine, but cant figure out how to use Roughness and Metalness.
A very realistic metal material in 3D Coat ends up like a glossy stone material in Lightwave.
I will read the article and do some more test.

Reco

calilifestyle
05-29-2015, 02:16 PM
Over on Allegomthinc one of the user's shared this node set for Substance Painter. Not sure if this can also be used with 3d-coat exports. https://forum.allegorithmic.com/index.php?topic=4310.msg24280#msg24280

jasonwestmas
05-29-2015, 02:34 PM
Looks cool.

I have not been paying attention to any sculpting tool in years. What I do know though is that more and more modeling work are done in those apps, and I guess it will continue to grow. I remember a time when ZBrush was mostly used for organic modeling. Nowdays, where I work, it is used for everything.

What is the difference now between 3D Coat and ZBrush? Can you do things showed here in ZBrush as well (the shading looks very good I have to say).

Preference comes from familiarity partly but there are some things I just can't tolerate, one is too many bugs and the other is too much segregation between tool-sets. Zbrush has the least issues with both bugs and segregation ime but it is an oddball workflow. . . but I started using zbrush since it was only a paint program so it's not odd anymore to me. So many might just prefer 3dcoat or mudbox just because they do take on similar characteristics to photoshop and sub-D 3D modelers.

Markc
05-29-2015, 02:41 PM
I know how to export, but Lightwave does not have the Roughness and Metalness channels.


Reco

Sorry, my bad.
As surrealist suggests, I have played around with different channels to see the result.
It would be nice for the new materials to cross over to LW (maybe into the presets panel).

Surrealist.
05-29-2015, 02:46 PM
Yeah I just work it backwards from how I would normally texture the surface. Then I use the maps in this case to augment the effect. I don't try and reproduce a PBM exactly.

And usually I don't even use all of the maps. Gloss and Specular with a standard shading solution is usually enough along with your color and normal map. Then just set up your environment as you normally would. You can use nodes or layers to augment the levels as well.

Amurrell
05-29-2015, 05:39 PM
This is how I usually do it. May not be totally correct, but our material nodes are energy conserving, which is the key for physically based rendering. In Subtance Painter I am outputting linear metalness, roughness and normal maps and setting them as such in LightWave and the only sRGB is the base color. Keep in mind that the background images used in each app are different, so there are different lighting conditions. The LW version is using IBL from a light probe with radiosity on and reflection blurring checked in the material node to take advantage of the roughness map.

Substance Painter doodle
128393

LightWave VPR preview.
128394

I've been getting pretty good results and am still testing. But then again LW3DG might be working on something towards PBR materials anyway, so...

lightscape
05-29-2015, 08:51 PM
I have played with it for the last few hours, and I am totally amazed. The preset materials looks extremely good, and easy to use
Well to play with it in 3D Coat is one thing, to use it another. Does anybody have an idea how to use the generated maps in "current" Lightwave?

Reco


Lightwave does not currently have the corresponding inputs to use pbr maps directly.

The purpose of using pbr workflow is to get consistent result from the beginning, lookdev, finals.
If the pbr maps are not going to be used then its missing the point and useless. The goal is to get similar results from 3dcoat, Substance to other appz.

3dcoat does still have the traditional shading method to export out glossy, spec maps that can be used directly in lightwave though.

lightscape
05-29-2015, 10:12 PM
Official announcement
http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17779

http://pilgway.com/images/big_baners/wasp_b.jpg

How can one programmer do so much yet we don't see much updates in modeller with more programmers? :boogiedow
Even TF buying Modo didn't see much improvement in modelling from 601 to 801. Smh.

Reco
05-30-2015, 01:32 AM
Sorry, my bad.
As surrealist suggests, I have played around with different channels to see the result.
It would be nice for the new materials to cross over to LW (maybe into the presets panel).

No Problem. I can see my reply was a bit short. Don't meant to be rude. My mind was operating in the technical channel.


Reco

Reco
05-30-2015, 01:39 AM
Over on Allegomthinc one of the user's shared this node set for Substance Painter. Not sure if this can also be used with 3d-coat exports. https://forum.allegorithmic.com/index.php?topic=4310.msg24280#msg24280

Thank you. Unfortunately it doesn't work for me since I'm missing some handles from dbw.

Reco

djwaterman
05-30-2015, 01:44 AM
This is how I usually do it. May not be totally correct, but our material nodes are energy conserving, which is the key for physically based rendering. In Subtance Painter I am outputting linear metalness, roughness and normal maps and setting them as such in LightWave and the only sRGB is the base color. Keep in mind that the background images used in each app are different, so there are different lighting conditions. The LW version is using IBL from a light probe with radiosity on and reflection blurring checked in the material node to take advantage of the roughness map.

Substance Painter doodle
128393

LightWave VPR preview.
128394

I've been getting pretty good results and am still testing. But then again LW3DG might be working on something towards PBR materials anyway, so...

I was going to suggest that the metalness map would go into the specular (reflective) channel like you've done. It seems to me that once you have these maps generated the work is done and it's just a matter of knowing how to apply them in Lightwave to get the same results. I've read all the guides about PBM's and it's really about a workflow more than the technology, systems like 3D coat do the technical work of selecting the correct grey scale levels for different surface properties, and these grey scale levels will be interpreted the same in most renderers. So if you know what channels to put the maps into you should get consistent results. I suppose if LW wanted to make it easier they could make a special PBM material node that had the inputs for the maps set up, but it's sounding like we have those nodes already and we just don't know the right way to use them, so perhaps a simple tutorial would be enough. Still don't know enough to be sure about this however.

For instance, how are the Fresnel values applied?

Reco
05-30-2015, 01:44 AM
This is how I usually do it. May not be totally correct, but our material nodes are energy conserving, which is the key for physically based rendering. In Subtance Painter I am outputting linear metalness, roughness and normal maps and setting them as such in LightWave and the only sRGB is the base color. Keep in mind that the background images used in each app are different, so there are different lighting conditions. The LW version is using IBL from a light probe with radiosity on and reflection blurring checked in the material node to take advantage of the roughness map.

Substance Painter doodle
128393




LightWave VPR preview.
128394

I've been getting pretty good results and am still testing. But then again LW3DG might be working on something towards PBR materials anyway, so...


Thank you

I'm getting closer using this method, but I'm not able to get this shiny metal look. It's more glossy than shiny.


Reco

Reco
05-30-2015, 01:52 AM
I was going to suggest that the metalness map would go into the specular (reflective) channel like you've done. It seems to me that once you have these maps generated the work is done and it's just a matter of knowing how to apply them in Lightwave to get the same results. I've read all the guides about PBM's and it's really about a workflow more than the technology, systems like 3D coat do the technical work of selecting the correct grey scale levels for different surface properties, and these grey scale levels will be interpreted the same in most renderers. So if you know what channels to put the maps into you should get consistent results. I suppose if LW wanted to make it easier they could make a special PBM material node that had the inputs for the maps set up, but it's sounding like we have those nodes already and we just don't know the right way to use them, so perhaps a simple tutorial would be enough. Still don't know enough to be sure about this however.

I think so as well. I'm not a node wizard so I'm not able to figure it out on my own, but a tutorial as you mentioned or best of all a PBM node will simplify the whole process.

Reco

jasonwestmas
05-30-2015, 07:20 AM
Thank you

I'm getting closer using this method, but I'm not able to get this shiny metal look. It's more glossy than shiny.


Reco

To make metal look like metal you need a good hdr or lots of objects with bright highlights to reflect. Intense lighting with super high values and high falloff helps too. Just look at a set of keys sitting on your desk with the monitor on and it will make sense.

Also keep in mind that Lightwave is not a physically based renderer even though it has some nice energy conserving materials. So you have to really push things hard to get it to look appealing in that physical kind of way.

jwiede
05-30-2015, 10:54 AM
Even TF buying Modo didn't see much improvement in modelling from 601 to 801. Smh.

I see little real basis for suggesting Lux/TF has somehow been substantially inadequate in modo's modeling development. modo has one of the very best modeling toolsets available (widely reviewed as such, publicly lauded as such by studios like Pixar, ILM, etc.). Having achieved that, it makes perfect sense that The Foundry would begin to slow down on large-scale modeling additions, and instead focused more on tweaking and improving the already-present tools and functionality. It isn't like there are huge swathes of customer-requested modeling functionality going unanswered by TF, after all. Lacking that, it is entirely appropriate that TF would turn their focus to making the existing functionality more stable and efficient -- exactly what they've done and are doing.

When they were presented with an opportunity to enable some new, cool modeling tech (Mesh Fusion), they did what was necessary to enable the Braid Art Labs guys. Clearly, The Foundry is not ignoring customer requests, tech advances in modeling, or otherwise being complacent. They are (rightly) focusing more on code stabilization and optimization now that they have delivered such an excellent set of modeling workflow and functionality. When Mesh Fusion (and related infrastructure improvements) opened up a bunch of new potential directions for modo modeling development, TF clearly began pursuing them, demonstrated by their integration of Mesh Fusion in 901, as well as statements they've made on where modo modeling is headed.

lightscape
05-30-2015, 11:22 AM
Do you have actual numbers of modo licenses at Pixar or ILM? Because most of that modo is great at modeling and used at pixar stuff is from an artist that heard an artist uses modo at pixar., etc.
Modo modeling is still destructive. Most of its ease of use is derived from modeller. Meshfusion although non destructive will not replace the whole toolset of modo modelling. Text tool anyone?

Surrealist.
05-30-2015, 11:30 AM
Regarding rendering materials.

What Jason said.

Basically you have to do everything as you normally would in LightWave.

One of the main issues with the maps is that because the channels are driven by these grey scale values, it would be very easy to turn a metal material into plastic or something else. Because the map is overriding the channel. So the overall value of reflectivity for example can come down. To solve this in layers for instance, simply bring the layer opacity down and you can drive this value with a mixture of the reflectivity value and the map.

To set up multiple materials on one texture - rather than assigning faces - you'd have to go the extra step and mask out areas of the texture to control the values explicitly by region. One way to do this with layers would be alpha masks and value procedural layers.

You could create these masks quite easily from the original Material Color ID maps as a selection source in you photo editing app. Or maybe there is a clever way to do this with nodes.

The output masks from the painting would then support another more basic role of simply adding details and overall surface quality.

Even with nodes I can't imagine a away to do this convincingly without alpha masks. I could be wrong. It has been a while since I used Nodes in LW.

When dealing with texture maps I find it convenient enough to use layers.

tyrot
05-30-2015, 12:12 PM
how will be the workflow for octane renderer in lightwave... nodes? etc?

Wickedpup
05-30-2015, 01:02 PM
How can one programmer do so much yet we don't see much updates in modeller with more programmers? :boogiedow
Even TF buying Modo didn't see much improvement in modelling from 601 to 801. Smh
IsnŽt 901 considered to be the first actual release under The Foundry? (or was that 801? Jeez...time flies)In that regard I think the amount of improvements were just fine....


And the artist that heard it from an artist could maybe have heard it from John Knoll:
“I am a big fan of both Luxology and The Foundry having been using modo for quite a while and Katana here at ILM in the last 18 months,” says John Knoll. “

jasonwestmas
05-30-2015, 01:16 PM
801 was a foundry release but it still smelled of luxology.

Surrealist.
05-30-2015, 02:03 PM
I like a lot of what Modo has to offer. I am waiting on the Steam Indie version to see what they include in it so I can have some proper time playing with some of the modeling and UV tools. There are some real handy time savers there.

I guess we have drifted off topic...

But regarding non-destructive or destructive workflows, mostly for me in my day to day work, Booleans are one of the main areas I like non-destructive workflows. The other is curve extrusions. Most of the other stuff I don't really require non-destructive workflows. But it is nice to have it to turn to when you need it. Nodes (inMesh outMesh) in Maya or Modifiers in Blender are very handy.

The things I see useful in Modo for me add up to some very handy and time saving, practical tools. Mesh Fusion for a lot of the very hard surface work I do would be very nice to have. I would likely wind up using that over doing extremely high poly dynamesh Booleans in Znbrush which are of course destructive.

tyrot
05-30-2015, 02:58 PM
3dcoat thread.... discuss modo somewhere else..

Wickedpup
05-30-2015, 06:23 PM
Can only hope youŽll showcase such diligence each time "off topic" software is discussed in a thread.....but somehow I doubt that you will. ;D

tyrot
05-31-2015, 06:10 AM
dude i know i know .. but this is so "disrespectful". stephen a smith.. style:)

first .. at least lets discuss 3d coat... and its new features.. workflows..
how to render pbr in octane ?

wtf modo this modo that.. i feel for modo.. i wanna have babies from modo... ... i dont f**king get it.. discuss modo at least in a lightwave thread not here..

show some respect... to andrew's insane efforts....

erikals
05-31-2015, 06:21 AM
maybe not so many use 3DCoat here, so it's kinda limited 3DCoat info bouncing around...

...thereby the "drifting"


i own 3DC, just haven't had the time to use it all that much... :/


wonder, for you 3DC users, what things would you guys like to see next in 3DCoat ?

jwiede
06-01-2015, 04:53 AM
dude i know i know .. but this is so "disrespectful". stephen a smith.. style:)

first .. at least lets discuss 3d coat... and its new features.. workflows..
how to render pbr in octane ?

wtf modo this modo that.. i feel for modo.. i wanna have babies from modo... ... i dont f**king get it.. discuss modo at least in a lightwave thread not here..

Well, as most of us are already 3DCoat customers, we've pretty much done our part in terms of supporting Andrew (personally, since v1, Pro license aka PC+Mac).

Modo came up because someone took a potshot at it, and some of us responded to it (quite civilly). No reason to drag it out, agreed, but then no real reason to bring it up in the first place that way either.

jwiede
06-01-2015, 04:58 AM
wonder, for you 3DC users, what things would you guys like to see next in 3DCoat ?

There actually aren't a whole lot more features I "need" from 3DC, mostly just further workflow optimizations for existing features. I'd like to see surface mode become more akin to dynameshes in ZBrush, and tools to allow faster retopo (along with auto-retopo more competitive with ZBrush's).

If 3DC had those, I could probably just about drop ZBrush, but likely wouldn't, so... (shrug) Right now, I use 3DC for some stuff, ZBrush for others, and find each has strengths and weaknesses to where owning both is beneficial, and see no reason that's likely to change in near future.

erikals
06-01-2015, 05:25 AM
i remember reading something about 3DCoat missing a morph feature or something, do you know if that is implemented these days ?

jwiede
06-01-2015, 05:45 AM
i remember reading something about 3DCoat missing a morph feature or something, do you know if that is implemented these days ?

Can you possibly be a bit more specific? I'm not sure I understand what you're referencing.

Greenlaw
06-01-2015, 12:45 PM
I use both 3DC and ZB.

I generally go to 3DC first, partly because I've been using it since the early pre-release beta days and 3DC has directly supported Lightwave since version 1.0. The second point isn't as big a deal anymore because Lightwave now has GoZ. In fact, there's quite a lot of overlap between the two programs, and in some ways the UI's are starting to resemble each other as well. IMO, you really can't go wrong with either 3DC or ZB.

For quick results (what I usually need,) I like 3DC. Over many years, it's saved my butt on more tightly scheduled jobs than I care to count, and it just keeps getting better. Great UV mapping and retopolgy tools have been in 3DC forever. I hardly ever use UVLayout anymore (even though I believe UVLayout is still the most precise program for UV mapping.)

For specialty tasks, like FiberMesh for FiberFX guides, I go to ZBrush. I know ZB had ramped up their UV and Retopo tools in recent years but haven't really used them yet.

In general, I find 3DC is a little more accessible because it resembles other layer based programs like Photoshop. But in fairness, once you learn how to navigate ZB (mainly though hot keys and other key commands,) it's very fast to work in--in fact, I would say you should learn the keys, you'll be happier for it.

I just installed 3DC 4.5 this weekend. Hope to start playing around with it this week. :)

G.

Reco
06-01-2015, 01:08 PM
I am using 3D Coat for texturing only, so I don't have a clue when it comes to the sculpting part of the software.
Even so, I'm still doing the basic texturing in Photoshop. 3D coat is a handy tool when it comes to touch up, as
well as make texture pattern seams invisible.

With the new PBR option its easy to make impressive textures quick.
Below you can see a test that was done in less than a minutes. It's not quite the same in Lightwave.

I am not sure if it just me who cant get this to work, or if we need a special node or some modification of the render engine.

128409

Note!! Spelling mistake in the image.

Reco

Surrealist.
06-01-2015, 01:34 PM
On the 3D Coat example is there a Fresnel on that material? I mean like a metallic refractive index. Usually this effect ads some hues to the Metallic look based on how it refracts light. Which is something I'd never thought about with Metal before.

Here is something about it for Renderman:

http://renderman.pixar.com/resources/current/RenderMan/PxrLMMetal.html

Just happens to be where I saw it recently and it might help describe it.

Not sure how to do it, but I think you could fake it with nodes somehow.

On the Layers version it just looks like there is not enough reflection.

JoePoe
06-01-2015, 03:27 PM
I am using 3D Coat for texturing only, so I don't have a clue when it comes to the sculpting part of the software.
Even so, I'm still doing the basic texturing in Photoshop. 3D coat is a handy tool when it comes to touch up, as
well as make texture pattern seams invisible.

With the new PBR option its easy to make impressive textures quick.
Below you can see a test that was done in less than a minutes. It's not quite the same in Lightwave.

I am not sure if it just me who cant get this to work, or if we need a special node or some modification of the render engine.

128409

Note!! Spelling mistake in the image.

Reco

Reco,

Why don't you post up the LW scene/etc and give people a crack at replicating the 3DC effect. :jam:....(don't forget the environment image).

It's easier to try fifteen things in just a couple of minutes and post the results, rather than just making speculative suggestions.
Suggestions like..... using one of the maps to control spec on Conductor :hey:.

erikals
06-01-2015, 03:34 PM
Can you possibly be a bit more specific? I'm not sure I understand what you're referencing.

hi, bit bad explanation there, but basically this >
http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15127&p=122794

http://3d-coat.com/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=422&type=bug&show_inline=1&file_show_inline_token=20150601f151199ed72471b720b be54d003a104bccb10f6b

erikals
06-01-2015, 03:37 PM
For specialty tasks, like FiberMesh for FiberFX guides, I go to ZBrush...

there's nothing like FiberMesh in 3DCoat, right ?

wish there was... :]

jeric_synergy
06-01-2015, 07:11 PM
there's nothing like FiberMesh in 3DCoat, right ?

wish there was... :]
::eyeroll:: Howzabout we concentrate on what IS in there?

Geeze.

Reco
06-02-2015, 01:22 AM
On the 3D Coat example is there a Fresnel on that material? I mean like a metallic refractive index. Usually this effect ads some hues to the Metallic look based on how it refracts light. Which is something I'd never thought about with Metal before.

Here is something about it for Renderman:

http://renderman.pixar.com/resources/current/RenderMan/PxrLMMetal.html


Just happens to be where I saw it recently and it might help describe it.

Not sure how to do it, but I think you could fake it with nodes somehow.

On the Layers version it just looks like there is not enough reflection.

Thank you for the article and advices Richard
Fresnel didn't do much difference, neither did anisotropic.
I used 20% blurred reflection on the layer version, and the conductor node only in the conductor version.

Having said that, I've boosted the reflection value up to 300% and ended up with the result shown below.

128411

Reco

erikals
06-02-2015, 01:31 AM
::eyeroll:: Howzabout we concentrate on what IS in there?

Geeze.

to me both subjects are important, so don't see why the question should create much noise

it's quite related, new 3DCoat features vs important 3DCoat missing features

Surrealist.
06-02-2015, 01:38 AM
Thank you for the article and advices Richard
Fresnel didn't do much difference, neither did anisotropic.
I used 20% blurred reflection on the layer version, and the conductor node only in the conductor version.

Having said that, I've boosted the reflection value up to 300% and ended up with the result shown below.

128411

Reco


Interesting. I am curious what the Layer Opacity is on Reflection. Did you try to reduce it? Anyway the 300% version looks pretty close.

Reco
06-02-2015, 01:45 AM
Reco,

Why don't you post up the LW scene/etc and give people a crack at replicating the 3DC effect. :jam:....(don't forget the environment image).

It's easier to try fifteen things in just a couple of minutes and post the results, rather than just making speculative suggestions.
Suggestions like..... using one of the maps to control spec on Conductor :hey:.

That's a good idea
It should be attached to this post. I have reduce the size of the maps and environ map.

The full resolution of the environ map can be found here.
http://www.hdrmill.com/freebies.htm

Note!
I will not be able to check the forum for a couple of days.

Reco

Reco
06-02-2015, 01:52 AM
Interesting. I am curious what the Layer Opacity is on Reflection. Did you try to reduce it? Anyway the 300% version looks pretty close.

Layer Opacity is 100%. I have to admit that I usually don't experience to much when it comes to reflection.
I start with the 100% rule. 70% diff=30% reflect and 30%diff=70% reflect, then I do some small adjustments. I haven't boosted it like this before.
Maybe I'm to conservative?

Reco

tyrot
06-02-2015, 02:44 AM
asking again.. any octane users who has workflow for 3d coat?

erikals
06-02-2015, 04:32 AM
maybe check >
http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=45708
http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17597

3DCoat
http://render.otoy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=41965&t=1

Octane
http://render.otoy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=41966&t=1

Surrealist.
06-02-2015, 04:39 AM
Layer Opacity is 100%. I have to admit that I usually don't experience to much when it comes to reflection.
I start with the 100% rule. 70% diff=30% reflect and 30%diff=70% reflect, then I do some small adjustments. I haven't boosted it like this before.
Maybe I'm to conservative?

Reco

Nothing wrong with that rule.

But you have more control of the reflection or any channel for that matter if layer opacity is set below 100%. Then your texture is a blend rather than overriding the channel. In this case I don't think you need the textures to override the channel. This is different than a procedural which usually Blends with the channel level.

However over-driving the reflection channel makes sense. For some reason with Layers anyway, adding an image to the color channel sort of forces a plastic look. I have no idea why that is. But something I just really noticed, looking at this more closely.

If you don't have an image in the mix it is real easy to dial in some plausible metallic looks. But as soon as you add an image for color, this changes. Why this is will be over my head. And I am no Nodes guru, so I can offer no help there.

At the end of the day, go with what looks right.

erikals
06-02-2015, 06:06 AM
using tone mapping could make things less "plasticy"

http://www.3dtotal.com/admin/new_cropper/tutorial_content_images/1949_tid_4_tone-mapping_comparison.jpg

erikals
06-02-2015, 06:29 AM
do note that some final post process retouching might be a good idea >

http://erikalstad.com/cgtemp/ToneM-Post-Process.png

Surrealist.
06-02-2015, 08:10 AM
Actually, the problem is plastic rather than metallic and to do with the surface properties. I am not sure why but just like in Rico's examples it looks more like painted metal or plastic rather than a metallic surface. You can control this by reducing the layer opacity of the texture, playing with a diffuse map etc. But getting a shiny metal look with some color to it that comes from an image seems to be not so easy. Over-driving the reflection seems to work.

JoePoe
06-02-2015, 08:49 AM
Conductor seems to work just fine (imho) :)

128417

I believe you had the maps in different spots.... like this...

128418

.... which is fine.... if you invert them :hey:

128419

ALSO... change your color space for the normal map to Linear! :thumbsup:
AND the background image you have isn't for ImageWorld. Used Textured Environment instead.
-----

Edit: Let the tweaking begin!!.... Kinda like the bump from the Metelness map better :) 128420

tyrot
06-02-2015, 09:51 AM
erikals you da man!!!

erikals
06-02-2015, 09:54 AM
http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/047.gif

jeric_synergy
06-02-2015, 09:55 AM
to me both subjects are important, so don't see why the question should create much noise

it's quite related, new 3DCoat features vs important 3DCoat missing features
The DECADES of listening to Amiga/Lightwave users concentrate on what they DON'T have when they should be looking at what they've GOT.

4.5 RELEASED is the thread title: concentrate on the release, not the EVER GROWING WISHLIST.

Also, it just seems rude: "Hey guys, look, I present a new release! (Implied: after months of work!)" ---immediate nasal voice:"You know what would make it better?" --Yeah, that's nice.

Surrealist.
06-02-2015, 10:05 AM
Conductor seems to work just fine (imho) :)

128417

I believe you had the maps in different spots.... like this...

128418

.... which is fine.... if you invert them :hey:

128419

ALSO... change your color space for the normal map to Linear! :thumbsup:
AND the background image you have isn't for ImageWorld. Used Textured Environment instead.
-----

Edit: Let the tweaking begin!!.... Kinda like the bump from the Metelness map better :) 128420

Nodes to the rescue. Much more advanced than Layers!

Inspiring me to dig into LW nodes again! Thanks for the tips. :)

Amurrell
06-02-2015, 10:25 AM
I was going to suggest that the metalness map would go into the specular (reflective) channel like you've done. It seems to me that once you have these maps generated the work is done and it's just a matter of knowing how to apply them in Lightwave to get the same results. I've read all the guides about PBM's and it's really about a workflow more than the technology, systems like 3D coat do the technical work of selecting the correct grey scale levels for different surface properties, and these grey scale levels will be interpreted the same in most renderers. So if you know what channels to put the maps into you should get consistent results. I suppose if LW wanted to make it easier they could make a special PBM material node that had the inputs for the maps set up, but it's sounding like we have those nodes already and we just don't know the right way to use them, so perhaps a simple tutorial would be enough. Still don't know enough to be sure about this however.

For instance, how are the Fresnel values applied?

The fresnel seems to be handled automatically at this point. I know Allegorithmic bases the fresnel values off of the F0 value, or rather the base reflectivity of the material and it ramps as it should from there. In my tests with LW material nodes, they seem to do the same. Using the traditional layered materials you would have to define a gradient, otherwise you get a continuous reflectivity value. Placing a material node like conductor will show the fresnel effect automatically. Go ahead and try it and you'll see what I'm talking about. The PBR materials that they speak of are based off of conductors and dielectrics, however our dielectric is transparent, so I have been trying to substitute delta, but most of the time fall back on conductor so far. Still testing...

To be honest, the setup that I showed earlier, and now it seems people have adopted, seems to work very well in general, and I rarely use anything else at this point. Delta in my tests have not worked out very well at the moment. For most diffuse materials or non-metals, the suggested range of 2-5% (most not being higher than 4%) or linear range of 0.017 - 0.067 (40-75 sRGB) for reflectivity should be used, and for metals the values are 70-100%. The fresnel is calculated from the IOR of the material, according to the PBR guide from Allegorithmic, but the shader handles this.

erikals
06-02-2015, 10:37 AM
The DECADES of listening to Amiga/Lightwave users concentrate on what they DON'T have when they should be looking at what they've GOT.
disagree, i do both.


4.5 RELEASED is the thread title: concentrate on the release, not the EVER GROWING WISHLIST.
maybe, but most ignored my question, and in the end, few people were hurt. no big deal imo.


Also, it just seems rude: "Hey guys, look, I present a new release! (Implied: after months of work!)" ---immediate nasal voice:"You know what would make it better?" --Yeah, that's nice.
do not make fun of people with nasal voice...

in the end, i'll take a small peace of self-criticism though


anyway, i'm very exited about 3DCoat 4.5 + 1 guy doing all of that coding is > incredible!
http://3d-coat.com/forum/public/style_images/3dc_master/f_icon.png

hrgiger
06-02-2015, 10:43 AM
Im a zbrush user but 3D Coat is lookin good.

Reco
06-02-2015, 10:44 AM
Conductor seems to work just fine (imho) :)

128417

I believe you had the maps in different spots.... like this...

128418

.... which is fine.... if you invert them :hey:

128419

ALSO... change your color space for the normal map to Linear! :thumbsup:
AND the background image you have isn't for ImageWorld. Used Textured Environment instead.
-----

Edit: Let the tweaking begin!!.... Kinda like the bump from the Metelness map better :) 128420

Thank you. Very impressive.

I knew somebody would come up with a node solution but expected it to be a confusing network with tons of nodes.
It is the same Amurrell was suggesting, but I was not able to figure it out.
I tried different input, but used the color channel instead of luma. However it doesn't make any difference on my computer.

I followed your advice regarding Normal map and Textured Environment, and my problem is that I'm not able to get the result you are posting.
If I invert the metallness map, my result is close, but I'm not happy yet.
128424

It looks like you have modified the maps. Can you send me your version so I can take a closer look?

Reco

Reco
06-02-2015, 12:22 PM
For those who doesn't have 3D Coat. Here are some examples.
One is just dirt, scratches and rust.
128425

Reco

JoePoe
06-02-2015, 12:25 PM
128424

It looks like you have modified the maps. Can you send me your version so I can take a closer look?

Reco

Interesting. I have not touched the maps at all (except for the Normal colorspace). I even left on Pixel Blending and Mip Mapping.
I notice you're in 2015. Maybe it's an Importance Sampling thing :stumped:??
The image Previews in your Node Editor have black backgrounds and the Color Map does look different (much more yellow) than my editor... But that could just be a display preference thing. That being said, changing my ColorMap to Linear did not come close to what you're getting.

Try the attached.... (same deal with the HDR)

Edit: fwiw, changing the color of the ColorMap to Cineon did come very close to what you're getting 8~.

Reco
06-02-2015, 01:10 PM
Interesting. I have not touched the maps at all (except for the Normal colorspace). I even left on Pixel Blending and Mip Mapping.
I notice you're in 2015. Maybe it's an Importance Sampling thing :stumped:??
The image Previews in your Node Editor have black backgrounds and the Color Map does look different (much more yellow) than my editor... But that could just be a display preference thing. That being said, changing my ColorMap to Linear did not come close to what you're getting.

Try the attached.... (same deal with the HDR)

Edit: fwiw, changing the color of the ColorMap to Cineon did come very close to what you're getting 8~.

Thank you Joe
I notice the difference in the node preview window. That's why I thought you had done some modification.
When I open your version, it came out exactly as in your posts.
When I tried to do the same node set up from scratch, it ended up as I have posted a few times. Not good.
But, when I imported your maps into my set up, the result was different. It rendered out exactly like your renders. Understand that if you can. Trouble shooting that issue is over my head.

Thanks again for your help. I'm leaving for some different fun now.http://www.swedenrock.com/festival/artister-biljetter/artister-2015
Who knows, Maybe the mystery is solved when I'm back

Reco

Lewis
06-02-2015, 01:14 PM
Here is Quick LW+Octane test

JoePoe
06-02-2015, 01:15 PM
Lewis, that looks very nice! But to me it looks more like paint than metal? Certainly quite a bit different from the 3DC example.... But beautiful.


Thank you Joe
I notice the difference in the node preview window. That's why I thought you had done some modification.
When I open your version, it came out exactly as in your posts.
When I tried to do the same node set up from scratch, it ended up as I have posted a few times. Not good.
But, when I imported your maps into my set up, the result was different. It rendered out exactly like your renders. Understand that if you can. Trouble shooting that issue is over my head.

Thanks again for your help. I'm leaving for some different fun now.http://www.swedenrock.com/festival/artister-biljetter/artister-2015
Who knows, Maybe the mystery is solved when I'm back

Reco


Well that IS weird. Because I got the maps....... FROM YOU!! :D

Anyway.... have fun. :rock:

**Edit: Some tweaks weren't doing what I expected so I actually took a close look. The Normal Map is useless. There's no information in it. It's all one shade of blue. All the "texture" in these examples is coming from the bump. Are all the Normal Maps coming out of 3DC like this????

Reco
06-02-2015, 03:34 PM
**Edit: Some tweaks weren't doing what I expected so I actually took a close look. The Normal Map is useless. There's no information in it. It's all one shade of blue. All the "texture" in these examples is coming from the bump. Are all the Normal Maps coming out of 3DC like this????

Sorry, I did not mentioned it. The normal map does not contain any information, but was a part of the export.
You can choose if you want bump/normal information or not. You can paint one channel at the time if you want to.

The PBR presets library contains materials with and without depth information.
In addition you can customize a material as simple or complexed as you want, and you can make your own from scratch
128434

Take a look at my previous example post. I selected a brush, then a preset material, and painted on a default 3D Coat object. Less than a minute on each.
As you can see, some are with normal maps and some are without.

Reco

Doctor49152
06-02-2015, 08:00 PM
Here's a quick test in octane 2.0 and LW. The trick to get the metal look is to ignore the diffuse (color) channel and plug the texture image into the specularity. This gives the metallic look.

jboudreau
06-02-2015, 09:20 PM
Thank you Joe
I notice the difference in the node preview window. That's why I thought you had done some modification.
When I open your version, it came out exactly as in your posts.
When I tried to do the same node set up from scratch, it ended up as I have posted a few times. Not good.
But, when I imported your maps into my set up, the result was different. It rendered out exactly like your renders. Understand that if you can. Trouble shooting that issue is over my head.

Thanks again for your help. I'm leaving for some different fun now.http://www.swedenrock.com/festival/artister-biljetter/artister-2015
Who knows, Maybe the mystery is solved when I'm back

Reco

Hi Guys

The issue you are having is in your scene you have the image coat lw_initialShadingGroup_nmap.jpg image set to Default for both the Colorsapce RGB and the Colorspace Alpha. Go into the image editor for that image file and Change both the colorspace RGB and the Colorspace Alpha to Linear and you should get the same results as Joe Poe.

I opened up your scene and created the node structure that Joe Poe posted and it was giving me different results until I noticed the issue above. Once I fixed the issue above it render exactly the same as Joe Poe's Post

Hope this helps

Thanks
Jason

erikals
06-03-2015, 12:12 AM
hi, bit bad explanation there, but basically this >
http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15127&p=122794

http://3d-coat.com/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=422&type=bug&show_inline=1&file_show_inline_token=20150601f151199ed72471b720b be54d003a104bccb10f6b

Great News http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif
read two places that Sculpt Layers in 3DCoat is beeing worked on...

http://erikalstad.com/cgtemp/3DCoat-honey.png

Surrealist.
06-03-2015, 01:01 AM
Cool. By the way I am glad these questions have been asked. A lot of LW artists have wondered about these new PBR workflows.

Good to have a thread to reference. And this, I would hope, should open up a world of texturing possibilities for LW artists using these new solutions, be it Quizel, Substance or even 3D coat.

The conductor node is a big "duh" moment for me. Been studying Renderman lately.

Have a look at this:


The specular component of a PxrLM Material can behave as a dielectric material or as a conductor. In other systems, this control has typically been offered in the form of a "metallic" parameter. In PxrLM, we expose direct control over the complex Refractive Index and Extinction Coefficient for solving the Fresnel equations.


http://renderman.pixar.com/resources/current/RenderMan/PxrLMMaterials.html

And if this link works, LW conductor node:

https://books.google.co.th/books?id=XDIoV9OvdpcC&pg=SA12-PA117&lpg=SA12-PA117&dq=LightWave+manual+Conductor+node&source=bl&ots=0PJpaQibSB&sig=8p_fh_OKRjfW70cJnz8up6-v-4E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cqVuVZ_PINLGuATpjYHgDg&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA#v=twopage&q&f=true

I love it when things cross-reference. Gives me a broader understanding of the tech.

@Doctor49152

Looking good :)

tyrot
06-03-2015, 12:21 PM
i guess you just nailed it sir. octane render i mean..

Lewis
06-03-2015, 12:43 PM
Here's a quick test in octane 2.0 and LW. The trick to get the metal look is to ignore the diffuse (color) channel and plug the texture image into the specularity. This gives the metallic look.

Hmm, not sure i get it, i get completely different result if I ignore diffuse input ? Can you post screengrab of your node setup ?

Thx

tyrot
06-03-2015, 02:14 PM
yeah good idea

Marander
06-03-2015, 02:15 PM
Hi

Thanks for all the useful info, specially JoePoe. I'm not using 3D Coat (yet) but Substance Designer / Painter. A SP / LW user created a LW node for using the PBR maps. So I took your LWO and modified the substance node slightly (added bump channel and color mixer). You'll find the modified compound node (including bump map) in the attached object. These are the results (pic 1 with inverse luma channel, pic 2 is without color mixer, pic 3 with bump - that's the one stored in the LWO, pic 4 the same without bump).

128503

128504

Marander

128505

128506

Doctor49152
06-03-2015, 07:09 PM
Hmm, not sure i get it, i get completely different result if I ignore diffuse input ? Can you post screengrab of your node setup ?

Thx

Here's the screen-shot of my octane node set-up. I'll also add that I did re-make the normal map. The original one in the archive had no 'normalcy' to it (meaning it was smooth) and octane had a problem with it. So I used the free NVidia normal map plugin on the rough.jpg

128515

Also it looks like the 3D Coat image doesn't actually cast shadows on the sample sphere image. That's why there's that reflection in the center of the 3D Coat image and it's black in all real renderers. So in a way we're all trying to chase and match something that's faked or wrong to begin with.

Markc
08-22-2015, 11:16 AM
I finally had a mess around with the PBR smart materials in 3D Coat.
This is my attempt at W13 Farnsworth :)

129403129404

CaptainMarlowe
08-23-2015, 12:30 AM
After spending a lot of time playing with smart materials, I found them not working as good as in Substance Painter, which is now my prefered app for painting. I sure wish Andrew now stops adding constantly new features and focuses on polishing the sculpting and retopo ones. I guess it is what he is doing now, based on his tweets, which would be great.

Markc
08-23-2015, 03:59 AM
I must admit, I did have some headaches trying to get close to the 3D Coat output in LW.
Is the workflow easier in Substance Painter, I believe someone has created a plugin to tackle this?

MSherak
08-23-2015, 04:34 AM
On thing you have to remember about these viewport renderers. They are not correct and approximate in the fresnel math to make it look more acceptable than what has been seen in the past for viewport rendering. Applying these maps to the model in a 3D package will result in look that is close with lots tweaking. One key part to get this metalness look is to utilize the normal map to help in the approximation. If you look at the screencap you see two different looking renderings. The only difference is the normal map is on for the one in the viewport and off in the image viewer. Only one node used and all other maps are just utilizing the 'T' button. The difference you are seeing is the normal map node is flipped in the Z. This is the key to getting the look of viewport PBR in a 3D render package by fooling the math to simple methods of multiplying, oh and color highlighting which most people forget to use. (its on in both)

-M

zapper1998
08-23-2015, 08:59 AM
Thank you for all the information

learned allot.. wow

wow so much information....

wow wow thanks

dam I need a beer..

awesome

Markc
08-23-2015, 10:06 AM
We really need a plugin/node for Lightwave to directly import PBR stuff.
Surely the whole point of smart materials is to make things quicker and easier.
I even tried exporting 'baked' maps from 3D Coat, it only exports Color/Nmap/Gloss, but straight into LW the initial result was a lot closer as a start.

Markc
09-20-2015, 09:04 AM
As I am not an active member on the 3D Coat forums, I am asking here.
Is there a way to transfer my custom Smart Materials from one version of 3D coat to another, when updates are released?

Markc
09-25-2015, 11:51 AM
Any 3D Coat users know of a solution to this?
I don't want to have to re-create my custom materials.

Markc
09-27-2015, 04:09 AM
As I am having a one way conversation.....:tongue:, I will continue.
FWIW you can export Smart Materials (or any other setting) using File/Create Extension, then Install Extension into new version :D

Waves of light
09-27-2015, 04:42 AM
Mark - Have a look at the Export Extension from the File menu. I believe that allows you to export all your smart materials as an extension and then re-import them with new versions of 3DC. I haven't tested it myself though.

Markc
09-27-2015, 05:23 AM
Thanks, yes I did some searching on the 3D Coat forums and found that :thumbsup:

AbnRanger
09-28-2015, 01:26 AM
What do you mean transfer you smart materials from one version to the other? When you install new builds, there is no reason those materials won't still be there. The PBR materials are stored in discreet folders within your MyDocs/3D Coat 4.5/Patterns directory. You can save backups of those and just copy/paste those onto your other computers (ie. laptop or home PC), so you can use them there as well. The extension is mainly a way to store them so they can be shared, or moved as a single file.

Markc
09-28-2015, 11:54 AM
Thank you Don, I didn't realise it worked like that.
That's good to know (I forgot about that other folder), I was looking in the application folder for the Smart Materials.

eon5
12-29-2015, 02:40 AM
http://3dcoat.com/home/newsletters/christmas-sales/

"Dear Friends,



We wish you peace, joy and family warm-heartedness during this Christmas and the whole New Year!



In the light of upcoming Holiday season Pilgway studio is happy to announce a special Christmas discount on 3D-Coat V4.

From December 20 until January 7, 2016 we are offering $100 off on 3D-Coat Professional and $20 off on Educational version.

Check out our new web-site 3dcoat.com with 3D gallery and the Buy now page to make use of this special discount.



Sincerely yours,

Pilgway team"

hrgiger
12-29-2015, 05:13 AM
I picked up a copy of 3DCoat. Don't know that I will do a lot of sculpting in it, I love zbrush but for $100 off, I do like the UV and retopo in 3DC.

DrStrik9
12-29-2015, 05:11 PM
I picked it up also. I just couldn't resist at $279.00 for a Pro License! :+)

It's an awesome deal. Thanks, Pilgway.

DrStrik9
12-29-2015, 05:28 PM
Now I have this huge learning curve before me. Thanks, Pilgway. :+)

lightscape
12-29-2015, 08:11 PM
I picked up a copy of 3DCoat. Don't know that I will do a lot of sculpting in it, I love zbrush but for $100 off, I do like the UV and retopo in 3DC.

The new smart materials makes it work like quixel and substance designer for generic canned textures.
For handpainted textures its a must have. Makes modo look like its painting using half a core turned on.

hrgiger
12-30-2015, 06:27 AM
Yeah I saw a nice video on texture painting with PBR for 3DC. I'm looking forward to trying it out.

tburbage
12-30-2015, 10:52 PM
I picked up a copy of 3DCoat. Don't know that I will do a lot of sculpting in it, I love zbrush but for $100 off, I do like the UV and retopo in 3DC.
You won't be sorry. 3DC pairs quite well with LW in the areas you cited and I'm hoping the upcoming PBR support in LW just makes for an even stronger synergism. I've also invested a lot of time in ZB, but this week I'm cramming on the Voxel and Surface/Live Clay aspect of 3DC, which I've neglected up until now (just due to lack of bandwidth...)

Ma3rk
12-30-2015, 11:35 PM
There've been a number of changes in this release that aren't particularly reflected in the Youtube vids. In particular, the Stamps tab which has apparently been incorporated into the PBR materials. It's probably very straight forward but the workflow is definitely different. The current 3DCoat online docs are pretty scant on details. I Hope to play around with that a bit in the next couple of days but would be nice to see other Wavers chiming in.

As another note, take a look in the 3D Coat Gallery. There's a fellow who's taken his project from concept to model to STL to actual bronze casting. Quite impressive to say the least.

lightscape
12-30-2015, 11:51 PM
There've been a number of changes in this release that aren't particularly reflected in the Youtube vids. In particular, the Stamps tab which has apparently been incorporated into the PBR materials. It's probably very straight forward but the workflow is definitely different. The current 3DCoat online docs are pretty scant on details. I Hope to play around with that a bit in the next couple of days but would be nice to see other Wavers chiming in.

As another note, take a look in the 3D Coat Gallery. There's a fellow who's taken his project from concept to model to STL to actual bronze casting. Quite impressive to say the least.


Check the official 3dc youtube. Plenty of up to date info there.
The stamp tools are now integrated into smart materials. They are still there except now the stamp "camera projection" is in a dropdown list when creating a smart material.

Ma3rk
12-31-2015, 10:06 AM
Check the official 3dc youtube. Plenty of up to date info there.
The stamp tools are now integrated into smart materials. They are still there except now the stamp "camera projection" is in a dropdown list when creating a smart material.

I have been and there are, but not specific to the stamp tool changes that I could find at least. I figured it out indirectly after finding some threads on the 3D Coat forum.

Markc
05-05-2016, 12:04 PM
Apparently the 3D Max Applink has been rewritten to send PBR materials back and forth.
Hopefully the LW version will follow.