PDA

View Full Version : Quixel Suite 2.0



DrStrik9
12-07-2015, 11:12 AM
Does anyone have experience with this?

I think it's a set of actions for Photoshop ... I remember it as a single action for Photoshop a LONG time ago. But it seems they've improved their offering quite a bit.

Of course, you can create normal maps in Photoshop CC now, but this workflow seems really fast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WirF2bV8iNk

$99 USD for "Indie, Hobby & Freelance"

pinkmouse
12-07-2015, 11:18 AM
Is it still Windoze only?

DrStrik9
12-07-2015, 11:26 AM
Yes, unfortunately. :-( I just hammered them with an email about this.

I wonder why, since Photoshop is multi-OS.

Edit: -- It could be that Windows Photoshop has 91% of the market, while Mac Photoshop has 5%. Oh well.

jasonwestmas
12-07-2015, 11:55 AM
There is really no excuse for this anymore imo. Unless it's because of lack of resources and knowlege on their end.

jasonwestmas
12-07-2015, 11:57 AM
Yes, unfortunately. :-( I just hammered them with an email about this.

I wonder why, since Photoshop is multi-OS.

Edit: -- It could be that Windows Photoshop has 91% of the market, while Mac Photoshop has 5%. Oh well.

nah, graphic designers still like their macs.

DrStrik9
12-07-2015, 12:09 PM
There is really no excuse for this anymore imo. Unless it's because of lack of resources and knowlege on their end.

<rant>

I wish the same, but ... many developers just don't seem to grasp this. I know for really small (like 1-person) developers, Macs are viewed as "expensive." But an iMac with everything needed is $1099 USD full retail, including monitor and the current OS.

Not being a developer, I suppose there would be other expenses associated with compiling code for Mac OS, but I don't know what they would be.

In Quixel's case, it seems worthwhile to increase sales by 5%. I'd buy this in a heartbeat.

</rant>

gordonrobb
12-07-2015, 12:18 PM
It is superb. V2 is streets ahead of V1. It is so much more than for normal creation. In fact, that is the only bit I had not used until very recently.

Skonk
12-07-2015, 04:29 PM
nah, graphic designers still like their macs.

and the 3D folk prefer their PC's.

Quixel's market is 3D and Photoshop users; a market which is over 90% windows based and it's not as simple as "just compiling the code for mac" in most cases to get stuff to work due to how everything, in the end, has to be compiled on a mac using XCode (even if you built it in third party systems).

Every Mac user knows that they will struggle to get all the software they want, yet they still go mac.

That said; I have just ordered myself a new Macbook Pro today :) but I fully intend to run Windows 10 on it as my primary OS; with MACOS used for some XCode stuff now and then.

DrStrik9
12-07-2015, 05:57 PM
and the 3D folk prefer their PC's.

Yes this is true.

Yet, although Mac represents about 5% of the Photoshop market, as of Sept, 2015, there are 5.3 Million+ Photoshop CC subscribers, and still MANY more who use Ps 6 and 5.5. At a 5% share, Mac Photoshop CC users then total 256,000, plus many more Macs using earlier Ps versions. It would seem a decent investment to develop a Mac version for a set of Ps plugs and actions, as all things considered, it would mean a 5% increase in sales.

But all this is theory, unless the developer agrees with this logic.


Every Mac user knows that they will struggle to get all the software they want, yet they still go mac.

We started with Mac long before Windows was a gleam in Bill Gates' thieving eye. For design it was clearly the only game in town. So we have a rather large backlog of files ...

It's never all that simple, is it? :+)

Still, I am tempted to load Windows onto a partition on this MacPro, so I can use all those lucious add-ons not available for Mac.

tyrot
12-07-2015, 07:02 PM
ok as a lightwave user which one should i choose and why ? substance painter ? quixel ? (or invest 3D coat for painter too )

Sensei
12-07-2015, 07:28 PM
Making version of app for Macintosh, that was not intended since beginning, is like writing application from scratch second time..
Non-portable applications are utilizing resources more efficiently, they are faster to write by programmer, faster for user, easier to maintain and extend in future.
Portable applications are harder to write, everything must be put to virtual C++ classes etc. So which system is used is completely not visible from the app's the main code.
If somebody writes LW plugin doesn't have idea whether it's for Windows or for Macintosh. Unless plugin has to deal with f.e. scanning folders, scanning files, or other operating system dependent features.

OlaHaldor
12-08-2015, 01:14 AM
You can't go wrong with Substance Painter - but it depends on how large texture sets you need too. Substance Painter currently have a 4K limit. But it works WONDERS. And it's super fast at baking stuff.
For instance, I made a lowpoly retopo of a statue. The statue was done with photo scanning. 150 million polygons.. Substance Painter baked the normal, ao, curvature+++ in just over a minute. Two minutes tops. I had expected like 10 minutes, or maybe more.
I can work rather fast with Painter. The generators are top notch too! It can add a whole lot to the texture in just a few steps.

You probably can't go wrong with Quixel either, but I personally feel way more comfortable actually painting on the model instead of a UV map. In painter you have a choice. With Quixel, you have to, if you want to paint anything custom. And you need to take into account the distortion of the UV as well. Not saying it's bad or impossible - just not for me. On the upside, Quixel supports.. is it 16K ? They also have way better default texture scans.

souzou
12-08-2015, 05:01 AM
You can't go wrong with Substance Painter - but it depends on how large texture sets you need too. Substance Painter currently have a 4K limit. But it works WONDERS. And it's super fast at baking stuff.
For instance, I made a lowpoly retopo of a statue. The statue was done with photo scanning. 150 million polygons.. Substance Painter baked the normal, ao, curvature+++ in just over a minute. Two minutes tops. I had expected like 10 minutes, or maybe more.
I can work rather fast with Painter. The generators are top notch too! It can add a whole lot to the texture in just a few steps.

OlaHaldor, if you don't mind me asking do you have a workflow for getting the painter textures into LW and looking similar/equivalent?

OnlineRender
12-08-2015, 05:52 AM
OlaHaldor, if you don't mind me asking do you have a workflow for getting the painter textures into LW and looking similar/equivalent?

there is a few ways to get colour id maps , some have been mentioned , dpfilter is another workaround , however regarding substance Andrew Comb wrote a substance-lw nodal compound which essentially lets you take all your exported maps from substance and channel them into LW , eh donwload is on lwiki group https://www.facebook.com/groups/lightwiki/search/?query=substance

- - - Updated - - -

download =>131395

gordonrobb
12-08-2015, 06:01 AM
You probably can't go wrong with Quixel either, but I personally feel way more comfortable actually painting on the model instead of a UV map. In painter you have a choice. With Quixel, you have to, if you want to paint anything custom. And you need to take into account the distortion of the UV as well. Not saying it's bad or impossible - just not for me. On the upside, Quixel supports.. is it 16K ? They also have way better default texture scans.

Quixel 2 is nothing like 1.8. You can paint custom masks and actual colour directly on the mesh in 3D. You can also creat Normal map details like this. It works a treat and there are more Improvers on the way.

souzou
12-08-2015, 06:51 AM
there is a few ways to get colour id maps , some have been mentioned , dpfilter is another workaround , however regarding substance Andrew Comb wrote a substance-lw nodal compound which essentially lets you take all your exported maps from substance and channel them into LW , eh donwload is on lwiki group https://www.facebook.com/groups/lightwiki/search/?query=substance

- - - Updated - - -

download =>131395

Thanks I'll check those out.

Simon-S
12-08-2015, 07:28 AM
ok as a lightwave user which one should i choose and why ? substance painter ? quixel ? (or invest 3D coat for painter too )

Having tried both Substance Painter and Quixel 2 - for me Substance painter is streets ahead. Quixel Suite is very good, there's no doubting that but the sheer fact its action based means there is a lot of waiting for these actions to complete, even with the smallest of changes.

Granted I don't know quixel as well as substance painter but on first impressions its very slow and it doesnt have the 'instant' feel of substance painter.

Just my 10 cents worth.

zapper1998
12-08-2015, 07:39 AM
I got Q2 but can not get it to work with CS5?? dangit...

lightscape
12-08-2015, 08:12 AM
ok as a lightwave user which one should i choose and why ? substance painter ? quixel ? (or invest 3D coat for painter too )

One advantage of 3dcoat over substance is you can paint across in realtime on multiple uvmaps seamlessly.
In subspainter I had to pick the uvmap then start to paint which is really slow workflow especially if you have lots of uvmaps in one model. I don't know if they changed that yet.
That's the same limitation with modo.
I still prefer painting in 3dcoat. Sculpting in zbrush.
I think the other appz have more bang for the buck than quixel.

gordonrobb
12-08-2015, 10:07 AM
I got Q2 but can not get it to work with CS5?? dangit...

Did you log the call over in the FB group? They seem to have been really quick to get things fixed.

zapper1998
12-08-2015, 10:22 AM
Did you log the call over in the FB group? They seem to have been really quick to get things fixed.

Yes "Teddy" is aware of the problem
loaded up all the screen grabs of the errors that occurred, for some reason CS5 is being a headache for a few people other than me, there are quite a few other people with CS5 having the same problem.
and have tried everything they have asked me to try ....

Oh well I guess I will keep on SP and SD for now and learn more as I go.

DrStrik9
12-08-2015, 10:37 AM
I got a nice reply from Quixel Tech Support:

"We have been working on a Mac port but it has been on the back burner until Megascans is out. We will announce the Mac port once we are back on track."

I'm very happy to hear this. :+)

EDIT: Also there's this, coming soon ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EyHSzfDo6c

DrStrik9
12-08-2015, 11:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw4IJuu0XSg

Wow ...

jasonwestmas
12-08-2015, 12:28 PM
NiceShading and texture viewing options!

DrStrik9
12-08-2015, 02:26 PM
I've also been looking at 3D-Coat 4.5, which seems very similar to Quixel Suite 2.0, the difference being Quixel is $99 USD, available so far for Windows only (but you probably need to be paying for current Photoshop -- haven't heard about how well Ps CS6 works with Quixel), and 3D-Coat is $379 USD, but is a standalone app, which is available for Windows, Mac, and Linux.

Surrealist.
12-08-2015, 03:27 PM
Yeah I installed 2.0 and I am real impressed. It is a whole new animal. So many areas of improvement. It even does its own baking now of some of the maps as an option if you load a mesh. I have not gotten that deep into it yet but at first glance the material presets (which have sustained quite a lot of improvement) are going to keep it as my first choice for fast turnaround.

djwaterman
12-08-2015, 07:11 PM
What type of meshes can you load into Quixel? Sub-D?

tyrot
12-08-2015, 08:09 PM
thanks guys i think 3D coat is still the way to go.

I also a bit disturbed enormous amount of actions duration in Quixel.

Surrealist.
12-08-2015, 11:08 PM
What type of meshes can you load into Quixel? Sub-D?

Polygon. So if you want subd, export a frozen version for viewing in Quixel.

djwaterman
12-09-2015, 12:37 AM
Polygon. So if you want subd, export a frozen version for viewing in Quixel.


Is that the same with Substance?

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 01:00 AM
Yes.

Does 3D coat have SDS? Curious.

Also I think Zbrush got something similar in 4 R7. Mudbox, of course has subdivide like Zbrush of old and you can back down the level as well as choose between smooth subdivision and faceted. But I am not aware of anyone of them having true CC Subdivs. Maybe that is another thing 3D Coat brings to the table not sure.

In a perfect world, I'd use all four: SD, SP, 3DC and QS.

jasonwestmas
12-09-2015, 07:45 AM
I haven't seen any SDS in 3dcoat yet but I haven't been using the latest. ZB4R7 does have something like SDS, yes. Mari 3 has the pixar openSubdiv.

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 09:36 AM
For texturing I would not call it a deal killer for most things. As long as you are keeping your UVs smoothed down the texture pipeline so that when the texture comes back to your unfrozen model there are no surprises you are good to go. There are some cases where being able to have SDS would be essential on a practical level as far as number of polygons when dealing with a large asset with a lot of geo.

lightscape
12-09-2015, 10:56 AM
I've also been looking at 3D-Coat 4.5, which seems very similar to Quixel Suite 2.0, the difference being Quixel is $99 USD, available so far for Windows only (but you probably need to be paying for current Photoshop -- haven't heard about how well Ps CS6 works with Quixel), and 3D-Coat is $379 USD, but is a standalone app, which is available for Windows, Mac, and Linux.

3dcoat has much much more features. The smart materials in 3dcoat is similar to what quixel offers. The painting in 3dcoat is just the best in class for now. And you also get 2nd best sculpting next to zbrush(imo) and a very good retopo toolset that beats topogun.

Photoshop already has 3d painting but it lags big time.

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 11:22 AM
Yeah the PS 3D painting is dismal. But with this plugin using 3do it is completely different and they have added some new brush features on a par with other 3D painting apps. I would not dismiss Quixel entirely just yet. This new version is leaps and bounds ahead of the last. At the price it is a bargain. And like Zbrush I have not paid for an upgrade since I bought it.

gordonrobb
12-09-2015, 11:47 AM
Yeah the PS 3D painting is dismal. But with this plugin using 3do it is completely different and they have added some new brush features on a par with other 3D painting apps. I would not dismiss Quixel entirely just yet. This new version is leaps and bounds ahead of the last. At the price it is a bargain. And like Zbrush I have not paid for an upgrade since I bought it.

I totally agree. If you haven't tried it, you should.

OnlineRender
12-09-2015, 01:13 PM
I totally agree. If you haven't tried it, you should.

I have both apps and I am edging towards quixel atm , mainly because I like staying in the photoshop environment .

jasonwestmas
12-09-2015, 01:42 PM
For texturing I would not call it a deal killer for most things. As long as you are keeping your UVs smoothed down the texture pipeline so that when the texture comes back to your unfrozen model there are no surprises you are good to go. There are some cases where being able to have SDS would be essential on a practical level as far as number of polygons when dealing with a large asset with a lot of geo.

Yes, as artists will figure out, having lots of models and shaders in the same scene as you texture is super helpful for reference and consistency reasons. In which case SDS may help in viewing a lot of polys at once. Mari is already going in this direction.

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 01:47 PM
I have both apps and I am edging towards quixel atm , mainly because I like staying in the photoshop environment .

Yeah and when you think about it, being able to paint in 3D (really for the first time ever in PS with ease) using a PBR workflow is pretty amazing.

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 01:52 PM
Yes, as artists will figure out, having lots of models and shaders in the same scene as you texture is super helpful for reference and consistency reasons. In which case SDS may help in viewing a lot of polys at once. Mari is already going in this direction.

Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

sadkkf
12-09-2015, 03:00 PM
So how does Ddo work exactly? Can I load my LWO models directly then paint on them or do I need to use another format?

gordonrobb
12-09-2015, 03:11 PM
So how does Ddo work exactly? Can I load my LWO models directly then paint on them or do I need to use another format?

It needs Obj or FBX (which I've never tried). But if you just export your LWO as Obj, do your work in DDO, then apply the exported textures to your LWO, it works dandy.

lightscape
12-09-2015, 07:22 PM
Yeah the PS 3D painting is dismal. But with this plugin using 3do it is completely different and they have added some new brush features on a par with other 3D painting apps. I would not dismiss Quixel entirely just yet. This new version is leaps and bounds ahead of the last. At the price it is a bargain. And like Zbrush I have not paid for an upgrade since I bought it.

I've paid maybe 200 bucks for 3dbrush 2 to 3dcoat 4 total. :D

Does quixel still have that tacked on script/batch processing when applying preset materials? That crashed photoshop sometimes that required restarting both appz.
I still don't see anything in it that I don't have in 3dcoat. 3dcoat has smartmaterials and pbr now. So its as easy to create canned texturing in 3dcoat just like quixel.
I also don't like freezing models or exporting an obj just to paint. 3dcoat reads lwo with subdivision natively. This is why I don't paint in zbrush even if polypaint is really flexible to paint with.

jasonwestmas
12-09-2015, 07:39 PM
Really depends on how much you like to use Photoshop tools. I do for a lot of things. Doesn't mean you have to pick one or the other. Use what makes the most sense at the time.

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 09:25 PM
Yeah agreed. Really liking where 3D Coat is going lately. And with Quixel stepping up to the plate, it is giving us lots of painting options when you consider Substance Painter as well. I just wish there was more time in the day. :)

Surrealist.
12-09-2015, 09:26 PM
Yeah agreed. Really liking where 3D Coat is going lately. And with Quixel stepping up to the plate, it is giving us lots of painting options when you consider Substance Painter as well. I just wish there was more time in the day. :)

lightscape
12-09-2015, 09:51 PM
Really depends on how much you like to use Photoshop tools. I do for a lot of things. Doesn't mean you have to pick one or the other. Use what makes the most sense at the time.

Unless everybody is using cracks these days software is not cheap when added up so make the wise choice that means picking one over the other. Quixel is behind ime.

DrStrik9
12-09-2015, 11:24 PM
Yeah agreed. Really liking where 3D Coat is going lately. And with Quixel stepping up to the plate, it is giving us lots of painting options when you consider Substance Painter as well. I just wish there was more time in the day. :)

So many good choices. PBR, PBR, PBR! :+) I'm currently drawn to 3D-Coat, but Quixel is only $99 USD and resides in Photoshop (my home town), but there is no Mac version yet. I only started looking at Substance Painter today, (I've got a WHOLE lot of YouTube to watch) and their PBR materials database is extensive (and expensive). 3D-Coat's brand needs a serious overhaul, but the product looks amazingly full-featured, and they seem to stay on top of improving it.

Yes, what we do for a living is "learn new stuff."

EDIT: Oh and one more thing: 3D-Coat can load a .lwo. :+) Quixel can't, and I don't know about Substance Painter yet.

Surrealist.
12-10-2015, 12:20 AM
Yeah that is a plus if you need it. Maybe it is something that will get more support in the years to come as LightWave moves into it's "New Era"

Practically speaking for me though, once the UVs are locked that object never leaves the host app and I never touch it anymore other than to rig it or assign materials which are also for the most part things that happen in the host app. But clones of it, both within the host app and those that are exported for baking are subdivided if need be, expanded apart, mirrored duplicate parts (with overlapping UVs) are deleted or separated and any number of other variables that I need for baking and painting outside of the host app. So as long as any baking painting or other process applied are done in the same texture UV space, it does not really matter.

So I have become accustom to just exporting in formats that are supported by painting apps. So for me anyways, in LightWave it would not make much difference. But I can see the attraction of having it for lot of people. It would be especially useful if, for 2016's new renderer that 3D Coat could export .lwo with PBR materials intact. Now that would be slick.

djwaterman
12-10-2015, 02:38 AM
I agree, that would be timely and smart for the next version of Lightwave. I have been looking at 3D coat and it really is pretty incredible, I mean it offers all the other stuff beyond just texturing as well. I feel like if I had to pick one app for this type of work and money wasn't an issue I'd go for 3D coat. It just looks very user friendly to my eyes.

The website is a little stale, you have to check out the Youtube channel to appreciate the product.

Surrealist.
12-10-2015, 03:17 AM
Yeah I think when I first checked out 3D Coat it was a few years ago. And the app was lacking in my opinion. So when it came down to a decision, I went with Zbrush. But since then it has gotten a lot of improvement. One thing is good. There seems to be fierce competition at this end of the market. I was actually blown away by Quixel 2.0. Considering they have committed to a Photoshop environment, they have answered to Substance P. and 3D Coat (on the painting side) quite well, keeping them well within range of these other apps, who clearly have had the edge as far as 3D painting. Just being able to paint in Photoshop with all of the brushes and workflow you are familiar with is amazing. It will attract a lot of PS 2D painters to 3D painting I think.

jasonwestmas
12-10-2015, 07:00 AM
yup, a lot of the guys I know don't feel like taking the time to learn yet another application for high end 3D painting. I think Quixel has taken a lot of that annoyance out of the picture since they all enjoy using PS.

zapper1998
12-10-2015, 07:10 AM
wahooooooo
Got Quixel 2 running.....

When I received Q2 after preorder. Could not get it to work crash crash.. sucked
they put out a patch 2.0.2


Ok..
Uninstalled Q 2.0, As Administrator
Installed Q 2.0.2 , As Administrator..
Quixel Running...
Pointed to PS CS5 as Quixel requested
PS CS5 opened up. No error, popups yet..

wahoooooo.... :)


And started a project, the one supplied with the Primer vid... To test it out.

And Wow it really takes advantage of the Titan-Z video card. W O W Fast it is, response is unbelievable fast, wow






Mike

Surrealist.
12-10-2015, 09:43 AM
yup, a lot of the guys I know don't feel like taking the time to learn yet another application for high end 3D painting. I think Quixel has taken a lot of that annoyance out of the picture since they all enjoy using PS.

Yeah I was showing 2.0 to a PS painter with a number of years experience painting in 2D for 3D Models. He was just blown away by 2.0. I think it is easily worth the price of admission just to be able to preview you 2D work in 2D with that much immediacy, if nothing else.

@Zapper1998, lol yeah it does skip along nicely, doesn't it?.

OnlineRender
12-10-2015, 10:06 AM
this is me when I first opened it ...

sorry I have loads of these now and nothing really productive to say :)

http://i.giphy.com/1iTIaWwKpqP95LC8.gif

jasonwestmas
12-12-2015, 07:53 AM
Unless everybody is using cracks these days software is not cheap when added up so make the wise choice that means picking one over the other. Quixel is behind ime.

I don't use crack and I don't discuss peoples money problems. ;)

Areyos Alektor
12-13-2015, 01:11 PM
For me the "Quixel Suite" and "3DCoat" do not have the same utility, they are rather complementary depending on the purpose. "3DCoat" allows to work directly on the geometry where "Quixel" allows to work directly in "PhotoShop". And then "Quixel" is thought to games engines :

http://quixel.se/usermanual/quixelsuite/doku.php?id=ddo_about

It seems more logical to use both not put them in competition :)

toeknee
12-13-2015, 01:26 PM
"Unless everybody is using cracks these days software is not cheap when added up so make the wise choice that means picking one over the other. Quixel is behind ime." Dude I have no idea what you are talking about. If you look at the functionality and pricing things just keep getting better and cheaper. When I first did Softimage the price was $63000.00 And that was for one piece of software. I mean is you are an indy guy you could get everything from Allegorithmic from $20.00 per month till its paid off. You can add Houdiini Indy for $200.00 per year. I mean I did some test with Montra renders at 1920X1080 and I scaled them in Photoshop to 4K, and they were very usable. Look at 3D coat if you get it as an indy artist its $99.00.
SO this whole oh man the software so expensive now is totally ridiculous.

Surrealist.
12-13-2015, 02:41 PM
For me the "Quixel Suite" and "3DCoat" do not have the same utility, they are rather complementary depending on the purpose. "3DCoat" allows to work directly on the geometry where "Quixel" allows to work directly in "PhotoShop". And then "Quixel" is thought to games engines :

http://quixel.se/usermanual/quixelsuite/doku.php?id=ddo_about

It seems more logical to use both not put them in competition :)



I definitely agree. The competition is on their end. And that has driven the development. And in this sense the line is starting to blur now a little bit. Quixel is adding features now that Substance has had for a while. Namely doing some baking. It will now automatically bake curvature, gradient and object space normal maps from your mesh. So that reduces a little prep work right there. And because of that they have also improved the edge detection. Before you used to really have to force it to find edges by baking maps a certain way. Now it bakes a curvature map. And so in some cases when the mesh does not have any other details you need to bake in from a high res mesh, you don't really even need a normal map to start out and it will still bake any details you generate into a blank map.

Surrealist.
12-13-2015, 02:44 PM
I don't discuss peoples money problems. ;)

I agree with this.

It should be banished from forum discussion along with other topics that are not allowed.

gordonrobb
12-13-2015, 03:46 PM
For me the "Quixel Suite" and "3DCoat" do not have the same utility, they are rather complementary depending on the purpose. "3DCoat" allows to work directly on the geometry where "Quixel" allows to work directly in "PhotoShop". And then "Quixel" is thought to games engines :

http://quixel.se/usermanual/quixelsuite/doku.php?id=ddo_about


It seems more logical to use both not put them in competition :)

Bear in mind with Suite 2 you can paint directly on to the mesh now too.

DrStrik9
12-13-2015, 05:18 PM
I agree with this.

It [money problems] should be banished from forum discussion along with other topics that are not allowed.

I agree also, along with talk of cracking software -- this is just stealing from creative people. But I think speaking about cost of tools should be permissible, as not everyone can afford to buy all the tools.

sadkkf
12-14-2015, 02:52 PM
Quixel is only $99 USD and resides in Photoshop (my home town)


This is great as long as they continue to support CS6 for those who still refuse the cloud. :)

Areyos Alektor
12-20-2015, 05:22 PM
Bear in mind with Suite 2 you can paint directly on to the mesh now too.


In fact, but what I wanted to say is manipulation of geometry not in the sense to paint on it ;)