PDA

View Full Version : LW with Zbrush...general concensus?



Algae998
10-06-2007, 04:52 PM
Ello all,

So inbetween classes I find myself cruising youtube and watching various modeling videos. Recently Ive been drooling over what some people have been creating in ZBrush.
Id like to get a general concensus on what people think about this program because Ive seen a number of tutorials and it looks great.

A big concern is how well it works, if at all, with LW. Ive heard that you can export these models as .obj files but Im still new to LW and not sure how to connect all the dots. Has anyone ever created models via ZBrush and successfully animated them?
If that is the case, would you treat the model as a regular LW model (load/import the .obj file into modeler or layout)?

Any stand points would be greatly appreciated!

IMI
10-06-2007, 08:36 PM
ZBrush (3.1) is an awesome program. it's ability to handle HUGE numbers of polygons in "2.5D" is simply amazing. it's a "trick", yeah, but it's a convincing trick.
In any event, that illusion is easily converted to real geometry when exported as OBJ...BUT... LW Modeler and Layout aren't exactly thrilled when presented with an OBJ file with a couple million polygons, so mostly people use ZBrush to sculpt an object, then export a displacement map for use in Layout on a sub-patch model.
Doing that essentially recreates the nuances of the sculpted object without the zillion polygons.
Oh, it works exceptionally well, but there are a few "gotchas" along the way, such as the object has to be UV mapped first (easy enough to do in ZB, though), and the V coordinates on the displacement map have to be flipped or LW won't be able to use them correctly.

Aside from that. ZB can also be used to paint directly on vertices on an extremely dense mesh, than that color info can be converted to a standard image map. Very cool, if you ask me. :)

And of course, you can create some fairly detailed, though low-poly objects in ZB and import them into Modeler fot sub-patching, UV-ing, and general editing.

I'm no expert in ZBrush by all means - only been using it a few months now, but I swear, aside from a few minor nitpickity things, it seems tailor-made for use with LW. All we need now is some kind of exchange plugin that directly loads a correctly displacement-mapped object into Layout. :)

Algae998
10-06-2007, 08:52 PM
I agree. I like what I see and I got a chance to quickly try out to program...its a boat load of fun. Its kind of like a "3d" version of ArtRage haha; modeling clay. I see what you mean by LW not being terribly happy with loading the .obj file, since theres soo many polys.
How would you export a displacement map into LW? Same way you export the model as an .obj file?
Im not familiar with many of these terms and percedures because Im still very new to the whole 3d modeling relm, but Im stoked!
Thanks for the reply.

IMI
10-06-2007, 09:58 PM
Well, in ZB you have to first tell it to create a displacement map, usually after lowering the subdivision level to 1. Then you have to let it do it's thing, then locate it in the Alpha maps section, flip the V, and export as an image map of choice. TGA and TIFF seem to be mostly what's recommended.
Then in LW Layout, you have to open the Properties panel for your object and select Deform>Edit Nodes and then use (IIRC) the displacement node with Multiply and Image - I'm not on my 3D machine right now and can't check for sure, and although it's not *quite* that simple, it's close.
Also, you could select the "T" in the Deform tab and directly load the disp. map. In either case, you have to have a UV map for the object, and it has to be sub-patched. The Geometry tab in the Object Properties panel allows you to set sub-patch levels, and that will determine the detail your model has, based on your sculpting in ZB.

It's a pretty intelligent process, and I really don't understand how, between the two programs such detail can be created, because when you create your disp. map at level 1 in ZB, it can look so...basic, undefined...
But, it works, somehow, and it works well. :)

EDIT:
Oh, if you have LW 9, the Content has a ZBrush head scene, which is a head with a ZB disp map applied to it. Check it out. :)

SplineGod
10-06-2007, 10:57 PM
Something else worth checking out:
www.3d-brush.com

IMI
10-07-2007, 07:20 AM
Something else worth checking out:
www.3d-brush.com


That looks interesting, Larry. Thanks. :)

EDIT:
From the download page:


The 3D-Brush software should not be used in the production of any erotic or obscene materials as well as of any products which propagandize hatred against people. We understand that we are not able to check you but we warn you about responsibility before God.


That's the first time I've ever seen anything like that. I think I like these people already. :D

Mike_RB
10-07-2007, 07:27 AM
That's the first time I've ever seen anything like that. I think I like these people already. :D

They don't mention which God... Shiva?

Steamthrower
10-07-2007, 07:29 AM
Wow, interesting. I would actually like subsidizing a company that says that.

And about which God...they're a European company which makes it very unlikely that they would be Shivites.

Mike_RB
10-07-2007, 08:07 AM
Wow, interesting. I would actually like subsidizing a company that says that.

And about which God...they're a European company which makes it very unlikely that they would be Shivites.

Thor then? Maybe Jupiter?

umstitch
10-07-2007, 09:55 AM
...had a go with this today, after using zbrush.
..then i went back to zbrush.
..i hope they keep improving this, some competition for basic sculpting apps is a must.

..but what on earth is the problem with eroticism?..are these people 12 years old and in the middle of "learning" the bible?

..please no hate propaganda (could be a lot of things but the message is a fair one)...and more power to them, but..

..eroticism? ... are they trying to say pornography, but dont want to mention such a foul word,..kind of thing//??..have they seen some of the kind of things that get done in zbrush/any modellin app?....or would they not class a bizarre alien getting its rocks off over a weird biomech thing, as erotic..//?

..maybe

Kryos
10-07-2007, 09:57 AM
See, that mentioning of God just turns me off. I'm an aethiest so any propaganda pertaining to a greater deity is a major no no in my book. But the program does look interesting, but here's my question... how can you, going by their wants, create an action sequence utilizing that program to detail/texture your models? Technically that would be against their wishes. Some people, I swear.

IMI
10-07-2007, 10:21 AM
I just think it's cool seeing people speak their mind, in this day where Political Correctness rules, whether I agree with them or not, and to see it on software, in such a EULA-esque way is...fascinating. ;)

Kryos
10-07-2007, 10:23 AM
I don't know about fascinating, but will agree to the fact that they are the creators, and it is their choice on how they wish to see their software used, so more power to them. I'm happy with ZB myself so not overly worried.

IMI
10-07-2007, 10:35 AM
Well, I'm happy with ZB too, and am planning on buying m*** 301 soon, but it does look like a good little up-and-comer.

Kryos
10-07-2007, 10:37 AM
Yeah, it does look like an interesting app, that's for sure. And it does look like it'll be decent in a niche market.

Mike_RB
10-07-2007, 10:45 AM
Well, I'm happy with ZB too, and am planning on buying m*** 301 soon, but it does look like a good little up-and-comer.

? Whats with the asterisks? Spinquad was the only forum to add a software specific filter as far as I know, Newtek has never done such a thing...

Kryos
10-07-2007, 10:47 AM
Well, you could've attempted to type out modo to see if it works for you... Which I just did to see if it is actually filtered... and pressing reply now to find out.

And so The m*** would've been IMI's own doing.

Mike_RB
10-07-2007, 10:48 AM
Well, you could've attempted to type out modo to see if it works for you... Which I just did to see if it is actually filtered... and pressing reply now to find out.

And so The m*** would've been IMI's own doing.

I know. I was asking IMI why he did that.

IMI
10-07-2007, 10:48 AM
That was a joke. There's another thread going on here where people started referring to modo as "that four letter program' and things like that, and using asterisks.

vadermanchild
10-07-2007, 10:49 AM
Mo**F****s









modo forums

Mike_RB
10-07-2007, 11:31 AM
Neverko, nice. :)

IMI
10-07-2007, 12:07 PM
I don't think that does the program much good, if that's what they're posting. The bump doesn't look right at all - it looks more like photoshop filters and embossing.

Puguglybonehead
10-07-2007, 12:29 PM
The poor fella looks like he's got goosebumps. Maybe he should be wearing more clothing. Oh, and the link to their site seems to be dead now.

hrgiger
10-07-2007, 02:57 PM
Well, that doesn't necessarily mean the program blows. It just might mean the artist blows. Wait, was that obscene of me to say?

Yes, I have to agree, that man in the loin cloth has damaged me morally. Now if they had put Laura Prepon in such an outift, I would be ok with that.

Algae998
10-07-2007, 04:01 PM
Id like to see what others have done with the program, other than the examples on the site. Maybe Ill check youtube or something and see what I can find...but for now Im leaning towards ZB.

Hmm, I wounder what they would do if you did make something..."erotic or obscene". Guinea pigs anyone?

Algae998
10-07-2007, 04:05 PM
I subconsciously find this male model deeply and strangely erotic in ways unknown to my conscious mind. :hey: I can't help it... :(

I guess they violate their own morality requirements by posting such erotic filth, toying with my pure and innocent, subconscious mind, making me commit acts of sinful subconscious thinking before the omnipresence of God - Our Most Holy and Sacred Creator, The Great Beard in the sky, The Inventor of Tin Foil Hats, The Knower of All and Proprieter of The Great Inn Beyond.

http://www.3d-brush.com/screenshots/man1.jpg

Hahahaha, lmao...that made my day. :D

IMI
10-07-2007, 04:20 PM
Id like to see what others have done with the program, other than the examples on the site. Maybe Ill check youtube or something and see what I can find...but for now Im leaning towards ZB.

Hmm, I wounder what they would do if you did make something..."erotic or obscene". Guinea pigs anyone?

Hey, if you decide to go the ZB route, check out the Digital Tutors videos for ZBrush 3. Great stuff!

Link:
http://digitaltutors.com/store/home.php?cat=29

jin choung
10-07-2007, 04:24 PM
hmmmm, the program seems to say they're working somewhat like modo 301.... would like to see what their sculpting workflow looks like. why no vids on sculpting?

anyhoo, competition is great and $70 is really really compelling.

as for moral restrictions... why just those two? they seem to be somewhat incomplete in their list of prohibitions...

jin

Algae998
10-07-2007, 04:48 PM
Thats a good site to keep in mind. Once Im finished buying books for the semester Ill have to consider that :) Some of their tutorials and dvd previews are very helpful.
Thanks for the link!

SplineGod
10-07-2007, 05:48 PM
Ive played with the demo version and its pretty amazing for the price. Really easy to use too. It also seems to work pretty well with graphic tablets.

loki74
10-07-2007, 09:48 PM
what platform are you using? if you're using a Mac, be careful about ZB... we're still waiting on the UB last I checked. Modo may be worth a look, as long as you have some extra money.

AbnRanger
10-08-2007, 04:59 AM
Knowing how Neverko has a major melt down :cursin: :cursin: :cursin: every time he see's the word "God," this photo is his clever way of showing everyone here what portion of his anatomy does the talking :D
I subconsciously find this male model deeply and strangely erotic in ways unknown to my conscious mind...making me commit acts of sinful subconscious thinking...

http://www.3d-brush.com/screenshots/man1.jpg

Lightwolf
10-08-2007, 01:22 PM
And it's not a photo, now is it? :question:
If it is then somebody out there has a major skin problem...
Now back to your scheduled thread ;)

Cheers,
Mike

theo
10-08-2007, 01:43 PM
If the company is Muslim or Christian-based it is obvious what constitutes "erotic" imagery, which explains the prohibition thereof, by the way.

Namely, images that register titillation on a pleasure graph. This will include a pretty large chunk of the titillation gradient, by the way.

And, one doesn't require the skillage of ten-counting to determine WHAT type of imagery registers waves on a pleasure graph (is there such a thing?).

Here are the specs to avoid (like the plagues) if you are interested in purchasing said software-

1) Females, with less then 84.3% of their body surface covered

2) Females, in poses where limbs, of any kind, are splayed wider than 24 degrees

3) Females, with facial expressions that project desire for fruits forbidden. The preferred level of facially-expressed desire is for the ubiquitous plate of spaghetti in a mildly hungry moment.

4) Females, with sweat- unless the beady drops of liquid can be conclusively proven to come from working on a farm in the lazy hills of New Hampshore.

5) Females, prostrate

6) Females, with one foot on the forehead of a cowering male (could be slighly erotic to some of you, eh?)

7) Females, near, bound with, touching, hanging on to, and/or cutting rope and/or chain.

That should just about cover most of the bases. Just one more service this valuable forum fulfills. :thumbsup:

SplineGod
10-08-2007, 01:53 PM
Sad that of all the things the software looks to be capable of that some choose to focus/obsess on the disclaimer...

theo
10-08-2007, 02:14 PM
Sad that of all the things the software looks to be capable of that some choose to focus/obsess on the disclaimer...

My post is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, Larry.

I can certainly understand if the developers specifically prohibit the use of their software for pornography, specifically, but not erotic imagery.

This would preclude, probably, 70% (maybe more) of digital artist, who at one time or another have produced "erotic" styled imagery.

This software could not be used to produce illustrations for the Song of Solomon, which is, arguably a highly erotic book in the OT (as you well know).

Ztreem
10-08-2007, 03:33 PM
I played around a little with the 3D brush demo and it's a quite nice app for it's price even if it's nowhere near Zbrush, but I think it feels alot better than Hexagon. You could do some nice things with it, but it's a bit slow.

RedBull
10-08-2007, 06:31 PM
I subconsciously find this male model deeply and strangely erotic in ways unknown to my conscious mind. :hey: I can't help it... :(


I would be concerned if you find actual male humans erotic in your real life for the same reasons.
If for example you are frequently walking up to half naked men, and asking to get a closer look at there displacement maps, they really may get the wrong idea... Not to mention if you also added the remarks about his bump map being a little overdone....

If this is occurring consult a doctor and cease 3D to until further advised...
Eventually you get that disease known as Threedeeism, where every cloud is a procedural noise texture and every person merely an instanced poly clone with not nearly enough SSS, and every female needs the Zbrush inflate tool in certain areas of her subpatches. If this is happening to you.........I'm afraid it's already too late... :)

IMI
10-08-2007, 06:38 PM
Sad that of all the things the software looks to be capable of that some choose to focus/obsess on the disclaimer...


I don't think we focused on the disclaimer, just a little discussion and some joking around.
I don't know about anyone else, but for the time being at least, I don't have time to focus on any aspect of the program.
The disclaimer seemed interesting enough to mention.

I'm sorry I brought it up.

cresshead
10-08-2007, 09:50 PM
i though i'd be reading some interesting insight into using zbrush and lightwave...but ohh no...here we go again some left field drag off into a cul de sac of melted cheese coversations....

any chance of getting back on topic?

or should i make a new thread with the VERY same title?

IMI
10-08-2007, 11:01 PM
i though i'd be reading some interesting insight into using zbrush and lightwave...

any chance of getting back on topic?



LightWave + ZBrush = :)

Ahh, though, I do have an insight, or rather, an observation: if you have a LW object with polygon groups and export it to ZBrush to sculpt or otherwise modify, and export it back out of ZBrush as .obj and load that into LW... The polygon groups are gone and all surfaces are consolidated into one and renamed to Default_mat or something like that.
There's probably a way to avoid that, but I don't know, because I quickly learned to do any mods before making poly groups and surfaces. Not a big deal now, but was a real pisser the first time...

Point groups (selection sets) are retained, however, if the option to export as such is chosen at export time from LW.

That having been said, I'll repeat, LightWave + ZBrush = :)

IMI
10-08-2007, 11:10 PM
Oh , I just mention that because it works both ways...
Not only is ZBrush great for creating meshes as well as displacement maps an textures for use in LW, but it's also great to use for sculpting and shaping a dense mesh exported from LW, even if you have no intention of increasing the poly count or using disp. maps.

In alot of ways, it's alot easier to shape a mesh in ZB than it is in LW.

jin choung
10-09-2007, 12:58 AM
Sad that of all the things the software looks to be capable of that some choose to focus/obsess on the disclaimer...

oh come on,

to be quite fair, if you put something like that in the disclaimer, you're really asking for it (undue attention to the disclaimer).

you may have a great accountant but if he's wearing a MEAT IS MURDER tshirt, it's gonna be that fact that gets attention and not his accounting.

jin

AndrewShpagin
10-09-2007, 01:09 AM
Hello!

Excuse me that I cut in this thread but if you tell about 3D-Brush I should tell something because I have written it. I am christian. And when I have read this thread I really felt itself shamed and hypocritical. I always supposed that erotical images are female images. May be I am wrong? Is this man really looks erotical? I have removed that image from gallery to avoid excess doubts and jokes.

Why have I written that limitation on 3D-Brush usage? I worked at GSC Game World for several years. And when I have understood that I had some conflict with my conscience than I have decided to change my workplace. It was not easy. I was lead programmer and very many things was dependent on me. But I and my boss have found the way how we can solve that problem without any conflict and remain to be a good friends. I have finished my last project and then I have left. Then for 7 month I worked over 3d-brush without financial support and I have put many creative efforts there. So I simply don't want that 3D-Brush should be used in some not good way (at least on my look).

AndrewShpagin
10-09-2007, 01:57 AM
Also I have add to the gallery a frog ( instead of man :) ) that was detailed and textured in 3D-Brush and rendered in XSI (using exported displacement map and texture). It is WIP, not the final image (eyes are still not ready).

SplineGod
10-09-2007, 02:41 AM
Jin,
Nobodies asking for anything. Someone is simply following the dictates of their conscience and trying to do what they feel is right. Why do people feel that this somehow gives them license to ridicule? Hows that better? THAT kind of behavior is NEVER justified and I expect better out of adults and professionals.

Andrew,
3D Brush looks to be a great tool. Ive tried the demo and intend to pick it up. The price is certainly right. Sorry to see you criticized for trying to do what you feel is right. :)

sculptactive
10-09-2007, 03:25 AM
Well I gave 3D-Brush a go, but I just get a Crash box with a list of errors whenever I try and imports an .OBJ.

AndrewShpagin
10-09-2007, 03:37 AM
Please send the bug report (crash.txt) and the model (if possible) to [email protected] . It is better to import models with UV-set without overlaps. 3D-Brush tries to unwrap mesh automatically if it does not contains UV - set. But sometimes it fails on some kind of meshes. I want to upload update (2.01) with some bug fixes (including this) and some new features in several days. So any information about crashes will be very helpful.

Also, may be it is better to start a new thread because 3D-Brush discussing is offtopic there? Or it is no problem to continue there?

RedBull
10-09-2007, 03:53 AM
Also, may be it is better to start a new thread because 3D-Brush discussing is offtopic there? Or it is no problem to continue there?

Congrats and well done on the development of 3D-Brush Andrew..
Feel free to discuss 3DBrush here as I'm sure there are LW users who would love to use your software.
In regards to your intentions of how your software is used, it's your software and you are certainly entitled to use and sell it as you see fit. So don't worry to much about the nay-sayers..

I'm sure adding .LWO support sometime in the future would ensure that people on this forum would be using 3DBrush more and more. .LWO is an open format that is used in Lightwave, XSI, C4D and Modo, and Blender and is usually much smaller file size than a .OBJ.. Look forward to seeing more updates from 3D-Brush in the future.

PS.... The Frog is looking good.

AndrewShpagin
10-09-2007, 03:55 AM
Not me have started the discussion about 3D-Brush. I have simply joined the discussion. I think you know well that most peoples love this forum and don't want to go to some "alien" place.

AndrewShpagin
10-09-2007, 04:30 AM
RedBull! Thank you for hospitality on this forum!

It is really dilemma - what to do first - multiple format export/import or new features...

sculptactive
10-09-2007, 07:05 AM
Andrew

I will email you the crash test asp.

RedBull is correct. I can only repeat what he has stated.

theo
10-09-2007, 01:42 PM
And when I have read this thread I really felt itself shamed and hypocritical. I always supposed that erotical images are female images. May be I am wrong? Is this man really looks erotical?

As an aside to the thread itself here you might want to consider listing some specifics as a type of guideline when you refer to erotic imagery or you could include a couple of descriptive terms from Adobe's legal pulp when they reference how Content Files are not to be used:

"....may not be used in the production of libelous, defamatory, fraudulent, lewd, obscene or pornographic material..."

This seems to be more professional than just the term "erotic".

It's bizarre to me how one can be allowed to freely discuss the software yet not the license. If terminology is used in the license that seems odd or vague then it should be perfectly acceptable to make statements in light of this.

IMI
10-09-2007, 03:06 PM
I don't think the erotic or pornographic part was actually part of the license, per se. It reads more like a desire on Andrew's part, to be enforced by God.

Andrew, the frog looks pretty good. I downloaded your demo and hope to get some time to try it out.

As to the rest of it, you're following your convictions and regardless of who agrees or disagrees, it's certainly an admirable attribute. :)

spothmann
10-09-2007, 04:35 PM
Hello all together,
I'm new here and I just dropped in because I was pointed to this discussion on another board; here (http://www.contentparadise.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7018), to be exact.
I would like to take the chance and talk to the creator of this application in person and publically. For this I will repeat some things that I have also written in the thread on the other board.
First, I would like to clarify one thing; as the small difference seems to be so important to the creator: I am not a man, I am a woman.

I am christian.
That doesn't explain much. What kind of Christian? Catholic?


I always supposed that erotical images are female images.
To most men, except of those who are homosexual, they probably are.
But for me, as a woman, there's nothing more erotic than the depiction of a nude, beautiful man in an interesting pose; believe me.
That having said... and in context with your statement, which is given from the male point of view... does that mean that I, as a woman, will not go to hell if I only create female images (which are rarely erotic to me) (given that your religion is the true and only one and all the other people who believe in other religions are totally wrong)?

However... here's some of the stuff I wrote in the other thread; with some additions.

Concerning this part of the Eula...:

"The 3D-Brush software should not be used in the production of any erotic or obscene materials as well as of any products which propagandize hatred against people. We understand that we are not able to check you but we warn you about responsibility before God."

I have the following to say...:

There are probably three things here that could bother a possible user...:
- religious belief;
- interpretation of the very same and
- definition of obscene / erotic / hateful material.

I see no problem going on here and will explain why. Keep in mind that this is about a software used to create texture maps for 3D meshes - not a modeling program or an image editing software when reading the following...:


1. Religious belief:
There's more than one God people believe in; not just subdivided by different religions. Then there are some people, like myself, who don't believe in any God. The nature of 'God' or the religion this part of the EULA applies to, however, has not been stated in that place. So it could be anything from Christian to one of the Gods from Hinduism to a rare kind of amazonian tribe god, which... but I'm getting lost, sorry.
So which God exactly is the statement about, and in context with which religion?
I think if you believe in a God (or are part of a religion believing in such a God) whose 'rules' bother you or slow you down in creative (or whatever) efforts just the tiniest little bit, then you should simply stop believing in him and look for someone or something else to believe in (like - for eyample - yourself!).
Because frankly, a God dictating rules which you *know* you won't or can't adhere to is not a good God, it's a dictator. But that is only my personal opinion.


2. Interpretation of religious belief:
Okay, for example, the Catholics say no sex before marriage.
However, I found no place in the bible (and yes, I've read that several times before deciding that any religion attached to it is not for me!) that clearly states "you must not look at a nude body, whatever your married state is".
So it seems looking at a nude body seems okay, no matter if that body is male or female, or if the onlooker is female or male.
Nevertheless, some Catholics find pictures of naked people are offending their religion. Porn (meaning the depiction of two people having intercourse, in this case...), even if depicted by a married couple, does the same.
Why is that so?

We shouldn't forget that the christian God's son was nailed to the cross wearing just a loincloth and is presented that way in each and every christian church in the world. Besides the question how cruel a God is who is letting that happen, there's the following problem...:
If you know what a historical loincloth is (in case you don't - a strip of cloth, wrapped around the hips, the ends hanging down the front. The back is nude, also anything - uhm - *below* the down hanging ends in the front... it's much likely to what we would call a 'sash' today, just deeper and with the ends at the front), then you'll know that if you're standing at a way lower point than an individual who wears one, looking up at that individual will show you *everything* that's - from front view - is hidden by the loin cloth's loose ends.

So basically Jesus was hanging at the cross and he was mostly nude for all the people looking up at him from below; but no one ever chided Mary Magdalen or Mary (or any of the male onlookers) for looking up at him.
Interesting enough, though, all 'Christ on the cross' sculptures in churches I've seen so far are clearly omitting that fact, letting one end of the loincloth conveniently extend between his legs, *hiding* what could be seen if the statues were correct.
I've seen the most gruesome depictions of thorn crowns piercing into the scalp and forehead, the most horrifying interpretations of the spear wound and other torture marks with partially lots of bright red paint blood flowing from those wounds on the sculptures, but never ever did I see a correct loincloth - how hypocritical is that...? (And a breast feeding Mary is something I've seen just twice.)

So the question is - from the christian point of view - it is okay to create texture maps and images depicting gruesome wounds and torture marks, but not genitals? And if so, do those genitals have to be covered by... a loin cloth? A leaf? Or what? Please also show me the paragraph in the bible that prohibits the depiction of the nude (female or male) body. If possible also for a digitally created texture map of a human figure, please :)


3. Definition of obscene / erotic / hateful material:
Almost the same as before. Is the creation of a texture of a nude body considered 'obscene'? 'Erotic'? If so, why?

Is, for a white individual, creating a colored toon character's texture who just looks funny considered 'hateful' because he / she makes sort of 'fun' of said color; be it black, yellow or red? If so, why? And would it be different if a colored individual would paint the texture of a white one?

Is the usage of Swastica in a texture for the clothing of a roman emperor (where they were actually extremely frequently used) considered 'hateful', just because the Swastica became a symbol of hate about 2000 years later...?

And is the usage of the same Swastica on the texture of a uniform of a Nazi officer hateful, given that the creator of said texture would want to use the texture in a rendered image which would then show the horror of the holocaust from a *victim's* point of view?

Then again, we're just talking about a texture map; so isn't it the responsibility (before God or whoever) of the one who uses this texture in a rendered image in what context it is used?
Think careful about your answer; and also think about other examples.


The software is used to make texture maps. For my life I can't see how the digital creation of texture maps could be 'hateful', 'erotic' or whatever (except of course if you're a man and use reference photos of a beautiful female model to create the texture; or, in my case, of a male model...); or how it could be against anything a (which?) 'God' of whatever (which?) religion dictated.
Unless, of course, if you're Amish - but then again, anything digital should be alien to you.

So all I think of that little part of the EULA is - it's useless, because it's hilarious. I like to interpret it like this:
If you have a religious problem with whatever you're creating, stop creating or change your religion. Or - in case you think what you created is okay - live happily ever after.
But whatever kind of - still in this case! - texture map you create, you can by no means control what people are doing with it once the texture set is on the market. And frankly, at least for myself I think it's nothing I really care about.
It's that simple, IMHO; and a software creator stating something like this in an EULA is, at least to me, more or less a probably non-volunteering comedian with a (to me) totally alien concept of the above stated three issues....


I have a perfect example to ask the creator of that software:
I've recently created a texture set for a male character. Fully nude, with genitals. However, the interesting thing while creating that texture set; I did some researches on the character (basically, he's from a movie and sports a lot of tattoos - which had to be researched properly).

While doing this, I stumbled over a 'christian' website which claims that two of the tattoos my character is sporting are 'signs of the devil', namely:
- the 666 (which, funny enough, was interpreted into an "xXx" tattoo on the back of the neck of said character - an "X", in the latin sense, is still a "10", not a 6; so the webmasters of that site definitely need some latin lessons...), and
- an eye on his shoulder which, according to said website, would be the eye of the devil (in fact, it's a Horus eye in the middle of a sun).
Now - both tattoos, according to said christian website, would be considered 'devilish' by christians. Not in my opinion, of course; but hey, my opinion doesn't count in this case.
My question is: Would I have been allowed to create said texture set with your software, given the fact that two of the too many tattoos the character is sporting are, according to a christian website, "devilish"?


As I've said; long posting, most of it I had already posted on the other board.
But I'm very much looking forward to the answers of the creator :)
(By the way, I was just thinking - how 'hateful' is it to assume that there's only one God for the whole world by clearly leaving out the religion this statement applies to? Isn't that sort of extremely hateful against other religions, too?)

theo
10-09-2007, 04:39 PM
This thread just got interesting, and probably very closed, fast.

spothmann
10-09-2007, 04:41 PM
This thread just got interesting, and probably very closed, fast.
Because people are exchanging opinions and ask questions?
Interesting board, I have to say... ;)

IMI
10-09-2007, 04:44 PM
Hey, we got noticed in a Poser forum - Content Paradise.
Well, doesn't that just beat all...

IMI
10-09-2007, 04:45 PM
Because people are exchanging opinions and ask questions?
Interesting board, I have to say... ;)

No, because the TOS says no religion or politics, The people here tend to have learned how to walk that line without going overboard.

spothmann
10-09-2007, 04:49 PM
No, because the TOS says no religion or politics, The people here tend to have learned how to walk that line without going overboard.
I don't think I or anyone else went 'overboard'. There are just a few questions that definitely need clarification.
I didn't bring the religious stuff up, either - it's part of the EULA of an application discussed here...
So... what's more appropriate; discussing and clarifying parts of an EULA or *not* to involve *any* kind of religious subject, no matter what it is about?
As I've said, interesting board.

theo
10-09-2007, 04:51 PM
Because people are exchanging opinions and ask questions?
Interesting board, I have to say... ;)

Don't misinterpret my comment.

I have been on these boards for quite a while now. In spite of the fact that this board sports the best mods in the business and the particular audience here is remarkably diverse and quite sophisticated things can get quite interesting fast. That's all I have to say.

I think I will sit this one out. :thumbsup:

cresshead
10-09-2007, 04:53 PM
thor and zues are my fav's!

IMI
10-09-2007, 04:53 PM
I'm not convinced it actually is an End User License Agreement.

And yes, it is an interesting board - a LightWave board. If there is any place to discuss the "EULA" of the program in question, this isn't it.

jin choung
10-09-2007, 09:28 PM
first of all,

andrew, welcome. your product looks neat and i wish you well. the disclaimer is rather unusual and invites discussion. nobody intends to be hostile i don't think. but imo, a discussion is well merited. so join in or ignore at your discretion. this is merely freedom of expression in all its "glory"....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

now,

i said: oh come on,

to be quite fair, if you put something like that in the disclaimer, you're really asking for it (undue attention to the disclaimer).

larry, your response is:

Jin,
Nobodies asking for anything. Someone is simply following the dictates of their conscience and trying to do what they feel is right. Why do people feel that this somehow gives them license to ridicule? Hows that better? THAT kind of behavior is NEVER justified and I expect better out of adults and professionals.


who's ridiculing?

and why does one group of people get to express themselves and somehow, everyone else is expected to clam up, be silent and just listen?

if you're gonna talk, you're gonna get talk BACK. that's how the world functions. why this expectation that we just accept someone's expression and move on? and if we're NOT ridiculing, what is the harm?

why should we believe that one group is bold enough to make a statement but not bold enough to withstand the response?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
it is something UTTERLY WORTHY OF COMMENT. for many many reasons, the least of which is incongruity in a product eula or disclaimer or whatever.


Someone is simply following the dictates of their conscience and trying to do what they feel is right.

i'm going to respond to your words LITERALLY. andrew's particular situation is not related to what i'm going to say but your literal sentiment is what i am addressing:

just in, ohhhhh, i don't know, the last six years, there have been AMPLE examples in our world where people who, acting on their conscience and doing what they feel is right have performed some spectacularly hideous things.

GOOD INTENTIONS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. never has been, never will be.

there can be MANY reasons why people would have a problem with someone doing exactly what you say... not the least of which is that they are GENUINELY WRONG.

as i said, just commenting on your statement. not really relevant to 3d-brush.

jin

jin choung
10-09-2007, 09:40 PM
also, i MEAN IT when i say it is an interesting topic:

- what about if someone says that they don't want their product to be used to express any REPUBLICAN ideas or to help that party?

- what if someone who IS racist says that it cannot be used by or in the promotion of certain races?

but none of this is legally enforcible anyway so does it ultimately boil down to "it doesn't matter"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

also, the erotic thing makes for an interesting topic of discussion....

arguably, A HUGE quantity of what is accepted now as classical art is erotic in nature. it seems that where ever REPRESENTATION goes, PORN is just one step behind if that.

so is erotic imagery of any and all kinds essentially wrong?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

and finally, an interesting topic of discussion comes from THEOLOGY - the fact that the eula or disclaimer seems to advocate adherence to certain christian ideals seems somewhat odd because it does not insist that all users of the program are in fact christian.

that being the case, is it really reasonable to expect non-christians to act under christian morals? is that even a REASONABLE EXPECTATION?

at least according to evangelical thought, if a non-believer is very moral, they're still going to heck in a hand basket.... so where's the sense in the preaching of mere morals?

wouldn't it be a more complete and self-consistent eula if it limited the use to christians only?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

see? LOTS of interesting topics for discussion. and no hostility. why must we tip toe around milk that someone else spilt? lets get in there!

jin

Algae998
10-09-2007, 10:18 PM
Hah, look where my thread has ended up...
Ok, so, long story short: ZBrush + LW = good models.

RedBull
10-09-2007, 11:32 PM
Yeah it's amazing how off-topic and non technical people wish to be on forums these days, i come craving for more technical appreciation for NT products and third party tools, and it ends up becoming a political/religious debate for certain ego's...

Meanwhile back at the ranch, ZApplink has been released for ZB3.1 today, which means it now plays better with other applications like Photoshop..
Generally i have to manually flip my displacement maps in Photoshop for them to work in Lightwave. (Can anyone tell me how to flip an Image node vertcially, with a Node setup?)
Otherwise ZB has it quirks and bug issues, trying to make a displacment map the other day, and if i created a Displacement Map, then changed the resolution and created another one, it would fail most of the time to create a 2nd map, several restarts later it works again........... Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

AndrewShpagin
10-10-2007, 01:29 AM
I want to tell something in reply to Spothmann. She has written a big story and she definitely merits an answer. But the only thing - I see not everyone likes religious debates, so it is better to write to me privately to AndrewShpagin (...) gmail.com . Later you can post all my answers anywhere. I will try to answer shortly. I am christian and my confession is near to protestantism (if confession is important). About nude body - Jesus tells (Matt 5:27,28): "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." If you will read all Matt 5 it is understood that it is not rule but principle that means that adultery begins at first in mind. New testament teaches us what kind of peoples we should be inside, it is not a list of simple rules (read Hebr 8:10-13 if interesting). It is impossible to write some complex law that prohibits all "bad" things. The man is smart enough to find "hole". So this law should be inside us. This law is not to avoid punishment but to reach the Holy Kingdom. The first level of this law is good conscience. The second level... Please seek if it is interesting to you. You ask me "will I go to hell because of ...". I ask you "Will you be able to live in Paradise?".
I also not able to write the precise law on 10000 pages in what cases you can use 3D-Brush and in what cases you can't. So I have simply written "we warn you about responsibility before God". So if you have read this you at least will think what are you doing using 3D-Brush. I fully agree with IMI "It reads more like a desire on Andrew's part, to be enforced by God." What about totally nude man with tattoos - I will not place it in 3D-Brush gallery if you will paint it in 3D-Brush and send it to me.

English is not my native language so I can't write long answers. If you want to continue discussion please write me directly.

IMI
10-10-2007, 01:47 AM
Generally i have to manually flip my displacement maps in Photoshop for them to work in Lightwave. (Can anyone tell me how to flip an Image node vertcially, with a Node setup?)

ZBrush can do that. You just have to select Flip V in the export window.

IMI
10-10-2007, 02:16 AM
Hah, look where my thread has ended up...
Ok, so, long story short: ZBrush + LW = good models.

Well of course, ZBrush doesn't have a "Make Good Model" button anywhere that I've seen. ;)

But yeah, ZBrush works really well with LW. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a demo, but as daunting as the interface seems at first, it's not that hard to learn how to do basic stuff. Again, I'd highly suggest buying at least one of the Digital Tutors videos, obviously the Intro one would be good.

As far as LightWave specifically is concerned, you could check this out, by Steve Warner:
http://www.zbrush.info/docs/index.php/ZBrush_to_Lightwave

Also, another Steve Warner page with some tutorials for ZBrush. (I think the PDF is the same as the html above)
http://www.stevewarner.com/html/tutorials.html

One thing to mention - I don't think I've read of any cases of Lightwavers who have bought ZBrush being disappointed with it. There have been some complaints regarding the use of displacement maps in LW, but it's really just a matter of getting the settings right - it takes some playing around with, and a computer with alot of memory and CPU power is almost a necessity.

Oh, another cool thing - ZBrush can create normal maps as well - more or less bump maps on steroids. ;)

spothmann
10-10-2007, 06:58 AM
About nude body - Jesus tells (Matt 5:27,28): "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
I don't see any reference to a nude body there. Also no reference to using reference photos of nude people (male or female) to create a texture map with your software.
Also, that bible paragraph doesn't talk about the male body. I assume therefore that it's okay to lustfully look upon - dressed or undressed - men?

You ask me "will I go to hell because of ...". I ask you "Will you be able to live in Paradise?".
No, the question is: Do I give a damn (pardon the pun!)? From my point of view, I already am in paradise - I'm content with my mind. If I was judging myself from christian standards, believe me, a place in the front row of hell would be already reserved for me for things I did in my life so far.

So I have simply written "we warn you about responsibility before God".
Still, you totally ignore other religions and other possible Gods than your own in that statement and in this discussion so far.
I am aware that the christian religion believes in just one God, but you have to take the others at least vaguely into consideration when writing such a 'guideline' for the usage of a software, right? I mean, you are aware that not just christians will visit your site to use the software, aren't you?

What about totally nude man with tattoos - I will not place it in 3D-Brush gallery if you will paint it in 3D-Brush and send it to me.
Why, the part of the bible you cited didn't say anything about the male body? Or women looking upon it? And I gather it's okay to decorate said body texture map with lots of 'signs' of the devil as tattoos, but not to show it completely nude?
Besides, it's just a rendered image of the texture map created with your software. It was probably rendered in a totally different software.

English is not my native language so I can't write long answers.
That's not really an excuse - English isn't my first language either...
In case anyone should want to ask why I'm writing this - I just wanted to show Andrew how ridiculous his 'rules'. 'guidelines' or whatever he wants to call that statement are, that's all.

theo
10-10-2007, 08:03 AM
spothmann,

I wouldn't get to worked up over this. Andrew is well within his rights to prohibit objectionable works of art to be created with his software.

I think his wording is a bit vague but putting that aside, most, if not all, software application providers, including web application providers, will not tolerate their contact with objectionable material of any kind (obscene, pornographic, defamatory, the list goes on).

If you read your EULAs you might be pleasantly surprised- and most of the legality there is designed to protect the software company from a variety of legal thorny issues, which I won't go into here.

Frankly, Andrew, you might save yourself some headaches if you just remove the religious context from the EULA and kept it neutral like 99% of the majors of do.

The creative business has just waay to many "erotic" cross-over issues (the skin texture issue, medical illustration, female fashion design, beach scenery, the list goes on) that must to be creatively addressed by a wide range of talent using a wide range of creative tools.

IMI
10-10-2007, 06:07 PM
I'd just like to know why this "spothman" person felt the need to come all the way from a ...Poser forum to a LightWave forum to get in a theological debate with someone who obviously knows what he believes and probably has no interest in changing that to suit someone else?

I mean, I haven't checked lately, but I imagine there are all kinds of forums out there where people can get into going-nowhere arguments about their core principles.

Spothman, go back to your Poser world where softcore porn is the standard, and the goods to supply all the needs for the Insta-Porn Society are only a click away in a Content Paradise or Marketplace Near You, and let us continue (if possible) with this ZBrush-with-LightWave discussion.

Algae998
10-10-2007, 09:09 PM
Thank you to those of you for the ontopic replies, haha. I have another question revolving 3d modeling in general; where can I find a dictionary or 3d modeling world for dummies book?

Im not up to par on the jargen of 3d modeling. I do understand some of the basics, like displacement maps (although Ive never done one), but Im unsure of how they work or really their function.

Is there a website or something you all would suggest that kind of explains all of this stuff?

Puguglybonehead
10-10-2007, 10:38 PM
Thank you to those of you for the ontopic replies, haha. I have another question revolving 3d modeling in general; where can I find a dictionary or 3d modeling world for dummies book?

Im not up to par on the jargen of 3d modeling. I do understand some of the basics, like displacement maps (although Ive never done one), but Im unsure of how they work or really their function.

Is there a website or something you all would suggest that kind of explains all of this stuff?

Probably the best '3D Modeling For Dummies' books, if you are using Lightwave, are the manuals that shipped with your copy. You would either have them in printed form (if you chose that option when you purchased) or in PDF form. The manuals are pretty dry reading compared to a 'for dummies' book (no cute cartoons or jokes), but, they do go into detail about each and every tool in Lightwave (and as PDFs, they're searchable).

Aside from that, I would also highly recommend the latest edition of 'Inside Lightwave' by Dan Ablan. He does a great job of getting you started and explaining tools, workflow, techniques, etc.

cresshead
10-10-2007, 10:55 PM
i wish we had an off topic checkbox to collapse out all the rubbish posts in a thread...

2BitSculptor
10-10-2007, 11:35 PM
I'd just like to know why this "spothman" person felt the need to come all the way from a ...Poser forum to a LightWave forum to get in a theological debate with someone who obviously knows what he believes and probably has no interest in changing that to suit someone else?

I mean, I haven't checked lately, but I imagine there are all kinds of forums out there where people can get into going-nowhere arguments about their core principles.

Spothman, go back to your Poser world where softcore porn is the standard, and the goods to supply all the needs for the Insta-Porn Society are only a click away in a Content Paradise or Marketplace Near You, and let us continue (if possible) with this ZBrush-with-LightWave discussion.

While realizing that it is still off topic. I'm a bit disapointed in the level of professionalism in your statement. I will leave it at that.

Chuck

IMI
10-11-2007, 12:58 AM
While realizing that it is still off topic. I'm a bit disapointed in the level of professionalism in your statement. I will leave it at that.

Chuck

I made plenty of "professional" replies in this thread, most of them directed towards the actual subject - ZBrush and LW. They're still here in these pages.

It's disappointing because there's so much that can be said regarding ZB and LW, but it's become mired in this discussion about morality and religion, and now we have people traveling all across the internet just to further the thread drift and to argue.

I'm just getting tired of it.

2BitSculptor
10-11-2007, 07:16 AM
Have you been to Content Paradise? I wonder how many of those models were created in LW?

Your statement is as misleading as saying that Sears and Robuck is providing clipart to pedophiles with their catalogues. Or that New Tek is in the p0rn business because the Video Toaster is used in editing adult films.

I own ZBrush as well as 3D-Brush, both apps have their unique attributes. I've edited models purchased from Content Paradise in those as well as LW. Does that somehow make any of those apps evil?

I was tired of the direction the discussion going as well.

Now back to ZBrush.

Kryos
10-11-2007, 09:45 AM
Yes, about ZBrush, minus the price, which is still cheaper than Modo of course, it is a great tool for what it is designed to do. I enjoy it and have no problems with it. With my limited skills with both ZBrush and Lightwave, I can still manage to get models into Lightwave without much hassle. Yes it does take some playing around with settings to get to work, but after the first time you get it, every other time after is pretty much a cake walk, so it isn't really a bad thing. It just because a few extra clicks is all. But again, my skills with the apps are beginner level for the most part. I've owned Lightwave now for 2 months, and though I've owned Zbrush for about 4 years now, I just started actually finally playing with it about the time I got Lightwave. I just don't have a lot of time right now to dedicate to learning the apps. But over all, it isn't too bad of a pipeline for integration. And if I can do it, anyone should be able to do it. Hehehe. :)

cresshead
10-11-2007, 11:40 AM
:offtopic: :hijack: :spam:

if your going to post an off topic reply just put one of these in the reply header so i know not to read the post and can skip to a relervant reply to the topic questions.

jin choung
10-11-2007, 02:23 PM
anything by GEORGE MAESTRI is excellent at giving you an overview of all the relevant issues in computer graphics in general. really highly recommended.

jin

IMI
10-11-2007, 02:34 PM
Your statement is as misleading as saying that Sears and Robuck is providing clipart to pedophiles with their catalogues. Or that New Tek is in the p0rn business because the Video Toaster is used in editing adult films.

I own ZBrush as well as 3D-Brush, both apps have their unique attributes. I've edited models purchased from Content Paradise in those as well as LW. Does that somehow make any of those apps evil?



Sounds like alot of assumption going on there based on one brief rant....

Actually, if you want to get down to it, I did give my opinion of Poser in the course of trying to discourage a certain "member" from continuing to take this thread where it should not have been. Big deal. Live with it. I don't go around spouting it off, but I did here, in one post, and that's that. Like I said, live with it.
You can defend Poser if you want, you can come up with as many examples as you want, and I don't care. I don't make it a habit to insult Poser or Poser people, and have actually avoided those threads, due to my strong opposition to and dislike of the program. You like it? Fine with me. Enjoy.

The fact is, we got invaded by a member of the Poser crowd who came here with the specific intention of engaging in a debate on morality and religious values with the creator of another non-Newtek software. She could have made it private, could have emailed him, could have done any other number of things, but no.

So I got pi$$ed off and let it show.
Yes, I was the one who quoted the "disclaimer" originally. Now I wish I hadn't, and I said that, but, oh well, too late now.

Sorry for this LAST O/T posting - this is all I have left to say on the subjects of morality, pr0n, Poser, non-Newtek software disclaimers, or anything similar, in this forum.
It would be nice to see this get back to ZBrush and LW, but I doubt that'll happen. I'm sure there will be another ZB/LW thread soon enough though.

2BitSculptor
10-11-2007, 02:44 PM
:beerchug:

StereoMike
10-11-2007, 03:04 PM
Strange thread, particularly that spothmann person. I guess that being is even more commited to something than Andrew i.e. spothmann has the bigger sense of mission, coming all that way to this peaceful place.

my findings with 3D brush: fun to use, easy to grasp, could be more responsive, but you can do alot of useful stuff with it. 70$ is a no brainer in my book.

mike

Puguglybonehead
10-11-2007, 05:51 PM
Is the workflow from Zbrush to LW better than Bodypaint to LW? I have Bodypaint 1 (with C4D 7.3). Working in Bodypaint with an .lwo is do-able, but still feels kind of awkward. You still have to create your all your UV maps in LW before you can send anything to Bodypaint. Is Zbrush any easier to use? Has anybody out there had experience with both?

IMI
10-11-2007, 06:06 PM
I use BodyPaint 3D 3 with LW objects, as well as ZBrush 3. For painting, I'd say BP3D is a bit more advanced, but not by much, with the exception of ZBrush allowing you to paint vertex as colors and make an image map out of that.
BP 3 has UV mapping tools, but I've never used them, as I do that in LW. ZBrush also has UV mapping tools, but it's more like an atlas map, which is good for 3D painting, but no good in a 2D package.
BP3D however, has an exchange plugin for Modeler, which will automatically load a LW object fully textured into it. and send it back to Modeler again - It's a very slick, smooth operation.
I'd say overall though, BP is easier to use for painting than ZB.

jin choung
10-11-2007, 06:59 PM
zbrush is primarily a modeler....

you can indeed paint now and with zapplink, you can go back and forth to photoshop pretty nicely.

but it's not really a 3d painter in the sense that you can paint different channels (spec, color, diffuse, etc...) and have that stuff visible.

it's great for painting the color channel but only the color channel. everything else, you could paint as grey scale and then render in lw or something to see the effect.

so if you're doing work inside of zb already, it's a great and capable painter. but if your interests do NOT lie primarily in sculpting and you just want a 3d paint, body paint (or even 3d brush) is probably the way to go.

jin

IMI
10-11-2007, 07:10 PM
Jin is right. I wasn't considering the spec and bump and such channels, because I tend to make those type of maps separately.
I know, I know... I'm probably missing out on some good techniques, but I got stuck in my ways. ;)
I also tend to use the 3D apps for only basic painting, preferring Deep Paint 3D in 2D mode and Painter for painting in details.
Still though, ZBrush's point painting is a a very useful thing. Technically, I suppose that even though it only paints color, considering the level of detail you can get, you could do any kind of effect with it.

IMI
10-11-2007, 07:14 PM
Here's a link to a good video tutorial:
http://www.digitaltutors.com/store/product.php?productid=3385
I bought this one, and it shows that ZBrush really is pretty good for creating decent textures. Not as advanced as more recent versions of BP 3D or Deep Paint 3D, but still pretty good.

akademus
10-11-2007, 10:09 PM
And you have Zapplink (http://www.pixologic.com/zbrush/zapplink/) now for 3.1!

IMI
10-12-2007, 04:50 AM
Oh, another thing I forgot to mention about painting in ZBrush is that you can paint in symmetry mode, meaning both sides of your model will receive the same brush strokes if it's turned on.
Also, before jin corrects me, it's called "poly painting" in ZBrush.
I'm surprised it's not called Zpaint. ;)

akademus
10-12-2007, 04:55 AM
It just cool to put Z in front of everything!
We figured that out the other day in studio because we name files Z_filename_in and Z_filename_out :)

As they say Zeeing is believing :)

bobakabob
10-12-2007, 05:41 AM
Is the workflow from Zbrush to LW better than Bodypaint to LW? I have Bodypaint 1 (with C4D 7.3). Working in Bodypaint with an .lwo is do-able, but still feels kind of awkward. You still have to create your all your UV maps in LW before you can send anything to Bodypaint. Is Zbrush any easier to use? Has anybody out there had experience with both?

PuguglyBonehead,

Disappointing to hear that you have to create a UV map in Lightwave first before using BodyPaint - I (naively) assumed it would give you greater control and / or generate them automatically.

UVs in ZBrush can be created at the press of a button but the only problem is that they can't be edited in Photoshop easily as GUV maps look like scrambled up jigsaws.

It would be great if there was some means of 'descrambling' these maps. Still, the end results are excellent and you can always import Lightwave UVs if you prefer.

Here's something I just posted on CG Talk:

The ZBrush > LW displacent node mentioned in Steve Warner's tutorial is strangely absent from Lightwave 9 contents - but you can easily create it yourself in seconds if you follow the diagram.

Perhaps Newtek should create a dedicated ZBrush node? This might make the process a little easier for people new to nodes in Lightwave.

Numerically adjustmenting the displacements to get them looking good takes a bit more time but there are recommended values in the tutorial. Setting up the Normal map node is simplicity itself.

Once you've gone through the process a couple of times it makes sense and results can be excellent. You can work with both apps open and exchange data in minutes.

cresshead
10-12-2007, 05:56 AM
Perhaps Newtek should create a dedicated ZBrush node?..yeha that would be really helpful for zbrush users...maybe even a specific 'loader' that does all of this for you...just have a import zbrush model and it all falls into place...model, flipped uv and a zbrush specific displacement node setup n rerady to go including the adaptive pixel subdivision and render settings.

would give a ''lightwave plays nice with zbrush''

bobakabob
10-12-2007, 06:02 AM
Perhaps Newtek should create a dedicated ZBrush node?..yeha that would be really helpful for zbrush users...maybe even a specific 'loader' that does all of this for you...just have a import zbrush model and it all falls into place...model, flipped uv and a zbrush specific displacement node setup n rerady to go including the adaptive pixel subdivision and render settings.

would give a ''lightwave plays nice with zbrush''

Glad you agree... The present process works well but it would be easier for folk who find nodes intimidating and good for marketing LW as ZB friendly.

akademus
10-12-2007, 03:49 PM
They should stick label Zbrush Ready! hehe
No seriously, current support isn't bad but it definitely be better. Zbrush node or whatever would be more than welcome. Good idea.

RedBull
10-12-2007, 04:43 PM
Perhaps Newtek should create a dedicated ZBrush node?..
would give a ''lightwave plays nice with zbrush''

I think it's a little pointless personally, Nodes are meant to be systems of individual pieces giving more control and power over what's capable and possible. This is one advantage of Node based control over standard layer type systems. At the moment you can do a ZB Node setup in the surface editor with two nodes, Multiply and Subtract (2Nodes) (Save a s a surface preset).. I do wish maps were automatically flipped from ZB, but that's more a ZB thing.

ZB31 and Zapplink crashed dozens of times on the first day of release, i got the workflow down, but it's still overly sensitive and crash prone.
3DBrush's Photoshop link is automatic and far more stable by comparison.

In terms of Bodypaint and UV's almost any program that does sculpting or painting requires a UV map.. Otherwise it doesn't know where to paint/sculpt.
So having really good UV's is important when using these tools..

3DBob
10-12-2007, 04:44 PM
I fully support a zbrush node

3DBob

artstorm
10-12-2007, 05:10 PM
I do wish maps were automatically flipped from ZB, but that's more a ZB thing.

When using the Displacement Exporter in ZB you can have the maps automatically flipped. :)

Other than that, I don't really see the need for a ZBrush node either, as it's just a matter of seconds to setup a ZBrush node flow in LightWave anyway. The only thing I really miss in my LW/ZB flow is that LightWave has trouble handling all the polygons needed to bring all the details back from ZBrush. I really hope that will be addressed in a not to distant LW update instead. Then I'll feel that LW is pretty complete in that aspect. Micropoly displacement or some more settings for the APS to easier be able to control where polys are not needed, in an animated scene where the object is rotating or similar. Anything that let me raise the amount of details enough without getting an out of memory message on my 2gb machine will make me happy with LightWave.

jin choung
10-12-2007, 05:45 PM
no uvs are needed to sculpt or paint in zb.

jin

IMI
10-12-2007, 05:47 PM
Regarding the ZBrush UV mapping:
As I had said above somewhere, ZBrush's UV mapping is more or less "atlas mapping". It's basic and quick, and guaranteed not to create overlapping UV's. Overlapping UV's can cause it to crash, so they say.
It works well for ZB, it works for LW, and it probably works OK for most other 3D apps, but it's not ideal.

Any model you're using for anything that relies on UV's is going to benefit more from a better UV map, and it's a far better idea to plan on creating one from the getgo, because if you ever want to tweak it quickly in a 2D painting app, it'll be next to impossible if it doesn't look like..."something".

However, you can reassemble those ZBrush UV's into something that looks more like your model, but it's going to involve *alot* of dragging around. It wouldn't be any less work than creating a good one in LW to begin with.

bobakabob
10-12-2007, 06:08 PM
When using the Displacement Exporter in ZB you can have the maps automatically flipped. :)

Other than that, I don't really see the need for a ZBrush node either, as it's just a matter of seconds to setup a ZBrush node flow in LightWave anyway. The only thing I really miss in my LW/ZB flow is that LightWave has trouble handling all the polygons needed to bring all the details back from ZBrush. I really hope that will be addressed in a not to distant LW update instead. Then I'll feel that LW is pretty complete in that aspect. Micropoly displacement or some more settings for the APS to easier be able to control where polys are not needed, in an animated scene where the object is rotating or similar. Anything that let me raise the amount of details enough without getting an out of memory message on my 2gb machine will make me happy with LightWave.

Yep unfortunately there are limits even on a 2 gig machine... whereas you can subdivide a typical head model x 10 in Layout for good displacements you can double that and more in Lightwave 64 bit.

Anyone know if micropoly displacement is on the way? Just how memory hungry is it?

cresshead
10-12-2007, 06:14 PM
a bucket renderer for lw would help with ZB models imported into lw.

bobakabob
10-12-2007, 06:16 PM
ZB31 and Zapplink crashed dozens of times on the first day of release, i got the workflow down, but it's still overly sensitive and crash prone.
3DBrush's Photoshop link is automatic and far more stable by comparison.



Good to know. Can you set UV maps up in 3D Brush?

artstorm
10-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Yes, 2gb might soon not be enough I guess. But still, my Zbrush models + displacement map renders perfectly in most renderers with all details intact, except LightWave. Maybe I am picky as I can get LW pretty close by combining with a normalmap, but it's not the ideal solution for closeups for instance.

Come to think of it, maybe it's not related so much to LW's polygon memory handling as to bucket rendering. The other renderers, like modo, uses bucket rendering, so I guess that's why they can get away with such a huge polygon counts without choking on a 2gb machine. But I am not that interested in other engines as I am pretty comfortable with the LW renderer and know it well, so I will keep using it. :)

So maybe the current APS will do if the LW renderer will support some kind of bucket rendering in the future. Wasn't there some talk about that path some months ago?

(Edit: cresshead just posted about buckets while i typed the above. :) )

RedBull
10-12-2007, 08:23 PM
no uvs are needed to sculpt or paint in zb.jin
Wow, I'm starting to think you need some lessons in ZB technology Jin...
You should pay more attention to what IMI says... ;)


Regarding the ZBrush UV mapping:
As I had said above somewhere, ZBrush's UV mapping is more or less "atlas mapping".

Yep you are correct (unlike Jin), It makes a UV for you when you create an object. But it's a simple GUV packed UV and as you go on to mention. It's good for automatic use, but hardly ideal for real nice UV maps..
Modo for example allows sculpting at a Mesh level without UV's or Vector Displacements which require UV's all other painting or sculpting applications need the U and V to know where they are sculpting on the model. (This was in initial reply about Bodypaint)


However, you can reassemble those ZBrush UV's into something that looks more like your model, but it's going to involve *alot* of dragging around. It wouldn't be any less work than creating a good one in LW to begin with.

Totally agree.....


Good to know. Can you set UV maps up in 3D Brush?

No it has Automapping, and two other options, but i have not worked it all out yet.... I will give a good read of the manual today, .LWO coming in the next few weeks, sounds great..


When using the Displacement Exporter in ZB you can have the maps automatically flipped. :)

Thanks, yeah i know it must be possible but i hadn't found the command.
Agreed with the rest of your thoughts as well. :)

jin choung
10-12-2007, 10:02 PM
no uvs are needed to sculpt or paint in zb.

jin

IMI
10-12-2007, 10:26 PM
He's right.
The sculpting and [poly]painting both occur at the vertex level and are dependent upon the vertex points, and not a UV map.
If that were the case, increased detail in a mesh would be impossible, without remapping it, because the UV's are set, regardless of the polygon subdivision.
ZB needs to have a UV map available for creating and exporting a displacement map, though, as well as creating an image map out of painted polys. Normals, too.

jin choung
10-13-2007, 01:12 AM
thanks.

in addition, you can simply create a cube without uvs in lw or any other app, export obj, import into zb, sculpt and paint, export as obj - without creating or enabling uvs in zb. open obj in lw or other app and check... no uvs.

finally:

Working without UVs will allow you to use more polygons and get more detail out of your model. Whenever possible, delete your UVs from your ZBrush model. You can always reimport them at the end of the process.

and you can see the text in its entirety at the source:

http://www.zbrush.info/docs/index.php/Polypainting#Set_Up_Your_Model_For_PolyPainting

the second bullet point under the big orange "Set Up Your Model For PolyPainting "

---------------------------------------------------

redbull, stop discrediting yourself and give your head time to catch up with your mouth. don't you get tired of being wrong?

jin

IMI
10-13-2007, 04:46 AM
What I meant when I mentioned ZB's "atlas mapping" is that's what you get if you choose to do your UV mapping in ZB.
I just wanted to clarify that so there's no more confusion.

Unless you know you're never going to need a "real" UV map for your object, like for painting textures in a 2D app, it's a really bad way to go. Just like LW's own atlas mapping is a bad choice.

It works well in 3D painting apps, in some sort of projection mode, but makes really unintelligible image maps, which alot of times will have very noticeable seams when it comes to rendering.

Overall, it's much wiser to take the time to make a good UV map in some other program or with some other plugin, for all kinds of reasons. :)

sammael
10-13-2007, 09:39 AM
Hello all together,
I'm new here and I just dropped in because I was pointed to this discussion on another board; here (http://www.contentparadise.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7018), to be exact.
I would like to take the chance and talk to the creator of this application in person and publically. For this I will repeat some things that I have also written in the thread on the other board.
First, I would like to clarify one thing; as the small difference seems to be so important to the creator: I am not a man, I am a woman.

That doesn't explain much. What kind of Christian? Catholic?


To most men, except of those who are homosexual, they probably are.
But for me, as a woman, there's nothing more erotic than the depiction of a nude, beautiful man in an interesting pose; believe me.
That having said... and in context with your statement, which is given from the male point of view... does that mean that I, as a woman, will not go to hell if I only create female images (which are rarely erotic to me) (given that your religion is the true and only one and all the other people who believe in other religions are totally wrong)?

However... here's some of the stuff I wrote in the other thread; with some additions.

Concerning this part of the Eula...:

"The 3D-Brush software should not be used in the production of any erotic or obscene materials as well as of any products which propagandize hatred against people. We understand that we are not able to check you but we warn you about responsibility before God."

I have the following to say...:

There are probably three things here that could bother a possible user...:
- religious belief;
- interpretation of the very same and
- definition of obscene / erotic / hateful material.

I see no problem going on here and will explain why. Keep in mind that this is about a software used to create texture maps for 3D meshes - not a modeling program or an image editing software when reading the following...:


1. Religious belief:
There's more than one God people believe in; not just subdivided by different religions. Then there are some people, like myself, who don't believe in any God. The nature of 'God' or the religion this part of the EULA applies to, however, has not been stated in that place. So it could be anything from Christian to one of the Gods from Hinduism to a rare kind of amazonian tribe god, which... but I'm getting lost, sorry.
So which God exactly is the statement about, and in context with which religion?
I think if you believe in a God (or are part of a religion believing in such a God) whose 'rules' bother you or slow you down in creative (or whatever) efforts just the tiniest little bit, then you should simply stop believing in him and look for someone or something else to believe in (like - for eyample - yourself!).
Because frankly, a God dictating rules which you *know* you won't or can't adhere to is not a good God, it's a dictator. But that is only my personal opinion.


2. Interpretation of religious belief:
Okay, for example, the Catholics say no sex before marriage.
However, I found no place in the bible (and yes, I've read that several times before deciding that any religion attached to it is not for me!) that clearly states "you must not look at a nude body, whatever your married state is".
So it seems looking at a nude body seems okay, no matter if that body is male or female, or if the onlooker is female or male.
Nevertheless, some Catholics find pictures of naked people are offending their religion. Porn (meaning the depiction of two people having intercourse, in this case...), even if depicted by a married couple, does the same.
Why is that so?

We shouldn't forget that the christian God's son was nailed to the cross wearing just a loincloth and is presented that way in each and every christian church in the world. Besides the question how cruel a God is who is letting that happen, there's the following problem...:
If you know what a historical loincloth is (in case you don't - a strip of cloth, wrapped around the hips, the ends hanging down the front. The back is nude, also anything - uhm - *below* the down hanging ends in the front... it's much likely to what we would call a 'sash' today, just deeper and with the ends at the front), then you'll know that if you're standing at a way lower point than an individual who wears one, looking up at that individual will show you *everything* that's - from front view - is hidden by the loin cloth's loose ends.

So basically Jesus was hanging at the cross and he was mostly nude for all the people looking up at him from below; but no one ever chided Mary Magdalen or Mary (or any of the male onlookers) for looking up at him.
Interesting enough, though, all 'Christ on the cross' sculptures in churches I've seen so far are clearly omitting that fact, letting one end of the loincloth conveniently extend between his legs, *hiding* what could be seen if the statues were correct.
I've seen the most gruesome depictions of thorn crowns piercing into the scalp and forehead, the most horrifying interpretations of the spear wound and other torture marks with partially lots of bright red paint blood flowing from those wounds on the sculptures, but never ever did I see a correct loincloth - how hypocritical is that...? (And a breast feeding Mary is something I've seen just twice.)

So the question is - from the christian point of view - it is okay to create texture maps and images depicting gruesome wounds and torture marks, but not genitals? And if so, do those genitals have to be covered by... a loin cloth? A leaf? Or what? Please also show me the paragraph in the bible that prohibits the depiction of the nude (female or male) body. If possible also for a digitally created texture map of a human figure, please :)


3. Definition of obscene / erotic / hateful material:
Almost the same as before. Is the creation of a texture of a nude body considered 'obscene'? 'Erotic'? If so, why?

Is, for a white individual, creating a colored toon character's texture who just looks funny considered 'hateful' because he / she makes sort of 'fun' of said color; be it black, yellow or red? If so, why? And would it be different if a colored individual would paint the texture of a white one?

Is the usage of Swastica in a texture for the clothing of a roman emperor (where they were actually extremely frequently used) considered 'hateful', just because the Swastica became a symbol of hate about 2000 years later...?

And is the usage of the same Swastica on the texture of a uniform of a Nazi officer hateful, given that the creator of said texture would want to use the texture in a rendered image which would then show the horror of the holocaust from a *victim's* point of view?

Then again, we're just talking about a texture map; so isn't it the responsibility (before God or whoever) of the one who uses this texture in a rendered image in what context it is used?
Think careful about your answer; and also think about other examples.


The software is used to make texture maps. For my life I can't see how the digital creation of texture maps could be 'hateful', 'erotic' or whatever (except of course if you're a man and use reference photos of a beautiful female model to create the texture; or, in my case, of a male model...); or how it could be against anything a (which?) 'God' of whatever (which?) religion dictated.
Unless, of course, if you're Amish - but then again, anything digital should be alien to you.

So all I think of that little part of the EULA is - it's useless, because it's hilarious. I like to interpret it like this:
If you have a religious problem with whatever you're creating, stop creating or change your religion. Or - in case you think what you created is okay - live happily ever after.
But whatever kind of - still in this case! - texture map you create, you can by no means control what people are doing with it once the texture set is on the market. And frankly, at least for myself I think it's nothing I really care about.
It's that simple, IMHO; and a software creator stating something like this in an EULA is, at least to me, more or less a probably non-volunteering comedian with a (to me) totally alien concept of the above stated three issues....


I have a perfect example to ask the creator of that software:
I've recently created a texture set for a male character. Fully nude, with genitals. However, the interesting thing while creating that texture set; I did some researches on the character (basically, he's from a movie and sports a lot of tattoos - which had to be researched properly).

While doing this, I stumbled over a 'christian' website which claims that two of the tattoos my character is sporting are 'signs of the devil', namely:
- the 666 (which, funny enough, was interpreted into an "xXx" tattoo on the back of the neck of said character - an "X", in the latin sense, is still a "10", not a 6; so the webmasters of that site definitely need some latin lessons...), and
- an eye on his shoulder which, according to said website, would be the eye of the devil (in fact, it's a Horus eye in the middle of a sun).
Now - both tattoos, according to said christian website, would be considered 'devilish' by christians. Not in my opinion, of course; but hey, my opinion doesn't count in this case.
My question is: Would I have been allowed to create said texture set with your software, given the fact that two of the too many tattoos the character is sporting are, according to a christian website, "devilish"?


As I've said; long posting, most of it I had already posted on the other board.
But I'm very much looking forward to the answers of the creator :)
(By the way, I was just thinking - how 'hateful' is it to assume that there's only one God for the whole world by clearly leaving out the religion this statement applies to? Isn't that sort of extremely hateful against other religions, too?)

Im did not even bother to read this but you should realy get a new hobby asside from writing painfully long posts about the creator or whatever, who is that anyway... Satan?

sammael
10-13-2007, 09:45 AM
algae998 - Zbrush and Lightwave are an excelent combination in my opinion, I use LW-Zbrush-Photoshop for all my works. There is a slight learning curve initially as IMI mentioned but once you have the workflow down its perfect... or close to.

Dodgy
10-13-2007, 11:30 AM
To add my two penneth:
On religion. I'm not religious, atheist through and through, but I'm not going to argue with a guy who wrote such a superb piece of software. He's free to believe what he wants and I'm free to disagree with him. I've already agreed to help him with some of the documentation since I am a native English speaker and he is not. That's how much I like this program.

On Zbrush and 3d brush and body paint. I own ZB and 3dB, having bought 2 copies of 3d brush yesterday on the strength of using the demo in a few hours. To me, 3d is the best of both worlds.
It isn't as fast as zbrush, but it's fast enough to be usable. It's also usable enough that anyone trying it can get to grips with it in a couple of hours.

It also allows me to paint variable spec, displacement/bump, colour and transparency maps at the same time, in a simpler more efficient way than when I last tried body paint.

It has full layer support, which I was disappointed by in ZB, because ZB3 only delivered displacement layers, not colour layers (which I thought was an obvious move when adding layers), and in BP3d because the layer system was so fiddly to work with. When you add a layer in 3dP, you get colour+disp+spec with each layer, not individual layers for each channel like you did in BP3d when I last used it. This means when you turn off a measles layer for example, you turn off bump+colour+spec, which is more intuitive than BP3d.

You can export varying levels of subdivision, and normal/displacement maps for that level of subd. You can do text, which is wrapped around curves, as well as patterns following the brush/curves so bullet belts and things like that are a snap.
It has X,Y and Z symmetry, a free form deformation system like Zbrush's transpose function, as well as soft modification tools.

Really, the feature list is phenomenal, and for $70, anyone who does this kind of work and doesn't have BP3d or ZB should pick it up. And those that do have one of them, should think about it too, because it's remarkably well implemented. The programmer is very approachable about features and he's already fixed bugs I've sent him.

Really, try the demo.

IMI
10-13-2007, 11:48 AM
Really, try the demo.


I shall. He seems like a nice guy, and I'd like to help him too, if possible. :)

bobakabob
10-13-2007, 12:59 PM
To add my two penneth:
On religion. I'm not religious, atheist through and through, but I'm not going to argue with a guy who wrote such a superb piece of software. He's free to believe what he wants and I'm free to disagree with him. I've already agreed to help him with some of the documentation since I am a native English speaker and he is not. That's how much I like this program.

On Zbrush and 3d brush and body paint. I own ZB and 3dB, having bought 2 copies of 3d brush yesterday on the strength of using the demo in a few hours. To me, 3d is the best of both worlds.
It isn't as fast as zbrush, but it's fast enough to be usable. It's also usable enough that anyone trying it can get to grips with it in a couple of hours.

It also allows me to paint variable spec, displacement/bump, colour and transparency maps at the same time, in a simpler more efficient way than when I last tried body paint.

It has full layer support, which I was disappointed by in ZB, because ZB3 only delivered displacement layers, not colour layers (which I thought was an obvious move when adding layers), and in BP3d because the layer system was so fiddly to work with. When you add a layer in 3dP, you get colour+disp+spec with each layer, not individual layers for each channel like you did in BP3d when I last used it. This means when you turn off a measles layer for example, you turn off bump+colour+spec, which is more intuitive than BP3d.

You can export varying levels of subdivision, and normal/displacement maps for that level of subd. You can do text, which is wrapped around curves, as well as patterns following the brush/curves so bullet belts and things like that are a snap.
It has X,Y and Z symmetry, a free form deformation system like Zbrush's transpose function, as well as soft modification tools.

Really, the feature list is phenomenal, and for $70, anyone who does this kind of work and doesn't have BP3d or ZB should pick it up. And those that do have one of them, should think about it too, because it's remarkably well implemented. The programmer is very approachable about features and he's already fixed bugs I've sent him.

Really, try the demo.

Dodgy, Thanks for the review and heads up on the features... Looking forward to investing in this app. Agree it's strange that colour layers aren't present in ZBrush which is the biggest drawback when using ZB generated GUVs... Great that 3D Brush supports them in such an intuitive way.

How easy is it to continue painting on a ZB generated GUV image map in 3D Brush? And do image and maps need flipping along a specific axis if you're swapping between apps?

Algae998
10-13-2007, 01:06 PM
Its good to know that ZB and LW play nicely together once you understand how to do the workflow. Is this mainly because you can export out of ZB as a .obj?

Would it be more logical to export as an obj or export the displacement map?

I did do a slight test with exporting a model into LW and it did bogg my computer down quite a bit. My laptop has a pretty beefy setup (upgraded to 4 gig the other day just for this kinda stuff :D ) but using high poly count models certaintly shows.

If Im planning on a basic animation, nothing special and more or less just to do one, what should be the approximate poly count coming out of ZB into LW so its not completely out of hand? I suppose I could try to lower the sub-D levels in ZB but I havent played around with that.


What do you all prefer for texturing and mapping? Photoshop or other apps? Ive only seen a couple vids or tuts on this process and Im lost.

Happy to see this thread is back on track! :thumbsup:

IMI
10-13-2007, 01:52 PM
The better way is to use your LW object in Layout, with a ZB displacement map. I tried loading a 2 million polygon object into Modeler and then Layout and they didn't like it much. ;)

For mapping, alot of us use the *free* Nifty PLG UV mapping plugins for LW:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/nif-hp/index2_english.htm
They are truly excellent. :)

Painting? Deep Paint 3D, Painter, Body Paint 3D, ZBrush. I like to use Layout's own Surface Baker shader as well, for turning procedurals into textures. It's a cool technique. :)

sculptactive
10-13-2007, 03:34 PM
Dodgy pretty much summed it up, so I shall not repeat it, other than to say that I tried the demo and new that it was worth buying.
Since my purchase there has been some updates like an option to auto smooth groups during the loading of an OBJ file and best of all improved it's compatibility with objects exported from LW. It is simply a great program

sammael
10-13-2007, 04:07 PM
Yes IMI has summed it up once again, PLG mapping tools and Zbrush displacement maps is the way.

Algae998
10-16-2007, 02:08 PM
Perhaps someone can shed some light. I want to be able to export my model's displacement map into Lightwave, but I cant quite seem to figure out how to make the magic work with the displacement map. Anyone have a couple brief steps I can take?

bobakabob
10-16-2007, 04:22 PM
Perhaps someone can shed some light. I want to be able to export my model's displacement map into Lightwave, but I cant quite seem to figure out how to make the magic work with the displacement map. Anyone have a couple brief steps I can take?

Did you follow Steve Warner's tutorial?.. It's all in there.

http://www.stevewarner.com/html/tutorials.html

Note you'll have to create the displacement node from scratch (it's not in LW 9 contents as Steve describes) but follow the diagram it just takes a minute.
You'll then have to mess with the values but the recommendations are a good starting point.

Algae998
10-16-2007, 08:01 PM
Cool, I was not aware of such tutorials. I must have missed it. The link looks pretty promising so Ill definitely check it out. Thanks for the post!

IMI
10-16-2007, 08:19 PM
Cool, I was not aware of such tutorials. I must have missed it. The link looks pretty promising so Ill definitely check it out. Thanks for the post!

I know it's been kind of hard to follow this thread, but the Steve Warner links were already here. ;)

I think he must have made and saved his own nodes and forgotten about it, and assumed it was part of LW, when it wasn't.
Either that or he was using an earlier beta version of LW that had a ZB node, but got removed for whatever reason.

I searched and searched for it, but it didn't work. I almost emailed him about it, but figured I was just being blind and stupid. ;)

goodrichm
10-17-2007, 07:08 AM
I've been trying to learn all this mapping stuff myself and found the following links on the LW9 node setup for ZBrush.

Remember in LW9, the displacement nodes get setup in the Object>Properties and click on displacement. I got caught by this mistake too!

Hope this helps...MG


ZBrush Node Preset Download:
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55857&highlight=ZBrush+node

ZBrush Node Tree Image:
http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=41870&d=1170604040

Tut:
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=37410

ZBrush 3.1 Displacement & Normal Map Quick Codes (by Steve Warner):
http://209.132.96.165/zbc/showthread.php?t=21078&page=5&pp=15

16-bit Displacement: DE-FCEK-EACADA-D16
16-bit Normal map: DE-HCEK-FAIAJA-Normal16

32-bit Displacement: DE-JCEK-EACADA-D32
32-bit Normal: DE-LCEK-FAIAJA-Normal32

colkai
10-17-2007, 12:55 PM
Me,
I'm waiting for Dodgys re-written docs on 3D-Brush.
I know da man, he gunna do gud. :D

Oh and Mg old bean? Throw a tutorial in pretty please? ;) :p

goodrichm
10-18-2007, 08:50 AM
colkai,

I'd throw you a tut, but I'm still just a noob at all this 3D stuff. It'd be like the blind (me) leading the blind (no disrespect intended to blind people or yourself). BTW I did include a link to a tut on LW9 & ZBrush displacement maps.

I've been sitting on the fence post on this new 3D-Brush program. I just spent a fortune on ZBrush3 to be able to paint & clothe LW 3D models. What can 3D-Brush do that ZBrush can't in this respect? Is there a poly count limitation on 3D-Brush?

Wish I had seen 3D-Brush (and its $70 price tag) before I bought ZBrush! I'm just a hobbyiest right now so I trying to decide if I can justify spending another $70 or not. Take care...MG

Algae998
10-20-2007, 02:58 PM
Does anyone have any models or animations theyve created using ZB or 3d-brush with LW? Id like to see some things people have created and know whats possible!

bobakabob
10-21-2007, 04:27 AM
Does anyone have any models or animations theyve created using ZB or 3d-brush with LW? Id like to see some things people have created and know whats possible!

Still learning but the workflow is pretty straightforward once you get your head round it. Here's a LW hydra model textured and rendered in ZB. I painted directly onto the model, UVs created in seconds. The second pic is rendered in LW using ZB displacement and normal maps. Again, a very quick process.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/213/456564127_57fde26a1a_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2061/1562893123_2bc276de38_o.jpg

Am currently working on an animated character using displacements, no problems so far :)

Algae998
10-21-2007, 08:45 AM
Wow, extraordinary work! Alright, Ive gotta learn these programs more hahaha. I wish my community college had the appropriate classes for this kind of art...pff.

sculptactive
02-08-2008, 01:33 AM
32-bit Displacement: DE-JCEK-EACADA-D32
32-bit Normal: DE-LCEK-FAIAJA-Normal32


Have you been able to get the 32-bit Displacement Map: DE-JCEK-EACADA-D32 to work in LW 9.3.1?

The 16 bit version is working ok, but the 32 bit just gets a white screen in the editor window and will not displace.

I thought 32 bits were completely fine in 9.3 now?

jesusguijarro
02-08-2008, 03:32 AM
Hi, it is broken in 9.3.1 in 9.3 it works ok, have reported long ago via fogbugz, and just a week ago they ask me for content, no news since then

sculptactive
02-08-2008, 05:09 AM
Hi, it is broken in 9.3.1 in 9.3 it works ok, have reported long ago via fogbugz, and just a week ago they ask me for content, no news since then

Thanks for letting me know. I have been "pulling my hair out" trying to get it to work.

I'll go back to 9.3 until hopefully there is an update