PDA

View Full Version : 3D Coat



Pages : [1] 2

sean hargreaves
04-12-2008, 05:17 PM
Has anyone here used 3d coat? Is it compatible with Lightwave, and a Mac?
And is it any good?

UnCommonGrafx
04-12-2008, 05:19 PM
Yes, yes, and yes.

Get it; it is more than worth it. It will even let you save out morph targets. How's that for compatible?
It was able to work with UVs where ZB crashed.

sean hargreaves
04-12-2008, 05:31 PM
Wow, great! Thanks! :thumbsup:

SplineGod
04-12-2008, 10:09 PM
I also highly recommend it.

Giacomo99
04-12-2008, 10:15 PM
Not wanting to rain on anyone's parade, but last time I checked, 3DCoat wasn't Mac-compatible.

UnCommonGrafx
04-12-2008, 11:02 PM
So...?

Go tell Andrew that. And let him know that he could beat zb to market with one and make a killing.

Until the time that he does, it doesn't mitigate that it is a darn good program only getting better.

AbnRanger
04-13-2008, 12:40 AM
So...?

Go tell Andrew that. And let him know that he could beat zb to market with one and make a killing.

Until the time that he does, it doesn't mitigate that it is a darn good program only getting better.Andrew is looking into it, but for the moment, Cross Over Office has been mentioned to work fine with it:
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75262&page=23

BTW...this software is updated at a pace unheard of, and he's gone out of his way for the LW community. Definitely worth checking out the demo

waly
04-13-2008, 02:41 AM
I was using 3d-coat from the very beginning of the software, man 3D-coat develops with speed of light, very good compatibility with LW, and 5 star support

and the interface deserves compliments, u ll get used to in matter of hours.

Costanel
04-13-2008, 02:56 AM
Yes, I recommend it highly as well. I've got it for a couple of days now.
It's quite fast and very easy to learn. Start the demo and fiddle with it, you'll see what I mean.
And if you've got request, just post it on the 3d-coat forum and you've got in a couple of days. :)

bobakabob
04-13-2008, 03:59 AM
You'll love this program... it's like a 3D Photoshop as you can paint on your models directly in layers. Andrew has worked hard to make it Lightwave compatible.

UnCommonGrafx
04-13-2008, 07:11 AM
AbnRanger,
Thanks for the clarification. I couldn't remember why there were Mac guys over there NOT complaining about the situation. As well, they seem to have Andrew's ear as to this becoming a possibility for the Mac.

This just happens to be a piece of software that transcends the norm as we know it today: a developer that updates OFTEN, listens and implements user-requests in .00x updates and as a 1.0 product offers some freshness into an already filled room (of threeD paint and sculpt packages).

archijam
04-13-2008, 09:56 AM
I have found it doesn't really run through parallels on the setup bellow (OGL errors), but that said, via bootcamp I am still a very happy 3D Coat owner ;) ...

adamredwoods
04-28-2008, 12:03 AM
I've finally tried out the demo. It's not bad, somewhat clunky interface, a few bugs still. Has a little trouble with various unwrapping and tight geometry.

Took me a few tries and a few hours to get used to the interface. Overall, I can't say it's professional grade yet, but it has some usefulness.

I found it's good for texturing when you're working organically. Not so great for stencils, unless you're working with a very high texture map.

I've attached something I did during my experimenting. Note the awkward stencil on the belt-- had a lot of trouble figuring that one out. I'd be better creating the geometry in LW.

I am going to try Adobe Photoshop CS3 next, to see how their 3D viewer works in conjunction with texturing.

StereoMike
04-28-2008, 12:34 AM
I use it for quite some time now. Andrew even integrated Space-mouse support, which feels really great (one hand on the spacemouse, the other holds the pen). You can even load objects as stencil. You need some time to find out the workflow for certain situations (e.g. how to work with hardbody geometry that shouldn't be smoothed on import), but once you get it straight the rest is a piece of cake.
And you can always ask on the forum. I think Andrew has cloned himself 12 times.

mike

SplineGod
04-28-2008, 01:34 AM
There are those who do feel that its easy to use and at a professional level. I know some guys and R & H are using it. I agree about the workflow. I did find it MUCH easier to pick up then Zbrush. :)

geo_n
04-28-2008, 04:06 AM
At the price I bought it, 85US, I didn't care if I would use it for work or not. It was just fun and easy to use. If you're into character and organic modeller its highly recommended.

RebelHill
04-28-2008, 04:19 AM
This software does look good.... I had a quick look at the demo... and couldnt help but notice that whenever the program is in the foreground, even when its not doing anything, it just eats up all your cpu time, a bit unfortunate.

Matt
04-28-2008, 04:19 AM
Looks interesting, but unsurprisingly, I'm not a huge fan of the look of the interface (Well, there's a surprise!) It's just far too heavy looking. I've not tried it, so workflow-wise I'm sure it's great.

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 04:23 AM
Looks interesting, but unsurprisingly, I'm not a huge fan of the look of the interface - far too heavy looking! (Well, there's a surprise!) Not tried it, so workflow-wise I'm sure it's great.

If you want you can custumize the interface colors and repaint all the icons.:thumbsup:

Matt
04-28-2008, 04:45 AM
If you want you can custumize the interface colors and repaint all the icons.:thumbsup:

Hmmmmmmmmmm!

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 05:00 AM
The icons even comes in a .psd file.

SplineGod
04-28-2008, 08:37 AM
Sounds like a challenge to me... :)

Steamthrower
04-28-2008, 08:39 AM
Andrew told me that he was expecting the Mac port to be running in about 3 months...all in all I'm very excited. That's seriously influencing me in holding off buying Zbrush or Silo.

All things considered, Andrew must be a heck of a developer!

Matt
04-28-2008, 09:31 AM
The icons even comes in a .psd file.

Just took a look, problem is, there's no way that I can see to re-define the size that they are, you could re-design them to look a little more subtle, but they will still be too big.

There are a few other issues too that you can't change.

hrgiger
04-28-2008, 09:35 AM
There are a few other issues too that you can't change.

Make a feature request to change them. Andrew seems like he's really taking requests into consideration. This is a new app and it's your chance to have an app shaped around some of our ideas.

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 11:26 AM
Just took a look, problem is, there's no way that I can see to re-define the size that they are, you could re-design them to look a little more subtle, but they will still be too big.

There are a few other issues too that you can't change.

No, you can't alter the size, but let Andrew know and I'm sure he will fix it.

It all depends of what resolution you're working in, I'm on 1920*1200 and I think the interface is quite pleasing in size.

PS. Lightwaves interface takes more space than 3D Coat so I don't see a problem.

Steamthrower
04-28-2008, 12:06 PM
Well, Matt apparently wants Lightwave Vx interface, so he doesn't like that either!

Seriously, though, Matt's interface concept is a lot more pleasing than the current one.

NAS
04-28-2008, 12:36 PM
Brilliant program
Just tried the demo and i took a model from Silo into it painted it and saved it as an LWO to render

Not one problem at all

NAS

Tony_R_B
04-28-2008, 12:48 PM
Brilliant program
Just tried the demo and i took a model from Silo into it painted it and saved it as an LWO to render

Not one problem at all

NAS

That is interesting - I'm a silo user too and they do seem ideal for each other and an excellent way to supplement 'true organic' modling to LW...

As for the interface - I'm not a fan of big icons either - I do like the simplicity of LW's text-button approach - as I can read :lwicon:

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 12:55 PM
Well, Matt apparently wants Lightwave Vx interface, so he doesn't like that either!

Seriously, though, Matt's interface concept is a lot more pleasing than the current one.

I agree, his Vx interface is super nice. I also think 3D Coat's interface could look a lot better than it does today, but I don't realy see a problem with the size of the icons. Sure, they could be a little smaller, but too small is also quite annoying when working.

bobakabob
04-28-2008, 02:06 PM
The look of the interface could be more subtle but it's getting better. Guess the most important thing is 3D Coat's interface is logical and a breeze to use.

Considering the price of BodyPaint this is an absolute bargain and much more intuitive to use. In an ideal world Newtek would collaborate Andrew to license the software and integrate it into Modeler :newtek:

adamredwoods
04-28-2008, 03:21 PM
My quick test with Photoshop CS3 went ok. The trick is you need to have a properly UV'd texture. And it doesn't subdivide your model (you can do this manually in a separate file), nor does it allow to preview bump maps.

But the plus is you have a great set of tools and you dont have to flip back and forth between softwares.

Attached an image. Note the backward "Hi", I think was a problem on my UVs.

---

Maxon's Bodypaint looks really nice. But it is pricey. Looks like they have a solution for Lightwave.

http://www.maxon.net/pages/images/products/bodypaint3d/bp_1_e.jpg

---

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 03:39 PM
When I tested CS3 extended it was really slow with 3D meshes and you can't sculpt in PS. With the new features that Andrew is working on I think you don't even need PS in the future. I'm very pleased with 3D Coat and for the money spent, it's so much value for the money. PS can't really touch it, but it always depends of what you do and what you're after. For me it works great for you maybe PS is a better solution. I really recommend 3D Coat that now also comes with a Tree Generator, great value.

adamredwoods
04-28-2008, 04:01 PM
I'm just testing my options out.

So far, 3D Coat is the closest and most stable I've seen for under US$200. My problem with it is that I don't want to be fighting the software when I am drawing. That is a sure way to never use a tool. So I am still trying it out, trying to see how I can adapt to it.

Like I mentioned, I've used it for organic textures, but not so much for hard textures.


PS can't really touch it, but it always depends of what you do and what you're after.

It is what you're after. Photoshop's drawing tools are years ahead of 3D Coat. THere is no comparison on that.

WIth 3D Coat I can only get so far when drawing fluidly. Photoshop and the others are quick. But these painting programs cannot paint in 3d. So thus itlooks like I have to compromise, and I'm trying to figure out what to compromise on. (Cost vs. flexibility vs. workarounds vs. ease-of-use)

Ztreem
04-28-2008, 04:11 PM
Of course if you do 2D painting then PS is the best, but if we are talking 3D paint as this is what 3D Coat does it's much better than PS. You can always use both 3D Coat and PS you don't need to use just one. I hope you find a solution that fits your needs it's always a compromise of some sort.

allabulle
04-28-2008, 08:33 PM
so interesting. What about using it without a wacom?

(Oh, I'm guessing this time I rather buy one, at last)

Salut!,
Allabulle.

adamredwoods
04-28-2008, 09:04 PM
3D Coat is tablet-aware, which is a real plus.

The only minus (a small one) is that it relies on the middle and right mouse buttons to navigate in 3D space. I don't think those can be redefined yet.

Otherwise it works very well with a tablet.

allabulle
04-28-2008, 09:12 PM
thank you, good to know.

I was assuming (maybe I'm wrong) that most of it's user base were in fact using a tablet. That's why I was asking about how well it was working without one. At the same time, I'm starting to consider seriously buying a wacom: being able to paint in 3D and controlling the pressure directly sound good enough. Not convinced yet, though.







(sorry for my english, I try to do my best)

StereoMike
04-29-2008, 02:25 AM
If you use your computer for textures and painting you should really try (ah- simply buy) a wacom. A used e.g. Graphire 4 will do it well. After you get used to look at the screen (and not at your hand) while drawing, you can't imagine going back.
Take at least an A5 size tablet. The more expensive intuous tablets are more sensitive and react to pen tilt, but you can easily do your textures without it.

mike

Tony_R_B
04-29-2008, 06:15 AM
That's good to know, as I can get my hands on a graphire 4 thanks StereoMike.

AbnRanger
04-29-2008, 05:33 PM
There are those who do feel that its easy to use and at a professional level. I know some guys and R & H are using it. I agree about the workflow. I did find it MUCH easier to pick up then Zbrush. :)Hey Larry, have you considered doing a dvd on this software and selling it over at Kurv, maybe as a package deal as well...a nice round $150 or so, perhaps? Could have a one short video on LW integration. I'm sure Andrew would put a link to it on his site as well.

Larry_g1s
04-29-2008, 05:41 PM
As for the interface - I'm not a fan of big icons either - I do like the simplicity of LW's text-button approach - as I can read :lwicon:I've downloaded the demo and going to try it out, but I thought I'd chime in on your comment here to. I'm presently going through some animation tutorials where I'm using Maya, and I understand it was my 1st go with the app. , but I gotta say, LW interface & work flow felt so much cleaner & intuitive. So I've gotta say too, I'm not a fan of big icons either. My 2 cents.

tortoro
05-03-2008, 08:13 AM
It's been a while since the last time i post a message on this board (stop 3d during several years).

I've bought 3d coat one month ago and i'm beginning to using it.
It is truly a great package at an affordable price.

I have only one prob: how are you dealing with multiple uv and displacement picture in lightwave ?

each time I apply my head displacement map the whole body go crasy.

does someone would like to enlight me please

tortoro
05-03-2008, 09:23 AM
just find a way to handle it


http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=5&t=579425&highlight=multiple+displacement

SplineGod
05-03-2008, 10:33 AM
Hey Larry, have you considered doing a dvd on this software and selling it over at Kurv, maybe as a package deal as well...a nice round $150 or so, perhaps? Could have a one short video on LW integration. I'm sure Andrew would put a link to it on his site as well.

Its definately something were interested in doing. Its mostly a matter of opening up some time to work on it. :)

jasonwestmas
05-03-2008, 10:57 AM
sweet. . .I was waiting for something like that that was affordable. Zbrush polypainting is way too slow if you want to undo something and that is with 64 bit system and 4Gigs of Ram.

Jake
05-03-2008, 11:37 AM
Zbrush polypainting is way too slow if you want to undo something and that is with 64 bit system and 4Gigs of Ram.

Really? I'm running 32 bit with 3 gigs of ram and it seems fine.

I bought ZBrush when it was first released. The interface was too alien to me and I never got anywhere with it. Periodically I'd try and then give up. Recently I found out that I could get a free upgrade to ZBrush 3, so I tried it again. Version 3 is much more straightforward to me and now I get it and am getting very good results.

In regards to 3d Coat, it's obviously a great price and offers similar functionality. Going to the website I wasn't all that impressed with the sample images. I'm curious whether this is a reflection on it's sculpting tools or the current user base. I'm also curious whether 3d Coat enables you to generate new geometry in the program and if it has retopologizing functionality.

The radical thing (to me) about the current state of ZBrush is that I can take some shape like a sphere, jack it up to something ridiculous like 3 million polys, sculpt it into a very complex organic form, and then just draw whatever topology I want directly on the high rez mesh. This new topology is then my base mesh based off where the detail of the final sculpt lies--I just subdivide it (to a much lesser degree) and project the detail from the previous high rez mesh back on to it.
Basically I can be a complete idiot when modeling, completely ignoring the flow of my topology until I'm done sculpting. Then I just draw it where I need it. No spinning quads, no big hassle with star shapes, no headache.

Ztreem
05-03-2008, 12:01 PM
Jake: For the things you mention like modeling a sphere into a full humanoid with millions of polys, then Zbrush is what you should use. If you have build a nice basemesh and wants to add some details with ease, like color, specular, normal and small displacement details then 3DCoat is a good choice. 3DCoat is also a very good choice if you don't want to spend the cash for Zbrush or don't really need to do million poly displacement models from spheres and mostly want a 3D painter for your models.

Jake
05-03-2008, 12:42 PM
Ztreem-- People should go with whatever solution is affordable and suits their needs. I certainly don't intend to suggest that 3d coat is a bad choice for what it does. It's just that in the early part of this discussion, some comparisons to zbrush were put out there. My impression is that this is a case of apples to oranges, though I could be wrong.

Also I don't advocate modeling everything from a sphere or using millions of polys. The point I was trying to get across is that ZBrush has tools that can make topology a secondary concern in the creation of a model rather than a primary one.

jasonwestmas
05-03-2008, 08:00 PM
Really? I'm running 32 bit with 3 gigs of ram and it seems fine.



Yeah it does run fine till you crank up your model to 6-7 million polys to get the desired poly-paint resolution. Undoing any operation at that level takes several seconds. I like undo when painting.

I also don't like the fact that you can't smooth edges for low poly game models without the SMT modifier (Which gives you an inaccurate picture/projection of how your color map will look on your low poly mesh. In order to retain your UV map's projection correctly, when using poly painting, you have to subdivide the model several times without the SMT modifier and then paint with flat rendering on. This is so the edges don't interfere with your view of fine detailing.

This 3d Coat program might make this projection painting thing a little easier for me I'm hoping.

Magnus81
05-04-2008, 01:41 AM
If you have build a nice basemesh and wants to add some details with ease, like color, specular, normal and small displacement details then 3DCoat is a good choice.
And Zbrush isn't good for that?:question: Have you checked out any of Steve Warner's tuts for LW to ZBrush pipelines.
I love ZBrush man. It has liberated so many aspects of cg that the traditional pipeline has held hostage for years. And everything I do in Zbrush is easily exported to LW. I don't use ZB exclusively for art, I always export everything back into LW to render, and I have to say that my experience with ZB and LW together has been awesome!:rock:


then just draw whatever topology I want directly on the high rez mesh. This new topology is then my base mesh based off where the detail of the final sculpt lies- I agree, Jake. I love the fact that I can just be an artist and create the shapes I want, then create a perfect base mesh later for everything. There's nothing wrong with using something like ZB to model characters exclusively. I used to be afraid to use anything besides LW to model. Now I realize how foolish my mentality was. Why limit myself.
I'm not saying anything bad about 3D Coat, it's looks pretty good. But I think ZB is more powerful and robust. Just my opinion though!:D
Later,
Magus81

Ztreem
05-04-2008, 02:53 AM
And Zbrush isn't good for that?:question: Have you checked out any of Steve Warner's tuts for LW to ZBrush pipelines.
I love ZBrush man. It has liberated so many aspects of cg that the traditional pipeline has held hostage for years. And everything I do in Zbrush is easily exported to LW. I don't use ZB exclusively for art, I always export everything back into LW to render, and I have to say that my experience with ZB and LW together has been awesome!:rock:

I agree, Jake. I love the fact that I can just be an artist and create the shapes I want, then create a perfect base mesh later for everything. There's nothing wrong with using something like ZB to model characters exclusively. I used to be afraid to use anything besides LW to model. Now I realize how foolish my mentality was. Why limit myself.
I'm not saying anything bad about 3D Coat, it's looks pretty good. But I think ZB is more powerful and robust. Just my opinion though!:D
Later,
Magus81

What I wanted to say that I agree with both you and Jake, if you want a modeling app then Zbrush is the best choice. If you just want to add textures to your models in a simple way then 3DCoat is good for you. Then of course you can do all this in Zbrush if you feel you can afford it. You can also use both Zbrush and 3DCoat you don't have to use just one app.

I don't own Zbrush but I've tested it and it's a superb app that I may buy when I feel I can afford it. But what I heard is that the color paintig in Zbrush is on a vertexlevel or polylevel not pixel, so you have to make the object very dense in polys to be able to paint it very well, that's where 3DCoat is better, if this is the case.

For displacement painting I still think Zbrush is better, you can do displacements in 3DCoat but you will never be able to compete with Zbrush and that's not the intention of the app.

jasonwestmas
05-04-2008, 12:29 PM
But what I heard is that the color paintig in Zbrush is on a vertexlevel or polylevel not pixel, so you have to make the object very dense in polys to be able to paint it very well, that's where 3DCoat is better, if this is the case.

For displacement painting I still think Zbrush is better, you can do displacements in 3DCoat but you will never be able to compete with Zbrush and that's not the intention of the app.

Exactly the case with ZB3. :)

tbennet
05-04-2008, 02:03 PM
I don't own Zbrush but I've tested it and it's a superb app that I may buy when I feel I can afford it. But what I heard is that the color paintig in Zbrush is on a vertexlevel or polylevel not pixel, so you have to make the object very dense in polys to be able to paint it very well, that's where 3DCoat is better, if this is the case.

You can paint on the polys or you can paint on the pixels...and if you paint on the polys you can convert to texture map. Thats what I usually do.

You guys are comparing apples to peanuts!

jasonwestmas
05-04-2008, 02:18 PM
no. . .we are actually comparing performance of one program's process to another. You can't paint pixels onto a mesh in real time within ZB3, you have to use projection master which has no symmetrical painting feature like poly painting has and you get more errors with it. Which is why many do use the poly painting method. The point I was getting at was the performance issues with poly painting. There are still some disconnects within the ZB3 pipeline when talking about texture painting.

tbennet
05-04-2008, 02:25 PM
no. . .we are actually comparing performance of one program's process to another. You can't paint pixels onto a mesh in real time within ZB3, you have to use projection master which has no symmetrical painting feature like poly painting has and you get more errors with it. Which is why many do use the poly painting method. The point I was getting at was the performance issues with poly painting. There are still some disconnects within the ZB3 pipeline when talking about texture painting.

yes that is correct about projection master... thats why I use poly painting.
I think it depends on your system weather or not you get a slow down.

Ztreem
05-04-2008, 02:49 PM
3DCoat has a demo, test it. If you like it buy it if you don't like it use another app. I bought it and I like it, works perfect and it's getting better every day.

SplineGod
05-04-2008, 09:16 PM
I agree. Its a great app and it is almost literally improving daily :)

Magnus81
05-04-2008, 10:07 PM
I heard talk somewhere about Newtek buying 3dCoat and implementing it into LW. Anyone else hear about this? I'm sure it's nothing more that idle chatter. Still a very interesting idea.

SplineGod
05-04-2008, 10:35 PM
The last time I mentioned this to anyone at Newtek they werent too impressed/interested....so hard to say.

Magnus81
05-04-2008, 10:54 PM
Hey! weren't you just at SQ? Stop stalking me SplineGod, or I'll slap you with a restraining order!;)

SplineGod
05-04-2008, 11:00 PM
I hate when that happens! :)

05-04-2008, 11:00 PM
I'm on vista 64 and I get no slowdowns with polypainting but I generally am only painting on 2 to 4 million polygons at a time if that has any relevance.

I'm really not a big fan of 3dcoat's sculpting - at least in comparison to Zbrush, Mudbox, or Silo. I think it works better than modo's in general, which as a modo user is a bit disappointing considering the cost difference. The 3d painting in 3dcoat is nice, and most likely what I would purchase it for, but it still feels rather muddy and lacking in precision. I think as this aspect improves I'll consider it for purchase, especially if Lux don't get their act together and improve on the painting tools in modo. The lack of true image layers in modo is a joke at this point, considering that the paint tools are now second gen and 3dcoat has no problem with their implementation.

What makes zbrush so irreplaceable is the fact that you really can disregard polygon technicalities like mesh density and topology. I can build entire characters complete with equipment, clothing and fine detail on everything all directly inside zbrush and never have to import or mess with polygon cages at all. Tools like mesh extraction and transpose have become an integral part of my workflow, and the new subtool master plugin that was recently released is a godsend for mirroring and merging subtools. 3dcoat also falls apart with anything but the simplest meshes when it comes to hiding or selecting pieces to work on, whereas zbrush rocks at separating and maintaining control over mesh visibility and parts. Breaking up a mesh before hand in order to work with it in 3dcoat seems a tad inefficient and would rob you of any overall perspective that you might otherwise maintain by being able to work with all pieces in the same file.

I also much prefer to do all the creative work in high rez and then just retopologize afterward. It's faster, and reconstruction is a no-brainer with tools like Nex or Polyboost or Silo, or even Zbrush's own built in retopology tools. Building your low rez mesh first and doing UVs before you even have any final shapes or details fleshed out just seems backward now. To me it's a fundamental flaw in modo's image based sculpting approach. These new tools allow for very fast creation of final low/med rez meshes which can then be uv mapped and rigged elsewhere with rarely any need to go back and adjust anything, since it's all based on the high rez mesh, which in production, would need to be approved as final before starting on the low rez.

I kinda disagree with the lack of saving in the 3dcoat demos too. I have no idea what to expect of the textures I make in 3d brush and how they'll turn out when I bring everything over to a game engine, as I can't save anything. This is really important when you are working with overlapping, mirrored UVs, which seem to handle just fine in 3dcoat for the most part... but I can't tell ultimately as I can't save my work. Crippled demos suck. It's time limited as it is. That should be enough.

I tend to only buy software if it's useful to me, regardless of price. Right now I'm feeling that 3dcoat is getting close, but not quite at the point where I'm interested in purchasing. If anything I hope the painting tools see more improvement as that's probably what will get me to buy in. I'm not happy with any other 3d paint software yet, including modo and bodypaint so I see this as a real area for 3d coat to compete if not shine. It's kind of outclassed for sculpting by existing tools in my opinion though. I certainly wouldn't replace my zbrush or mudbox licenses with it for sculpting work at this point.

$.03

tbennet
05-04-2008, 11:13 PM
I'm on vista 64 and I get no slowdowns with polypainting but I generally am only painting on 2 to 4 million polygons at a time if that has any relevance.

I'm really not a big fan of 3dcoat's sculpting - at least in comparison to Zbrush, Mudbox, or Silo. I think it works better than modo's in general, which as a modo user is a bit disappointing considering the cost difference. The 3d painting in 3dcoat is nice, and most likely what I would purchase it for, but it still feels rather muddy and lacking in precision. I think as this aspect improves I'll consider it for purchase, especially if Lux don't get their act together and improve on the painting tools in modo. The lack of true image layers in modo is a joke at this point, considering that the paint tools are now second gen and 3dcoat has no problem with their implementation.

What makes zbrush so irreplaceable is the fact that you really can disregard polygon technicalities like mesh density and topology. I can build entire characters complete with equipment, clothing and fine detail on everything all directly inside zbrush and never have to import or mess with polygon cages at all. Tools like mesh extraction and transpose have become an integral part of my workflow, and the new subtool master plugin that was recently released is a godsend for mirroring and merging subtools. 3dcoat also falls apart with anything but the simplest meshes when it comes to hiding or selecting pieces to work on, whereas zbrush rocks at separating and maintaining control over mesh visibility and parts. Breaking up a mesh before hand in order to work with it in 3dcoat seems a tad inefficient and would rob you of any overall perspective that you might otherwise maintain by being able to work with all pieces in the same file.

I also much prefer to do all the creative work in high rez and then just retopologize afterward. It's faster, and reconstruction is a no-brainer with tools like Nex or Polyboost or Silo, or even Zbrush's own built in retopology tools. Building your low rez mesh first and doing UVs before you even have any final shapes or details fleshed out just seems backward now. To me it's a fundamental flaw in modo's image based sculpting approach. These new tools allow for very fast creation of final low/med rez meshes which can then be uv mapped and rigged elsewhere with rarely any need to go back and adjust anything, since it's all based on the high rez mesh, which in production, would need to be approved as final before starting on the low rez.

I kinda disagree with the lack of saving in the 3dcoat demos too. I have no idea what to expect of the textures I make in 3d brush and how they'll turn out when I bring everything over to a game engine, as I can't save anything. This is really important when you are working with overlapping, mirrored UVs, which seem to handle just fine in 3dcoat for the most part... but I can't tell ultimately as I can't save my work. Crippled demos suck. It's time limited as it is. That should be enough.

I tend to only buy software if it's useful to me, regardless of price. Right now I'm feeling that 3dcoat is getting close, but not quite at the point where I'm interested in purchasing. If anything I hope the painting tools see more improvement as that's probably what will get me to buy in. I'm not happy with any other 3d paint software yet, including modo and bodypaint so I see this as a real area for 3d coat to compete if not shine. It's kind of outclassed for sculpting by existing tools in my opinion though. I certainly wouldn't replace my zbrush or mudbox licenses with it for sculpting work at this point.

$.03

I agree with all of that.
Especially with topology now being an after thought. I think that is one of the best parts of zbrush! I can sculpt how I want and build my mesh afterward.

AreDub_3D
05-05-2008, 10:42 AM
It is coming to Mac OSX. I asked the guys a few weeks ago. They said there might be something in a few months. I think there's something about this on their forum.

It does look very cool!

Nemoid
07-04-2008, 01:53 AM
didn't try 3D coat as for now, but i'm looking at its evolution since some day!
It seems a really interesting app especially for painting purposes.

since retopology is theme of last posts
look at how Andrew is implementing it (still on the works btw)

http://207.44.140.6/~dcoat/Tutorials/3dc_retopo.swf

IMO this is way better than current Zbrush retopology tools.
Its more similar to Polyboost and nex. it adds more control to the process from within the app, and i've seen adding features to it into a day by day progress !!

btw i like ZBrush for sculpting very much, it is the leader on this field now.and i love z spheres!


Andrew is also working on adding volumetric sculpting in the app in 3.0 version

so my conclusion is : maybe 3D coat its not yet mature, but its approaching rapidly

Nemoid
07-04-2008, 04:10 AM
Just took a look, problem is, there's no way that I can see to re-define the size that they are, you could re-design them to look a little more subtle, but they will still be too big.

There are a few other issues too that you can't change.

hey Matt! could be interesting to read/post some opinions in thsi thread!
maybe you can help 3d coat to grow better.

http://3dbrush.kriska.hvosting.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=1171

creativecontrol
07-04-2008, 03:15 PM
I'm just trying the 3D-Coat demo. I have never used any 3D paint system before so I didn't really know what to expect. I must be doing something wrong.

If I import any LW object, it just makes a mess of it. I'm not sure why it has to re-teslate it. Looks like crap with thousands of messed up polys.

Dodgy
07-04-2008, 06:05 PM
It is because your UVs are overlapping. 3d coat needs every poly to have it's own space in the UV map. If polys are in different UV maps, then they can overlap, as it will use different textures for each, which is how you can paint mirrored objects. if polys are looking rubbish, it's because they are overlapping.
On import, if 3d coat finds overlapping polys, it'll say 'Use clusters' instead of 'Use UVs' in the import dialogue. If you click okay to that, it'll rearrange the UV maps to try to separate the overlapping parts. When you export the finished images it'll use the original UVs though (if that option is toggled on).

creativecontrol
07-05-2008, 09:44 AM
Well, I've given up on 3D Coat. Maybe I just don't understand the overlapping UV thing but after many hours of frustration I've made no progress. I just wanted to paint some weathering on parts of this object:
http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82179

When I saw 3D Coat I thought, wow, I can import a LW object and paint on it! How cool is that, after years of programs promissing this and failing misserably, they finally did it, this will be the one! Yippee! I just wanted to paint a bit of color detail. No scupting, no displacing.

Well, sadly, that was just too good to be true...

What you CAN do is import an object, turn it into a dogs breakfast and then paint on it. Not really what I had in mind. Just that middle step I'm not liking.

It SEEMS that 3D coat INSISTS on subdividing your object weather you like it or not, NO choice. That may be fine if your object is a soft organic shape bit if it's a hard edge mechanical shape with any detail, forget it.

Oh well, one more 3D paint system dies a horrible death. I guess it's just not the tool for this. Very dissapointing.

OK, my rant is over. I'll go have a few beer, chill out, and maybe it'll somehow look better then.

Does anyone know of anything that WILL paint a simple high-res texture with minimal fuss? I don't need sculpting.

Maybe I'll try the new Photoshop even though it's a bit pricey and I haven't really heard anything that good about it. Sounds like it performs like an old dog in the mid afternoon sun but maybe it'll work, sort of...

AndrewShpagin
07-05-2008, 12:16 PM
Have you tried to import model with unchecked "Smoothing" option?
It helps to paint non-organic models.

creativecontrol
07-05-2008, 09:38 PM
Have you tried to import model with unchecked "Smoothing" option?
It helps to paint non-organic models.

Ya, I did. The results were still very far from satisfactory.

creativecontrol
07-05-2008, 09:45 PM
I really wish it had an option to NOT modify the geometry. Don't know if that's possible or not, but it seems like it should be. It would sure be usefull for hard surface painting. Not everyone wants to sculpt.

Dodgy
07-05-2008, 10:00 PM
You can turn off the sculpting of you want to just paint colour/spec/transparency maps. Just right click the channel you want to turn off.

creativecontrol
07-05-2008, 10:15 PM
You can turn off the sculpting of you want to just paint colour/spec/transparency maps. Just right click the channel you want to turn off.


Yes. But before that, right when you import the model, it subdivides it right away. There doesn't seem to be any way around it. Very odd.

grn
07-05-2008, 11:04 PM
Yes. But before that, right when you import the model, it subdivides it right away. There doesn't seem to be any way around it. Very odd.

Yeah, it's weird. Can't keep the original model as low-poly either.

07-06-2008, 12:08 AM
Painting still tends to move verts around as well, even if you turn off the displacement. It's very unsettling when you see that happening to a low rez mesh. I'd like to see full support for low rez meshes and imported normal maps (if it isn't already there). For games work it's very important.

I don't have the latest beta installed, but is it possible yet to import a normal map that was baked elsewhere and use that as a sort of high rez guide when painting diffuse maps on a low rez mesh? I have no interest in using 3d coat for sculpting nor normal map generation, but I'd love to be able to import my meshes with baked normals from elswhere and paint diffuse, spec, etc on top of those. I find the paint tools are nice enough at least to be good for that. The layer support alone makes it a better option than modo. With proper openGL and directX support in the works, I'd hope we get to see a wide variety of shaders to help get as close to the in-game look as possible, in general.

I'm a lot pickier about the software I use these days and since the demo doesn't let me save images I can't test them to see what results I'm getting.

Also, support for multiple mesh pieces in the same file needs to be better... or at least some way of masking/hiding stuff more precisely. Zbrush is awesome for that. Last time I tried 3dcoat this aspect was quite painful to work with, using a rather simple mesh with a few overlapping components. Not really interested in chopping up the mesh for painting separate pieces either.

Dodgy
07-06-2008, 12:09 AM
Well I just imported a cube with the 'Smoothing' option off and it didn't smooth it. It does subdivide it (like a Subdivide>Faceted operation in Modeler would do), just not smoothed it (which is more like a Subdivide>Metaform). You did turn the "Smoothing' option off in the Import dialog?

Dodgy
07-06-2008, 12:19 AM
You can hide by surface(material), or by (lightwave) Object Layer. You can also paint polys to hide/unhide them (using all the different paint modes, like bounding box and curves). You can expand/contract the hidden areas using + and -. What other methods would you suggest?

Dodgy
07-06-2008, 12:25 AM
Painting still tends to move verts around as well, even if you turn off the displacement. It's very unsettling when you see that happening to a low rez mesh. I'd like to see full support for low rez meshes and imported normal maps (if it isn't already there). For games work it's very important.

I haven't had that happen with the Displacement channel turned off, and I've used it a lot. Are you sure about this?



I don't have the latest beta installed, but is it possible yet to import a normal map that was baked elsewhere and use that as a sort of high rez guide when painting diffuse maps on a low rez mesh? I have no interest in using 3d coat for sculpting nor normal map generation, but I'd love to be able to import my meshes with baked normals from elswhere and paint diffuse, spec, etc on top of those.

You can use a displacement map imported from somewhere else, and apply that. If you put it in it's own layer you can turn it on and off as well.



I'm a lot pickier about the software I use these days and since the demo doesn't let me save images I can't test them to see what results I'm getting.


I've used it on game objects and it used to have a few problems when first released, but I sent Andrew the objects and now I get perfect maps out. You should use the Smoothing angle of your surface as the AutoSmoothingGroups value or turn smoothing off depending on your object. I've just asked Andrew to look at importing the Surface smoothing angle instead of just one value, so this should make it have a perfect LWO import.

07-06-2008, 12:28 AM
Polygroups would be one. I suppose the materials could be used as such but that takes away the freedom to create and remove groups on the fly like in zbrush. I recall not liking the paint mode for hiding as it was too easy to paint something you DIDN'T want to hide, especially when trying to work with multiple components. Has this changed in the last couple of months? Anything that doesn't require you to set up your mesh prior to bringing it in to 3dcoat is worth looking at.

07-06-2008, 12:31 AM
You can use a displacement map imported from somewhere else, and apply that. If you put it in it's own layer you can turn it on and off as well.


Cool, does it work as well with mirrored UVs?

The vert jittering was happening in one of the last releases I checked... which was a couple months ago at least now. It wasn't major, but it was enough to be distracting.

SplineGod
07-06-2008, 12:45 AM
Weve been using 3dcoat quite a bit for a TV series and its been very solid for us and fast. Thanks Andrew! :)

AndrewShpagin
07-06-2008, 12:49 AM
Painting still tends to move verts around as well, even if you turn off the displacement.

It can happen if mesh resolution (Millions of poly) is set to low value. It should correspond to texture size. If mesh res is less then 1M it really can happen. So please set bigger resolution.

Also, reading this topic I am seriously thinking over implementing of pure low-poly painting without displacement & sculpting. It is not easy to insert in to-do list (it will require some time to do - 2 weeks of work). But seems it is very required feature. I hope I will do it in at least 3.0 (will be released in 3-4 months).

07-06-2008, 02:17 AM
Good to hear andrew. I think it would make 3dcoat even more valuable for games work. Especially if you are making content that doesn't require any sculpting or baked normals at all. Just painting directly onto game resolution meshes would be great.

Ztreem
07-06-2008, 04:17 AM
Good to hear andrew. I think it would make 3dcoat even more valuable for games work. Especially if you are making content that doesn't require any sculpting or baked normals at all. Just painting directly onto game resolution meshes would be great.

It's possible allready, just load your object into 3DCoat without smoothing and turn on view mode - low poly mode. Now you can paint on your low poly object. When you're ready you just save your maps and apply it on your original mesh.

07-06-2008, 05:22 AM
Thanks, I already know about the smoothing/low poly mode. I've brought stuff in to test, including mirrored uvs and that seemed to work ok after configuring the import options. I haven't bought the software yet though so I don't know about saving stuff out. At some point I will but since I don't need it for sculpting or anything else but painting I'm just going to hold off a bit longer. I still have a mudbox2 upgrade to see before I invest in my next paint program. Not happy with modo as a painter at this point so I'm not upgrading that either.

creativecontrol
07-06-2008, 09:48 AM
Also, reading this topic I am seriously thinking over implementing of pure low-poly painting without displacement & sculpting. It is not easy to insert in to-do list (it will require some time to do - 2 weeks of work). But seems it is very required feature. I hope I will do it in at least 3.0 (will be released in 3-4 months).

This would be very usefull to me and I'm sure others. I would buy it in flash if it had that. I have fairly high poly models already and I don't want to mess with them in any way. Just paint.

I hope you can do it. Please keep us posted.

Cheers!

wulfie
07-17-2008, 03:58 PM
I purchased 3D-Brush some time ago....does anyone know how to upgrade to 3D Coat? I think I read somewhere it is free.

Do I need to download the demo?

Thanks anyone!

Bev

PS I second the request to get Larry to do a 3D Coat DVD or Live class.

Ztreem
07-17-2008, 04:05 PM
just download the demo and install it and then put your serial number in the registration field at startup. If it doesn't work contact Andrew for a new serial.

SplineGod
07-17-2008, 08:36 PM
It worked fine for me doing what ztreem said. :)

Julez4001
08-28-2008, 10:09 AM
Newtek should offer to buy just the topology toolset and integrate that into Lightwave ASAP.

StereoMike
08-28-2008, 10:16 AM
His retopo tools are so fun to use, really awesome piece of work.

mike

DiedonD
08-30-2008, 02:58 AM
His retopo tools are so fun to use, really awesome piece of work.

mike

Though Ive owned Coat for a year or more, it is just now that Im getting into details with it. And regarding Retopo... It is to my understanding that, with Retopo you put polys on top of a ready made object right?

Why do we need that? I mean. The object is already there and was build previosly? At first glance I thought that Retopo puts polys based on the image! But the tut starts with a ready made model instead!

So Im curious to know what is it there for!

Appart from making clothes, or perhaps remaking the model with ultra low polys this time for games or such.

But cant it use the image as reference and build polys on top of that. That would be an awsomely intuitive and quite FAST photoreal modeling, that might even cut Modeler completely and go straight to Layout from Coat.

Dodgy
08-30-2008, 03:04 AM
Well it's more for taking a generic mesh which has been sculpted, then making a new clean mesh topology which matches the shapes sculpted better.

DiedonD
08-30-2008, 03:26 AM
Oh I see. Thanks.

Since we are here though. Is there such a thing out there? Modeling from a picture like that? Retopo on top of an image basically?

Sounds alota fun to me.

Julez4001
08-30-2008, 06:45 AM
So far, Coat's retopo tools have Lightwave's knife, drag, dragnet, magnet, bandsaw, Connect, Bridge and it has Maya's Split tool and has a slew of stuff that neither have unless you have plugins: commerical and free. This is just the retopo tools.

DiedonD
08-30-2008, 06:59 AM
Oh dont get me wrong. I love the tool really. Its too good for the price. And what I intend to do! It should be more than enough! I dont know we'll see.

But I was just curious about the need for retopo, and after Dodgy told me, then it wouldve been better if one could retopo based on a picture image instead. And have the model ready more intuitively.

I was imagining going through Draw Strokes lines on the picture of the model to be. Arranging Edges in the proces with a pen tablet. Its like drawing a 3D model. Very intuitive, Isnt that a wild idea?

Ok heres another one. You need UV Mapping so as you can draw or sculpt on a model. But since you already can do that in Coat without having to go through the (dreadful) UV mapping, why is UV Unwrap there then?

It kinda suggests to unwrap it in Coat and take it somewhere else for the paint, like, I dont know, PS maybe? Doesnt it? And again, why bother, you already are there and have alot in Coat!

akademus
08-30-2008, 07:43 AM
I believe one of new features of 3D coat allow you to paint textures both directly on model and onto UV's, so PS is not necessary. I haven't tried it my self, but there is a video on that on their site.

Nemoid
08-30-2008, 09:59 AM
retopology serves the purpose of re-modeling or also fixing a mesh. building up a low poly meh from a scanned mesh also.

lets say you have a mesh onto wich you have sculpted tiny details , but that base mesh is not so good for animation.
with retopology you can build up a new one so that you can animate it into , lets say, lw, and assign displacement or normal and other texture map so that you get the look you want.

btw, if you have a great base mesh modelled yet, before sculpting you very prolly don't need retopology

UV unwrap, i think its useful as well. ZB 3.1 doesn't have real unwrap functionality, but "only" adaptive tile and group tile uv map.
these are good however, but you'd have probs if you wanted working with a traditional texture artist using only photoshop.

unwrapped UV maps are more traditional workflow. plus, i think uv maps in 3d coat can be great also for painting onto inorganic objects too.

DiedonD
08-30-2008, 11:14 AM
I believe one of new features of 3D coat allow you to paint textures both directly on model and onto UV's, so PS is not necessary. I haven't tried it my self, but there is a video on that on their site.

Yes I know that. You can even sculpt directly on them aswell. I was saying why is UV Unwrap there in the first place when it offers direct intervention to the model!

Anda... Dont give advices if you dont know for yourself and havent tried it before. It just aint serious.

After what you did and stated your position that clearly I dont even know why you even bother in advices with me.

You have a long way to go before we could ever give friendly advices to one another.

Nicolas Jordan
08-30-2008, 12:41 PM
Ok heres another one. You need UV Mapping so as you can draw or sculpt on a model. But since you already can do that in Coat without having to go through the (dreadful) UV mapping, why is UV Unwrap there then?

It kinda suggests to unwrap it in Coat and take it somewhere else for the paint, like, I dont know, PS maybe? Doesnt it? And again, why bother, you already are there and have alot in Coat!

The reason you have to create UVs is because thats how the texture map is pinned to the surface of the object so if you decide to take it into a different program you can and assign the maps you painted to the object there. There is no other option or magical technology to get around this reality. All sculpting and 3d painting programs work in a similar way using UV mapping technology.

DiedonD
08-31-2008, 12:12 AM
The reason you have to create UVs is because thats how the texture map is pinned to the surface of the object so if you decide to take it into a different program you can and assign the maps you painted to the object there. There is no other option or magical technology to get around this reality. All sculpting and 3d painting programs work in a similar way using UV mapping technology.

Aha.... So this is the way you get around Coats milion poly export problem. You UV and texture/sculpt it in Coat, and then you take out the UV's together with Texture/Sculpt and apply it in Modeler or Layout model? Right?

If so. How is that done please? Can anyone guide me to that kind of Coat UV export to LW process. Perhaps it was even mentioned before. I dont know.

Or am I just elaborating too much.

Dodgy
08-31-2008, 04:09 AM
Basically you need the UV map as 3dcoat will create either a displacement map, or normal map (your choice) from the sculpted object, which you can then use on your base mesh to add the details. You can export this low poly object from 3dc directly if required...It has awesome import export lwo capabilities in that regard. You can even choose layers to be exported as morph maps.

akademus
09-01-2008, 01:50 AM
Yes I know that. You can even sculpt directly on them aswell. I was saying why is UV Unwrap there in the first place when it offers direct intervention to the model!

Anda... Dont give advices if you dont know for yourself and havent tried it before. It just aint serious.

After what you did and stated your position that clearly I dont even know why you even bother in advices with me.

You have a long way to go before we could ever give friendly advices to one another.

But I do know what retopologizing means and what software can do. I didn't tried it because I use Zbrush instead.

If you don't want advice than don't ask for one!

Little ignorance just goes a long way, it seems.

DiedonD
09-01-2008, 06:44 AM
But I do know what retopologizing means and what software can do. I didn't tried it because I use Zbrush instead.

If you don't want advice than don't ask for one!

Little ignorance just goes a long way, it seems.

Just for the record. I never ask anything from you. I got real friends in here who generously spend their time in providing meaningful help.

Not advice nor a suggestion I never ask from you. And your persistance to "help" me can only be understood as "hope of becoming friends in the future".

And Im telling you, after what you did, it aint gonna happen. Ever! Just quit! You have along, long way to go, before that can happen. Furthermore calling me ignorant isnt helping you in the matter neither!

akademus
09-01-2008, 06:54 AM
This and other threads are not about you. They are about what their topics say.
You made a clear fool in front of this forum with your idea to "retopologize" 2D image. That's what other people here are trying to tell you.

If you want to improve your self, it's about time to stop embarrassing your self and take advices from professionals in 3D.

DiedonD
09-01-2008, 07:19 AM
This and other threads are not about you. They are about what their topics say.
You made a clear fool in front of this forum with your idea to "retopologize" 2D image. That's what other people here are trying to tell you.

If you want to improve your self, it's about time to stop embarrassing your self and take advices from professionals in 3D.

Exactly, it and it isnt about you neither. Simply put I dont care about YOUR "professionalism" advice. Spare me from them please.

And its not them who are trying to to tell me that Im a fool, but its you!

And why must the idea of Retopoligizing be a foolish idea? The 2D Image has shady areas just like the 3D Mesh does. It should be available in some future if it isnt just now for the stroke lines to go lower Zwards or upper Zwards based on those shaded areas that were caputred in the image. With that, then youll create patches, and with patches the whole model!

WHy must speaking about ideas be soemthing foolish Akademus?

DiedonD
09-01-2008, 11:19 AM
DiedonD... when you post in this forum, you ARE asking EVERYONE questions - not JUST your friends. Anyone and everyone can respond which is what makes these forums so helpful. Akademus posted a simple statement (with a helpful link) and was neither confrontational nor condescending. Why did you get angry with him? Based on reviewing this thread, there is NO reason for you to get upset. Do you perhaps have a history outside of this thread?

I initially chalked up your first response as a language thing, but subsequent responses seemed to prove otherwise. You really need to simmer down and relax a bit.

Oh me an Akademus go way back Megalodon. Way, way back. Hes done certain bad things to me, and now seeks to become friends again by giving me advices and beeing polite an all that. I am unprepared to forgive him, and with him calling me names like that he isnt really trying neither.

Anda... Im pretty cool calm this time. Its just this thing between us, that Id rather not involve you guys in it, cause last time it became a hell of a devision while I was asleep. Long story.

Anyway... 3D coat rocks huh! Ive been experimenting with auto tracing, and have found a way to get edges from EPS loader in Modeler. But now before I can load it to 3D Coat for paintings and Scultpings, the edges need to become polygons. Can that be done automatically? Id hate to go through those hundreds of points and then click "P". Is there an edges to polys button?

akademus
09-01-2008, 12:07 PM
Hes done certain bad things to me, and now seeks to become friends again by giving me advices and beeing polite an all that. I am unprepared to forgive him, and with him calling me names like that he isnt really trying neither.

I certainly do not!!!:thumbsdow

othornton
09-01-2008, 12:39 PM
It seems there is some confusion here.

3d-Coat allows one to paint color, spec, and displacement values directly onto a mesh. You can use your own UVs or create them inside of 3DC. You can also use 3DC to make small UV tweaks on the fly if you run into odd-shaped polys. You can load photos directly to project onto your model; these photos can be loaded into different channels, so if you use CrazyBump or a similar program you can load the different color, spec, and bump maps to make a full material. You can paint in 2D, 3D, paint in layers, use camera projection, UV-mapping or cube-mapping, modulate textures, modulate brushes, use a tablet, or even use a built in link to output texture layers or camera projections to Photoshop.

3DC also supports mesh sculpting. In future versions this will be upgraded to include volumetric sculpting. Painting will be upgraded to allow painting depth without displacement (ie directly to a normal map) in the future as well.

3DC also supports Texture Baking of all texture channels, normals, and displacement from a high res mesh to a low res mesh. It has cavity masking as well as ambient occlusion generation, allowing for creation of fantastic details. It even supports Vector displacement for those who like to use the 'uber' displacement format. And of course, it has a shiny new set of retopolization tools.


Well it's more for taking a generic mesh which has been sculpted, then making a new clean mesh topology which matches the shapes sculpted better.

This quote from Dodgy is fairly accurate but a bit vague (no offense Dodgy). Retopolization is rarely necessary for anything that is not animated. The main functional purposes of retopolization are to create mesh with good edge-looping to facilitate smooth deformation during animation and to allow projection of high res details to a low res mesh. This can be done in 3DC using the Texture Bake tool and any mesh, not just one created using 3DC's retopo tool.

If you need a low res version of a static (ie non-animated) mesh you could either use retopo (projection onto the low-res source mesh should be sufficient) or output the high res sculpt and use a program like Poly Cruncher to strip out tri-polys while preserving the original UV borders. A reduced mesh with the same UVs can use the same normal map as the high res, or for more accuracy you could rebake. Either way retopo is not usually necessary.

There is some confrontation that is going on here between DiedonD and akademus. :twak: It sounds like it started elsewhere and probably does not involve 3D-Coat. However...

DiedonD: Please relax. Perhaps you are confusing retopolization tools and projection tools like ZBrush's ZProject. Retopolization creates a mesh like a glove around your sculpture by sticking to the surface of the reference model; Projection on the other hand projects details from a model or image onto a pre-existing mesh. Retopolization tools in 3DC can do projection of imported low-res meshes onto high-res models, but the mesh creation on top of the old mesh is the real power of the toolset. Even before ZBrush had retopolization there were vids of using ZB to project details from a picture of a skull onto a mesh to shape a sphere into the skull. There were three images used I think, but if you had more you could use an image-modeling program like Photomodeler to grab profiles and texture from images and create slices that are combined into a final (sometimes messy) mesh. Perhaps it is one of these modeling techniques that you are referring to?

akademus: You just need to take a time-out on this. Even if you were right, your attitude is undesirable. Real professionals don't call people fools, if you are one then act like one please. You say in your own words that you haven't tried 3DC. While I would strongly encourage you to do so, your lack of experience with the product makes me wonder why you are lurking in this thread and trying to hijack it with your argument. Yes, DiedonD may have overreacted, but there is no such thing as a stupid question; please do not ridicule people trying to learn. If you have a personal issue, take it to Private Message or a moderator please.

In summary I think most agitations here could be solved by both of you downloading the demo and giving it a run. If you find it lacking certain tools, you may be happy to know that Andrew Shpagin, the developer, loves nothing more than feedback from his users, positive or negative. I have suggested several features that are now in the program, and have never dealt with a more responsive developer. Ever. For the price, there's really no other product like it, especially for LW users.

Here's a great link chunderburger posted about normal baking. The article uses a high poly mesh to bake normals and textures into a low poly model and has some great tips for preserving details:
http://www.gameartisans.org/gamecon/tutorials/tut_3.htm

And now, an image made with 3D-Coat. Maybe it will put things back on track. Please enjoy. All models made in Lightwave, painted and sculpted with 3DC, then back into Lightwave for rendering. No retopo used and all are ready for rigging. This is a render I made to show folks at Siggraph.

62676

akademus
09-01-2008, 12:55 PM
To set the things clear. I wanted to point out what 3DCoat can do opposed to other similar programs. A piece of information Megalodon found good.

By not using it, I meant I'm not using it in everyday production as I'm locked to Zbrush, but I do keep a close eye on 3D-Coat, former 3D-brush as I think it's a software with bright future. And I have the demo version, of course.

I also wanted to point out that this tread is about this specific piece of software and if someone have issues with that (or me) I, frankly, don't give a damn.

Forum is a privilege to be used wisely and for everyone else good.

Nice models, Oliver, I'd like to see wires and views of each one separately, please.

Cheers everyone

DiedonD
09-01-2008, 01:30 PM
Oww... Youve ripped through all the issues quite mathematically like one of my engineers Othornton! :thumbsup:

Perhaps that alas will keep him off my back for the rest of my time here.

Now, back to work. You mentioned


Even before ZBrush had retopolization there were vids of using ZB to project details from a picture of a skull onto a mesh to shape a sphere into the skull. There were three images used I think, but if you had more you could use an image-modeling program like Photomodeler to grab profiles and texture from images and create slices that are combined into a final (sometimes messy) mesh. Perhaps it is one of these modeling techniques that you are referring to?


I went to Photomodeler
http://www.photomodeler.com/index.htm

Well heres what I was thinking. Youve seen Coats Roto tuts. The Draw Stroke command. Well, I visualized it beeing used onto an image instead of a model mesh. Now perhaps it was used before ZB with skulls as you say, I havent seen it though, but what I was specifying is would something along those lines be applied to Coat someday, and how good that wouldve been. That is what I was immplying.

Imagine the image of a face, and you stroke lines on various key areas of the face horizontally. The strokes again like in the tut "know" when to go a bit further Z-wards and a bit closer Z-wards, by following the information in the image that are shadier as you go along faces outter edges. If the light is camera originated that is. And then later on you stroke it vertically again in key areas and again it should know, and all this would be like Spline Modeling but with incredibly faster spline making and far better patching process. That would be an awsome feature for Coat.

If the imagination isnt getting through, please say so, ill try to illustrate it somehow.

akademus
09-01-2008, 08:57 PM
Perhaps that alas will keep him off my back for the rest of my time here.

Makes you wonder who attacked who for posting but never mind. :hammer:


If the imagination isnt getting through, please say so, ill try to illustrate it somehow.

Please, do illustrate for us as I don't know how your "imagined image of the face" is suppose to hold correct Z information. Maybe via Microsoft's mosaic or something.

Illustration would be nice indeed, to clarify your idea to others (and me) as there seem to be some confusion.

DiedonD
09-02-2008, 01:18 AM
Please, do illustrate for us as I don't know how your "imagined image of the face" is suppose to hold correct Z information. Maybe via Microsoft's mosaic or something.

Illustration would be nice indeed, to clarify your idea to others (and me) as there seem to be some confusion.

Man look at this guy. How low. I dont want anything to do with this guy and he keeps on coming back to me.

If I dont even want to hear your "advices" what makes you think Ill do something for you?

Just get a life without DiedonD. As I said no matter how much you want to, I wont forgive what you did.

Now. If ANYONE else in the forum asks for the illustration, Ill be happy to do it. Anyone at all. By God even if it was oDDity himself Id do it.

archijam
09-02-2008, 01:58 AM
The ignore button is there for a reason guys. Do each other a favour and use it.

Loving the mac-3Dcoatness so far. Has anyone posted some links to tutes yet on some advanced work (beyond the ones on the 3DC site) ?

Cheers!

calilifestyle
09-02-2008, 02:27 AM
I have to say i enjoy using it when i can. But i believe that it need to be better optimized for loading 3d. Its sometimes locks up on me and when i check the task manger, the resources are moving up and down. So I'm not sure what its doing. I had few times where it just stopped and the ram its using is insane, but after a few mins its up and running but the ram is no longer insane. When i try to run the program with Firefox i cant load anything. I don't have any of these problems with Lightwave, Vue, Houdini with Firefox. But its fun tool.

BTW for away i to was kind of confused about the need for the topology thing added. But after reading this post it makes senses.

DiedonD
09-02-2008, 02:28 AM
The ignore button is there for a reason guys. Do each other a favour and use it.

Loving the mac-3Dcoatness so far. Has anyone posted some links to tutes yet on some advanced work (beyond the ones on the 3DC site) ?

Cheers!

The problem is he cant live without me :)

And heres the test. Ill go again with a complete different issue to talk about, and again hell respond to me or would otherwise hint it, and require any kind of reaction from me. Thus wont leave me alone. If not here in any other thread!

Here we go.


If you find it lacking certain tools, you may be happy to know that Andrew Shpagin, the developer, loves nothing more than feedback from his users, positive or negative. I have suggested several features that are now in the program, and have never dealt with a more responsive developer. Ever. For the price, there's really no other product like it, especially for LW users.


I totally agree with that. He even finds the time to chat in Gmail! Awsome response really. And a fine lad too.

Nemoid
09-02-2008, 03:39 AM
I think that obtaining a new topology mesh working onto an image (maybe front and side view of a model at least ?)
could be a good idea, but difficult to realize.

complex models and shapes require not only z axis information but also other vectors so i think you could get some errors when shapes become very complex (for example a head or a ear).
what you think, diedond could be IMO more applicable for more flat surfaces (example: the side of the body of the 3d coat sample dinosaur could be obtained quite well , if the shading of the image is coherent with its volume - this depends also from lighting-shading of the image you use, because how its shaded can make the software obtain some shape errors too.

btw who knows what the future could bring...

as for now, retopology tools allowing the user to build the new mesh onto the high poly sculpted one, are a real benefit.

these tools can also be used as a complete modelling workflow, especially for organics, considering that in apps like ZBrush you can sculpt complex shapes out of a sphere or even better from zsphere/adaptive mesh models.

that way , u can project all sort of creatures and more, and at the end of the process, build up a mesh with topology good for animation and obtain a character complete for animation purposes quite from scratch .

akademus
09-02-2008, 06:10 AM
The ignore button is there for a reason guys. Do each other a favour and use it.

Cheers!

Damn good idea. I forgot that!

Aside from silly ideas, I tried retopology tools in new 3D-Coat. They are quite up to par with Zbrush and it's good that intermediary model is not needed (zsphere) to make a new retopologized model. Projection doesn't work very well, though, but I believe my new favorite Ukranian (is he Ukranian or Russian?) will get around that.
Zbrush Adaptive skin is still far advanced but we'll see how to future development goes.

Cheers

DiedonD
09-02-2008, 07:55 AM
Busted :)

Facts speak for themselves...

@Nemoid: Ive got a few hours free. I think Ill use it to illustrate just what I mean. It may take some time.

DiedonD
09-02-2008, 09:52 AM
Alright heres a quicky. You can download it in Yousendit on the below link:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bVlBclVETStiV3l4dnc9PQ

It will be gone after 7 days or 100 downloads its says so...

Basically, while making a stroke, the X and Y coordinates are based upon our movement of the mouse/tablet. The remaining Z coordinate, if the picture is taken with frontal lights, may be automatically arranged by HSV values. And arranged in that a way that the application should move the cursor further where its more shadowy, and it should get closer when its more lighter. Like shown in the video illustration.

Thus you can get more accurate strokes. Perhaps with an added anti hand shake/get back to a more straighter line :cool: - script aswell. And of course with accurate strokes, that we can train to control skillfully, we can then make accurate patches. The rest is very well known.

In the end it will come out faster and more intuitively...but tell me what you think?

Best
Diedon :cool:

othornton
09-02-2008, 12:58 PM
Basically, while making a stroke, the X and Y coordinates are based upon our movement of the mouse/tablet. The remaining Z coordinate, if the picture is taken with frontal lights, may be automatically arranged by HSV values.

DiedonD, your explanation is fairly clear, no examples are needed. The main flaws with your idea D are that lights have fall-off, and HSV or Luma values will almost never give accurate depth. Say for example, if we take a picture of a person's face with a light on the camera, the center will be the brightest. If you take a picture of the body these values would change again. Dark areas like eyebrows, eyelashes, hair, etc, would all register as negative value even though they are above the skin. You would also need to account for areas of overlap (hair over forehead, ears, nostrils, chin overhang, etc etc) Then there's seperating the image from the background.... compositors can tell you how difficult this can be at times. Combine these with perspective from the camera and lens distortion, and the model may come out looking pretty bizarre.

It's a fine idea DiedonD, it's just not possible with 1 picture. As humans, even we need two eyes to evaluate depth, it's just a fact of nature. There are so many better methods for attaining your model that I just don't think this technique is viable. Unfortunately this is something that no amount of examples will change.

I think you could much faster get a model by using the photo as reference and modeling it by hand. If modeling from a photo is essential for some reason, then the image modeling programs are the only alternative.

In conclusion, is the tool possible? Maybe, but not with a single photo. With today's technology a single image simply does not carry enough information

Would we want it? Probably not. The lighting needs are so specific that few small studios would be set up to take advantage of it immediately. If a studio wanted perfect photo-realism of a subject they would most likely use a 3d scanner anyway, then retopo it for animation.

I hope this answers the question completely for you DiedonD. Your idea is not bad, just not possible today with a simple image. Within the next couple of years I am sure we will see cameras coming out that may record additional z-depth data, but that extra information recorded would make the image more than just a normal photo, and the camera more of a point and shoot 3d scanner. That level of image analysis would make a tool like you are suggesting not only possible but maybe even not powerful enough. What I mean is, with the z-depth info and good background seperation the mesh (1 side of it anyway) could be interpolated just from the z-depth and retopo, making your suggested tool unnecessary.

DiedonD
09-02-2008, 01:26 PM
Well... Othornton. You surely left me speachless! I have nothing to add. Thanks alot indeed. I appreciate the time and empathy you used to realize where I was and elavated me from there. Makes me thinking though.

Do you teach? Are you a teacher or something? Nice work.

Cheers
Me

faulknermano
09-02-2008, 08:21 PM
Within the next couple of years I am sure we will see cameras coming out that may record additional z-depth data, but that extra information recorded would make the image more than just a normal photo, and the camera more of a point and shoot 3d scanner.

http://www.vimeo.com/1513129


in that vid, (originally posted by aaronv2 in this thread: http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87664) demos the extraction of a depth map, apparently, using only a video camera.

othornton
09-02-2008, 10:05 PM
http://www.vimeo.com/1513129


in that vid, (originally posted by aaronv2 in this thread: http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87664) demos the extraction of a depth map, apparently, using only a video camera.

See? Already on the way. Their system uses a fusion of video tracks and high res photos, but how long until that system is built into one camera or a studio package of some sort? The full link is a bit more technical, but it goes in-depth into how they put everything together. Can't imagine what that system costs...

http://grail.cs.washington.edu/projects/videoenhancement/videoEnhancement.htm

DiedonD
09-03-2008, 12:16 AM
@Stereomike. As my test proves it. He cant live without me Mike. I mean to think out laud there was the test openly telling that sooner or later he WILL make a comment directly to me, asking my bad respond, (which Im withholding so far for the sake of this good community) , and it was there for the common sense to see, STILL he couldnt resist it, and still he went ahead and made an unneccessary comment like that. Totally proving my test. For all to see. As I said, facts speak for themselves.

Now how do you settle this you ask me? You tell me. I never called names so far, never belittled, just shoed off facts as the test proves it. Now how do you get a person whos crazy in love with you, off your back for good? I dont know, but I seem to tried everything except taking matter on my own hands again.

Anyway. @Othornton.

I slept over it. And I think you missed a point. And that is that, it doesnt has to be photorealism. You know. You have pastel painters. They Ive seen specifically follow that logic of more lighter to more darker areas in the sides. So for them, whose the face is imaginative, that 3D Brush Stroking could be invaluable.

Gosh I really see your point. Why should one bother to that extent just to use 3D Brush Strokes. But if it was going to be a model derrived from an imaginative pastel paint, then its a different ball game. Wouldnt you agree?

StereoMike
09-03-2008, 02:00 AM
Now how do you settle this you ask me? You tell me.
I would PM you this, but I think it has a general truth that everyone can profit from:
I takes two for an argument, but only one to settle it.
It's not a 50/50 responsibility for each of you. Each of you carries the full 100% of responsibility to put this to rest and keep calm.
Don't rely on the other, do it like it's all your task. Even if that means you're the only one working on it, doing apologies or making progress.
Applying this in life will have all sorts of positive effects (e.g. marriage, work, ppl in general)

mike

DiedonD
09-03-2008, 02:17 AM
I would PM you this, but I think it has a general truth that everyone can profit from:
I takes two for an argument, but only one to settle it.
It's not a 50/50 responsibility for each of you. Each of you carries the full 100% of responsibility to put this to rest and keep calm.
Don't rely on the other, do it like it's all your task. Even if that means you're the only one working on it, doing apologies or making progress.
Applying this in life will have all sorts of positive effects (e.g. marriage, work, ppl in general)

mike

Yeah alright. Compare how are my replies now to the ones I use to deliver to the ones who asked for it, and then look at me and say Ive not done my 100%!

DiedonD
09-03-2008, 04:39 AM
Anyway lets leave the issue to the authorities. As Ive got nothing to loose. If he keeps away from me for good Im happy, if he doesnt I suspect the authorities should notice in which case still Ill be happy. Its a win win situation for me.

Now for the good stuff.

What I need Coat for is basically a more advanced way of making my Papercutts:

http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81431&page=2

I cutt but afterwards the inner texturing has always been limited to a black pencil. And frankly Im sick of black and white outcome.

Ive tried all sorts of coloring in real life, but all have its flaws. Only after scanning them, autotracing, EPS loading in Modeler will I have a chance to finally start using Coat. And perhaps afterwards an animation.

But aside from animation. I really need to match the moving character that is beeing animated with the real deal in real life. Can anyone suggest me please just what is the best coloring technique I should use for the to be more photorealistic.

Color Pencils - leave small whity areas that are hard to fill, and offer little if none gradient coloring that is required.

Water Colors - They ruin the paper to start with and also have the same flaw.

Any suggestion you might have please PM me cause I sure dont want to hijack the thread. Ive been stuck for quite a while now in coloring them after cutt in a photorealistic way.

Thanks in advance.

Sekhar
09-04-2008, 02:20 PM
Guys, a newbie question. Looks like 3D Coat pricing will go up after 9/15, so I'm deciding whether to get it before that, so please help.

Basically, I've never had any success doing anything meaningful with earlier trial versions. I just downloaded 2-10-05 and tried to load a simple box created in LW 9.5.1. Below is what I get (1) without smoothing and (2) with smoothing during import. What am I doing wrong?

Ztreem
09-04-2008, 02:23 PM
I would guess it's a UV problem, test and make an atlas UV map in LW before loading it in 3DCoat and see if it helps.

jaf
09-04-2008, 05:54 PM
Must be something in the water here in San Diego Sekhar! I had the same problem and question.

I think I was assuming 3D-Coat could import a mesh without smoothing and a UV map. I couldn't understand why a simple cube looked so bad. Especially when the carcas resolution offered "6" when offered a simple six poly cube.

When I can get back to my workstation I'm going to try this again with Zbrush. I'm pretty sure Zbrush handles a simple mesh without a UV map (I think 3D-Coat did too, a few revisions back.)

othornton
09-04-2008, 08:46 PM
Guys, a newbie question. Looks like 3D Coat pricing will go up after 9/15, so I'm deciding whether to get it before that, so please help.

Basically, I've never had any success doing anything meaningful with earlier trial versions. I just downloaded 2-10-05 and tried to load a simple box created in LW 9.5.1. Below is what I get (1) without smoothing and (2) with smoothing during import. What am I doing wrong?

The smoothing issue is simple. Either smoothing is on or off. A simple cube brought in without smoothing will always be a cube. If you turn on smoothing groups you can set the angle at which the mesh is smoothed.

The patchy rendering is a UV issue. 3DC can import any object without UVs, but UVs must be assigned at import using the Mapping: Auto-mapping option. After the auto-mapping has been assigned with the import you can change it with the regular 3DC UV-mapping tools.

I have spoken to Andrew about getting 3DC to recognize edge weighting as a way to facilitate importing objects with a mix of hard edges and smooth organic forms. If he can do this the smoothing angle issue can all be solved within LW before export to 3DC.

Sure, ZBrush handles objects without UVs. But in order to get displacement back out you need UVs, and currently in ZB that means your only option is UV tiles. Which would be ok for most situations but impossible to read visually for objects with dozens or hundreds of polys.

What is the cube intended for? Did you want sharp or smooth corners? If you still can't get it to work there is a demo cube that comes with 3DC. You should be able to paint on that if needed and I can tell you how to bake it back out to a plain cube.

manholoz
09-04-2008, 08:52 PM
It does handle meshes without UVs. Just tell it to auto-UV map it upon import.
If a mesh has only parts with a uvmap applied, those parts appear transparent. If you assign them UVs (it can be done inside 3d-coat) the invisible parts magically re-appear.

monovich
09-04-2008, 10:40 PM
Has anyone here used 3d coat? Is it compatible with Lightwave, and a Mac?
And is it any good?

just bought it and love it. I haven't sculpted previously and don't know the other apps. It looked cheap and capable so I downloaded the demo and bought it an hour later.

being able to intuitively sculpt a mesh in no time at all is a lot of fun and something I wished for in modeler for a long time but didn't know what to call it. I highly recommend 3d coat.

jasonwestmas
09-05-2008, 07:28 AM
I remember how I felt using ZBrush 1 for the first time. I was pretty gitty. I can only imagine how people like monovich are feeling with 3D coat considering 3D coat is probably way more advanced than ZB1 was. I would defininately buy a program that does what these two apps do.

StereoMike
09-05-2008, 02:32 PM
Before 3dCoat I only had a short look at zBrush (whose gui put me off) and way before I tried amorphium.
I guess zBrush is really awesome (look at all the work that ppl can do with it) but I'm pretty pleased with 3DC. I can paint my models and add details that would cost me way more time without it. I can use a tablet together with my space mouse (yeah NewTek), which feels like manually modeling clay (without the feedback). Now the developer adds a voxel sculpting mode like that sensable software....!!
It gets better and better :)

mike

Greenlaw
09-05-2008, 04:06 PM
Hi,

I think I may have posted this image before but I thought users here would find it of interest. This character was my first use of 3D coat, and it was finshed rather quickly. This project was from last year and my memories about it are a bit little fuzzy, but if I remember correctly 3D coat allowed me to paint the color, spec, normal, and bump maps for the character in two days, and that included a day to learn how to use the program.

I haven't used 3D Coat much since then, but I'm expecting to use it a LOT in the upcoming months. For me, 3D Coat is a bargain for what it allows me to do in a short time. I highly recommend it.

(Also of note, I used LightWave's FastSkin node for the skin. This worked out great too!)

DRG

Sekhar
09-05-2008, 04:37 PM
Thanks Ztreem and Oliver, I'll test some over the weekend. You're right, when I added a UV map to the box, it loaded fine. Manholoz, I thought the same (that "auto-map" is supposed to add UV map if it didn't find one; it sure is named that way), but apparently you do need to add a UV map first.

Ztreem
09-06-2008, 02:44 AM
The best approach is to make your own UV map in LW, I prefer PLG. 3D Coat also seems to performs better on a continuous UV map than on a splitted up one.

cresshead
09-06-2008, 03:00 AM
Oh me an Akademus go way back Megalodon. Way, way back. Hes done certain bad things to me, and now seeks to become friends again by giving me advices and beeing polite an all that. I am unprepared to forgive him, and with him calling me names like that he isnt really trying neither.
button?

just put people who you don't want to talk with on your ignore listin the forum setup.

that's what i've done to people who i don't wish to read their responses:thumbsup:

cresshead
09-06-2008, 05:46 AM
just having a play with 3d coat [i'm a zbrush user]
so a couple of quick questions to help me with the trial version

where do you subdivide the model?
where can you find out how many polys are in the displacement model?
are here such a things as a move, inflate and pinch brushes?

so far with my first 20mins..
it's looking interesting..i ike the nav style based on maya
also the brush size based on [ and ] keys plus the strength based on - and = keys with the feedback on the brush alpha splineline.

also quick question what the new price after 15 sept?



i'm actually running the demo on my ultraportable advent pc with winxp and the intel atom chip...works for me!

Ztreem
09-06-2008, 06:05 AM
just having a play with 3d coat [i'm a zbrush user]
so a couple of quick questions to help me with the trial version

where do you subdivide the model?
where can you find out how many polys are in the displacement model?
are here such a things as a move, inflate and pinch brushes?

so far with my first 20mins..
it's looking interesting..i ike the nav style based on maya
also the brush size based on [ and ] keys plus the strength based on - and = keys with the feedback on the brush alpha splineline.

also quick question what the new price after 15 sept?



i'm actually running the demo on my ultraportable advent pc with winxp and the intel atom chip...works for me!


If you use the sculpt tools (displace the mesh) the resolution is set when you load the model, it's the carcass resolution.

For paintbrush (normalmap+displacement) you can use the adjust subpatch command in menu to set the resolution.

Move, pinch and inflate is found in the sculpt tools.

I think the new price is comming from the new big feature volumetric sculpting that looks very promising.

cresshead
09-06-2008, 06:20 AM
thanks, the thing i do like about 3d coat is the painting with layers, the general u.i. seems logical and the price looks okay even with 19% eu vat ontop of $120..

so with volumetric scultpting we'd expect much higher res models to work with yeah?

also like theidea of being able to install on 3 pcs and use on 1 at any one time..that should help with being mobile and also any crashes of licences..you can keep working.

if i buy now will i get the vol sculpting unpadte free or have to pay a point update?

Nemoid
09-06-2008, 06:27 AM
Thought to post first very early examples of volumetric sculpting. very early alpha stage so it will grow in efficiency in final release. :agree:

http://3dbrush.kriska.hvosting.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=1412

jasonwestmas
09-06-2008, 08:56 AM
I haven't had time to play around with the demo. . .Can you really paint on specular and view the map in ogl right after you paint on the spec map layer?

manholoz
09-06-2008, 09:10 AM
Manholoz, I thought the same (that "auto-map" is supposed to add UV map if it didn't find one; it sure is named that way), but apparently you do need to add a UV map first.

I mentioned this, because a week ago I wanted to edit a mesh in 3d-coat, of which a part was invisible. I was not freezing or hiding faces, and I was certain that everything had UV maps.

Well, I was wrong. The invisible parts did not have UVs. I just imported the UVs, and presto, the invisible part appeared, without affecting anything else.

So I was not auto-mapping on import, as I (incorrectly) thought that everything had a UV. And auto-mapping would discard the UV maps that did come in the file, which I could not change. Fortunately, there is the import UV function.

JeffrySG
09-06-2008, 05:26 PM
Does anyone know how much the software will be after the 15th of Sept?

cresshead
09-06-2008, 05:33 PM
apparently 3d coat will rise from $120 to $200 or that's what redbull posted over on the 3d sculpting poll in the general section of newtek forums.
if your in EU you also have to factor in 19% vat on top of that.

if it does rise to $200 then it needs to start delivering multi-million poly models that you can sulpt on with sub objects also...

i think the 200 dollar pricepoint is a little high..it's heading into zbrush zone once it hits 200...and so need to start to deliver like zbrush does...
and in some respects it does that already..but not sculpting as yet....painting yeah and re-topology yeah.

that'll be around $240 for uk and europe...nr double the cost currently.

JeffrySG
09-06-2008, 09:39 PM
^ok, thx for the info cresshead. :)

Offhand, do you know the price of Zbrush for the mac for a new full version? not an upgrade?

--nevermind--- I see that it is currently 489 going up to 595 shortly... a bit more than coat...

cresshead
09-06-2008, 09:48 PM
$489 for zbrush for mac with fre upgrade to 3.12 on sept 29th 2008, eyah more than 3d coat but it does have more on offer on various tools.

3d coat is good though..and that price rise to $200 is NOT confirmed as yet....could be $149 for all we know.

Nicolas Jordan
09-06-2008, 09:55 PM
Does anyone know how much the software will be after the 15th of Sept?

Ya, I was wondering about that Sept 15th thing too because it doesn't say anything on the 3d coat website about what price it's going to be after the 15th. If it's going to be $200 then that is probably as high as 3d Coat can go until some better sculpting features are implemented.

Ztreem
09-07-2008, 03:40 AM
I can only say that volumetric sculpting even in it's very early beta state feels very promising, that's something mudbox and Zbrush doesn't have.

Nemoid
09-07-2008, 12:54 PM
yep, and being not based onto polygons will also free users from basing the sculpt on geometry and sometimes bad polyflow.:agree:

Andrew says that youll also be able to build up base for characters, and that the system to o organize the inherent "structure"will be based onto splines

plus, volumetric sculpting should be actually competitive with the way its handled in ZB , which is actually very powerful.

Then, with retopology tools you'll have the right toolset to obtain the good geometry for animation purposes. :thumbsup:

Philbert
09-07-2008, 01:14 PM
Quote from Andrew on CGTalk about the new price:


After 15 price will grow to 140 or 150, but upgrade to 3.0 price will become less for users after 15. Our principle - grow price with fetaures so that price always will look reasonable. 120 seems to be really low value.

Of course we need some material background to grow. This year we was not able to take part in SIGGRAPH...

Nemoid
09-07-2008, 01:24 PM
Alright heres a quicky. You can download it in Yousendit on the below link:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bVlBclVETStiV3l4dnc9PQ

It will be gone after 7 days or 100 downloads its says so...

Basically, while making a stroke, the X and Y coordinates are based upon our movement of the mouse/tablet. The remaining Z coordinate, if the picture is taken with frontal lights, may be automatically arranged by HSV values. And arranged in that a way that the application should move the cursor further where its more shadowy, and it should get closer when its more lighter. Like shown in the video illustration.

Thus you can get more accurate strokes. Perhaps with an added anti hand shake/get back to a more straighter line :cool: - script aswell. And of course with accurate strokes, that we can train to control skillfully, we can then make accurate patches. The rest is very well known.

In the end it will come out faster and more intuitively...but tell me what you think?

Best
Diedon :cool:


Sorry DiedonD i noticed i didn't reply to you on this vid. I think the same Oliver said, so well !
tho. would not be possible exactly now, but surely in near future something will get closer to it.:thumbsup:

About iperrealistic coloring. usually iperrealistic painters tend to use oil colours or also acrylics on canvas or even better , on boards : i've seen great works on this field. Usually, these are large paintings that you can't quite distinguish from photos hehe. But i think that, with some good efforts you could obtain similar results painting digitally with Photoshop or Painter.

cresshead
09-07-2008, 01:41 PM
Quote from Andrew on CGTalk about the new price:

yeah was good to hear the price increase would not be too huge..going from $120 to $140ish is a good incremental move you keep those interested but not 'onboard' still interested:thumbsup:

i have the demo and will keep an eye on it's development for sure even though i'm a zbrusher...i do like the pace of development and the openess of the betas in this product.

JeffrySG
09-07-2008, 10:13 PM
I think it's great they have a mac version of coat now. Right now for me it really would only be for texture painting and placement not really for displacement painting. I'm hoping to get some time to test it over the next week or two.

geothefaust
09-08-2008, 03:15 AM
yeah was good to hear the price increase would not be too huge..going from $120 to $140ish is a good incremental move you keep those interested but not 'onboard' still interested:thumbsup:

i have the demo and will keep an eye on it's development for sure even though i'm a zbrusher...i do like the pace of development and the openess of the betas in this product.

I couldn't have said it better.

Andrew seems to keep things moving along nicely, at a decent price, and is very open about the development status. I'm a zbrusher as well, but I think this program may very well have a spot in my arsenal. :thumbsup:

AbnRanger
09-08-2008, 04:40 AM
One feature that I think would be pretty nice to see, if it's possible, is a live link to a host app like LW or Maya, so that you could use the IPR for Maya, and FPrime for LW (Max has finalRender and VRay set to release their own FPrime-esque IPR's within the next few months) to see the changes in near realtime, with Lighting, shadows and GI already set up in the host app.

This way, what you see REALLY is what you're going to get (WYSIWYG) in your final render. This would take away much of the appeal of Mudbox 2009's realtime rendering...which I really dig. But my question about the new MB is how does that translate to the host app.? If the lighting, and scene are different, if may not look the same way it did back in MB...which is why a live link (which updates the material/displacement/NormalMap changes automatically everytime you let off the stylus) would have a much better appeal, IMHO.
With multithreaded CPU's, that may be entirely feasible. An example of this "Live Link" is the integration between 3ds Max and Combustion. I can use the live link from Combustions paint tools to Max's material editor to paint on my model in a similar fashion as Body Paint or Deep Paint (just not as instantaneous)...even doing so in Max's viewport.
So, between the availability on a MAC, compatibility with SpacePilot/Navigator, volumetric sculpting, and having a live link as described, Andrew would have some key distinguishing features!

Tonttu
09-08-2008, 04:51 AM
Let's study the history of the ol' 3d-Jacket a bit, eh guys?

http://www.3d-coat.com/news_old.html

September, 19th - release date of 3D - Brush 2.0 - release version

14.09.07 - Theme: release

Price for Commercial version - 210$,
for Basic version - 140$

Then came the discount, to 50$ at first, if I remember correctly?

06.11.07 - Theme: release of 3D-Brush 2.01
Also we decided to increase the product price slowly. So we have not reverted to the initial price declared ($210). Until the end of November the price will remain on the level of $85.

Now how about that :cool:?

Nemoid
09-09-2008, 03:42 AM
One feature that I think would be pretty nice to see, if it's possible, is a live link to a host app like LW or Maya, so that you could use the IPR for Maya, and FPrime for LW (Max has finalRender and VRay set to release their own FPrime-esque IPR's within the next few months) to see the changes in near realtime, with Lighting, shadows and GI already set up in the host app.

This way, what you see REALLY is what you're going to get (WYSIWYG) in your final render. This would take away much of the appeal of Mudbox 2009's realtime rendering...which I really dig. But my question about the new MB is how does that translate to the host app.? If the lighting, and scene are different, if may not look the same way it did back in MB...which is why a live link (which updates the material/displacement/NormalMap changes automatically everytime you let off the stylus) would have a much better appeal, IMHO.
With multithreaded CPU's, that may be entirely feasible. An example of this "Live Link" is the integration between 3ds Max and Combustion. I can use the live link from Combustions paint tools to Max's material editor to paint on my model in a similar fashion as Body Paint or Deep Paint (just not as instantaneous)...even doing so in Max's viewport.
So, between the availability on a MAC, compatibility with SpacePilot/Navigator, volumetric sculpting, and having a live link as described, Andrew would have some key distinguishing features!

i agree on this one.
I talked lest evening with a fellow lightwaver and c4d user .

he said he was using bodypaint for texturing for that very same reason.

to get a decent render preview of what he was painting using Cinemas preview system.

Now, i don't know how this could be handled for 3d coat, since it should have to play nice with several packages rather that only one (obviously C4d) like Bodypaint does.

but, you could just put a feature request in the 3d coat forums and see what Andrew can do in this field. :)

StereoMike
09-09-2008, 04:31 AM
Would be cool. How should it look like? I think there are easy and quick and complicated but more feature-laden ways. As an easy suggestion, would a automated e.g. save to lwo (once a second or maybe whenever 3dc loses windows focus, save to specified file) and an automated reload lwo (inside LW) do this? dpont did a mdd relaod node that allowed a similar way (external animation and results inside LW) for a different field.

just an idea to kick this off
mike

Philbert
09-09-2008, 07:35 AM
I know it's not quite the same, but Andrew was talking about adding in a render engine. I got the impression he would rather find one than write it himself. I suggested Aqsis is open source, but I don't really know anything about it other than that. I only tried it once in Make Human just the other day and it seemed pretty slow.

blacksmith
09-09-2008, 07:36 AM
So, how does that volumetric sculpting thing works???

Andrewstopheles
09-09-2008, 12:28 PM
Does photoshop cs3 extended actually let you paint on the model once you import it into a 3d layer? Any good tips, hints or tutorials available on this?

Andrewstopheles
09-09-2008, 12:29 PM
i should add that i tried 3d coat and love it, will buy someday soon when i get some cash

Ztreem
09-09-2008, 12:52 PM
Photoshop CS3 don't let you paint on the model as I recall it, it's also very slow.

Philbert
09-09-2008, 12:54 PM
So, how does that volumetric sculpting thing works???

The way I understand it every brush stroke adds, removes, or tweaks a cloud of voxels. The voxels are coated with a mesh of triangles in real time. You can import your own model to work on or start from the default sphere. You can also import a model to use as a brush.

As for Photoshop, no it does not let you paint directly on the model. The best you can do is load the model in one window and the texture in another, when you save the 2D texture the model gets updated automatically with the new texture.

Philbert
09-09-2008, 01:34 PM
Really quick little video I made. Only showing the Carve tool.
http://screencast.com/t/sLEwh5j2tNJ

AbnRanger
09-09-2008, 02:55 PM
Would be cool. How should it look like? I think there are easy and quick and complicated but more feature-laden ways. As an easy suggestion, would a automated e.g. save to lwo (once a second or maybe whenever 3dc loses windows focus, save to specified file) and an automated reload lwo (inside LW) do this? dpont did a mdd relaod node that allowed a similar way (external animation and results inside LW) for a different field.

just an idea to kick this off
mikeAs long as you are working on Material changes (diffuse, specular, displacement, and normal map, etc), all 3DC would have to do is maintain a live link to the applications material nodes/editors in the same fashion as Combustion does with Max or GhostPainter does:
http://www.cebasserver.com/GP2/GP2.html

How they implement the updates I don't know. I'm thinking that the SDK allows them the same live access to make changes to materials that you natively have in the host app.
The beauty of this approach would be that you're NOT seeing a proximation, but the final output. With 3DC on your 2nd monitor, this could work great...just keep zinging away in 3DC and periodically look over in LW (w Frime running), and you can see EXACTLY how it's going to come out.
Why this would be important is when you make subtle changes as you go...you can instantly gauge how much that stroke affects the look (may look too heavy in the 3DC viewport, but barely noticable in the LW render.

So, instead of wasting time and money on a renderer for 3DC...I'd go with the live-link strategy. Screw proxies when you can see the REAL thing. XSI, Maya, and C4D users can fully benefit from it right now, and Max users will be able to very soon.

RedBull
09-09-2008, 06:49 PM
How they implement the updates I don't know. I'm thinking that the SDK allows them the same live access to make changes to materials that you natively have in the host app.
So, instead of wasting time and money on a renderer for 3DC...I'd go with the live-link strategy.

It was something i thought of talking with Andrew with, It really should of come from NT however.. Somewhere not exposed to the public exists HUB SDK abilities that should allow 3rd parties to tie into LW. As did some applications like Aura/Mirage which had 2D Paint updating via the hub into Modeler. This was an announced as a public SDK feature for LW8.x i believe, However NT never kept to their promise of releasing it. If the ability was documented, I'm sure Andrew would consider a similar idea for 3DC/LW.

AbnRanger
09-09-2008, 11:21 PM
What's even better about having 3DC using the host render application's renderer is that most have a Region Render selection and all Mental Ray renderers now allow you to isolate changes to just an object within the scene, as well. So the updates should be even quicker.

I think tapping into the Interactive Rendering capabilities of these applications is the way forward, and could really give 3DC a leg up (especially if Volumetric sculpting turns out to be comparable to Zbrushes performance), instead of being just another knock off.

AbnRanger
09-09-2008, 11:31 PM
Just imagine...you have a Character with SSS skin already set up, and simply sculpt and paint in details to the diffuse channel of that Skin shader, with bump and displacement changes seen live as well. T'would be nice, me thinks.

AbnRanger
09-10-2008, 12:04 AM
One other thing, for what it's worth...here's a video showing how the link between Combustion and Max works:
http://rapidshare.com/files/144036458/CGR-ch12-04.mov

Perhaps a special 3DC node that you can connect to any of your Map channels/nodes?

geothefaust
09-10-2008, 10:18 AM
Perhaps a special 3DC node that you can connect to any of your Map channels/nodes?

Awesome idea. If we get one for 3DC, I also want one for ZBrush. :thumbsup:

cresshead
09-10-2008, 10:50 AM
Awesome idea. If we get one for 3DC, I also want one for ZBrush. :thumbsup:
the idea of preset displacement nodes for 3dcoat, zbrush, mudbox woudl be great...

and that idea of a HUB live connection that works with 3dcoat, zbrush would be amazing.

geothefaust
09-10-2008, 10:52 AM
Hear hear!

geothefaust
09-10-2008, 10:58 AM
Stupid edit times... Argh.

Hijacking thread...


This has bothered me for a long while now, but... How come the nodal displacement and the displacement tab in general, are not within the texturing panel (F5)? That just never made sense to me. It's part of texturing, right? How about a logical move on over there. :p

Giacomo99
09-16-2008, 08:53 PM
Just a bump to this thread--I bought 3D Coat the other day and have been fooling around with it intensively for the last few hours. I have to say it is AWESOME, and I do not use those all-caps lightly. Well worth its low price.

Also, the documentation is very good and really helped me get into it. The tutorials and manual aren't perfect, but they're a LOT more helpful than many what's provided for many other similar apps (e.g., Silo, ZBrush or modo).

SplineGod
09-16-2008, 09:58 PM
I agree. Im glad I got it at the $85 price :)

Giacomo99
09-17-2008, 10:50 AM
I agree. Im glad I got it at the $85 price :)

Even at $120, I think it's still the best deal out there. Using 3DCoat is a far better solution to the limitations of Lightwave Modeler (painting, sculpting and retopo tools) than putting in the time and money necessary to buy and become proficient with modo.

SplineGod
09-17-2008, 12:47 PM
I also agree on that point. For what you get and how fast Andrew is on getting new versions out, its a tremendous bargain. Of all the apps in this category such as mudbox, zbrush etc I think it supports LW the best out of them all and should be supported and encouraged.

Philbert
09-17-2008, 12:59 PM
I'm actually using it for a paid project for the first time right now. So far the client is very pleased I think.

Tom Wood
09-17-2008, 01:08 PM
I've only just skimmed the site, but someone here might know this quickly. I'm still at LightWave 8.5. Is 3D Coat backward compatible to me?

Thanks,

DiedonD
09-17-2008, 01:16 PM
I've only just skimmed the site, but someone here might know this quickly. I'm still at LightWave 8.5. Is 3D Coat backward compatible to me?

Thanks,

You can also ask him at his e-mail:

[email protected]

Philbert
09-17-2008, 06:00 PM
Yeah best to ask Andrew on that one. It might not be, since it uses nodes.

SplineGod
09-17-2008, 07:42 PM
I've only just skimmed the site, but someone here might know this quickly. I'm still at LightWave 8.5. Is 3D Coat backward compatible to me?

Thanks,

I would think so. Its possible to export maps and geometry separately and there are a couple of plugins that might allow the normal maps to be used.

jaxtone
09-18-2008, 12:15 AM
Easy to pick up sounds good to me... but one thing I have been thinking about... is it its possible to create animated melting stuff or liquids that also is possible to animate?

Tom Wood
09-18-2008, 08:33 AM
I would think so. Its possible to export maps and geometry separately and there are a couple of plugins that might allow the normal maps to be used.

Thanks Larry,

I've just re-learned how to do UV colors for LightWave in Mirage, so I'll probably work with that for now. When I started down this road I intended to KISS it all the way, so a single color for each surface is my norm. But there are times when some more nuanced coloring helps.

SplineGod
09-18-2008, 02:56 PM
Hey Tom.
Id have to say that I really enjoy using 3dcoat even for just painting textures. Its nice to see them go exactly where you want and expect them to rather then trying to paint on UV templates :)

Philbert
09-18-2008, 03:02 PM
I would think so. Its possible to export maps and geometry separately and there are a couple of plugins that might allow the normal maps to be used.

I'm not sure, because if it's exporting an LWO with nodes in it's surface, then it's using a more recent LWO format than 8.5. Unless you exported as an OBJ, but if I recall earlier versions of LW made a mess out of OBJ UV maps.

jasonwestmas
09-18-2008, 06:08 PM
8.5 UVs should work fine with the 8.5 obj exporter when using Zbrush. Just so you guys know. I realize this might not be the case with 3D coat but it should work theoretically.

Philbert
09-18-2008, 06:13 PM
I was actually referring to LW's OBJ importer

jasonwestmas
09-18-2008, 06:32 PM
I was actually referring to LW's OBJ importer


Yes, the OBJ exporter/importer was broken at one point during the 8.x series.
Never had a problem when 8.5 was released however.

3DBob
10-01-2008, 11:39 AM
Just for those that have not tried Andrews amazing new Voxel Modelling Tool in the new Alpha version of 3DCoat Alpha I seriously recommend you do.

It is the most natural sculpting tool I have ever used - I have ZBrush 3, Silo and Modo - and this just blows them out of the water - he has been developing this module for less than a month - mindblowing!

Just down load the link below, install (it will run as demo) and click on the bottom box for voxel modelling.

If you have a Space Navigator and a tablet - the sculpting experiance is unparalleled in my opinion. He is even planning to make the meshing active soon for testers on a 2 licence until 3 is released.

This is NOT a Normal/displacement modeller - it is a Voxel modeller - as such you can build geometry in any direction - even punching holes right through the sculpt..... enough waffling - just try it and laugh with glee!

http://www.3d-coat.com/files/3d-Coat-3-00-ALPHA0.exe

Enjoy!

3DBob

3DBob
10-01-2008, 11:42 AM
Here is a couple of examples of what I did in 10-20mins...

I would love to see newtek do a special LW/3DC bundle....

3DBob

Kevbarnes
10-01-2008, 12:13 PM
[QUOTE=3DBob;758962] just try it and laugh with glee!3DBob[/QUOT

I shall check it out, Thanks

ps - I'll send a skype contact, where are you in the UK?

Regards Kevin

3DBob
10-01-2008, 12:23 PM
You'll love it Kevin!

Fled UK in 2006 because of political (Iraq War) differences and the lack of support and opportunities for an entrepreneur to develop a business in a country obsessed with Ponzi house price inflation as the only way to make money.

Now have 9 staff here in Sothern India, and including two houses and all costs I am still 1000 better off a month than when I was a 2 man shop working out of my back bedroom in the UK!

3DBob

Kevbarnes
10-01-2008, 03:46 PM
You'll love it Kevin!
Fled UK in 2006 3DBob

I'll reply with PM

SplineGod
10-01-2008, 04:22 PM
I agree with Bob, the new tools are amazing. Once its complete and combined with the retopology tools it will be hard to beat especially for the price. :)

Giacomo99
10-01-2008, 05:54 PM
Just a minor note of warning: I bought 3DCoat a couple weeks ago and have been using it extensively on jobs since then.

In my opinion, the retopo tools are rock-solid and alone justify the price, but the rest of the program can be a bit dicey at times--in particular, 3DC requires all imported objects to have UV coordinates and can be really persnickety about importing existing UVs. Also, 3DCoat's method of managing multiple layers of retopologized and existing geometry in the same scene file is pretty weird--I still don't think I have a handle on it.

3DC's enormously useful for the price, but after using it for a couple weeks I'm starting to wonder if I should pony up the cash for ZBrush.

jasonwestmas
10-01-2008, 06:03 PM
Zbrush3.1? Depends on your needs Giacomo99. If you want to sculpt several million polys with zero performance problems ZB is your best buy. ZB Poly painting. . . well could be better. I wish I had the ability to apply all my maps and view them in OGL in ZBrush and then render them all right there for a preview. Now that would be precious!

Giacomo99
10-01-2008, 06:23 PM
Yeah. I often wonder how much software developers actually care about the workflow of people actually using the app to make a living.

I mean, the ZBrush gallery at pixologic.com is almost entirely renders of grotesques, monsters, abstract stuff, battle armor etc. and almost entirely unmapped. And that doesn't really do very much to sell me the software--it's pretty easy to create grotesque or mechanical forms in most 3D apps, but I need sufficient control to create everyday humans, with everyday hairstyles, wearing everyday clothing.

jasonwestmas
10-01-2008, 06:34 PM
Well I can tell ya that you can sculpt anything in Zbrush with the new Subtools layers and 3D layers, its really sweet! If you browse around the CGsociety gallery you'll see that most of the people there use Body Paint and Photoshop for texuring and not ZB. I like Polypainting in ZB though mainly because I don't want to buy/ learn another app. The resolution thing in ZB is murder on my Ram because you have to crank up the Sub-D level so high. So what I do is paint my shapes and general color gradients in ZB and go to Photoshop for the fine detailing. Import those images again in LW/ Fprime for my preview.

AbnRanger
10-08-2008, 03:56 PM
the idea of preset displacement nodes for 3dcoat, zbrush, mudbox woudl be great...

and that idea of a HUB live connection that works with 3dcoat, zbrush would be amazing.That would catapult 3DC's sales tremendously since no one else does it.
I don't see why even current Mudbox and ZBrush users wouldn't buy a copy of this as well.

SplineGod
10-08-2008, 10:05 PM
The nice thing about 3dcoat is that of all these types of apps is that it supports LW the best. You export and then when you load the object into LW the nodes for normal maps etc are already there. Displacement layers will export as endomorphs. It recognizes LWs layered UVs.

jasonwestmas
10-09-2008, 07:51 AM
Hmm, Sculpting endomorphs. . . now that's worth the price tag in itself, imo.

boolewan
10-11-2008, 09:02 PM
The nice thing about 3dcoat is that of all these types of apps is that it supports LW the best.
Do you know if this is true with LW on mac systems? Both mac UB and mac PowerPC?

SplineGod
10-11-2008, 11:07 PM
It should. Hes got a 15 day free trial. I would download it and check it out. :)

Philbert
10-12-2008, 05:40 AM
I don't see why the export would be any different regardless of what system you're using.

SplineGod
10-12-2008, 09:50 AM
I agree and its easy enough to download the demo and check it out. :)

boolewan
10-13-2008, 02:46 PM
I got in touch with 3D Coat and learned that those of us with Power PC are out of luck. And, they have no plans to write a powerPC version. Same story with Modo, BTW. Gads, what do i do? I don't want to touch off a platform battle, but would you recommend i get a new Intel based mac or go the PC route? I have always worked on macs but they cost a lot more i am told.

jasonwestmas
10-13-2008, 03:32 PM
Unless you build your own PC, a Mac is well worth it's value in a performance comparison.

SplineGod
10-13-2008, 03:50 PM
Id recommend something that doesnt have issues with not having plugins available, cheap, and isnt always behind in being developed for.

Philbert
10-13-2008, 03:57 PM
I built my PC but I compared it to ready-made PCs out there and I actually only saved a little but I got all of the parts and brand names I wanted.

I saw an article recently by a guy who compared the macbook to other laptops and found for example that a PC laptop was $700 and a comparable mac laptop was $1515. For desktops on average the mac was more than $1000 more expensive.

I just found it was in this episode of Diggnation that I saw it:
http://revision3.com/diggnation/2008-08-14dolby/ (about half way through, after the Hershey's discussion)

jasonwestmas
10-13-2008, 04:49 PM
Id recommend something that doesnt have issues with not having plugins available, cheap, and isnt always behind in being developed for.

I was talking about the Hardware itself.

boolewan
10-13-2008, 05:42 PM
OK. I guess i may go the PC route, finally after all these years of being frustrated waiting for developers to port to mac. This may be off topic, but i would love it if a LW expert, like you Mr. Shultz, would recommend to me a good system configuration that would make 3d coat and LW sing together in sweet harmony.

LW_Will
10-13-2008, 05:59 PM
No, I think that SG has a point. You shouldn't leave any situation behind in choosing a computer... so, I'd get an Intel Mac. ;-)

Look, you've got OS X 10.5, you know and doubtless have allot of software. So, when you get the Intel Mac, get Parallels, VM Ware, or the free version of the emulator software, or just use Boot Camp that comes with the system. THAT way, you'll have total access to any piece of software that only comes for a PC, while still being able to use all the software for the Mac.

You can get a starter iMac for around $1000 dollars (and get 4gig memory from OWC for (get this) $70!)

Or, wait until Jobs speaks tomorrow about the new notebooks... and that he is IRON MAN!

jasonwestmas
10-13-2008, 06:05 PM
I like the "Use OSX when you can" Philosophy and have windows on the same machine so you can use those plugins and programs you want right away.

boolewan
10-13-2008, 06:11 PM
Thanks. have been chastened by Virtual PC years ago. That never worked well. I should have left some info on what i am used to using. So, here it is: 4 x 2.5 GHZ G5, 3.5 GB DDR2 SDRAM, GeForce 6600. I understand my graphic card performance will improve a lot regardless of which platform i choose.

LW_Will
10-14-2008, 03:26 AM
I know the software emulator of Virtual PC worked badly. That is not the point. The point is, with a native INTEL PC, the new virtual machines ARE PCs. They will run at full speed of the processor in the case of Boot Camp and only with a small slow down under OS X. I once used the PC version of Modeler, and the Mac version of Layout in the same session. And it worked totally and flawlessly.

Get a PC and cripple your capabilities. Get a Mac and DOUBLE your capabilities.

Here ends the lesson...

Philbert
10-15-2008, 09:43 PM
Getting back to 3D Coat, if you didn't know already, v3.0 is getting a major interface upgrade from a pro GUI designer. He's just posted the latest news on the GUI.




1) There will be dockable panels to the left, right and bottom. These panels can be drag & dropped also outside window (dual screen arrangements). They also can be stacked side by side once docked or on top of each other.

2) Colors can be custom, but default skin will be dark grey (not the actual one), as we all know neutral grey is better suited for artistic work like sculpting, 3D, color correction, compositing.

3) GUI will be mainly Text, BUT there will be a nice surprise for icon lovers, a quick access menu to tools that will be icon or text (you can chose both if you want too). As also icons for some things even if you go the text only thing.

4) Each stackable panel can be collapsed (even if it's docked) to save space, and uncollapsed again if you need it.

5) Able to save different layouts for different modes of work : painting, sculpting, etc.

6) Tools beeing re organized, there will some major tools that will in the future include others.

7) A unique and centralized brush editor that will be universal for painting, sculpt, etc. (to change shape, size, and all the brush/pen parameters).

8) New panels for colors, textures, alphas, etc eating less space and better organised.

9) New layer panel way improved.

10) Quick panels access with shortcuts (don't know how to explain this better than this, you will get it later when you get to see it).

11) more to come... and maybe one screen shot or two if you people are nice ;-)

Julez4001
10-15-2008, 10:10 PM
OK. I guess i may go the PC route, finally after all these years of being frustrated waiting for developers to port to mac. This may be off topic, but i would love it if a LW expert, like you Mr. Shultz, would recommend to me a good system configuration that would make 3d coat and LW sing together in sweet harmony.

If you want the complete safe route

buy a Intel Quadcore q6600 package from Circuit City, Best Buy or other box shoppe ...cost way under $1000

You get 3 GB RAM
600 GB drive(s)
Geforce card with dual vid ports
and tons of xtras

and some come with Linux OS or Vista

No headaches , plenty of quad power!

AbnRanger
10-16-2008, 12:20 AM
Getting back to 3D Coat, if you didn't know already, v3.0 is getting a major interface upgrade from a pro GUI designer. He's just posted the latest news on the GUI.Who is the Pro GUI designer? Matt? Wouldn't be a bad choice. I'm still waiting for Newtek to adopt his LW VX designs for the interface. Would give the program a major boost asthetically.

Philbert
10-16-2008, 12:39 AM
I don't know who the designer is, I had suggested Matt a while back so who knows. He goes by the name "Arkanis" on the 3DC forum.

AbnRanger
10-16-2008, 12:49 AM
I don't know who the designer is, I had suggested Matt a while back so who knows. He goes by the name "Arkanis" on the 3DC forum.I think Andrew should consider using "3DC" for the name (most people would know it stands for 3D Coat)...maybe spelling it out in smaller text below. 3DC sounds like it would catch on in the industry much faster than the words 3D Coat. Technically the name isn't changed...just like 3ds Max (3D Studio Max), or IBM...easier to pronounce and more catchy, IMHO.

StereoMike
10-16-2008, 12:15 PM
I'm with AbnRanger.
3DC sounds cool. 3Dcoat not so...
If you pronounce it a bit flat, it sounds like the German word for feces:3D Kot

mike

Philbert
10-17-2008, 12:27 AM
I like that idea.

jasonwestmas
10-17-2008, 09:05 AM
Yeah "3D poop" is not the best for the German crowd, hehe.

iangregory
10-18-2008, 04:46 PM
I downloaded the trial this morning, and bought the program this afternnoon. Love it! But after reading the above I wonder if I should have waited for V3 to be released to buy it. Anyhow, no matter. What a great program for lightwave users, and a very fair price.

Philbert
10-18-2008, 05:32 PM
Hmm... Funny I thought I made this comment but I don't see it. Anyway it seems the name "3DC" is already taken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3Dc

iangregory
10-18-2008, 06:33 PM
Ah, just read that the upgrade will just be the difference between what I paid and the price of the new version when released. So, glad I didn't wait. :D (that's the way I understand it anyhoo).

Philbert
10-18-2008, 10:36 PM
Yup, upgrade is the different between 2.10.x and 3.0, so you're only paying for the new tools.

jasonwestmas
10-19-2008, 08:29 AM
3D Jacket anyone?

AbnRanger
10-19-2008, 08:44 AM
3D Jacket anyone?

I'm pretty certain that you can have the same name as long as it is not competing in the same market...so if 3DC were some CG content creation program or plugin, it would indeed be off limits. What's more it is STILL officially 3D-Coat. He's well entitled to use the anacronym for his name.
Additionally, he is in the Ukraine, so he will not be bound by US trademark laws.

Again, it's an anacronym (an abbreviated nickname for his title), and he's in no danger of trademark infringement, especially when the full name is spelled out below the logo in small text.

AbnRanger
10-19-2008, 09:08 AM
The Art Institute has numerous locations in the US, and here in San Bernardino (where I'm taking some evening classes), they have been planning on adding a Zbrush class (considering implementing Mudbox as well). I'm going to have to talk with the program director and see if I can talk him into adding 3DC instead of Mudbox...cause it has some advantages over Mudbox and the volumetric sculpting looks like a Master Stroke on Andrew's part...not to mention the Mac compatibility.

I'm also going to try and see if he can get some 3DConnexion Space Explorers (that can be checked out from the equipment room), because between that and a wacom tablet, I'm sure the students will fall in love with the program; especially since the commercial license is already within their budget range...unlike ZBrush or Mudbox. If it goes over well, then perhaps he can get other branches to follow suit. Zbrush was an upstart just like Andrew is, and it was the sheer capability that won so many people over. No reason Andrew can't do the same. His trump card is unprecedented development speed. I think he needs to start using that as a selling point when v3 is released.

Mudbox 2009 appears to have overtaken Zbrush on raw poly-handling capability, but it is currently a compatibilty nightmare (obvious that they rushed it to market before ZBrush comes out with 3.5).

Over at CGSociety, very few people are able to use all of it's features, and many like myself, have it crash upon loading. So, I think Andrew, at this pace is going to be right in ZBrush's grill before you know it. If it's as easy to learn as Mudbox is, there are going to be a lot of 1st time buyers choosing it over it's more costly competitors.

Philbert
10-19-2008, 09:31 AM
I think that might be a hard sell. I think we can all see that 3DC is going to be really big, but right now it doesn't have a huge following like ZB and MB do, seeing as it's only like a year and 2 weeks old and it doesn't have a big company behind it. Also I think it'll be tough to sell with the current interface. I know I don't mind the current interface and I'll be using 3DC for a long time to come, but I'm looking at it from an instructor's point of view.

AbnRanger
10-19-2008, 10:07 AM
Hmm... Funny I thought I made this comment but I don't see it. Anyway it seems the name "3DC" is already taken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DcI did some searching about trademark rights, and it seems clear that Andrew can use the acronym, 3DC, since there is no direct competitor in his market with that name, and chiefly that there would be no customer confusion. There are plenty of companies that share the same name. Just look at the yellowpages online for different major cities and you'll find the same names used for different businesses. You just can't be competing in the same market, where there would be a chance for customer confusion. That's pretty much the bottom line.

http://books.google.com/books?id=LG3lUlVaL7kC&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=can+you+use+the+same+company+name+as+long+as+it %27s+not+in+the+same+industry&source=web&ots=gBxkzz5fG5&sig=RaxYvPDrIAvYnA-rOE0hSPHXXgM&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result

Nicolas Jordan
10-19-2008, 10:16 AM
I am playing with both Mudbox 2009 trial and the 3D Coat trial versions right now and will probably end up choosing one of them soon. I am finding choosing between the two programs to be really hard considering I have already invested $300 in Mudbox 1.0 Basic. I really enjoy the simplicity and power of Mudbox but I rarely need it's extensive sculpting capabilities. 3D Coat seems sufficient for most detailing work. The $480 cdn price to upgrade to Mudbox 2009 and then $400 per year to keep it current after that is lots of money to dish out for Mudbox unless I am making money doing just sculpting work. After trying to use Zbrush once a couple years ago I won't even consider touching it again so it's not even an option for me. I really don't like making software choices. :bangwall:

starbase1
10-19-2008, 11:27 AM
Never mind the name, just call it 3d knickers, and get on with the graphics...

jasonwestmas
10-19-2008, 11:38 AM
3DC is a nice name but what I was thinking before is that I wouldn't want to have the same name as another product, legal or not.

I really can't imagine ZB getting much easier to use for everyday things but each to their own. ( I have to admit the ZB color texture options are a little limited.) If anyone thinks MB and 3DC is easier to use, then it must be a real dream! I still think Zbrush is by far the best deal, it's fast and uses memory well.

As for teaching stuff in school: usually they teach industry standard tools that are used the most within the studios; Which is of course a biased opinion. Zbrush, Maya, Mental Ray and Photoshop is by far the most popular combo for modeling, animation and rendering today. Not sure about compositing programs but Adobe software is usually used the most for 3D.

StereoMike
10-20-2008, 01:11 AM
Not sure about compositing programs but Adobe software is usually used the most for 3D.

But not for native 3D painting. Only things you can do is paint your 2D uv maps (I don't know if anybody uses the new extended version for serious texturing jobs). For 3D painting I guess the market is not as consolidated as for 2D painting. While it would be impossible to break into photoshops market, there's still the chance to get head to head with ZB and Mudbox (marketshare-wise), cause it's not really far spread compared to 2D tools.

my 2ct...

mike

tyrot
11-09-2008, 02:25 PM
dear 3Dcoaters

Ok i m also very confused. I wanna detail some Weapons, Hard edge objects...Which one should i choose? mudbox2009 or zbrush or 3Dcoat..

mike, i have tired to import some hardedge models to 3Dcoat (demo) i got horrible results and this awful view in my viewport keeps me from purchasing 3dcoat.

Unfortunately this thread corrupted by some personal arguments i couldnt find this answer.. Is there a way to solve this issue? (smoothing)

Best

SplineGod
11-09-2008, 02:35 PM
Ive had great results with 3dcoat. Have you tried posting your problems on the 3dcoat support forums? Andrews extremely responsive as are the others there.

IMI
11-09-2008, 02:40 PM
Does 3D Coat have an exchange plugin for Photoshop like ZB does?
Zapplink is what I'm referring to - automatically sends a projection to photoshop where you can paint and save and Zbrush automatically picks it back up. Very cool little feature there.

I've been thinking about checking out 3d Coat as there are alot of things about ZB that simply annoy me. The LW displacement attempts can be a real b1tch.

IMI
11-09-2008, 02:43 PM
dear 3Dcoaters

Ok i m also very confused. I wanna detail some Weapons, Hard edge objects...Which one should i choose? mudbox2009 or zbrush or 3Dcoat..

mike, i have tired to import some hardedge models to 3Dcoat (demo) i got horrible results and this awful view in my viewport keeps me from purchasing 3dcoat.

Unfortunately this thread corrupted by some personal arguments i couldnt find this answer.. Is there a way to solve this issue? (smoothing)

Best

Hard edges softened by subdividing you mean? You could add "weight" edges close to the model's existing edges to minimize that, I would think.

Philbert
11-09-2008, 03:48 PM
Does 3D Coat have an exchange plugin for Photoshop like ZB does?
Zapplink is what I'm referring to - automatically sends a projection to photoshop where you can paint and save and Zbrush automatically picks it back up. Very cool little feature there.


Yes but it's not a plugin it's built in. :) Just go to Edit > Edit all layers in external editor. It will send everything over to Photoshop as a PSD file, you edit, save in Photoshop when done, pop back to 3DC and the edits automatically update. You can also edit all brushes this way, along with importing Photoshop ABR brush files.

Greenlaw
11-09-2008, 04:12 PM
I discovered an interesting way to use 3D-Coat recently.

On our current project at work, I needed to create two different long-hairstyle wigs that closely followed the shape of the head for two characters. I wanted to use Stu Aitken's techique posted at the Worley Labs website, and to save time I used 3D-Coat's new Retopology Tools to create a foundation for the guides.

Using 3DC's Retopology Tools I was able to quickly plot out a new scalp where the geometry flowed the way I needed the hair to follow. Then I exported the new mesh as an .lwo, brought it into Modeler, converted it into an easily tweakable spline cage, and finally finished the wig using Stu's technique.

It was still a lot of work but, with 3DC, the first part of the process was considerably easier and more accurate than trying to do everything in Modeler, and the final version of the two hairstyles look great!

DRG