PDA

View Full Version : Photoshop CS4 Extended



user5192
10-11-2008, 12:15 PM
Anybody know how Photoshop CS4 Extended's 3d paint function stacks up Z Brush's texturing tools? How's the work flow with LW?

IMI
10-11-2008, 12:33 PM
Beats me, I didn't even know there WAS a Photoshop CS4. :D

I'd tend to doubt it rivals ZBrush though, or Mudbox, modo, Deep paint 3D, or Body Paint 3D.
Did they use OpenGL or DirectX, or some sort of software acceleration? That would be a concern, as well as how many polygons it can handle.

Personally, I think ZBrush has them ALL beat, by far, and probably will for quite a while, simply due to the proprietary and ingenious way it deals with "polygons" and pixols.

Silkrooster
10-11-2008, 09:24 PM
I would think PS CS4 is more like body paint 3D than Zbrush. It can paint and apply textures directly to a 3d object. But it can not manipulate the mesh like Zbrush does.
Silk

IMI
10-11-2008, 10:38 PM
I would think PS CS4 is more like body paint 3D than Zbrush. It can paint and apply textures directly to a 3d object. But it can not manipulate the mesh like Zbrush does.
Silk

You're probably right about that. Body Paint 3D was pretty much designed around the PS idea - an early look into what Photoshop with 3D painting might look like. I bought the standalone version of Body Paint 3D a few years back and just didn't like it. Too slow, for one thing, and I was already using Deep Paint 3D anyway, which was able to deal with much more geometry, and quicker, too.

ZBrush is nothing short of AMAZING in the way you can "poly paint" on a ridiculously hi-res mesh and then convert that to an actual texture to be used in LW or other programs. The amount of detail you can get is mind blowing.

grimoirecg
10-13-2008, 04:58 AM
The amount of texture detail you can get in zbrush is limited by the final image resolution you use, just like any other 3d painting app. There's no point poly painting down to a microscopic level and then baking it onto a 1024x image.
I doubt CS4 will be able to handle very high res meshes, but it's certainly going to be great using the full suite of photoshop tools for 3d painting.
It's nearest competitor will be bodypaint, and we'll just have to wait and see how it stack up against that.

IMI
10-13-2008, 11:06 AM
The amount of texture detail you can get in zbrush is limited by the final image resolution you use, just like any other 3d painting app. There's no point poly painting down to a microscopic level and then baking it onto a 1024x image.


Well I know that, of course, I've done it before. What I meant regarding ZBrush's poly paint is it's way of converting that into a texture map. Like, in DeepPaint 3d and Body Paint, the paint strokes themselves are interpolated between vertex points on the UV map, as opposed to painting a detailed 2D map and slapping it on a UV map. Not quite as much interpolation going on. So doing it in ZB is like doing it in 2D, but with the advantage of being better able to see exactly where you're painting on the mesh. The texture maps come out better than in regular 3D painting, especially if it's a lo-res mesh you're using.

adamredwoods
10-13-2008, 11:19 AM
If CS3 is any indication of the power of 3D in CS4, then I doubt even body paint will have any competition.

In CS3, the meshes were not subdivided. That alone would keep me away. But it seems Adobe is finally heading in the 3D direction.

So get ready for some serious bloatware.

IMI
10-13-2008, 03:46 PM
I did not get that... sorry. Not sure what kind of interpolation you're speaking of... ??



When you are painting in DeepPaint 3D, a line between vertex points will be"guessed" as to where it's going. You can't paint much detail between vertex points which are spaced far apart. The lower resolution your mesh is, the more obvious that becomes.
However, you can paint that detail in 2D, over your UV map and apply it, and the amount of detail you can get in that same physical space is only limited by your image map size in pixels and your UV map size relative to the 0-1 UV space.
That's more or less what ZBrush does when it converts a poly paint session into an actual image map - it turns a group of 3D painted polygons into a 2D image map and wraps it around your model in accordance to its UV coordinates. With BP 3D or DP 3D you can't get as much detail if you're painting on a low res mesh, and you'd have to go 2D in order to get anything with alot of detail. ZBrush eliminates that restriction, and allows you to paint an image map on a 3D object as if it were very hi-res with a very dense UV map.

BlueApple
10-15-2008, 03:17 PM
If CS3 is any indication of the power of 3D in CS4, then I doubt even body paint will have any competition...
So get ready for some serious bloatware.

Totally agree. I grabbed CS3 extended hoping that some 3D tools would pop up that got me excited (Rendition perhaps.) Unfortunately, there just isn't anything in the 'extended' part of extended that does it for me. Barring some grand piece of news with PS CS4 I'll be picking up the non-extended version if, I pick up CS4 at all.

BeeVee
10-15-2008, 03:38 PM
Did you guys see the Las Vegas Adobe presentation? :eek:

B

BlueApple
10-15-2008, 03:44 PM
I saw some video from a blog that showed them using PS CS4 to paint directly on a dinosaur model. They also showed some new scaling technique (they're calling it "smart scaling" I think,) and the ability to handle far larger files than currently possible. Was this the Vegas presentation?

The one thing that I am actually excited about in CS4 is the ability to rotate the canvas similar to what Painter has been able to do for years! This will go a long way to help folks do natural rendering in PS with a tablet, but I don't know if it'll make it worth the upgrade price.

What do you think BeeVee?

user5192
11-12-2008, 08:58 PM
So I'm using CS4 and it's decent. One problem though is it's slow when handling 3d objects. Anybody have this problem? Is it an open gl issue?

Red_Oddity
11-14-2008, 05:04 AM
I didn't see much in the Vegas presentation that warented a 770 euro (975 dollar) update.