Is too much zbrush bad?

[Simon]

What industry are we talking about here? games/films/commercials?

If you can produce a good basemesh, and can detail in Z I don't se why there should be any problems.

[LikuidSnake]

That's going to depend on the industry first of course.

I think you'd want to avoid relyin too much on third partys software, IMHO people who hires cg work is not that inclined to include other softwares if they are not into the pipeline already. Anyway, too much of anything is mostly a bad thing, even though, don't worry about that too much. If you have some good kick ass models in your reel, that's pretty much what you need.

[Bonedaddy]

I think so, absolutely. Almost anyone can detail well in zBrush -- hell, even I can do that. Making a usable, animatable mesh, with good UVs and good textures? That takes skill.

[CIM]

Why would anyone frown upon something that can make your work better?

[sambath]

I'm asking in terms of games and movies. Yeah the base mesh would be animatable and all uv's woud be spread out. but like muscle definition and detail would be zbrush displacement maps . I don't want to boggle my meshes down with a high resolution. Thanks for the replies.
\

edit. Yeah I agree with bonedaddy that it's easier to define with zbrush, that's why I'm wondering if it could be a deterrent to use it when applying to jobs

[seven6ty]

No, it wouldn't be frowned upon, but just keep in mind that, most likely, what they'll really be looking at is your base mesh. Then, probably stuff like general proportions and the lot... The displacement mapping stuff would just be a bit of icing on the cake, so make sure your foundation is strong first.

[Signal2Noise]

The ultimate goal of any company is to get the best results on time and on budget. If this means using a tool or method that is "easier" to achieve the end result then by all means go for it!

[itsallgoode9]

guess it depends on whether or not a studio uses Z-Brush...if the only thing you know how to do is make good models when using z-brush you could be closing a couple doors as far as getting jobs....that said I have no clue how many studios do and don't use Z-brush.

[Womball]

Isn't the base and form the most important part? Details come second imo. Zbrush is great for texturing though, and maybe for modeling low pol too. I haven't quite grasped the concept of zspheres entirely yet. And adding edge loops seems awkward too.

[KingMob]

depends on the pipeline.

We don't have a good solution for character displacements, so we can only use normal maps.. So if you work here you better know how to poly model. But we still use zbrush on nearly every character(nearly) in at least some capacity.

Hopefully in the near future*cough* brazil 2 *cough* that will change and we can do more with displacements.

[seven6ty]

Yeah, actually, now that I think about it, displacement mapping and all of that stuff would probably be better suited on a texture painter's reel, but ya know, it's sometimes a good idea to show a range of skills, especially as modelling and texture painting often come very close to overlapping each other.

[NeptuneImaging]

Well, for me, a guy who paints his displacements in PS, I don;t think too much Zbrush is a bad thing. I think if your pc craps out, then it is a VERY BAD thing

[DoubleSupercool]

To quote a T-shirt I once saw:

"Of course too much chocolate is bad for you . . . that's why it's called "too much"

[playmesumch00ns]

Using it in the right combination with modelling is essential. Personally, I'd much prefer to see our texture artists paint all the displacement maps in zbrush, as it gives them a much better idea of what the end result will look like than painting in deep paint or photoshop.

However, there are issues with being able to get enough detail (it starts chugging when you want to put in the really fine detail you need for film work).

More importantly, you cannot, repeat CANNOT, take a very low poly model, detail it to some insane level in zbrush and expect it to look good when it moves. It just won't work. I've seen some very impressive work with people basically taking a cube and turning it into a demon or an orc or something: that's fine for a still, but there's no way it'll deform right when it moves (not to mention how heavy it would be to render).

[RabbitRun]

That's a good point about animation, could you maybe elaborate a bit? I'd be really interested in getting some info on what ratio between poly-count of the mesh and level of detail in the displacement map is generally considered best in production as far as smooth animation and render-time are concerned.

I personally feel much more comfortable blocking out the basic proportions and muscles with polys: theres a proper quad-view and I can manipulate faces, edges and verts in any manner I want to. Also the restrictiveness of poly-modeling has a certain disciplining effect, so one tends to keep an eye the overall shapes. It might be a different story, if I was a master modeler/sculptor though.

[OptimusDinkus]

Depends, as it usually does. I think theres nothing wrong with takeing a simple but good topo model and painting in zbrush at a high sub-d and then exporting the semi lower subdivided model, or just to do the same thing and then poly model around the form. Plus usually once your done sculpting in zbrush you and lump and bumps that slightly change the form from the base mesh. different folks different strokes =). However Im not a fan at all of displacement, takes way too damn long.

[NeptuneImaging]

Well, that is a point about displacements, they are damn slow...usually for human characters I just stick to Normal Mapping or Bump Maps, but for buildings with thick bricks, I could always use Steep Parallaxe mapping :)

[CelticArtist]

For film modeling, in my experience it's not a good idea to have too much zbrush on your reel. Other comments are correct, for film pipeline, zbrush is looked at more as a texturing tool than a modeling one. The company i'm at is trying to bring it into the pipeline, but it's just testing right now to see where it would fit. And also, render times come into play, film rendering is already extremely long. Personally, i see zbrush as a wonderful detailer, you have a complete mesh, not a simple one, something that with textures would be film rez easily, and then you take it into zbrush and detail wrinkles, skin blemishes, scales, etc. superficial stuff. the zbrush models i've seen that just use a few cubes or something, just would never work for film deformation.
However, five years from now, I think it will be very completely integrated and I can't wait to be able to sculpt my models for film when needed, that is a day I highly anticipate, so don't get me wrong and think i'm anti-zbrush, i love the possiblities of the program, but it does have current limitations.

[sambath]

hhm very interesting indeed. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, but I'd also use zbrush for normal and bump mapping too. I should post some of my wip models and let you guys judge what is too basic for animating.

[metamesh]

I think so, absolutely. Almost anyone can detail well in zBrush -- hell, even I can do that. Making a usable, animatable mesh, with good UVs and good textures? That takes skill.

I quite disagree with that, of course everyone can pick up a model and add stuff in it with zbrush, but that doesn't mean that it will be better...is almos like saying: nearly anyone can sculpt well using a hammer and a piece or rock...
I've seen many cool models done with poly modelling, without zbrush, and i've seen crap done in zbrush also, and the other way around too. So i don't think that cos u use zbrush u will have better models, u will have more details, more poligons, but that does not mean better models, again it just depends on ur ability to sculpt interesting characters, with weithg, fleshy feeling...that is neither in zbrush nor maya, is just how u model. Many studios start to implement zbrush in their pipeline and u wouldn't have problems finding a job if u show just zbrushed models in ur reel, as long as they are kick ass models ( BUT that doesn't mean that you don't need to know how to model in the old poly way, or u don't need to know how to UV...etc )

[User1234]

A rookie like myself likes Zbrush mostly because I can scult using the wacom but I have noticed that I'm not paying much attention to my poly modeling skills also and I feel that can hurt me a lot in the long run. I'm trying to get back to doing just poly modeling w/o Zbrush. I pretty much started Zbrushing everything I had to death I Zbrushed in the morning, the afternoon at night I remember my mother yelling into my room "STOP Z-BRUSHING IN THERE" till one morning I woke up and noticed that my penis fell off, I blame this on my over use of Zbrush, so If you wanna keep your penis don't abuse Zbrush

[mike0006]

I was under the impression that if you didn't want to lose your penis, you should abuse your penis... and just where did it go off to? Is it the same kind of suprise when you find change under the couch?

[Laa-Yosh]

I think so, absolutely. Almost anyone can detail well in zBrush -- hell, even I can do that.

Er... I'd say no. Although our Zbrush guys are really really good (they're our concept artists as well, decades of drawing experience) but nevertheless, even a simple case of detailing a metal surface takes a lot of artistic skills.

[Rambiert]

I think so, absolutely. Almost anyone can detail well in zBrush -- hell, even I can do that. Making a usable, animatable mesh, with good UVs and good textures? That takes skill.

I agree with you. Definitively it's better to base just on the pure multidimensionall "SPACE". No UI, no GUI, just 3-D window. When you can create something interesting in emptiness it means that you grew up enough to use "last touch" modeling - rather finall sculpturing tool in your interesting porduction. But you should only touch. I see here too much pretty job damaged by one thing. I see that it is Z-Brush, but i don't see an artist and his skills inside. Good Z-Brushing is invisible Z-Brushing. Your job should cry "It's made by ... YOU " than it doesn't matter what tools you use.

[sambath]

well for my demo i was going to have 3 modeled and textured characters, then a few quick zbrush ones with no textures. I was just wondering if that 's the reight way to go for my demo

[Arcanox]

well for my demo i was going to have 3 modeled and textured characters, then a few quick zbrush ones with no textures. I was just wondering if that 's the reight way to go for my demo

It's a bit vauge on details but heres my advice

You should try to display a variety of techniques when showing demo reel material because it will really show the entire scope of your capabilities. An example of this is to have a really highly detailed mesh that would be used for displacement, created exclusively in Max or Maya. Then you could show a character thats very low in mesh details and most of it's visual quality is driven by good textures. You could finish off with your Z-Brush material.

You can have 3 good pieces, spend roughly 45-50 seconds on the different wireframe, shaded, textured views per item. And have your intro, and contact information crammed into the remaining time. Then what I would do is to include extras on the disc that your sending them, throw in additional Z-Brushed models, high res stills, images of your painted textures etc...

You have thier attention for 3 minutes give or take. Start out with your strongest work and go down from there. The idea is to show them variety at first because it can snag thier attention for longer. If they want to see more, they'll review the extras on the disc. I garuntee this approach will be much more appealing to whoever is reviewing it.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.