PDA

View Full Version : More Mudbox 2009 videos


njanim8tor
09-17-2008, 04:13 AM
Hey guys,

I was just tooling around the autodesk site and noticed some more MB 2009 vids were there. I think these are new.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=11458946

Hope this hasn't been already posted, if it has, sorry.

lovisx
09-17-2008, 06:16 AM
These are looking great. Hate the new ui colours though.

DDS
09-17-2008, 11:01 AM
wow this is great! now just some more hardware compatibility and I'll be a happy guy :)

TJFrame
09-17-2008, 07:15 PM
This is shaping up to be a stunning package. Mudbox's interface and workflow actually work the same way as my brain is predisposed to work, unlike certain other products.

I've run into the same issue with Modo recently - after 9 years of using 3ds Max, I just cannot seem to wrap my brain around Modo's methodology, despite its supposed strengths. I downloaded the demo and I really WANT to get into it, but it's just not happening :( Zbrush 3 sits on my desktop unused as well. I always see such amazing work with it, yet whenever I try to use it I throw up my hands after a few hours in frustration, thinking "Why did they do it THAT way. THAT makes NO sense!!!" At least Maya uses the same general workflow patterns (ie. creating new geometry = creating new objects, not more geometry within the same item. There is a "Select object" tool in both Max and Maya, which my brain simply needs in order to function :)

Anyway, now that Mudbox's toolset and features are maturing, I will gladly be switching over when it's out.

PS: This is not a slam on Zbrush or Modo - I'm just a creature of habit and severly ingrained motor pattrerns developed over years of using the same workflow. Same thing happens when using Painter and Photoshop, although the differences are smaller and more manageable.

Am I alone on this?

ambient-whisper
09-17-2008, 07:21 PM
you cant use modo?! but its sooo simple, and pretty much no different than any other app.

man, im gonna have to make some sort of learning thingy for it someday. the more i talk to people, the more i find that many dont understand how modo works. i find it surprising because its really no different from other packages.

if you have problems with modo, id hate to see what would happen if youd use clay :D that application throws a complete curve ball when it comes to selections and stuff. it works great, but im sure many many people wouldnt be able to cope with the twist.

TJFrame
09-17-2008, 07:28 PM
you cant use modo?! but its sooo simple, and pretty much no different than any other app.

man, im gonna have to make some sort of learning thingy for it someday. the more i talk to people, the more i find that many dont understand how modo works. i find it surprising because its really no different from other packages.

if you have problems with modo, id hate to see what would happen if youd use clay :D that application throws a complete curve ball when it comes to selections and stuff. it works great, but im sure many many people wouldnt be able to cope with the twist.

he he... maybe I'm just getting old and senile ;)

ambient-whisper
09-17-2008, 07:36 PM
or perhaps i switch up apps more than should be allowed to. granted, most are small, but pretty much all have different navigation methods ( clay, houdini, zbrush, xsi, modo, and maya whenever im forced to use it...:/ )

Wizdoc
09-17-2008, 10:16 PM
I wonder if there's going to be some sort of rendering features in Mudbox 2009 - apart from the realtime preview we've seen.

It'd be really tempting to bypass all the usual hassle with displacements/normals and imports and exports, and use purely Mudbox for stuff like presentation and illustrations if you could painlessly set up good looking antialiasing, tweak the camera, render out print quality resolutions, and get neatly layered 2D images with alphas and zdepths.

iatriki
09-17-2008, 11:07 PM
Those MUDBOX videos look awesome! It seems that it won't have transpose or retopo...but it looks very solid. The brushes seem very precise and quick.

you cant use modo?! but its sooo simple, and pretty much no different than any other app.

man, im gonna have to make some sort of learning thingy for it someday. the more i talk to people, the more i find that many dont understand how modo works. i find it surprising because its really no different from other packages.

if you have problems with modo, id hate to see what would happen if youd use clay :D that application throws a complete curve ball when it comes to selections and stuff. it works great, but im sure many many people wouldnt be able to cope with the twist.

MODO is great. it has a great modeling tool set and an ubercool render engine. the layering system is cool too. but it is a bit slow at not so high polycounts ...and....it kinda needs a general ironing out . they keep filling it with features without apparent optimizations.

FreakWizz
09-17-2008, 11:17 PM
you cant use modo?! but its sooo simple, and pretty much no different than any other app.

man, im gonna have to make some sort of learning thingy for it someday. the more i talk to people, the more i find that many dont understand how modo works. i find it surprising because its really no different from other packages.

Most of the time Modo simply doesn't work... ;), but c'mon there is no comparison in Workflow between Modo and MB, MB sets new levels of greatness in terms of Workflow.
That all other programs should take heed with. Modo is just a as fiddly as Zbrush, and the painting is far worse than BP. And it cannot handle anywhere near the polys...
But in terms of Workflow MB is like the only software application to think of it as a priority, and i cannot applaud their efforts enough for this reason alone.

inverse catheter
09-18-2008, 12:30 AM
i take a somewhat opposite view and consider mudbox to be less about enhancing workflow so much as standardising it. between it and zb their apparent stubborn take is to maintain their positions at either end of the spectrum

for all its many many flaws once you're in the zb viewport ( canvas ) the workflow is really quite slick ( current navigation notwithstanding ). aspects such as :

isolating polygroups with a single click
marquee / lasso isolation in a single action
masking ' sticky ' key

etc

mudbox 1 doesn't even come close to that kind of approach and feels more like artisan on juice. the few little things zb has done there are quite well considered. and make for a pretty good experience. it's near everywhere else they've fallen flat and f__ked it up miserably

mb2009 looks like it will be an amazing piece of tech but at this point i'm feeling they've towed the standard autodesk line with emphasis on high level function and wow features. and little concern for the nuts and bolts stuff you do hundreds of times over in a session. i'm worried that yet again users will be stuck in the middle. wanting in vain for the best of both worlds

Sonk
09-18-2008, 12:38 AM
you worry too much :P Anyway, lets not turn this into a ZB vs MBx thread. MBx 2009 will be out on October 6 and the SDK is in alpha state. Supporting cgfx in MBx just gives more freedom/power to game developers to plug their own shaders into Mudbox(can't do this with any other sculpting app on the market now).

subtlebluetones
09-18-2008, 02:53 AM
Mudbox 2009 = Awesomesauce!!!:thumbsup:

This app is what i need in my life. Its fantastic. But has worried me at how much the bar will be raised in the character modelling department now. All the stuff I have struggled with over the years seems to have now been made so easy to do, but i can only imagine what the people who didnt struggle with the same things that i did will achieve.

I still cant wait to get my grubby mits on a demo.

I do remember seeing in earlier vids (it appeared) that you could sculptgeometry using stamps, and it also seemed to paint a texture at the same time too. For example cracks in bumpy skin, when sculpted, would make the deepset cracks a darker colour, and the raised areas a lighter colour. This was not mentioned in the above videos. You could paint, and sculpt using the same stamp, but not at the same time. The problem i see with this, is that they will not align. Your painted cracks will not sit inline with your sculpted cracks, unless you have a freakishly accurate hand, and paint over exactly the same areas at the right angles.

I dont even know if this is a definite feature, or if it was just my eyes playing tricks on me.

vfx
09-18-2008, 10:33 AM
This so looks like its addressing all the issues with v1... UV Viewer!! Finally woo hoo..

Now I'd like to see a video showing maya integration.

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 10:40 AM
Most of the time Modo simply doesn't work... ;), but c'mon there is no comparison in Workflow between Modo and MB, MB sets new levels of greatness in terms of Workflow.
That all other programs should take heed with. Modo is just a as fiddly as Zbrush, and the painting is far worse than BP. And it cannot handle anywhere near the polys...
But in terms of Workflow MB is like the only software application to think of it as a priority, and i cannot applaud their efforts enough for this reason alone.

depends which aspect of the application. the painting aspect, i agree. its a hit and miss, and slow. it still needs a lot of work to be usable/stable, and actually useful.

the modelling aspect while not fast ( especially with dual monitors ) actually works, and the uv tools are wicked simple, and work. ive made enough money with it to know that it can get the job done, and on time. but i only use modo for hard surface type of stuff, and simple sculpting ( on medium rez objects. ).

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 10:47 AM
i take a somewhat opposite view and consider mudbox to be less about enhancing workflow so much as standardising it. between it and zb their apparent stubborn take is to maintain their positions at either end of the spectrum

for all its many many flaws once you're in the zb viewport ( canvas ) the workflow is really quite slick ( current navigation notwithstanding ). aspects such as :

isolating polygroups with a single click
marquee / lasso isolation in a single action
masking ' sticky ' key

etc

mudbox 1 doesn't even come close to that kind of approach and feels more like artisan on juice. the few little things zb has done there are quite well considered. and make for a pretty good experience. it's near everywhere else they've fallen flat and f__ked it up miserably

mb2009 looks like it will be an amazing piece of tech but at this point i'm feeling they've towed the standard autodesk line with emphasis on high level function and wow features. and little concern for the nuts and bolts stuff you do hundreds of times over in a session. i'm worried that yet again users will be stuck in the middle. wanting in vain for the best of both worlds

ive been waiting for a good 3d painter myself for years now with no end in sight. the videos that we see here look good for muxbox 2009, but what ive heard fom a beta tester so far is actually not very positive unfortunately. pixelated textures, slow performance ( compared to what we are led to believe ) i hope to be proven wrong but so far it almost looks like the same sort of hype that weve seen luxology build up time and time again. i remember seeing the modo 201 videos of their painting sytem way back. a year and a half later or so and still no sign of a fully working and stable painting system. :( but modos painting system has improved leaps and bounds over what was initially introduced, so i atleast they are working on improving it. things like improving seam quality, speed, stability, painting accross multiple maps at the same time, and support multiple channels, which is huge in my books. but it still needs way more stability increase, and performance/optimization to be really useful. ( needless to say, a better brush editor/browser )

bodypaint works but im still getting grips with it, and zbrush is probably the fastest of the bunch but lacks channel capabilities which sucks a large one.

but im silently rooting for mudbox here, hope they bring some solid competition to the table.

kursad_pileksuz
09-18-2008, 03:56 PM
I have never thought that Modo paint was slow. I could actually paint 4k textures(10-15 of them in same material sometimes) with symmetry-4k displacement enabled without real speed sacrifice.

The only issue with painting in modo is uv boundaries limit. Some tools like blur, gradient do not work great across uv patches. But normal paint tools rock!

Generally what I do is blocking out the texture in ZBrush and cleaning up-adding detail in Modo. I use 4k textures and I hardly feel the need for lowering the tex resolution.

Martin I remember you were hesitant using Modo(first version of Modo) in the beginning. I am glad that you like it now :)


depends which aspect of the application. the painting aspect, i agree. its a hit and miss, and slow. it still needs a lot of work to be usable/stable, and actually useful.

the modelling aspect while not fast ( especially with dual monitors ) actually works, and the uv tools are wicked simple, and work. ive made enough money with it to know that it can get the job done, and on time. but i only use modo for hard surface type of stuff, and simple sculpting ( on medium rez objects. ).

Doug816
09-18-2008, 04:01 PM
it almost looks like the same sort of hype that weve seen luxology build up time and time again. i remember seeing the modo 201 videos of their painting sytem way back.

Since most of your post looks like it was done to bash modo..

Aren't you a modo beta tester? Shouldn't you be telling them what the problems are so they could fix them?

iatriki
09-18-2008, 04:12 PM
i ive heard fom a beta tester so far is actually not very positive unfortunately. pixelated textures, slow performance ( compared to what we are led to believe )

pixelated textures, slow performance? hmm....maybe your guy was using an early alpha version

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 05:29 PM
pixelated textures, slow performance? hmm....maybe your guy was using an early alpha version

maybe, dunno. i wont make up my mind until i actually try it. again, im rooting for it silently inside just because this area of 3d is sooo under developed, and someone needs to step up to the plate big time.


Martin I remember you were hesitant using Modo(first version of Modo) in the beginning. I am glad that you like it now :)

yeah man, i really wasnt a fan of modo 101 mostly based on the hype it got, and the final package totally under delivering that promise. i liked a few ideas in there but overall it was unstable, and not very fun to use for me. it has improved soooo much since that time. its pretty much rock solid modelling wise. i dont get it crashing while modelling, ever. the tools that they added to modo since 101 have been great, like the bend tool deformer, the sculpting tools, the extra options to loop split, edge split, tabs, etc. general speed increase too.

its not a bad package and i support it by buying upgrades. but im also hoping that they will fix the 3d paint because unless you are using good hardware ( or something very similar to what then are using at the dev center, then you are out of luck. i know more people that say that the paint stuff is slow than people say that it works well for them. but i guess that also depends how they paint too. their style of painting can also differ. some people paint slow steady strokes so they dont notice, some people like to change up brush size and paint large broad strokes quickly and they might notice the slow performance better.

i personally want fast performance because i like slick fast optimized packages. it looks better for lux in the end when i give demos to people :D



Since most of your post looks like it was done to bash modo..

Aren't you a modo beta tester? Shouldn't you be telling them what the problems are so they could fix them?

ya man, ive already mentioned all of this to them :). im totally unbiased and not really affraid of telling them that modo needs work. the great thing is, they actually listen for the most part, and accept criticizm well. afterall, i cant think of another person than myself who bashed the package more when it was originally released. its great too because most of the complaints i had at the beginning have been solved since. some things took longer than i though they would, but its getting better gradually.

( i still dislike the tweak tool tho :D and the edge split, but those are old tools that might need some re-engineering ) all the new tools are rather fast.

skycastle
09-18-2008, 05:53 PM
but what ive heard fom a beta tester so far is actually not very positive unfortunately. pixelated textures, slow performance ( compared to what we are led to believe ) i hope to be proven wrong but so far it almost looks like the same sort of hype that weve seen luxology build up time and time again. i remember seeing the modo 201 videos of their painting sytem way back. a year and a half later or so and still no sign of a fully working and stable painting system. :(

Yes the beta was beta. They are supposed to have bugs. All do. The current version has none of the problems you mentioned and is the fastest smoothest 3d paint engine out there when the correct hardware is used.

If your friend has issues with painting or other features please invite them contact me (Dave) on the "private" Mudbox2009 beta forums. We want to make sure to capture their issues.

The paint speed shown in the videos here are not `hyped` or leading you to believe anything. They just show the real performance on the machine he has.
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=11458946

P_T
09-18-2008, 06:07 PM
... when the correct hardware is used.Do tell us, what is the 'correct' hardware? And what is the spec of the machine used for the new demo videos?

iatriki
09-18-2008, 06:30 PM
@ambient-whisper: why don't you try silo? it will cure your modeling frustrations. It's clean and beautiful and...it flows.

majid-smiley
09-18-2008, 06:53 PM
im really excited to check the new version of Mudbox ! realtime rendering and painting on layers are just amazing !
but i dont know the release time...

SheepFactory
09-18-2008, 06:57 PM
Yes the beta was beta. They are supposed to have bugs. All do. The current version has none of the problems you mentioned and is the fastest smoothest 3d paint engine out there when the correct hardware is used.

If your friend has issues with painting or other features please invite them contact me (Dave) on the "private" Mudbox2009 beta forums. We want to make sure to capture their issues.

The paint speed shown in the videos here are not `hyped` or leading you to believe anything. They just show the real performance on the machine he has.
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=11458946


What are the specs of the machine you used for these videos?

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 06:58 PM
@ambient-whisper: why don't you try silo? it will cure your modeling frustrations. It's clean and beautiful and...it flows.

i've been on beta of that too :D for many years now. its not a bad package. i really like its sculpting aspect for the most part, but the poly stuff i don't really agree with 100% ( and management of objects for some reason feels a bit odd to me., and i don't agree with the way retopology is done either. i can suggest things here and there, but im on beta of another package which does this beautifully which i cant share, so i keep quiet about those aspects.



Yes the beta was beta. They are supposed to have bugs. All do. The current version has none of the problems you mentioned and is the fastest smoothest 3d paint engine out there when the correct hardware is used.

If your friend has issues with painting or other features please invite them contact me (Dave) on the "private" Mudbox2009 beta forums. We want to make sure to capture their issues.

The paint speed shown in the videos here are not `hyped` or leading you to believe anything. They just show the real performance on the machine he has.


yep, which is why i said that i wont make up my mind personally until its finally released :).
for all i know the person i was talking to could have shitty hardware. BUT, at the same time we were initially led to believe that polycount wise mudbox was supposed to compete with zbrush as well, and it failed to do that by quite the margin ( well compared to zb3 ), which is why nowadays i take initial marketing of a new package/version as a grain of salt until i try the actual product :). im sure you'd understand :)

im still really excited that you guys are tackling the 3d paint aspect. its about time someone had the balls to :).

ThomasMahler
09-18-2008, 07:08 PM
I think Martin nails it by saying that where Mudbox could really kick the ball out of the field is in 3d painting. I'm not a big fan of BodyPaint, always found it to be super quirky and have high hopes for Mudbox 2009 to be the 3d painting system we've all waited for. But I've also heard that a lot of brushes are still missing, blending isn't working correctly, etc. Lots of ugly stuff that I just hope would be fixed from the get-go.

ZBrush's biggest weakness probably is the digital painting aspect. While it's fun to paint in Z directly on a model and it definitely works, the architecture isn't really there to paint a couple of textures and multiple channels at the same time for a whole character - with layers! Mudbox has a lot of tech that'd be great for doing this, so I'd be really disappointed if the painting engine really turns out to suck, cause that's what I've been looking forward to the most.

Mudbox should do a hell of a lot in this direction. In the end, all the sculpting stuff we do ends up in maps anyway, and that's where Mudbox should really bring it home. I want to bake great normal, displacement, AO, Cavity, Alpha, Albdeo etc. maps directly in Mud, paint on top of it, use blending modes, tons of layers, organize the textures and finally take all that stuff over to Photoshop. That's what has to be possible. Just being able to punch colors onto a model isn't going to cut it here.

So we'll see. October isn't far away and I'm really looking forward to giving it a test drive. Especially the shader and viewport rendering stuff looks great for client previews. I'm still often using Mayas High Quality Viewport Render for that sorta stuff, yikes!

Sonk
09-18-2008, 07:28 PM
I think Martin nails it by saying that where Mudbox could really kick the ball out of the field is in 3d painting. I'm not a big fan of BodyPaint, always found it to be super quirky and have high hopes for Mudbox 2009 to be the 3d painting system we've all waited for. But I've also heard that a lot of brushes are still missing, blending isn't working correctly, etc. Lots of ugly stuff that I just hope would be fixed from the get-go.

ZBrush's biggest weakness probably is the digital painting aspect. While it's fun to paint in Z directly on a model and it definitely works, the architecture isn't really there to paint a couple of textures and multiple channels at the same time for a whole character - with layers! Mudbox has a lot of tech that'd be great for doing this, so I'd be really disappointed if the painting engine really turns out to suck, cause that's what I've been looking forward to the most.

Mudbox should do a hell of a lot in this direction. In the end, all the sculpting stuff we do ends up in maps anyway, and that's where Mudbox should really bring it home. I want to bake great normal, displacement, AO, Cavity, Alpha, Albdeo etc. maps directly in Mud, paint on top of it, use blending modes, tons of layers, organize the textures and finally take all that stuff over to Photoshop. That's what has to be possible. Just being able to punch colors onto a model isn't going to cut it here.

So we'll see. October isn't far away and I'm really looking forward to giving it a test drive. Especially the shader and viewport rendering stuff looks great for client previews. I'm still often using Mayas High Quality Viewport Render for that sorta stuff, yikes!

Mudbox 2009 has layer blending? thats news to me..

kursad_pileksuz
09-18-2008, 07:30 PM
I hope that there is material baking in Mudbox (occlusion, shading etc). That is something that rocks in Modo. I can paint and add more shading by baking procedurals and materials.

ThomasMahler
09-18-2008, 07:33 PM
Mudbox 2009 has layer blending? thats news to me..

No, I said it should have Layer Blending. I want to paint my models just like I would in Photoshop (heck, a lot of stuff in Mudbox 1.0 was directly copied from Maya / Photoshop, which was a very good thing. That's part of the reason why people say that it's so easy to learn Mudbox), but in 3d. I want a nice brushing system and it should do a very good job with projections. ZBrush still creates tons of artifacting with ZAppLink, so having a rock solid paint engine in Mudbox would've been a godsend. Doesn't seem like it's that tool quite yet, though.

Heck, quite a couple of studios and a few freelance buddies of mine still use the waaaay old Deep Paint 3d just for doing projections. There's quite a big gap in the market right there.

CHRiTTeR
09-18-2008, 07:35 PM
Yeah, the texture painting looks verry promessing. (especially with the great rt rendering/shading features)
Sculpting looks great too, not as advanced as in ZB3 but good enough and so much more simpler/more natural/straight forward!

Cant wait to try this out.


Im am curious too what you mean by 'the correct hardware' and the specs of the machine the demos were recorded on.

iatriki
09-18-2008, 07:42 PM
im on beta of another package which does this beautifully which i cant share, so i keep quiet about those aspects.


So...you're a topogunner...ain'cha? or is it NEX? POLYBOOST?...ZB?(it can't be ZB...right?)...or that mysterious clay thingie?



we were initially led to believe that polycount wise mudbox was supposed to compete with zbrush as well, and it failed to do that by quite the margin ( well compared to zb3 )

Are you talking about mudbox1? with those 14million polyz..that were triz, not quadz?

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 07:51 PM
So...you're a topogunner...ain'cha? or is it NEX? POLYBOOST?...ZB?(it can't be ZB...right?)...or that mysterious clay thingie?





Are you talking about mudbox1? with those 14million polyz..that were triz, not quadz?

clay ( i wish he would just release the thing.. its not a complete package, but what it does, it does well, its minimalistic, very very fast, and its sooo stable that on average i get it crashing once a year. its a god send for production type stuff since crashing is a time waster. )


and i dont remember if that was a whole quad tri thing. i just remember seeing a video posted about high poly sculpting, but when i tried the trial i wasnt able to go anywhere near as high as i was able to go with zb, and many users backed it up saying that they rarely go over 2 mil in mud because it gets a bit tedius dealing with slow performance.
a few artists use mudbox to lay out the general forms and then go into Z to do the high rez finish pass.

even if mudbox can sculpt at 6-10 mil at the same speed that zb can ( a fraction of what is being demoed ), it will be good enough for version 2 because i rarely need to go past 8 mil. hell 1 mil is more than enough for getting all the forms out, but i also like to paint my bump type detail into the disp map instead of an actual bump map since the modelling tools are excellent. so i obviously go higher than 1-2 mil as a result.

subtlebluetones
09-18-2008, 08:04 PM
Could someone just confirm to me something about zbrush painting. Ive only used it briefly, but i assumed that when you are painting, you could not rotate at the same time. You had to constantly, choose an angle, paint as much as poss, bake it in, then choose another angle. Rotating and painting was not fluid.

It sounds like i might have been doing something wrong :curious:

I think i was using projection master to do it.

iatriki
09-18-2008, 08:14 PM
clay ( i wish he would just release the thing.. its not a complete package, but what it does, it does well, its minimalistic, very very fast, and its sooo stable that on average i get it crashing once a year. its a god send for production type stuff since crashing is a time waster. )

I think many people(including me) would like to see what's so different....so fast with that clay mystery. By your description it sounds like silo...excepting the sculpting and retopo bits.

many users backed it up saying that they rarely go over 2 mil in mud because it gets a bit tedius dealing with slow performance.
a few artists use mudbox to lay out the general forms and then go into Z to do the high rez finish pass.
even if mudbox can sculpt at 6-10 mil at the same speed that zb can ( a fraction of what is being demoed ), it will be good enough

Yea mudbox 1 is a bit slow on meshes beyond 2mil...or sometimes lower...but the feeling is special. The brushes deform the surface like you'd expect them to. Mudbox's display is a bit milder on the eyes. ZB's viewport and materials are a bit too contrasty..too flashy(I don't mind the interface cause I colapse the shit out of it).

About mudbox 2009 polycount and brush responsiveness...hmmmmm...wait and see...It will probably blow you away

ambient-whisper
09-18-2008, 08:16 PM
Could someone just confirm to me something about zbrush painting. Ive only used it briefly, but i assumed that when you are painting, you could not rotate at the same time. You had to constantly, choose an angle, paint as much as poss, bake it in, then choose another angle. Rotating and painting was not fluid.

It sounds like i might have been doing something wrong :curious:

I think i was using projection master to do it.


That was a long time ago. you can now paint directly onto your model at any time. you can sculpt and paint at the same time. you can even change uvs on your model and still retain all of your paint work because the paint system works from vertex/poly colours which isnt tied to uvs in any way. the only downside is that if you want to output high rez textures, then you need to subdivide the model more to get a smoother result. its also very fast.

zapplink works through projection master, and allows you to paint with any paint package you want, and then when you save the file in your 2d package and return to zbrush it will project that data onto your model in zbrush. the cool thing is that you are able to create character sheets so you can paint on multiple angles of a model at the same time and then project all those angles in one pass in zbrush. pretty cool stuff ( but i havent tested this feature much. )

subtlebluetones
09-18-2008, 08:28 PM
Thanks for the info. Being restricted to your poly distribution sounds abit of a down point for me though, as you've said.

Was this possible in zbrush 3 from the start then? When you say a long time ago do you mean there has been an update for zbrush 3, or in earlier versions of zb.

Zapplink sounds ok, but id still much much rather the mudbox approach. Even if it is pixely as your friend may have suggested, yuo can fix that up on pshop afterwards.

Im really looking forward to this :)

ThomasMahler
09-18-2008, 08:39 PM
Nah, in Z2 Projection Master was the only way to apply texture and details. In Z3, you just flick on the RGB Button and color away.

Poly (vertex) Painting has its up- and downsides, just like any tool out there. Course it can be a bit tedious to work with highPolys to get highRes Textures, but the huge advantage is that you can just store the color data at all time and introduce new UVs to the mesh whenever you want to. With the click of a button you'll be able to bake them back to the 2d texture space. Also, you can combine ZAppLink (Painting textures in Photoshop or Painter) with Polypainting (Colordata is being stored in the models vertices). ZBrush has no trouble with storing multiple million poly models (I had models with up to 50 mio polys on my mid-level system), so that's pretty nifty.

Though I also think that Mudbox has the better architecture as a painting app though. Being able to load in multiple objects, each with their own shaders and each with their own texture sets is very powerful stuff. That's why it'd suck even more if the painting engine doesn't quite cut it (yet).

kursad_pileksuz
09-18-2008, 08:54 PM
Well, once you go up to 8 10 mil polys per model you wont feel much distortion or problems. But as I said you definately want to paint details (if you need) in another app. One 4k tex is 16mil pixels. On the other hand zbrush can go upto 11-12 mil polygon generally. You cannot get 4k texture details in Zbrush but it offers very good tools for laying the foundation.



Thanks for the info. Being restricted to your poly distribution sounds abit of a down point for me though, as you've said.


Im really looking forward to this :)

TheAlienGus
09-18-2008, 09:08 PM
As someone that uses zbrush3 and mudbox, i'm excited for this release. I must say though, it seems poeple are bashing v1 for speed, i must say my timeframe might be a bit off on this. V1 of mudbox out performed v2 of zbrush on every system i've ever used. Zbrush3 was huge performance over 2 (duh, obviously). And Mudbox was released before Z3. However, my hardware, at home, seems to favor Mudbox over Zbrush. I can go MUCH higher in mudbox than Z3. Granted there is a slight speed decrease. However, it's not that huge of a speed decrease, just a slight annoying lag.

I must say, i am quite hopeful Mudbox can take painting farther than anything yet. And with the back of Autodesk, hopefully that will become the case. But, yeah . . . autodesk. We'll see, i guess. Hopefully Autodesk has a roadmap that pans out. I mean on a level that goes past Mudbox alone, but that's another thread all together. So, change of subject. I've got my fingers crossed.

And since we've seen the subject of modo brought up, all i'm gonna say is that luxology has been the only application for me. That has been a pleasure to use to model with. Sculpting is far too new, and unfinished to make a judgement on, yet. We all know this. So, let's just sit tight and see what happens. And painting, well . . . yeah . . it needs more work too. Personally, i think they should just sit tight on modeling, develop a stand alone plug in renderer for other apps and sit back till everything else is finished, than, and only than go farther. Luxology has broadened it's horizons too fast and left painting unfinished. That needs work, than take sculpting. Guess we'll see what happens though.

Go Mudbox. lol

njanim8tor
09-18-2008, 09:55 PM
Do tell us, what is the 'correct' hardware? And what is the spec of the machine used for the new demo videos?

I think Dave is referring to these specs in terms of correct hardware:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=11462683

CHRiTTeR
09-18-2008, 09:58 PM
Those are the minimum requirements i dont think the app will be as fluent as in the sample movies on these specs ;)

vlad74
09-19-2008, 12:25 AM
Like Mudbox mainly because of the way it deforms the mesh. It feels soooooo natural. It is addictive. :)

And yes version 2 is gonna be piece of art!

DisturbeD2k
09-19-2008, 12:45 AM
really looking forward to trying the new mudbox. Hopefully it will be as user friendly as mudbox 1.07

earlyworm
09-19-2008, 12:53 AM
It's good to see the texture painting features finally make it to Mudbox. Would be nice to have a colour-palette or colour-wheel to choose colours instead of having to use the Windows colour picker.

inverse catheter
09-19-2008, 02:46 AM
while respecting the need for better painting tools being made available to the industry i could care less about them myself. what i was looking for in the next release was of course the speed enhancements but also some real improvements to the workflow. which i find to be terribly weak. simply packaging up all those polys into a standardised ui isn't enough. where's the sculpting specific functionality in the viewport and speed of interaction

zbrush is borked and full of holes throughout. but an ' artisan on crack ' approach aint hitting the mark either

ElectricIris
09-19-2008, 05:59 AM
Hello all,

Just a quick note - Enzo, the 3D paint system for Photoshop (7, CS, CS2, CS3) has been progressing very nicely this past year, and is well worth another peek. The paint projection has been improved immensely, and now takes full advantage of all of Photoshop's cabilities (Layers, Masks, Blending Modes, Adjustment Layers, Effects, etc), all inside the 3D scene window as 3D layers. Enzo can also output QuickTime Object VR movies of models, or as turntables, panoramic VR, etc. ( http://www.electriciris.com/frogVR.mov )

There are still a few limitations (2K textures are the current max, we jump to 4K and 8K images next month), and the docs and videos are little out of date, but development continues, focusing on major speed gains and stability.... Keep us on your radar! http://www.enzo3d.com

kursad_pileksuz
09-19-2008, 06:20 AM
Never heard Enzo before. It looks interesting. I guess to me most important things are "distortion free painting" and "symmetry painting". Does it support distortion free painting (regardless of what uv`s look like) ? I watched the videos but couple lines and dots wont tell the real picture, also no uv screenshot of the model was provided in the video.

Sonk
09-19-2008, 07:22 AM
It's good to see the texture painting features finally make it to Mudbox. Would be nice to have a colour-palette or colour-wheel to choose colours instead of having to use the Windows colour picker.

You could probably add this easily with the Mudbox 2009 SDK :)

truestar
09-19-2008, 04:28 PM
I'm not so overly excited about the sculpting vids...I was expecting new brushes, not necessarily brushes and behavior already available in other packages like z-brush for instance.

subtlebluetones (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=260988) on page 1 did ask a good question:
______________________________________
I do remember seeing in earlier vids (it appeared) that you could sculptgeometry using stamps, and it also seemed to paint a texture at the same time too. For example cracks in bumpy skin, when sculpted, would make the deepset cracks a darker colour, and the raised areas a lighter colour. This was not mentioned in the above videos. You could paint, and sculpt using the same stamp, but not at the same time. The problem i see with this, is that they will not align. Your painted cracks will not sit inline with your sculpted cracks, unless you have a freakishly accurate hand, and paint over exactly the same areas at the right angles.

Any insight would be appreciated ;)

skycastle
09-19-2008, 06:32 PM
Well, once you go up to 8 10 mil polys per model you wont feel much distortion or problems. But as I said you definately want to paint details (if you need) in another app. One 4k tex is 16mil pixels. On the other hand zbrush can go upto 11-12 mil polygon generally. You cannot get 4k texture details in Zbrush but it offers very good tools for laying the foundation.

In Mudbox 2009 you can also apply and paint across multiple 4k texture maps per object on a 32 bit OS. For 2x 4k maps for example, as long as you have a GPU with 512 meg ram, thatís 33 million pixels (Not polys) of detail and the mesh and scene is 60 fps because you do not need to subdivide to paint the mesh. And if you are painting using the bump display, there is no need to extract a displacement map as well. You just save your Mudbox scene and the textures are saved to disk.

In Mudbox 2009 you can also paint in 8bit 16bit and 32bit color as bump maps and use them directly as displacement maps in your software renderer. 16 bit maps have enough color range to hide any banding or stair stepping you see with 8bit painted maps.


See a picture here

4k paint (http://area.autodesk.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/16935/)

I do remember seeing in earlier vids (it appeared) that you could sculptgeometry using stamps, and it also seemed to paint a texture at the same time too. For example cracks in bumpy skin, when sculpted, would make the deepset cracks a darker colour, and the raised areas a lighter colour. This was not mentioned in the above videos. You could paint, and sculpt using the same stamp, but not at the same time. The problem i see with this, is that they will not align. Your painted cracks will not sit inline with your sculpted cracks, unless you have a freakishly accurate hand, and paint over exactly the same areas at the right angles.

We can sculpt or paint with 8, 16, 32 bit stamps (An object can be made into a brush using 32 bits color). But the brush does not color and sculpt at the same time. But there is a workflow that involves our Screen Space Ambient Occlusion that allows you to have a skin with cracks and then be able to paint "a color" down into those cracks using stencil masks.

**And about hardware. The specs will be similar to what is required for Maya but there will be, as always, an official Autodesk hardware qual chart released with the software. Please follow this as a guide to getting the best results from Mudbox 2009.

ChewyPixels
09-19-2008, 06:50 PM
I can't wait to try this out! If it runs well, I am definitely getting this. October can't come soon enough!

Alekzsander
09-19-2008, 07:30 PM
i'm really excinting for the new mudbox , but without

isolating polygroups with a single click
marquee / lasso isolation in a single action
masking ' sticky ' key
or the famous transpose
i wouldn't feel so much freedom to sculpt like zbrush :(

subtlebluetones
09-19-2008, 08:06 PM
I'm not so overly excited about the sculpting vids...I was expecting new brushes, not necessarily brushes and behavior already available in other packages like z-brush for instance.

subtlebluetones (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=260988) on page 1 did ask a good question:.....

:beer: Thanks for the acknowledgement. Really appreciated. I did feel somewhat blanked, and could see the virtual tumbleweeds rolling by. :)

lovisx
09-19-2008, 08:22 PM
:beer: Thanks for the acknowledgement. Really appreciated. I did feel somewhat blanked, and could see the virtual tumbleweeds rolling by. :)

did you catch the answer from mudbox devs? I think this is a good solution actually... what skycastle mentioned. I almost never want to texture and sculpt at the same time. Kinda like zbrush's mask crevices.

We can sculpt or paint with 8, 16, 32 bit stamps (An object can be made into a brush using 32 bits color). But the brush does not color and sculpt at the same time. But there is a workflow that involves our Screen Space Ambient Occlusion that allows you to have a skin with cracks and then be able to paint "a color" down into those cracks using stencil masks.

subtlebluetones
09-19-2008, 09:42 PM
hmm. interesting. form the sounds of it, this isnt done with one stroke. it sounds like a 2 step operation.

I am going to have to dig out those vids than im thinking of. Its the eariler mudbox 2009 demo vids which had some sort of elf character fully rendered and was still being manipulated. I cant do it now, as im literally about to walk out the door.

Cheers for the reply.

skycastle
09-19-2008, 09:58 PM
the sounds of it, this isnt done with one stroke.

No it is not all in one stroke.

But there is a simple workflow to paint the cavities of what you sculpted. So it can be done. Sorry its not push button in the next version but we will continue to work on it.

jasonhuang1115
09-20-2008, 09:16 PM
I'm really interested in the painting of Mudbox 2009 and wondering how well it works with Photoshop. I have been using Bodypaint; its new release with better integration with Photoshop like .abr brush import looks attractive. But, the HDR lighting with AO preview in Mudbox 2009 makes me think about switch from Bodypaint to Mudbox. Could anyone compare Bodypaint and Mudbox in terms of texturing workflow?

MisterE
09-21-2008, 02:21 AM
Hi Dave, since you seem to be the go-to-guy for answering Q's, I was wondering if you can settle this once and for all: Will users be able to reconstruct a previously subDivided mesh in Mudbox 2009 as users can similarly do in Zbrush? If not, on behalf of other users that may have recommended this, is it possible you guys can look into adding this feature down the line?

Also, since Mudbox claims to be able to handle normal and displacement maps better with integration into Autodesk Maya and Max, will users be able to, for whatever reason they so desire, import and export SubDivided levels (i.e. a mesh with TurboSmooth) FROM Max/Maya TO Mudbox and back??

skycastle
09-21-2008, 03:19 AM
Will users be able to reconstruct a previously subDivided mesh in Mudbox 2009

No there is no un-subdivide button. I hope that is clear. But there is a workflow to re-create a mesh using floating point displacement maps. Our goal is to aid in artist workflows so a story of what you are trying to do may help me help you best? I am very familiar with reconstruct mesh you mentioned and have used it many times in the past but donít need to anymore. This is part of the reason we donít do this. Please let me know what problem you are anticipating without that.


Also, since Mudbox claims to be able to handle normal and displacement maps better with integration into Autodesk Maya and Max, will users be able to, for whatever reason they so desire, import and export SubDivided levels (i.e. a mesh with TurboSmooth) FROM Max/Maya TO Mudbox and back??
Yes Mudbox 2009 normal map support has been totally re-worked and is faster, more memory efficient and more compatible with Max and Maya than Mudbox 1.0. This is a benefit of working at the same company. You can export any subdivision level you wish to Max or Maya and import it back into Mudbox a few different ways to update the mesh in Mudbox.

Perhaps you should give a story of what task you are trying to complete with import and export of subd levels?

kursad_pileksuz
09-21-2008, 04:43 AM
Since we are having QA here, here is mine :)

Is there any improvements-additions regarding detail transfer from one model to another model(same vertex order or not). Zbrush is so unforgiving and strict that most of the time I get exploding meshes even if I just create new uv set(without changing vertex order) outside of Zbrush. This is well known and there are a lot of topics in ZB forums. Anyways I was wondering if there is any addition or improvement to detail transfer from one model to another(models that have same vertex order or without same vertex order). I can bake disp maps between artbitrary meshes inside Modo to transfer from one to another. However this is not very precise method and should be kept as final solution rather than first.

I was hoping that things like, mesh projection, mesh conforming, arbitrary mesh baking that works on masked areas etc would be on the table for the new version.

skycastle
09-21-2008, 05:29 AM
-You can import a mesh with same vertex order to update the mesh in the scene.(masking supported)

-You can import a mesh with different vertex order and the UVs match and update(masking supported)

-You can bake maps between arbitrary meshes and use those maps to displace a mesh and you also have masking with that.

-You can bake parts of a terrain or environment or group of multiple objects into a 32 bit floating point stencil or stamp (brush tip image) and use that over and over again on any mesh. This is akin to using a model to brush with.

Thats a few ways in Mudbox 2009 to get details from one mesh to another.

But you can not sort of push button clone/copy paste mesh deltas from one mesh to another. We could perhaps figure out a way to do this but its lower priority currently. In production as a sculptor yea I wanted to do it once or twice but it was not a several times a day sort of operation. Things I want to reuse I bake down into a stencil or stamp. You are not alone in this request though. I have had others ask the same thing. Perhaps share a story where you are constantly needed to do this?

kursad_pileksuz
09-21-2008, 05:49 AM
Skycastle, thanks for the additional info. It gave me further picture.

Well I was asking for such mesh transform feature in case of vertex order or uv method fails. As I said, in ZB the importing method fails quite alot of the time. But Zbrush has detail projection and projection through rig-retopo method. These 2 methods provides some backup in case of failure. They generally work fine for transfering detail but you need to clean up your model if it has alot of grooves, concave sections etc. Again at least it is better than nothing.
The detail projection in subtools menu in ZB saved me quite a lot (althou importing failures was Zbrush`s fault :))


-How does uv match method works?
-How successful is baking arbitrary meshes? For example can I bake a full human body(naked) from one model to another without getting weird spikes on the new model? I am asking for this example because Topogun and Modo fail when you try to bake objects that have limbs or externals. This method is good for heads, torso etc. But trying to bake more complex surfaces is quite a work around.

MisterE
09-21-2008, 07:53 AM
[edit: Questions already answered on the next page and didn't see. Mods please delete]

skycastle
09-21-2008, 04:02 PM
-How does uv match method works?

Source and target mesh need to have UVs in the same location based on a tolerance. You could even do things like create your new mesh with three new arms on it but because the UVs on the rest of the model match you can still transfer details from the old mesh with less limbs.

-How successful is baking arbitrary meshes? For example can I bake a full human body(naked) from one model to another without getting weird spikes on the new model?

Raytracing works very well. You need to have the source and target mesh be somewhat near each other because rays fired from the target need to be able to hit the source mesh and the rays only fire along the surface normal. Ive used this many times on feature films you have seen and it looks great. Is it possible to get spikes like on the end of a characters shirt or from some strange twisted area of the mesh? Yes. Sometimes but its not normal. But that is why when you use texture maps to displace a model in Mudbox we store the displaced result directly to a 3d Sculpt layer that has its own masking channel that you can use to paint this away.

Mudbox 2009 displacement GUI and the tech behind it have been completely redone to be able to extract maps from extremely large data sets without crashing and to be more friendly. This was because of problems with the way 1.0 worked you could get into trouble and the GUI was crap. For example in 1.0 we needed to literally subdivide the high res mesh few more times further to get a smooth maps. Well this would eat your system memory like crazy and Mudbox could die on you. Now we use some Autodesk technology so we don't need to do that at all to get smooth result saving tons of memory. also parts of the extraction process have been setup to take advantage of multiple cpus so its much faster...anyway lots of improvements in many areas including normal maping. You will need to try it for yourself to see how it will work for you.

ThomasMahler
09-21-2008, 05:00 PM
Great stuff, thanks for all the info dave! Especially the bake stuff sounds great, even though I never had problems with baking in Muddle in the first place. Baking out a 32bit displacement map and mesh displacing an aribtrary mesh saved my neck on my last job. Can't wait to see what improvements you guys have made in that area, the GUI in that video looked WAY better than what you had before.

kursad_pileksuz
09-21-2008, 09:18 PM
skycastle

You have given good information. Thank you.

Baothebuff
09-21-2008, 11:01 PM
skycastle,

Speaking of displacement layers and masks, can we smooth masks in mudbox 2009? When masking out spikes and such from a displacement layer, often times there would be a harsh line where the mask ends and it would make the model look unnatural. If only there was a way to smooth that out, maybe like holding down the shift key while in the mask tool.

skycastle
09-24-2008, 02:54 PM
I made a post on how to blur sculpt layer mask and a sample of what can be done with them.

Click here for mask info (http://area.autodesk.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/17083/)

njanim8tor
09-24-2008, 07:32 PM
Thanks Dave. Very cool to see in action. October 6th can't come fast enough.

Lone Deranger
09-25-2008, 12:13 AM
Any word on pricing?

(and dare I ask,... an OSX version?)

STANER
09-30-2008, 10:15 AM
Hi guys!

i just wondering if i paint my textures in mudbox, does it create automatically the UV's or i have to create them in 3ds max for example? do i also get rid off the nasty seems?

mackster
10-02-2008, 09:29 AM
I can assure you that the upcoming Mudbox 2009 will feature 100% awesomeness!

*currently beta testing*

Wheiraucher
10-02-2008, 04:54 PM
I wonder. Will there be vertex-color-painting in Mudbox 2009?

Nathan
10-02-2008, 05:12 PM
the documentation is online now... have a look through and see for yourself.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=10710291

Wheiraucher
10-02-2008, 06:40 PM
the documentation is online now... have a look through and see for yourself.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=10710291

hey thanks. answers my question with a NO. unfortunately. Would have been another cool feature. Maybe some day...

But the documentation seems to be very helpful and well organized. can't wait for mudbox 2009, now.

Spin99
10-02-2008, 07:20 PM
A couple things came to mind when watching the new vids :)
First of all looks very clean and user friendly and a pleasure to bite into.

* Is it possible to use the new texture view to create "alphas" from images with different brush shapes. ie oval rectangular etc This would be so nice that you could skip a whole step in opening/closing feathering using Photoshop.

* Can you sculpt in a way that displacement propagates to the lower levels of subdivision using the new layering system. This could be very handy to choose in the end which level you want your model to be and have them all working together?

Or do you have to specifically sculpt different levels in different layers and subdividing won't be coherent with your high-res mesh?

PS-- Really exciting stuff btw. Looking at the demo videos on layered painting this looks like a really killer tool. Layered diffuse maps easy reflection + specular maps sounds like bliss. Cavity masking to boot as well? I dunno this new Mudbox looks like one exciting tool to get :p

PPS--I love the "LaFortune" shader wondering how it got into the CgFx list :buttrock:

alshakno
10-06-2008, 08:42 AM
... So today should be the day!

CGTalk Moderation
10-06-2008, 08:42 AM
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.