Modo 401 vs ZBrush 3.5 vs Mudbox 2010 - Need Advice

[Bmoner]

Ok your title is misleading. I kind of understand what you're asking, but it's REALLY vague and all over the place.

Firstly Modo can't compare to MudBox or ZBrush. It's an all encompassed 3D suite. The later two are strictly for high-detail sculpting and painting.

If you're looking for a good workflow method, you'll have to find that on your own. I did a lot of trial and error and the best workflow for me is:

Modo > MudBox > Topogun > Maya or Houdini

So, you're right...it does depend HIGHLY on the person, and what you need to accomplish. What you described, you can do in just about ANY program.

1) If you're looking for a great program to sculpt and texture your Daz/Poser models, try either MudBox, ZBrush, or 3D Coat.

2) If you're looking for programs to manipulate the models...any 3D app SHOULD be able to do that out of the box.

All of these apps have trial version that you can download on the companies websites. Try and see what you like.

[Animasta]

For sculpting, right now I'd go with Mudbox over Zbrush. The current state of Zbrush 3.5 is nice and all, but it doesn't have import/export (don't know why they released it in this state). There's a plugin for exporting, but nothing for importing yet. Modo is good for modeling, but I wouldn't use it for serious sculping (maybe minor tweaks here and there).

[macsupremacist]

For sculpting, right now I'd go with Mudbox over Zbrush. The current state of Zbrush 3.5 is nice and all, but it doesn't have import/export (don't know why they released it in this state). There's a plugin for exporting, but nothing for importing yet. Modo is good for modeling, but I wouldn't use it for serious sculping (maybe minor tweaks here and there).

I have to disagree. I see they're on a mac, and the mac version of Zbrush (currently 3.2) has GoZ, which transfers to Modo perfectly.

[Animasta]

3.2 (mac) is NOT 3.5 (PC). Your argument is moot.

[pnoland]

3.2 (mac) is NOT 3.5 (PC). Your argument is moot.

You're right, 3.2 and 3.5 are quite different but I think macsupremacist is stating that 3.2 for Mac does have good import/export like you say Zbrush 3.5 does not. 3.5 PC no GoZ (just yet)...3.2 Mac has GoZ so you can easily go from zbrush to other applications GoZ supports and back easily and conveniently.

I agree about Modo sculpting. It's good for minor tweaks as you are modeling within Modo but for serious sculpting it doesn't touch Zbrush or Mudbox.

[Kerem]

I was about to ask the same question. I'm working on PC. I've tried Maya > Zbrush > Mudbox workflow, but I didn't enjoyed importing exporting stuff that much.

When it comes to Modo - it's all inside in one application. You can do almost same stuff without leaving that application in question (which is Modo)... So I'm very undecided about this :banghead:

[HiTekJeff]

Thanks for the replies, all this information helps. So as it stands now, it seems I need either Mudbox or ZBrush and then a modeling program too? I thought Mudbox or ZBrush was good for making things like props and other general modeling objects too. Can someone maybe expand on how it varies or the kinds of uses Modo would have as opposed to doing sculpting and modeling or texturing in Mudbox or ZBrush. Are the latter two mainly just good for sculpting and texturing only type of tool?

I will try out the demos, but ZBrush does not have a Mac demo. Also, just need some general advice on their uses for the most part.

Thanks

[williamsburroughs]

It's pretty simple.

Use Modo for the following:
1. Modeling
2. Animating
3. Rendering

Use zBrush or Mudbox for the following:
1. Add Super hi-res details to your organic or hard surface modeling work


You then import these "super hi-res" displacement maps into modo and animate/render.

[Bmoner]

@ HiTekJeff

You know a lot of this could have been explained to you if you'd have maybe visited the websites of these companies. They go into great detail about everything that their specific software is good for, so that way no question will be left unanswered. They even have galleries so you can see what certain artists have done with the programs.

To put it simple:


There is no all-in-one solution that can do everything great, only a lot of things ok.
Importing/Exporting is necessary when it comes to interaction between a sculpting and modeling/rendering program. The end.
Sculpting programs are a necessity if you want to get into hyper-real/photo-realistic modeling and texturing.
No modeling programs sculpting features (Not even Modo's) will allow you to attain the high frequency detail you can get easily in an actual sculpting program. This is because a modeling program isn't made to work with hundreds of millions of polygons on the fly.
If you're asking "Why use a sculpting program when modeling programs can't use that Million+ polygon mesh?", this is because after you make all of your tweaks...you MUST retopologize (Look it up) the mesh into a more polygon efficient one that plays well with other programs.
So at the very least, yes, you'll need both a modeling and sculpting program. Which ones, however, is all up to which ones you like working with the best.

And as far as retopologizing meshes goes, although Zbrush and MudBox claim to be able to do this easily, nothing...hear me again...NOTHING is faster or more powerful or easier to use than Topogun. But you'll see what I mean when you check that out for yourself.

[Navstar]

I occasionally use Poser, so let me offer my 2¢.

Poser Pro has a cool plug-in that offers Maya, C4D and Max import of Poser files through COLLADA.

Go Zbrush (in Mac 3.2/PC 3.5) allows quick and easy transport of models and maps between Zbrush and Maya/C4D/Max.

So I would probably go that route (if you have Maya/C4D/Max). Daz Studio Pro and Carrera have some Poser interoperability too, but I'm not too familiar with them.

[Per-Anders]

Go Zbrush (in Mac 3.2/PC 3.5) allows quick and easy transport of models and maps between Zbrush and Maya/C4D/Max.
GoZ isn't available on the PC yet.

To the OP, here's the difference between Modo, Z-brush and Mudbox:

Z-Brush is a high poly modeler and 2.5d painting app. What that means is it allows you to sculpt very high resolution meshes, meshes with millions of polygons with ease adding in insane levels of detail, and it has some pretty unique tools designed for this sculpting and deformation.

Mudbox is a high poly detailing and basic texturing app. What this means is that it's somethign that you load other meshes into and touch up, adding in detail to millions of polygons. It's workflow is much more standard, it's very simple, no thrills but no bumps either, it's just a great solid app for this task and is more trying to compete with z-brush in this regard.

Modo is a low poly 3D app and would be considered completely the odd one of the bunch here. It includes tools for modeling and working with polygonal geometry that only contains up to a million or two polygons before it becomes unweildy. It has some basic texture and displacement painting tools, but more importantly it has far better tools for creating polygonal geometry and editing lower res polygonal geometry than the other two This is the app you would want to use when you need to roughly adjust the form or create new meshes from scratch, creating morph targets etc.

Poser as I recall can't really handle high res meshes and I'm not sure if it even handles displacement or normal maps in which case I don't see the point of using Z-Brush or Mudbox for creating assets with it, so given these choices that you've picked I'd just get Modo in this instance and later on if you want to progress and change your workflow to render from Modo itself then add either Z-Brush or Mudbox to your toolset.

[HiTekJeff]

Per-Anders,

Thanks for the information, that was what I was looking for mainly. Some asked why I didn't go to the company web sites and of course I did that first and read about them. As your reply states, I wanted to hear from actual users and someone that can tell me the differences between these programs. Some have trials, but ZBrush does not for the Mac yet.

I am mainly looking to work on doing some custom characters from the V4/M4 Daz figures using their mesh and not do any from scratch at this time. It will save me time and focus more on getting my art done for my graphic novels. What I will be doing is bringing those figures into ZBrush or Mudbox, sculpting the head morphs, doing some body work, then exporting back into Poser Pro 7. I will then setup the cloths, textures, etc. inside Poser that I have worked with in Photoshop, do the pose setup, then export into another program like Vue, Cinema 4D, etc.

So it would seem from the talk here I MUST have either ZBrush or Mudbox to do that kind of work. So far, I am leaning to ZBrush because I have found more tutorials on it and there seems to be more support for getting help. I may give Mudbox a chance too and try the demo. I am still confused after reading the posts here and the info on their sites the main difference between them. You said ZBrush was a little more detailed. Also, I found a ZB plug-in that auto scales Poser figures on import/export to take the work out of it. Is there something similar like that for Mudbox or how does one do it in Mudbox for Poser?

If I build props for my figures or scenes, do I need Modo which would be better for that than a sculpting program like ZB or Mudbox?

Thanks all for the replies, this is the sort of info I just can't get from reading basic web site info.

[Bmoner]

The only MAJOR difference between MudBox and ZBrush:

ZSpheres. If you've ever done any clay figure work, then you can relate ZSpheres to a volumetric wire skeleton. Essentially giving you the power to model directly in the software before, during or after the sculpting the process.

But if you have NO NEED for a modeling tool directly within a sculpting program, then get MudBox. But, then again, it comes down to user preference...

Yes, some of the features in ZBrush are cool...but I cannot wrap my head around why the developers made such a confusing UI. but, then again, maybe you'll feel right at home. And, aside for ZSpheres, anything you can do in one...you can do in the other.

I'm a Maya/Houdini user...so working in MudBox was just like working with these programs to me. I didn't have to learn anything extra, nor did I have to force my brain to turn of my Maya/Houdini Hand Autopilot. And as of this latest release of MudBox (both 2009 & 2010), I NEVER found myself saying "I wish it could do..." or "I wish...was easier".

Side-Bar: What is it that you do that requires you to work on a [Mac Pro 2008, Leopard OS 10.5.8, Windows 7, 2 x 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon, 10GB 800 MHz DDR2 RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT]? If not TRUE 3D or Film work...then what?

[mus0u]

I really want to incorporate zbrush into my workflow but the UI is as confusing as hell =(

[williamsburroughs]

I really want to incorporate zbrush into my workflow but the UI is as confusing as hell =(

I thought the same for the longest time, but after watching some of the quickStarts on their site, I find it fluid and fast.

Watch the Getting Started videos
http://www.pixologic.com/zclassroom/homeroom/

[cgbeige]

if you plan on doing very high-res sculpting, avoid modo. Unless something has changed since 3.0.2, modo chokes when you start working on models over a few hundred thousand polygons since it doesn't have any quick scheme of working with such geometry, unlike Mudbox or ZBrush which both have specialized sculpting engines that are very fast and work with many millions of polygons. Mudbox does the sculpting right in the GPU and ZBrush is heavily multithreaded and doesn't use OpenGL or Direct-X to draw to the screen, unlike all the slow sculpting apps like modo/silo/etc. 3D-Coat is cool for the voxel stuff - I own it as well as ZBrush/Mudbox - but I only use it for retopo and voxel base meshes since the sculpting quality is nowhere near as good as ZB/MB.

[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.