CGTalk - Pixologic Reveals More ZBrush 4 Info

DutchDimension

07-27-2010, 05:05 PM

All current ZBrush license holders are entitled to a free upgrade to ZBrush 4.0 Win/Mac, regardless of when they purchased ZBrush. If you currently have ZBrush 3.5 (PC) or 3.2 (Mac) you will be sent your upgrade instructions beginning on 8/9/10 - 9th August 2010*. If you have not yet upgraded to the current ZBrush version please submit a Support ticket at http://support.pixologic.com as soon as possible so that your upgrade to version 4.0 can proceed smoothly.

Aurick, does that mean Mac users running 3.2 need to send a support ticket to 'get ready for the free update'? Bit of a weird thing.. raising a ticket...

moogaloonie

07-27-2010, 05:11 PM

Look at the section that is the section to the right of the tea cup section, Batmans utility belt... (The 5th section from the left)

Those aren't the zBrush 4 gallery images though.

Kuziola

07-27-2010, 05:17 PM

DutchDimension -3.2 is a current version for mac.

demoniorojo

07-27-2010, 05:43 PM

Great!! Match maker looks very impresive!:bowdown:

Nothingness

07-27-2010, 06:12 PM

I think they really matured some and kept their promise on the release date and especially the mac one.

way to go.

GQ1

07-27-2010, 07:22 PM

I might be wrong but in two of the beta 4 images it looks to me like a realtime subsurface scattering material.

Anyway great work Pixologic! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

DutchDimension

07-27-2010, 07:33 PM

Yes it is indeed. Except when compared to the Windows version (v3.5). Which is why I found the Pixologic statement a bit ambiguous. Could be perceived either way.

DutchDimension -3.2 is a current version for mac.

BigPixolin

07-27-2010, 07:35 PM

I might be wrong but in two of the beta 4 images it looks to me like a realtime subsurface scattering material.

Anyway great work Pixologic! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I'm really digging that green material on the watch. I hope it is real time that would be sweet.

webhead

07-27-2010, 07:42 PM

I'm really digging that green material on the watch. I hope it is real time that would be sweet.
Yes, that caught my eye as well! Looks very promising. :thumbsup:

Venkman

07-27-2010, 07:48 PM

That shadowbox feature is bizarre. They really look at sculpting on a computer different than everyone else. I'd love to see more on it. :thumbsup:

Nothingness

07-27-2010, 07:51 PM

I might be wrong but in two of the beta 4 images it looks to me like a realtime subsurface scattering material.

Anyway great work Pixologic! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I would say they are renders and not screenshots.

But i bet they could be fast. Or not.

we'll have to wait a little to know.

DimensionalPunk

07-27-2010, 09:15 PM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/IT_%28South_Park%3B_The_Entity%29.jpeg

This is what I feel like when I use ZBrush. Awesome technology, but designed by a crazy person. Sorry if you haven't seen the episode.

Magnus3D

07-27-2010, 09:18 PM

Haha yep that's a funny episode of South Park :D

Besides that, i'm really looking forward to the new release 4 of Zbrush. It looks great so far! :)
The UI is just a minor obstacle, once you get used to it it's easy to work with.

/ Magnus

meleseDESIGN

07-27-2010, 09:32 PM

Looks like features for hardsurface modelíng has been improved and the green wax dovetails nicely too.

Where can I download the upgrade?

BigPixolin

07-27-2010, 09:35 PM

Looks like features for hardsurface modelíng has been improved and the green wax dovetails nicely too.

Where can I download the upgrade?

From your support account after they send you the email which begin being sent out on he 9th of August. Traditionally that has been just before midnight California time on the 9th. Sometimes it takes a day or two to receive the email.
Emails are randomized to make it fair to all customers.

meleseDESIGN

07-27-2010, 09:46 PM

That's great, the 10th August is my birthday. What a nice birthday present - isn't it(?). Thanks BigPixolin!

http://1.1.1.4/bmi/forums.cgsociety.org/images/smilies/beerchug.gif

From your support account after they send you the email which begin being sent out on he 9th of August. Traditionally that has been just before midnight California time on the 9th. Sometimes it takes a day or two to receive the email.
Emails are randomized to make it fair to all customers.

BigPixolin

07-27-2010, 09:56 PM

pluMmet

07-27-2010, 11:23 PM

I can't believe that it's so late in the day and there is no news from the floor!

Roger Eberhart

07-27-2010, 11:39 PM

I can't believe that it's so late in the day and there is no news from the floor!

Maybe they had to sign an NDA? More likely they're still at the show. It's only 4:38pm PST on the west coast.

Fumetsu

07-28-2010, 12:59 AM

Looks awesome! The video kept getting better and better towards the end :)

BigPixolin

07-28-2010, 02:43 AM

I can't believe that it's so late in the day and there is no news from the floor!

Yes where is the news?

aurick

07-28-2010, 03:42 AM

I'm very happy with zBrush4 so far but I can't let it slide that not all the images were created "entirely" in zBrush.

For example the head by Luc Begine (http://features.cgsociety.org/newgallerycrits/g34/30534/30534_1274821510_large.jpg) used Hair Farm for the hair and Max to render.

The gallery in the post is the entire gallery from the Pixologic website. As a couple other people mentioned, the first three pages of the gallery are ZBrush 4. You can easily tell them from the rest by the fact that the page thumbnails have the Z4 logo, and also by the fact that each image in the ZBrush 4 Gallery says so under the picture's thumbnail. All older gallery entries have the work's title instead. :)

aurick

07-28-2010, 03:43 AM

Aurick, does that mean Mac users running 3.2 need to send a support ticket to 'get ready for the free update'? Bit of a weird thing.. raising a ticket...

3.2 is the current Mac version. Since you already have it, you're set for ZBrush 4 and there's nothing more that you need to do!

moogaloonie

07-28-2010, 06:25 AM

The gallery in the post is the entire gallery from the Pixologic website. As a couple other people mentioned, the first three pages of the gallery are ZBrush 4. You can easily tell them from the rest by the fact that the page thumbnails have the Z4 logo, and also by the fact that each image in the ZBrush 4 Gallery says so under the picture's thumbnail. All older gallery entries have the work's title instead. :)

Also, the recently acquired Sculptris has been re-designated as alpha so that it can be be improved further for a proper 1.0 release.

bjoern

07-28-2010, 09:19 AM

mhhh, where is that awesome texturePainting stuff that they showed a year ago....
With this kind of a wheel of brushes... Don't know how to discribe it...
Anybody has a vid, or know what I meen?

ice-boy

07-28-2010, 09:27 AM

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showpost.php?p=710032&postcount=139

- Improved Best Render - Allowing you to render out multiple shots of your image in one render, compositing it all in zbrush as you would in photoshop. Also allowing you to export out each image of that render to allow for more customization in photoshop.

- Subtool Control - Better ways to organize your subtools. Organizing by name of subtool rather than scrolling a giant list.

- Fiber FX - This wasn't gone over much... sadly. Sounded like a hair and fur simulator within zbrush.

- Improved Layers - Allowing the artist to paint in layers, control the opacity of each polypaint layer, and more.

- Saving of Project - this will save out your tool's orientation, rotation, everything as is. So the next time you open zbrush up and load your Project, everything is how you left it. Including every singe setting on every single slider. Very handy!

- Duplication of Subtools - No longer do you need to clone, then append a subtool to duplicate it. A simple button does everything for you now allowing you to quickly clutter your creatures mouth with teeth!

- Expand - A new feature that explodes your tool and its subtools into space allowing the user to quickly select one of the subtools. Rather than scrolling through the subtool list you can click the expand button which is located under the frame button in the UI on the right, and you'll see all the subtools fly out in space. Pretty nifty.

FabioMSilva

07-28-2010, 10:26 AM

still no 64 bit version :(

07-28-2010, 10:44 AM

It goes without saying that I hope the scale issue from 3.5 is fixed - but there are some genuinely productive/helpful updates there!

Phrenzy84

07-28-2010, 10:56 AM

how would you guys feel if the main texturing update is layers with poly painting?

07-28-2010, 11:09 AM

how would you guys feel if the main texturing update is layers with poly painting?Frustrated... But not hugely surprised.

It does seem to be the way with Pixologic that every decent feature they implement has a major forehead-slapping catch. The fact that you can already display pixel based textures on geometry but only edit polypaint information is extraordinarily irritating, so I really hope they make the leap to pixels at some point.

Phrenzy84

07-28-2010, 11:26 AM

ice-boy

07-28-2010, 12:02 PM

i dont expect anyhing other then polypainting.

Laa-Yosh

07-28-2010, 01:56 PM

Not without a complete rewrite, anyway. The entire architecture of Zbrush isn't geared for serious production but for the lone artist and it's starting to show. They can't compete with the tech behind Mari, for example. The question is, do they want to...

BigPixolin

07-28-2010, 02:07 PM

still no 64 bit version :(

That is so sad to hear.
#1 on most peoples list.

I hope it doesn't take as long to get 64 bit as long as it took to get another standard thing like.
- Saving of Project - this will save out your tool's orientation, rotation, everything as is. So the next time you open zbrush up and load your Project, everything is how you left it. Including every singe setting on every single slider. Very handy!

oglu

07-28-2010, 02:16 PM

how would you guys feel if the main texturing update is layers with poly painting?

i wont use them... i need uv based painting or ptex stuff...

pluMmet

07-28-2010, 02:42 PM

Improved Layers - Allowing the artist to paint in layers, control the opacity of each polypaint layer, and more.

Sounds fantastic to me!

Intervain

07-28-2010, 02:43 PM

aurick

07-28-2010, 03:05 PM

mhhh, where is that awesome texturePainting stuff that they showed a year ago....
With this kind of a wheel of brushes... Don't know how to discribe it...
Anybody has a vid, or know what I meen?

You're talking about SpotLight (http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=71829). It has been stated elsewhere that SpotLight will be included in ZBrush 4.

aurick

07-28-2010, 03:12 PM

Frustrated... But not hugely surprised.

It does seem to be the way with Pixologic that every decent feature they implement has a major forehead-slapping catch. The fact that you can already display pixel based textures on geometry but only edit polypaint information is extraordinarily irritating, so I really hope they make the leap to pixels at some point.

This is just me speaking, and not as a representative of Pixologic. I'm sorry, but I've never understood that view of it.

When you're painting directly on a texture, there are limitations imposed by its very nature. Your model MUST have UV's already. If your UV's change, your work is lost and you have to redo everything. If your topology changes, your UV's change and so your work is lost and you have to redo everything. You must also work with the highest texture size that you might need and resize down later because you can't work at the size you expect to need and risk that expectation being wrong -- you'd have to redo everything if you change your texture to the next size up. It's just all very, very linear and restrictive.

PolyPaint eliminates all those restrictions. You can start texturing at any point in your project, well before topology or UV's are finalized. You can make big changes without losing any work that you've done painting. Does it take an extra couple moments to convert PolyPaint to texture, or texture to PolyPaint? Sure. But speaking for myself, I'll gladly take that trade off!

07-28-2010, 03:21 PM

When you're painting directly on a texture, there are limitations imposed by its very nature. When you're painting directly on to polys, there are limitations imposed by its very nature :)

The level of detail with which you can paint is defined by the number of polys. While I apprecaite what you're saying & I *do* see the benefits of painting onto an object straight away, why can't you have both? With uv's you can have an 8'000x8'000 pixel map on a 12 poly cube - and that's extremely important.

Laa-Yosh

07-28-2010, 03:24 PM

It doesn't help that Zbrush itself isn't nearly as feature rich for texture painting as BodyPaint or Mari either. There's no 3D accelerated viewport display (or multiple viewports if we're at it), no 2D editing of the texture and so on.

It's not that the program is bad, it's just not as good as other apps, and the poly limitations are part of it.

oglu

07-28-2010, 03:25 PM

BigPixolin

07-28-2010, 03:33 PM

Another vote for texture painting here. This is beyond essential.
It would be great if Pixologic started taking feature requests from these forums. :deal:

Laa-Yosh

07-28-2010, 03:54 PM

there is no need for topo changes when im done with modling...

That's what I've used to think, too ;)
Unfortunately things keep changing as you start to work with some clients...

Phrenzy84

07-28-2010, 03:56 PM

i cant subdivide most of my objects... cause they are hardsurface game stuff...
so i cant paint them with polypaint...

Go into you Geometry settings in the Tool palette and turn off SMT (Smooth modifier). This way when you subdivide it divides the model but doesn't apply the smooth modifier therefore retaining its shape.

This technique work really well also with game models.

Stellios

07-28-2010, 03:59 PM

Go into you Geometry settings in the Tool palette and turn off SMT (Smooth modifier). This way when you subdivide it divides the model but doesn't apply the smooth modifier therefore retaining its shape.

This technique work really well also with game models.

yes, or you can always store a morph target on lvl 1

oglu

07-28-2010, 04:02 PM

i wont use the polypaint crap... ;)
there are much better tools out there for texture painting...

thanks for the hint...!

Roger Eberhart

07-28-2010, 04:04 PM

i cant subdivide most of my objects... cause they are hardsurface game stuff...
so i cant paint them with polypaint...

it depends on the pipeline... there is no need for topo changes when im done with modling...
and for higher resolution i have to subdivide my model up to 100mio poly to get a proper poly count...

Oglu,

You could subdivide with Smooth turned off. But yeah, you have to go pretty high poly. Most of my textures are 2048x2048, so I need to subdivide up to at least 4 million polys.

Re: what Aurick said. Changing UVs is not really a big deal anymore. You can bake from one UV set to another in several packages. I do this all the time in Softimage using Ultimapper.

All this being said, I am much more likely to start experimenting with Polypaint again now that there are texture layers. Not sure if it will replace Bodypaint in my pipeline, but I'll at least give it a shot.

Laa-Yosh

07-28-2010, 04:42 PM

A game ready hardsurface model would have pretty uneven poly size and lots of triangles, which don't really subdivide well anyway...

ambient-whisper

07-28-2010, 08:15 PM

This is just me speaking, and not as a representative of Pixologic. I'm sorry, but I've never understood that view of it.

When you're painting directly on a texture, there are limitations imposed by its very nature. Your model MUST have UV's already. If your UV's change, your work is lost and you have to redo everything. If your topology changes, your UV's change and so your work is lost and you have to redo everything. You must also work with the highest texture size that you might need and resize down later because you can't work at the size you expect to need and risk that expectation being wrong -- you'd have to redo everything if you change your texture to the next size up. It's just all very, very linear and restrictive.

PolyPaint eliminates all those restrictions. You can start texturing at any point in your project, well before topology or UV's are finalized. You can make big changes without losing any work that you've done painting. Does it take an extra couple moments to convert PolyPaint to texture, or texture to PolyPaint? Sure. But speaking for myself, I'll gladly take that trade off!

There are many ways around this. Using tools like poly split can preserve your uvs 100%. changing the shape doesnt destroy your uvs. deleting edges doesnt destroy your uvs either, except unless its around the uv border. This is the same reason why uv master is able to down size your model but keep your Uvs intact. it keeps the uv burder as is.. but it simplifies the geometry on the inside of the uv islands.

Lets just say this. I can do more with a uvd model than a polypainted one. Granted, I like poly painting, because it has its ups, but hard surface models, game models are a huge pain in the butt, so no go.

velesius

07-28-2010, 08:48 PM

Totally agree with thoughts above. I think zb must have similar powerful tools for polypainting and texture painting as well. Most of my zb models have not so dense mesh (up to 3 mln maximum), but many subtools. To achieve good enough result with polypainting subtools must be divided one more time, just for texturing purpose. On another hand good-for-polypainting mesh must have more or less even topology. There was many times when mesh was good enough for the normal map baking, but terrible for the polypainting because of stretched polygons.Yes, I can do retopo, but it takes some time. In some situations polypaing really good thing, but with few awkward limitations.
Again, at Siggraph Pixologic has introduced 32 bit version of zbrush (just a rumors), which suggest that zb4 x64 doesn't exist at all (hope I'm wrong). And its limitation on memory doesn't conform to the polypainting paradigm, which imply dense meshes, especially now, when polypainting has layers with different opasity. My comment about possible absence of zb x64 at zbrushcentral provoked many critique. It seems for some peoples new features much important than productivity.

BigPixolin

07-28-2010, 08:52 PM

Zbrush with 32-bits like a Corvette with a 4-cylinder engine.

velesius

07-28-2010, 08:59 PM

Zbrush with 32-bits like a Corvette with a 4-cylinder engine.
Yeah, I tried to proof there exactly this thought!)

BigPixolin

07-28-2010, 09:12 PM

Yeah, I tried to proof there exactly this thought!)

Honestly and no offense to anyone but most people there are not the ones to talk to about the more technical side professionals need.
You can say here is a teapot created in zbrush that is reflecting this checkerboard.
You will get 100 wow, omg, thank you, thank you, type response and only like 5 people coming in with comments saying you can do this for years in every 3d other program on the planet and better. We need other tools than reflective teapots!
Then 20 of those first 100 people will attack those lonesome 5 people for being a whiner or ungrateful or something.
I don't post there at all but I lurk and that is basically the daily routine.

moogaloonie

07-28-2010, 11:13 PM

Honestly and no offense to anyone but most people there are not the ones to talk to about the more technical side professionals need.
You can say here is a teapot created in zbrush that is reflecting this checkerboard.
You will get 100 wow, omg, thank you, thank you, type response and only like 5 people coming in with comments saying you can do this for years in every 3d other program on the planet and better. We need other tools than reflective teapots!
Then 20 of those first 100 people will attack those lonesome 5 people for being a whiner or ungrateful or something.
I don't post there at all but I lurk and that is basically the daily routine.

You appear to be one of the 5 people you mentioned, and I am still trying to figure out what your point is. I've never seen the teapot, reflective or otherwise in the zBrush gallery. Are you trying to make some connection between their enhancing the rendering quality before becoming fully 64 bit? I never thought the point of zBrush was to be the best at any one thing but rather to explore new ways of visualizing things. You have to admit it's worth the price, right?

DimensionalPunk

07-28-2010, 11:19 PM

I'm more interested in Sculptris, it sounds like they're developing it further. It could become ZBrush a logical interface and without all the 2.5D crap.

rasamaya

07-28-2010, 11:20 PM

very happy to hear there will will better Layer support. Including Transparency.
all I am waiting for is someone to tell me there will be CONNEXION Support!
seriously, 3d controllers make sense.

Pretty Please

BigPixolin

07-29-2010, 12:29 AM

You appear to be one of the 5 people you mentioned, and I am still trying to figure out what your point is. I've never seen the teapot, reflective or otherwise in the zBrush gallery. Are you trying to make some connection between their enhancing the rendering quality before becoming fully 64 bit? I never thought the point of zBrush was to be the best at any one thing but rather to explore new ways of visualizing things. You have to admit it's worth the price, right?

No I said I don't post there at all.
There is no reflective teapot that was hypothetical.
My point was most of the users there are excited at the most trivial feature and post 100 pages of nothing but blind praise. Then when someone comes there with more serious requirements and they question the more trivial things they get attacked by the hordes of the people that are mystified by "the reflective teapot".
Yes Zbrush was worth the price. I will pay for upgrades at anytime.

moogaloonie

07-29-2010, 01:32 AM

My point was most of the users there are excited at the most trivial feature and post 100 pages of nothing but blind praise. Then when someone comes there with more serious requirements and they question the more trivial things they get attacked by the hordes of the people that are mystified by "the reflective teapot".
Yes Zbrush was worth the price. I will pay for upgrades at anytime.

Hmmm... I totally sympathize with the people who have to do use zBrush for very specific features and feel those features have been neglected. I just get annoyed when a small handful of users take the attitude that they are the only ones doing serious work and the developers should only focus on their needs above all others. If a user doesn't expect to use Spotlight, Lightbox or animation, fine. When they tell the company not to give the rest of us those features, they shouldn't be surprised at the reaction.

The zBrush tools most used in "production" weren't even hinted at in the earliest versions of the program anyway. I'm sure there were people who looked at zSpheres and thought "what the hell is this doing in an illustration program?"

meleseDESIGN

07-29-2010, 02:29 AM

Do they really?
I was going to buy one but I heard they aren't more useble than a sweet 3 button mice.

http://1.1.1.5/bmi/forums.cgsociety.org/images/smilies/shrug.gif

seriously, 3d controllers make sense.

rasamaya

07-29-2010, 06:34 AM

Yes, its sorta hard to think of it anyother way now.
You can pick up a lil guy for $50-100 .
I have a pro, and the keys around the navigator are helpful in avoiding keyboard commands.
It plays well with all my engineer programs... Natively.
And works well in Max, Maya and 3DCoat.
If you do pick one up, and have troubles, feel free to ask.
For maya I altered the ConnexionMels to revovle around subobject pivots as it does in Max.
Also in maya i created a proper camera for recording camera moves with the Navigator and i also rebuilt all of there silly recording tools. Now its realtime. You can even switch objects of interest while recording. I put a good week+ into these tools before i met my expectations in maya. I am very very happy now.
By sunday i will have my tools online for free as in free beer.
PM me if you want to get an email on release.
Only catch, i have these working on vista 64 maya 64. I dont run the other platforms, so sorry.
Its probably 5-10 scripts on one shelf. I am just making instructions now.

Rasa

R10k

07-29-2010, 06:44 AM

A game ready hardsurface model would have pretty uneven poly size and lots of triangles, which don't really subdivide well anyway...

Why not exactly?

I like poly painting, because it has its ups, but hard surface models, game models are a huge pain in the butt, so no go.

Not that I'd take Zbrush over 3D-Coat for texture painting, but why are they a pain in the butt for you in Zbrush, ambient-whisper?

ambient-whisper

07-29-2010, 08:22 AM

game models=

triangles, try to subdivide triangles in zbrush, then polypaint on that.
game models also often have single poly planes for hair, and other effects. try texturing an item in zbrush that is only a single poly. now, have many of these planes, on a complex model.
now, make use of those planes and use them for the purpose of hair.

zbrush doesnt cope well for this type of work.

or.. try painting a hard surface model that has very few polygons on the inside of the model, and most of the detail on the model is on the outside surface. what will happen when you subdivide to paint with polypainting? you will get a lot of detail around the surface, but nowhere near enough on the inside.. so you will be very limited in terms of poly detail to texture anything useful.

polypainting has its limits, and HD geo wont help either, because HD geo limits how much you can paint on any given time.

but like I said, Polypainting has its ups/ advantages over uv painting too.

R10k

07-29-2010, 08:40 AM

You know, I actually know all of that, but thanks for listing it anyway because for some reason my brain had drawn a blank on the subject :D

Although, this-

triangles, try to subdivide triangles in zbrush, then polypaint on that.

If you're subdividing into the millions, does it really make that much of a difference to the detail of the polypaint you're applying (assuming your mesh is fairly even in detail)? Or, are you referring to something else?

pluMmet

07-29-2010, 10:14 AM

Sil3

07-29-2010, 11:07 AM

If your UVs are set up I thought you could export your poly paint just like normal within your UV map?

Its not how the Uvs are setup or not, its the polygon density on certain areas that are not PolyPaint friendly.

Sure we can do alterations on a specific object so it has more or less proper Polygons before exporting it to ZBrush... but its another step and doesn't really help alleviating the "pain" or ease of use of simply paint textures like you do in BodyPaint or Mudbox.

Even on Organic meshes sometimes its hard to have the same flow of polys in certain areas and it shows when Polypainting them... to be honest I was expecting Painting in the same style Mudbox and BP have, that and a 64 bits application, its kind disappointing if those features are not present, even though a lot of other goodies and useful features will be present.

Campi

07-29-2010, 12:32 PM

I'm more interested in Sculptris, it sounds like they're developing it further. It could become ZBrush a logical interface and without all the 2.5D crap.

The "2.5 Crap" is the only thing I still use from a texturing point of view in Zbrush. It may be old, it may have been discontinued in terms of new tools for editing but I still routinely use it on feature film assets.

And in regards to Aurick:
I see great uses for poypainting but like so many other people have stated, it just has serious resolution issues. When all you need is a 2k map that is enough. But imagine for example a tree geometry. The UVs of the trunk are split in the middle and layed out next to each other. So with a 4k Map you would get 8k resolution along the length of the trunk. A tree trunk is not something I would split into subtools so in order to get the 8k I need to subdivide to 64 million polys. Which is of course no possible. I tried working on objects like this as subtools but it brings with it all sorts of issues around the seams. In Pixologics Quest to have all things under one roof it would seam logically to have the option. But quite possibly if it were easy to add we would aready have it 10 years in. It's probably something that doesn't fit into the application design.

BigPixolin

07-29-2010, 12:59 PM

I'm more interested in Sculptris, it sounds like they're developing it further. It could become ZBrush a logical interface and without all the 2.5D crap.

That would be my dream come true.

R10k

07-29-2010, 02:20 PM

The "2.5 Crap" is the only thing I still use from a texturing point of view in Zbrush.

Nice you mention that. It's funny how people go on about 2D editors like Photoshop, yet completely miss the power of Zbrush's '2.5D crap' ;)

Cometsoft

07-29-2010, 03:43 PM

Nice you mention that. It's funny how people go on about 2D editors like Photoshop, yet completely miss the power of Zbrush's '2.5D crap' ;)
Agreed, the 2.5D stuff is some pretty impressive "crap".

Alex Morris

07-29-2010, 05:25 PM

Sat through loads of sessions on this yesterday at Siggraph. Really nice new features, but contrary to some posts here there is no support for 3DConnexion Space Navigator-type devices in R4.
Main highlights for me were some of the new brushes, subtool management and the shadow box tool.

DutchDimension

07-29-2010, 07:02 PM

Any word on 64-bit Alex?

Sat through loads of sessions on this yesterday at Siggraph. Really nice new features, but contrary to some posts here there is no support for 3DConnexion Space Navigator-type devices in R4.
Main highlights for me were some of the new brushes, subtool management and the shadow box tool.

SheepFactory

07-29-2010, 07:32 PM

Per-Anders

07-29-2010, 07:39 PM

More new brushes? :/ Does it at least have some better organization tools, filters, groups and stuff for handling this ever increasing overload of tools and presets?

Also has the labeling changed at all in the GUI? I mean away from meaningless acronyms?

mecos

07-29-2010, 08:45 PM

Agreed, the 2.5D stuff is some pretty impressive "crap".

the 2.5d stuff is the only aspect i use professionally, all other tools i just use as a hobby.

duke

07-29-2010, 11:03 PM

Nice enough, but would rather an interface redesign. Also, the hard edge stuff is neat, but oh god the imprecision!

claybub

07-29-2010, 11:17 PM

wowza, some people have obnoxiously high expectations for zbrush. Pixologic seems like an honest company to me and they've been giving artists really innovative tools in their upgrades which are FREE. I've only had to buy zbrush once. they could have introduced a more profitable business model, but they didnt. I await zbrush 4's release with giddy anticipation and will continue to be very grateful for everything they've accomplished.

R10k

07-30-2010, 02:04 AM

Ditto on that, claybub.

NinthJake

07-30-2010, 03:22 AM

Well I have been thinking ever since the animation announcement that Pixologic is working too hard trying to make Zbrush an "All-in-one" program rather than focusing on the sculpting features that made it famous.

Though I can't deny the fact that this looks completely AWESOME! =D

meleseDESIGN

07-30-2010, 06:09 AM

Wasn't the animation features mainly developed by a guy named Darukin?

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=61937
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=74724

Well I have been thinking ever since the animation announcement that Pixologic is working too hard...

pencil-head

07-30-2010, 06:24 AM

Wasn't the animation features mainly developed by a guy named Darukin?

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=61937
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=74724

He could be referring to these animations maybe? http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=86043

rasamaya

07-30-2010, 06:29 AM

No connexion support :(
I read a few people made the request at siggraph and conversed with Connexion.
Apparently they are working together on it, but i have heard that before.
I hope zbrush gets it before mudbox.

At least we have paint layerers, lets see if its workable.

Everything else feels a little fluffy to me still.
Nothing worth a pre-order.
I would never do my hardsurfaces in Z, or animation...
And how do they expect you to export the new fur?

Hope not to sound like a Troll.
My eyes are lurking the threads for other secrets and more info on paint layers.

X fingers

velesius

07-30-2010, 09:22 AM

To be honest, Pixologic's marketing about zb 4 slightly strange. Why so many secrets about it during and even after Siggraph (so good PR platform fo zb)? Just few words from peoples from the conference (thank them). There is some amazing videos (pixologic always did excelent presentations, often much better then features itself), but no full list of final improvements, only a whole lot of questions without answers. So if someone will pre-order zb4 now, he will obtain "cat in the bag". One more thing-upgarde will be free for all current users. Excelent and very user friendly strategy, but there is one shortcoming-in my opinion free upgrade decreases developer's responsibility before users. After release of zb 3.5 r1,2 many users was complaining about its glitches, and another users (fanboys maybe, but not official Pixologic) sometimes told them that no one forced them to use zb 3.5, and how they dare to complain on free upgrade. I hope not to sound like a Troll too. I'm zb user since 2005 and I like to work with it, hope the next release will be little revolution, like 3.1 was.

alexentremont

07-30-2010, 11:42 AM

Indeed, the marketing strategy is a bit wierd : if ZBrush 4 is going to be released in 10 days, why not announce it formally at Siggraph????
ZB is a great tool, but Pixologic leaves me clueless from time to time (yes, I'm a mac user still waiting for ZB 3.5...).

phobos

07-30-2010, 12:16 PM

Supposedly we would have more info after siggraph but it's amazing how little we know about the new release after it.
Aside from a few people posting about what they saw, the excitement about Zbrush even from the developer side seems flat.
I'm waiting with excitement for the 9th of august which in a usual pixologic way is going to be the 10th but I'm getting prepared for a new set of bugs that probably will never be addressed.
I guess we will have to wait and see.

Nothingness

07-30-2010, 12:22 PM

I'm waiting with excitement for the 9th of august which in a usual pixologic way is going to be the 10th but I'm getting prepared for a new set of bugs that probably will never be addressed.
I guess we will have to wait and see.

you're not in the same timezone so by the time they might release it, you could be ready for bed-time.

velesius

07-30-2010, 12:36 PM

One more remark. Since Zbrush never was the stablest software on the Earth, Pixologic should release its trial(even 7 days will be enough) as soon as possible.

DDS

07-30-2010, 01:53 PM

One more remark. Since Zbrush never was the stablest software on the Earth, Pixologic should release its trial(even 7 days will be enough) as soon as possible.

thats precisely why they won't...:)

Nothingness

07-30-2010, 02:23 PM

One more remark. Since Zbrush never was the stablest software on the Earth, Pixologic should release its trial(even 7 days will be enough) as soon as possible.

Pixologic already have a big beta-tester group. So why would they.

velesius

07-30-2010, 02:53 PM

Pixologic already have a big beta-tester group. So why would they.
Simply because trial it's a manifestation of respect to their future users, which want know what for they will pay. No more no less. Zb 3.5 also had beta-tester group, but real beta-testing began after release of 3.5 r1. And we all was beta-testers. The same thing was with zb 3.0.
It reminds me situation with one game called S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky. In the day of release, game come to stores on 2 dvds, game and patch for it, which was made one or two days before. But even with that patch game was impassable with tonn of glitches. Many patches after, the game become usable.

R10k

07-30-2010, 02:59 PM

Pixologic already have a big beta-tester group. So why would they.

Possibly because after a great deal of beta testing, 3.5 arrived with some incredibly obvious bugs. Five seconds into the program and I could see things that made me question whether it'd been through a proper beta testing process. Seriously, I know of children who could've picked up on the issues, let alone someone with experience looking to properly test the program. I have a few theories on why that happened, but suffice to say, there's nothing like just getting the program into the hands of the general public.

Nothingness

07-30-2010, 03:20 PM

You could say this about all program builders.

in a way, you are just saying the current out-of-sight beta testers are no good because it came out with some bugs (how many big and advanced apps do you know come out without a bug - there still are only a few).

Who said that those bugs were never reported? Who knows they may have slipped into the completion of the beta. Who says it's not just pixologic that had a shit-load of bugs to fix, and went for the ones that were more critical. Bug have a rating you know.

And besides, maybe they should just be more carefull on who to include in the testing phase.

R10k

07-30-2010, 03:35 PM

in a way, you are just saying the current out-of-sight beta testers are no good because it came out with some bugs (how many big and advanced apps do you know come out without a bug - there still are only a few).

I'm not talking about 'some bugs'. I'm talking about bugs that are so obvious one would think the 'beta testers' didn't actually load the program up. But, that's getting OT. The point is, Zbrush could use more than a Pixologic style beta test.

Who said that those bugs were never reported?

Hey, who knows. Maybe aliens came and collected the reports in the night. Maybe the dog ate them. This is fun... let's speculate some more, shall we?

And besides, maybe they should just be more carefull on who to include in the testing phase.

Like I said, I have theories on why it happened. But, that's not the point. You're the one who asked why they might use more than a beta. As you've managed to answer your own question, you can obviously see why.

Nothingness

07-30-2010, 03:45 PM

You're the one who asked why they might use more than a beta. As you've managed to answer your own question, you can obviously see why.

I didn't asked that question nor did i awnsered it.

my point is: little companies have open beta's so stop naggin'

SheepFactory

07-30-2010, 04:19 PM

I agree with r10k. There are bugs in zbrush that should have been fixed long ago. Hopefully they are fixed for this release.

R10k

07-30-2010, 04:23 PM

I didn't asked that question nor did i awnsered it.

True, you're right- you didn't answer it. But, two people answered your question from before, so I have no idea why you think you didn't ask that question (not that you were asking for an answer).

my point is: little companies have open beta's so stop naggin'

What the...? That was your point? Talk about miscommunication. Ah well. Time to move on.

Nothingness

07-30-2010, 04:30 PM

Talk about miscommunication.

most possibly.

my point in fact should be something like this: Pixologic is stuborn so an open beta will have no more effect than a closed one.
Zbrush is not the only one that gets users upset.

BigPixolin

07-30-2010, 04:37 PM

most possibly.

my point in fact should be something like this: Pixologic is stuborn so an open beta will have no more effect than a closed one.

True they are not going to fix any bugs found with a update or patch so there really is no point.

R10k

07-31-2010, 01:17 AM

I agree with you on that, Nothingness.

ice-boy

07-31-2010, 09:10 AM

siggraph is over so why i are they waiting with the new video?

ambient-whisper

07-31-2010, 03:23 PM

siggraph is over so why i are they waiting with the new video?
Weekend. Plus they don't owe you a new vid.

ice-boy

07-31-2010, 06:45 PM

they dont owe me. i forgot about the weekend ;)

is anytone thinking that this update will not be as big as zbrush 3?

Magnus3D

07-31-2010, 07:01 PM

Nope! this update will be bigger and better than release 3. :)
Really looking forward to it now, only a few days more to go until the real fun starts.

/ Magnus

R10k

08-01-2010, 09:10 AM

When you say, 'real fun', you mean a giant CGTalk thread filled with bitching and moaning about every conceivable thing, right? ;)

Fumetsu

08-01-2010, 09:51 AM

When you say, 'real fun', you mean a giant CGTalk thread filled with bitching and moaning about every conceivable thing, right? ;)

Why would there be a thread filled with bitching and moaning? It looks like a good release, especially for a free update :D

R10k

08-01-2010, 10:15 AM

Because this is CgTalk, where common sense often plays no part.

BigPixolin

08-01-2010, 04:43 PM

Maybe because this is mostly a professional forum where free upgrades should play no part and really only makes the situation worst.

Veehoy

08-01-2010, 06:32 PM

Funny though.....the 3DCoat thread with their "next big thang" dies after 29 post, while this one keeps on going, despite ZB4 lacking some new big feature (according to some, at least)....yup, Pix owes some people a big thanks :D

R10k

08-02-2010, 02:04 AM

The 3D Coat thread 'died' because it wasn't full of guys complaining.

Fumetsu

08-02-2010, 03:36 AM

Maybe because this is mostly a professional forum where free upgrades should play no part and really only makes the situation worst.

I don't understand, why shouldn't a free upgrade play any part in a professional forum? And please explain how it makes the situation worse.

The developers at pixologic are human you know, and this is what they thought was important to work on. And if they were wrong, I guess they will learn from their mistake. But I don't think this one mistake (which according to the complaints is not having a 64 bit version) is going to put them out of business.

jpatel

08-02-2010, 03:57 PM

I spent some time watching demos in their booth at SIGGRAPH. Shadow Box, Spotlight, the curve cut tool, painting in layers and being able to save as projects rather than only ZTools seems like a pretty solid release to me.

Unfortunately it's not 64bit yet. When I asked them about that they said it's in the works but they have reasons why it's not 64bit yet.

meleseDESIGN

08-02-2010, 04:31 PM

I guess you asked for the reasons why it's still not 64bit?
What did they tell you? Maybe they said 64bit is not really important since you can use subtools?
Don't get me wrong, I am just wondering as much as everyone why ZB still isn't 64bit.

Unfortunately it's not 64bit yet. When I asked them about that they said it's in the works but they have reasons why it's not 64bit yet.

iatriki

08-02-2010, 05:08 PM

jpatel

08-02-2010, 05:48 PM

Does it have layer blending modes?

No. They said they're working on that too. But you can decrease the opacity of a layer. The painting in layers was a little wierd in that you have to hit the record button on the layer to record what you paint. I'm hoping that's not too much of a pain.

Phrenzy84

08-02-2010, 06:16 PM

...But you can decrease the opacity of a layer. The painting in layers was a little wierd in that you have to hit the record button on the layer to record what you paint. I'm hoping that's not too much of a pain.

I really hope it isnt that confusing. The reason most of us are accustomed to layers is because of Photoshop and since then most of us have the expectation that it should be as simple.

Is it me or do you feel Pixologic has an ace up its sleeve, some rockstar feature that we will all go gaga for? I guess we might find out tonight or tomorrow? (that is if they let post a video and stop keeping us in the dark :))

hobo

08-02-2010, 06:30 PM

Is it me or do you feel Pixologic has an ace up its sleeve, some rockstar feature that we will all go gaga for? )

I'd say so too ...

ice-boy

08-02-2010, 06:44 PM

so it takes 3-5 years to make layers with blending modes?

BigJay

08-02-2010, 06:49 PM

I'm not expecting a new gaga feature right out the bag with 4.0. Although if it is anything like the 3.5 updates we could see lots of new features come out based on the ones they setup in 4.0.

Look at the way you can paint z-spheres onto an object. So if they have layers and the ability to save your work in a form that doesn't drop everything to the canvas I'm already excited.

WyattHarris

08-02-2010, 06:50 PM

No. They said they're working on that too. But you can decrease the opacity of a layer. The painting in layers was a little wierd in that you have to hit the record button on the layer to record what you paint. I'm hoping that's not too much of a pain.
Hit the record button? I'll have to see that to understand I guess.

jpatel

08-02-2010, 07:20 PM

Hit the record button? I'll have to see that to understand I guess.

They were going through stuff fast, so I didn't get all the nuances, but it seemed that every layer has a record button and when you want to paint on a specific layer you have to hit the record button. You can paint and sculpt on a layer or do it separately. The good thing is if you paint and sculpt on the same layer and decide you want to separate the paint from the sculpt there's a button for that. I'm just not sure what happens if you start painting without turning on record. I hope it warns you or doesn't let you do it so you don't spend time painting only to realise it didn't stick.

WyattHarris

08-02-2010, 07:36 PM

I'm just not sure what happens if you start painting without turning on record. I hope it warns you or doesn't let you do it so you don't spend time painting only to realise it didn't stick.
I hope so too. Even after all this time it still sometimes feels like arm-wrestling with ZBrush.

CHRiTTeR

08-02-2010, 07:45 PM

R10k

08-03-2010, 02:31 AM

Although i silently hoped v4 was going to be a rewrite... guess not. :(

Same, although I suspect a rewrite is now (still?) underway, and that's what's holding up the 64bit side of Zbrush.

Ordibble-Plop

08-03-2010, 02:52 AM

Which in turn may have been held up until they could unify their PC and MAC code - would it make much sense to rewrite code before that was done?

inverse catheter

08-03-2010, 03:51 AM

with the release getting nearer i'm becoming more and more nervous. with every kick ass feature they implement ( and there are many ) it feels like 9 times out of 10 it'll be coupled with a kick you in the balls workflow and very little consideration to it's accessibility and flow within the ramshackled ui

working in zbrush is like dining at a restaurant where. while the food itself is awesome. you have to put up with the psychopath of a chef taking a massive dump right in the middle of your plate. and then behaving like it's a feature of the meal

Fumetsu

08-03-2010, 03:57 AM

jpatel

08-03-2010, 12:43 PM

I guess you asked for the reasons why it's still not 64bit?
What did they tell you? Maybe they said 64bit is not really important since you can use subtools?
Don't get me wrong, I am just wondering as much as everyone why ZB still isn't 64bit.

I did ask what the reason is but he wouldn't tell me. He just smiled and said they can't talk about it yet.

Phrenzy84

08-03-2010, 01:02 PM

I did ask what the reason is but he wouldn't tell me. He just smiled and said they can't talk about it yet.

yep, i get the feeling Zbrush is dramatically gonna change over the next few years. Ofer, Jack and anyone else working on Z know that in order for the app to grow and become more featured without hindering the creative process, certain ... probably architectural changes need to be made.

And i think that's also why people have been hinting that this will be the last of the free updates. I wouldn't be surprised if the next incarnation of Zbrush took more than 12 months, picture 18 or possibly 24 (though that is quite a stretch).

BTW this is all speculation and rumor and is in no way factual. :)

velesius

08-03-2010, 02:22 PM

Phrenzy84

08-03-2010, 03:26 PM

Maybe they really want to rewrite it, maybe. One thing I can't understand-why so many secrets around future of zb. Even around zb 4, which, I hope, will be released in few days. There is impression that Pixologic writes soft for the Ministry of Defence, CIA etc. Why not to publish general roadmap of the software, without any dates, just general roadmap, to show customers possible future of zb. Yes, roadmap will provoke many wishes about some features, but some of them will be really useful, right? Look at the "zbrush 4 wishlist" thread at the zbrushcentral. There is so many useful for everyone ideas there. Look at modo, for example. They speak with their customers much more intensively than Pixologic do, and we can see modo's new features few months before its release date. Anyway, I hope Pixologic knows what they do.
There was one famous software called Sofimage|3D. In 1999(or near) Avid decided rewrite its old core, and in 2000 was released Softimage|XSI 1.0, the successor to Softimage|3D. It was very raw and imperfective. So many big studios choose Maya (which was developed 2 years before) as their main 3d software, and Softimage lose its leadership. Now Autodesk Softimage-just a good companion (read-ICE plugin) for the Maya or 3ds max.

I understand your frustration, i want to know everything that they have planned. I think i have a reasons why they dont publicly give a roadmap and why some others do.

Pixologic has big competition. If they decide to do a bunch of tests or give a broad overview of what they have in mind for future releases, Autodesk (which as they should) will be looking to implement these features themselves.

And by the looks of things, Autodesk has a much larger resources to pull it off quicker than Pixologic.

The main reason in my mind as to why Modo is so open, is its a growing 3d application. Maya and 3ds max have done their growing up. All they can do now is adapt and change to the environment, which is definitely a lesser evil. (Could you imagine them re-writing the animation core of maya just to keep up with Modo's take on it?)

Modo is adding things iteratively, making sure they get things right as they go along. Its an amazing luxury for them because 3 years from now, Modo might sit in a few more studios because they did things right. Although to my understanding they dont have an API which would definitely hurt them in the VFX world.

Either way, Modo, Lightwave Core .. cant think of any others are trying to carve out what could almost be considered as the next gen 3d programs. Focusing on architecture and problems that plague artists/studios today and probably tomorrow. 3ds Max, Maya etc never had to think about normal maps, GI, Fluids, Dynamics in the same way they do today as they did 12+ years ago.

So in some instances its only because of the current situation of programs out there, that its ok to be secretive and at other times, benificial to be open.

But no matter what... there will always be wishlist's (even the modo forums have them :)) and i think just about every 3d company listens to users requests.... and if they are smart, listens to their competitors users requests.

Joebount

08-03-2010, 04:07 PM

I'm not asking for much, I just want not to have to flip my textures every freaking time I import or export them...

Anyway, looking forward to it (but weirdly enough, not excited one bit :-/)

CHRiTTeR

08-03-2010, 06:02 PM

R10k

08-04-2010, 02:28 AM

I'm not asking for much, I just want not to have to flip my textures every freaking time I import or export them...

Not that that's a bad request, but can't you just set up a Zscript to do that?

Crusoe the Painter

08-04-2010, 02:33 PM

64 bit support can be tricky. First the code has to be 64 bit clean, with no assumptions made about the size of pointers by other areas of the code base.

Also, the memory intensiveness of the application, and its use of logging unused objects to the file system, and compacting memory, makes the program a pain to debug. Just switching to 64 bit w/o going over it with a fine toothed comb, and running it through something like valgrind ( which would slow it way done ) is asking for trouble. All it takes is missing one spot where the code made some bad assumptions about pointer size, and you get a subtle bug that causes random crashes and is difficult to track down.

BigPixolin

08-04-2010, 08:23 PM

No blending modes for layers?
Press record to paint on the layer?
No 64-bit support?
Instead tools to make a still images jiggle?
Zbrush is truly weird.
I can't wait for the floods of girls boobs jiggling and characters walking off into the canvas I mean sunset.
But hey it's free.
Flame on.

SheepFactory

08-04-2010, 08:23 PM

BigPixolin

08-04-2010, 08:25 PM

Did they announce some new features somewhere?
No this is just what I gather from what has been released and said in this thread by those who seen it.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 01:35 AM

Yes, the problem is they are building all this stuff on a foundation that was designed for 2.5D painting... and its getting problematic.

Maybe thats why they bought sculptris... a fresh start with a foundation designed for 3D sculpting and painting.

Wait, what? 2.5D is the idea of storing depth on the canvas. This has absolutely nothing to do with 3D sculpting in Zbrush. The only remants from the 2.5D UI are documents and the edit button, that's it. But for some stupid unexplainable reason the 2.5D buzz word continues to stick with the App like it's still somehow magically dragging it down. Go figure.

They bought Sculptris because it's a damn smart little app that came up with a very practical solution to getting true digital clay that is both fast and requires less polygons. Sculptris does have a great interface, but it also does not have to hold as many features. Also Sculptris' painting is medicore at best and requires you to stop sculpting completely.

___________________________________________________________________________

Anyways I went to Siggraph and checked out the Zbrush booth on several occasions. All the new features I saw looked very useful. One in particular that caught my attention is the Topo Brush which allows you to move around the topology independently while retaining the surface mass. Even animation, which I was very skeptical of, looked practical for testing Morph targets (much improved btw) and blending displacement maps.

Don't get me wrong there are improvements I'd love to see in Zbrush, in particular better painting without the poly paint and 64-bit, but when it comes down to it Pixologic is still pumping out practical features that make me want to continue using it as my primary sculpting app.

R10k

08-05-2010, 03:08 AM

The only remants from the 2.5D UI are documents and the edit button, that's it. But for some stupid unexplainable reason the 2.5D buzz word continues to stick with the App like it's still somehow magically dragging it down.

What's so magical about it? A lot of the lighting, the materials, the way a lot of the tools work, and a bunch of other stuff reminds me every time I use it that Zbrush is designed for 2.5D work, and the rest is bolted on top of that. Part of that combination of both 2.5D and 3D is what makes Zbrush so powerful. But, it hasn't exactly resulted in a clean (and entirely obvious) separation of the two.

ThE_JacO

08-05-2010, 03:17 AM

Wait, what? 2.5D is the idea of storing depth on the canvas. This has absolutely nothing to do with 3D sculpting in Zbrush. The only remants from the 2.5D UI are documents and the edit button, that's it. But for some stupid unexplainable reason the 2.5D buzz word continues to stick with the App like it's still somehow magically dragging it down. Go figure.
Last I read any posts or doco, they still pimp pixols as the core concept of ZB, and there are many features and artifacts in it that literally scream 2.5D.
How has that got nothing to do with 3D sculpting in ZB? And it's not like edit is just a tiny button somewhere, when you stop moving the camera and you start painting, you are affecting pixols, not a dense mesh, or a grid of voxels.

2.5D isn't a buzzword, it's what a number of things actually are, like it or not.
Or maybe we should stop call 3D apps that, because they offer 4D (or even more sometimes) the moment they have a timeline?

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 04:14 AM

Last I read any posts or doco, they still pimp pixols as the core concept of ZB, and there are many features and artifacts in it that literally scream 2.5D.
How has that got nothing to do with 3D sculpting in ZB? And it's not like edit is just a tiny button somewhere, when you stop moving the camera and you start painting, you are affecting pixols, not a dense mesh, or a grid of voxels.

I don't know, you tell me, what exactly is so dramatically different about Zbrush's pixol that makes Zbrush's 3D sculpting workflow distinctively 2.5D. Last time I checked sculpting in Zbrush and Mudbox is pretty similar when you get down to the brass tacks, so someone here please help me understand how this theoretical 2.5D problem is getting in the way of your sculpting. I'm just trying to point out how ridiculous and misinformed of a complaint it is.

In the context of 2.5 painting in zbrush, a pixol is just a pixel with depth + material values, in the context of a sculpting it makes up a poly with color and material values. Call me old fashioned but I consider a polygon when at least 3 lines intersect to make a plane and Pixologic may want to call it something different but it's still polygon sculpting.

2.5D isn't a buzzword, it's what a number of things actually are, like it or not.
Or maybe we should stop call 3D apps that, because they offer 4D (or even more sometimes) the moment they have a timeline?
You are right, it's not, used in the right context. Again I'm referring to when people try to claim somehow zbrush is being dragged down by some 2.5D problem. I called it a buzz word because people toss it around as if Zbrush is some alien software.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 04:32 AM

R10k

08-05-2010, 04:37 AM

I'm just trying to point out how ridiculous and misinformed of a complaint it is.

No, you were also making comment about how the UI lacked remnants of a 2.5D workflow, which is untrue.

I called it a buzz word because people toss it around as if Zbrush is some alien software.

It's the only program in the world that allows you to swap between a fully 3D workflow and one that's locked down to a 2.5D canvas. Why is it so wrong to consider that alien?

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 04:51 AM

What's so magical about it? A lot of the lighting, the materials, the way a lot of the tools work, and a bunch of other stuff reminds me every time I use it that Zbrush is designed for 2.5D work, and the rest is bolted on top of that. Part of that combination of both 2.5D and 3D is what makes Zbrush so powerful. But, it hasn't exactly resulted in a clean (and entirely obvious) separation of the two.
Zbrush definitely has it's apparent differences in the way it displays objects and handles materials, but you wouldn't call working on a Model 2.5D work. If your manipulating something in space and can view it from all angles you are working in the 3rd dimension. Mat Caps/ Lit Spheres may be a 2D way of shading but that's not something unique to Zbrush or 2.5D.

For me it's the exact opposite, with each new Zbrush it gets harder to imagine it was conceived as a 2.5D painting software. All the 3D related buttons, menus, and tools have taken the front seat and you start with a mesh. Aside from a few naming conventions and left-over menus, a new user could easily pick it for their 3D sculpting needs and know nothing of 2.5D.

R10k

08-05-2010, 05:02 AM

Zbrush definitely has it's apparent differences in the way it displays objects and handles materials, but you wouldn't call working on a Model 2.5D work.

No, and I don't think anyone is debating you on that point.

Aside from a few naming conventions and left-over menus, a new user could easily pick it for their 3D sculpting needs and know nothing of 2.5D.

I half agree with you. On one hand, yes, a new user could. But, unlike every other bit of sculpting software out there, the new user also needs to navigate their way around the canvas aspect of the program to get things done. I don't think the 2.5D aspect is just leftovers. I think it's still a huge part of the program, one any new user couldn't help but notice.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 05:05 AM

No, you were also making comment about how the UI lacked remnants of a 2.5D workflow, which is untrue.
I exaggerated a bit and was wrong. All that stuff definitely is still there, it's just less in the forefront. The majority of what makes up the Zbrush interface has to do with 3D.

It's the only program in the world that allows you to swap between a fully 3D workflow and one that's locked down to a 2.5D canvas. Why is it so wrong to consider that alien?
2.5D may be alien to people but most of those 2.5D tools are independent of the 3D environment.

DimensionalPunk

08-05-2010, 05:07 AM

Okay, I'm the one who brought up 2.5D, so let me explain what I meant. ZBrush was originally intended to be an illustrating application, with 2.5D pixols being the backbone of the program. In ZBrush 1 it booted up to show the 2D canvas where you could play with painting pixols. 3D artists noticed that you can also import .obj files to use with your illustration, not only that but you could leave it in edit mode and sculpt, sweet!

Of coarse, the 2D part of ZBrush never really caught on, but 3D artists loved being able to really sculpt for the first time with digital clay. Pixologic saw this and the rest is history. As much as ZBrush has changed, it still feels like using a program for something it wasn't intended for. The funky unintuitive workflow is a result of the program originally being intended for 2.5D work. That's what I meant.

rasamaya

08-05-2010, 05:16 AM

what!
So I select a layer and then hit record for layer painting? how does transparency look with modeling?
Why cant I just select a layer, then that is active aka recording.
Layered painting and the connexion support were all I wanted.

No connexion support... and I am getting nervous about layers now.

still, fingers are crossed.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 05:21 AM

I exaggerated a bit and was wrong. All that stuff definitely is still there, it's just less in the forefront. The majority of what makes up the Zbrush interface has to do with 3D.

2.5D may be alien to people but most of those 2.5D tools are independent of the 3D environment.

There is no 3d environment at all. It is a 2.5d canvas with a 3d model loaded into it.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 05:30 AM

I'm sorry but it is not ridiculous or misinformed. The 2.5d problems I can think of off the top of my head are the fact there are no cameras, no true 3d view, no multiple viewports, weird perspective, working with a 3d model on a 2.5D "canvas" and not in 3d space, models that disappear into this canvas, no 3d painting. I am sure there are more too.
When what you need is a 3d sculpting and 3d painting app 2.5d is in fact dragging that down.
Most of what you've mentioned has nothing to do with 2.5d, but here you go anyways:

1. You don't need cameras, you are sculpting. Multiple view ports with dense meshes would be unnecessarily taxing on performance.
2. Perspective can be set to the origin or local to where you sculpt. Zbrush does have it's own way of handling perspective but that's not due to 2.5d.
3. Zbrush does work in 3D space. Don't believe me, turn on the grid.
4. Models don't disappear into the canvas unless you are working on a canvas with overlapping parts.
5. 3D painting exists in Zbrush, but it just needs a major overhaul. The projection master needs to be scraped in favor of texture projection that is not dependent on the canvas resolution and instantaneous.

I do agree with the complaints on 3D painting, I myself take models over to Mudbox for texturing. Hopefully spotlite will fix these problems and not be limited to just poly painting.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 05:57 AM

There is no 3d environment at all. It is a 2.5d canvas with a 3d model loaded into it.
So you are really telling me this does not look like a 3D environment to you?
http://a.imageshack.us/img269/9141/zbrush.th.jpg (http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9141/zbrush.jpg)

Zbrush 2 lacked a 3D environment, but things changed with Zbrush 3. It may still play by it's own rules, but you can navigate 3D space with perspective. For me that's enough to call it a 3D environment. Sure the model may actually be what's getting rotated around but the illusion still reads.

It may not control or behave like other apps viewport, but who cares when it does such a great job keeping your view pivot local when sculpting.

PorkpieSamurai

08-05-2010, 06:33 AM

I like sculpting in Zbrush but for production work I need to start the model in Mudbox first to make sure my forms are accurate in 3d space. Even with perspective turned on in Zbrush your not going to have the same looking model in Maya as your seeing in Zbrush. The real strength to Z is how much resolution it can handle for detailing and the array of brushes available to the artist but I really think its necessary to have both programs in production.

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 08:52 AM

Zbrush 2 lacked a 3D environment, but things changed with Zbrush 3.

Bollocks. Zbrush still doesn't have a proper 3D space. You still scale and move the object instead of rotating the camera, but now there's a grid linked to the object too - oh my, I'm amazed.

Their entire subtool system is a workaround to having multiple objects in a scene because of this, too. The core workings haven't changed since Zbrush 2 at all, it's all hacks and it starts to show.

CHRiTTeR

08-05-2010, 10:51 AM

Wait, what? 2.5D is the idea of storing depth on the canvas. This has absolutely nothing to do with 3D sculpting in Zbrush.

Oh but it does...

When you make a fishing boat, you try to optimally design everything so it makes you catch the fishies as optimal as possible.

Now, try to adjust that finished design to do some speedsailing also.

Depending on your skills it will work, maybe even quite good. But it will never work as good as you made a boat designed to do speedsailing from the ground up.

or

build a small cottage. You obviously apply the foundation required for that cottage.
But over time you need more space and have more and more requirements so you keep adding stuff. It keeps getting bigger and bigger... Do you think the foundations designed for a small cottage can hold a skyscraper?

its the same thing basicly.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 12:36 PM

Even with perspective turned on in Zbrush your not going to have the same looking model in Maya as your seeing in Zbrush.
I completely agree. Zbrush's different perspective makes life very difficult when you bring the model into Maya. It is a problem, I'm not denying that.

Bollocks. Zbrush still doesn't have a proper 3D space. You still scale and move the object instead of rotating the camera, but now there's a grid linked to the object too - oh my, I'm amazed.
It may not be a true 3D environment but the illusion works. It's not perfect, but it's not like Zbrush is incapable of giving the user the impression they are viewing and moving objects around in 3D space.

Their entire subtool system is a workaround to having multiple objects in a scene because of this, too. The core workings haven't changed since Zbrush 2 at all, it's all hacks and it starts to show.
But Subtools are functional. If a workaround works and in practice is not at all limiting is it still worth complaining about? The core of the app definitely hasn't changed since Zbrush 2 but the illusion of 3D space is better at least to the point where it's not so apparent that you are just scaling and rotating an object. Zbrush may be filled with visual tricks and workarounds but it still has its advantages that keep us using it.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 12:52 PM

Most of what you've mentioned has nothing to do with 2.5d, but here you go anyways:

1. You don't need cameras, you are sculpting. Multiple view ports with dense meshes would be unnecessarily taxing on performance.
2. Perspective can be set to the origin or local to where you sculpt. Zbrush does have it's own way of handling perspective but that's not due to 2.5d.
3. Zbrush does work in 3D space. Don't believe me, turn on the grid.
4. Models don't disappear into the canvas unless you are working on a canvas with overlapping parts.
5. 3D painting exists in Zbrush, but it just needs a major overhaul. The projection master needs to be scraped in favor of texture projection that is not dependent on the canvas resolution and instantaneous.

I do agree with the complaints on 3D painting, I myself take models over to Mudbox for texturing. Hopefully spotlite will fix these problems and not be limited to just poly painting.

1. If it is taxing or not is not the issue here. They are not there because it is NOT a 3d environment.
2. Umm yes it is. What you are seeing is a illusion of perspective. Thats the reason the perspective can change when you add a subtool.
3. the floor grid does not make zbrush true 3d space.
4. The fact that they disappear at all is one reason why working with a 3d model in 2.5d can be a "drag".
5. 3d painting does not exists in Zbrush, you can paint on a 3d model but it isn't a true 3d painting system.

So you are really telling me this does not look like a 3D environment to you?
http://a.imageshack.us/img269/9141/zbrush.th.jpg (http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9141/zbrush.jpg)

Zbrush 2 lacked a 3D environment, but things changed with Zbrush 3. It may still play by it's own rules, but you can navigate 3D space with perspective. For me that's enough to call it a 3D environment. Sure the model may actually be what's getting rotated around but the illusion still reads.

It may not control or behave like other apps viewport, but who cares when it does such a great job keeping your view pivot local when sculpting.

There are guys out there that look like lady's so be careful.
The only thing that changed with Zbrush 3 in regards to the perspective issues is they improved on the illusion of perspective and then they improved on it more with 3.5 making distortions when adding subtools less noticeable. Call it what you want but you are not navigating 3d space in zbrush you are rotating a 3d model on a 2.5d canvas.

EDIT: I didn't see your above post we must of been posting at the same time.

Stellios

08-05-2010, 01:00 PM

I'm sorry but it is not ridiculous or misinformed. The 2.5d problems I can think of off the top of my head are the fact there are no cameras, no true 3d view, no multiple viewports, weird perspective, working with a 3d model on a 2.5D "canvas" and not in 3d space, models that disappear into this canvas, no 3d painting. I am sure there are more too.
When what you need is a 3d sculpting and 3d painting app 2.5d is in fact dragging that down.

2.5d paved the way. Lets remember what technology revolutionized digital sculpting. Without it I seriously doubt we would be where we are today. If you dont like it, mudbox in my opinion has become quite the product, try that?

As to your complaints, while they may be valid i dont see what the big deal. 3,5 introduced all the things you need to simulate a real camera and Ive never had aproblem with that. 3d painting i could care less about because mari is coming and really what else would you need? your models dissappear on your canvas? Hasnt happen to me in over 5 years of using zbrush.

Im more concerned about how zbrush is really lacking some real production level tools. Vector displacement fbx import that uses imported rigs, ptex, autoretopology (or something other than the archaic topology tools that are in zbrush as a gag) Proper map generation workflow.

Zbrush has its pros and cons for sure, gone are the days where they are the big fish in the pond, they have some real competitors now.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 01:09 PM

2.5d paved the way. Lets remember what technology revolutionized digital sculpting. Without it I seriously doubt we would be where we are today. If you dont like it, mudbox in my opinion has become quite the product, try that?

Nobody is denying that. I didn't say I didn't like it. What we are talking about is, that it is becoming more and more noticeable that the 3d is built on top of the 2.5d and can cause some issues.
I have Mudbox, both have their strengths and weakness of coarse. I still prefer Zbrush.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 01:36 PM

Yeah, lets find some common ground here cause quite frankly I don't even know what the point of all this is anymore.

Zbrush does play by it's own rules, but in terms of sculpting I don't find it's differences inhibiting the workflow aside from the perspective differences between applications. The painting to me a bigger issue but it's not like I can't do that in another app. What I'm not convinced of is the idea that these setbacks can only be resolved by a ground up re-write of the software.

The application may have it's roots in 2.5D painting but I don't think it's so far lost in it's foundation as a 2.5D painting software that it's beyond repair and not functionable as a 3D artist's tool. The foundation is blamed for a lot of UI complaints, but those complaints are often exaggerated by people who don't devote the time to picking up a new software that's not immediately familiar. There is room to streamline the UI and trim off some fat, but it's not like 2.5 painting tools are cluttering up the workspace when I'm trying to sculpt.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 01:46 PM

Im more concerned about how zbrush is really lacking some real production level tools. Vector displacement fbx import that uses imported rigs, ptex, autoretopology (or something other than the archaic topology tools that are in zbrush as a gag) Proper map generation workflow.

Those are my thoughts exactly, but toss in 64-bit as well. Tried auto re-topology in 3Dcoat the other day. Pretty fantastic despite the flaws and how unnecessarily difficult it is to bring in a pre-existing mesh to apply it to.

Speaking of apps in dire need of a UI re-organization 3DCoat almost makes Zbrush look like a stallion. Lots of cool stuff in there, but I think they've lost sight of their initial plans to make a more streamlined interface.

Nemoid

08-05-2010, 02:06 PM

The concepts aroound whick ZBrush is built aren't the same of the ones of a traditional 3D app, this is why you have no real 3D environment. But despite this you can obtain nice results in terms of sculpting. If that was not the case, WETA couldn't do so well in LOTR with ZB. BTW, time passes, technology evolves, so now is possible to have real 3d environment in apps like Mudbox and 3D Coat which came after ZBrush.
All in all i consider ZBrush an artist oriented app, not forcely having to work with a 3D app. its clear that other apps have their advantages too, in a production pipeline.
So, i wouldn't expect a rewrite of ZBrush fot the perspective problems.

Nemoid

08-05-2010, 02:12 PM

Anyways I went to Siggraph and checked out the Zbrush booth on several occasions. All the new features I saw looked very useful. One in particular that caught my attention is the Topo Brush which allows you to move around the topology independently while retaining the surface mass. Even animation, which I was very skeptical of, looked practical for testing Morph targets (much improved btw) and blending displacement maps.

Don't get me wrong there are improvements I'd love to see in Zbrush, in particular better painting without the poly paint and 64-bit, but when it comes down to it Pixologic is still pumping out practical features that make me want to continue using it as my primary sculpting app.

Could you elaborate a bit more ? Me courious about topo brush and animation features ! :buttrock:

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 02:13 PM

When you make a fishing boat, you try to optimally design everything so it makes you catch the fishies as optimal as possible.

I'm sorry but I have no clue what you're trying to say here.

Anyway, 2.5D in Zbrush was good for Projection Master which basically used the canvas and its Z info to project details back onto the surface. Now we prefer to sculpt in 3D and in realtime with proper feedback, instead of projecting all the time.

Although it still has its uses (see Sebcessoir's environment and mech work).

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 02:14 PM

If a workaround works and in practice is not at all limiting is it still worth complaining about?

The hell it isn't limiting...

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 02:16 PM

If that was not the case, WETA couldn't do so well in LOTR with ZB.

You do realize that Weta decided to develop Mudbox because they were having serious issues with the development direction of Zbrush? So, if they were right in one case then they should be right in the other as well?

CHRiTTeR

08-05-2010, 02:37 PM

I'm sorry but I have no clue what you're trying to say here.

that there is a big difference between a 2.5D painting program and a 3D sculpting program.
In some ways they may look simular but under the hood they work in a completely different way.

Building a 3D sculpting program on top of a 2.5D painting program isnt easy and the 3D sculting part will have to suffer and struggle with limits because of some choices the devs made in the early stages of development (when they didnt have a clue the 3D sculpting was going to be added by popular demand).

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 02:45 PM

That I can agree with, and it's one of the reasons for a lot of complaints here, most of which are justified.

Anyway, it is very clear by now that Pixologic is aiming for the enthusiast crowd, and this way they're making it harder and harder for larger studios to keep relying on their software for some of the good stuff (like the brushes).

For example making displacement maps used to be straightforward, despite the small issues, and it was one of the advantages over Mudbox and its raytracing based approach. But by 3.5 it gets so complicated and prone to error (not to mention FUBARing cavity map extraction) that we're more and more seriously considering a change; for all the restrictions it's still a more mature and stable app and there's a point where it's not worth trying anymore.

R10k

08-05-2010, 03:04 PM

5. 3d painting does not exists in Zbrush, you can paint on a 3d model but it isn't a true 3d painting system.

By 'true 3d painting' you mean texture painting, right? Whatever polypainting is (vertex painting?) it's in 3D.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 03:05 PM

Anyway, it is very clear by now that Pixologic is aiming for the enthusiast crowd, and this way they're making it harder and harder for larger studios to keep relying on their software for some of the good stuff (like the brushes).
.

This is very clear, but to some they still can't see it and instead choose to flame the person who points that out. To them I say have fun making still images jiggle.

R10k

08-05-2010, 03:06 PM

Try not to get too high and mighty about it. There are tons of pros out there who use Zbrush daily without issue. It might not be perfect for everyone, and it may be catered to multiple crowds, but it's not an newb's-only program.

kollatt

08-05-2010, 03:22 PM

from an illustrator's point of view i don't look at the 2.5 and 2D aspects of zbrush as something that's holding the program from being a great 3d app but as a bonus. i've been able to accomplish many things in the program that would take much longer ( or not be possible at all ) in zbrush. it seems to me anyway that they had 3d sculpting in mind from the beginning because of the obj. import feature. the 3d and 2d aspects mingle well together and pixologic can usually develop in confidence knowing that because of the architecture of the program that whatever features that will come up with usually benefit the other side of the app.

because it's such an open ended program it allows for a lot of experimentation, which can't be neglected as a great selling point for artists.. because artists love to experiment and try new things.

i get what everyone is saying about zbrush in comparison to mudbox. but mudbox is very obviously focused. i think pixologic does try to accommodate many different industries, not just the vfx industry. decimation master is a good example as it's uses can spill into games, illustration, and rapid prototyping ( toys etc. ). and of course you have things like paintstop and quick mesh generation like zspheres ( and probably shadowbox ) for concepting. whatever is in the works for zbrush, it has never struck as having too many tacked on ideas. everything seems to play well together. and it's not like they're ignoring the major cg companies because they're are upping the horsepower of their program ( 8 bit to 16 bit polypainting, higher polycounts etc. ) and producing things like goz ( which i'm sure took a lot of work to develop.. they had to hire out luxology programmers to help them with it ). and yes.. the way in which they develop simultaneously creates some workflows that are different and not always what people want.. but it also keeps the program VERY open ended and able to go in many directions. i imagine they'll always be trying to fix bugs and make workflows more acceptable.. but they don't want to neglect any artist's field if it can be helped.. they're just not a big enough company to do that and i don't think it's what they want anyway.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 03:50 PM

By 'true 3d painting' you mean texture painting, right? Whatever polypainting is (vertex painting?) it's in 3D.
Sorry I don't know enough of the technical aspects behind that to give a straight answer. I know I have read that is is not a true 3d painting systems multiple times in the past. My guess would be because everything is z projected.

Try not to get too high and mighty about it. There are tons of pros out there who use Zbrush daily without issue. It might not be perfect for everyone, and it may be catered to multiple crowds, but it's not an newb's-only program.

Trust me I am not getting high and mighty, I am not saying it is a newb only program. I was referring to some of the new features that are clearly aimed towards the enthusiast as they have absolutely no use in a professional 3d pipeline while there are many features that are VERY useful to the point of a absolute necessity in a 3d pipeline.

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 04:07 PM

There are tons of pros out there who use Zbrush daily

That is correct

without issue.

That's however quite unlikely...

it's not an newb's-only program.

Enthusiast =/= newbie

Stellios

08-05-2010, 04:13 PM

Those are my thoughts exactly, but toss in 64-bit as well.

yes, 64 bit, to think that zbrush hasnt gone 64 bit considering that from what i understand the viewport performance is largley RAM based, is UNBELEIVABLE. There is absolutely no excuse, 32 bit is dead, I am literally at a loss for words for this oversight.

R10k

08-05-2010, 04:27 PM

My guess would be because everything is z projected.

Heh, I'm pretty sure they're all Z/screen projected.

I was referring to some of the new features that are clearly aimed towards the enthusiast as they have absolutely no use in a professional 3d pipeline while there are many features that are VERY useful to the point of a absolute necessity in a 3d pipeline.

Maybe they're not aimed at anyone in particular. Maybe Pix just like coming up with new and interesting ways for artists to do things. That was certainly the mentality behind the earlier versions. It certainly wasn't to design a program for professional 3D pipelines.

My point here is- I think after 30 million posts on the subject, we all get your point of view on the topic, BigPixolin. Time to move on, yes? I'm sure to some it'd be great if Pixologic ditched their love of doing things differently and made a plain old app dedicated to professionals and their pipelines, but that's not going to happen. You know it. I know it. We all know it.

Enthusiast =/= newbie

Semantics, Laa-Yosh.

yes, 64 bit, to think that zbrush hasnt gone 64 bit considering that from what i understand the viewport performance is largley RAM based, is UNBELEIVABLE. There is absolutely no excuse, 32 bit is dead, I am literally at a loss for words for this oversight.

Are you a programmer? If yes, please explain why (in detail) why it's so unbelievable. If you're not, quit being a stoopid-head artist and just accept that this stuff takes time, as it has been explained by people in this thread already.

Nemoid

08-05-2010, 04:27 PM

You do realize that Weta decided to develop Mudbox because they were having serious issues with the development direction of Zbrush? So, if they were right in one case then they should be right in the other as well?

yes i do realize it, my point is that ZB can be used despite these problems. If an user is unhappy with ZB i don't see why he doesn't go for all Mudbox or other solutions rather than hoping for it to get fixed ?

Stellios

08-05-2010, 04:28 PM

Are you a programmer? If yes, please explain why (in detail) why it's so unbelievable. If you're not, quit being a stoopid-head artist and just accept that this stuff takes time, as it has been explained by people in this thread already.

you dont need to be a programmer to demand what is currently pretty standard but thanks for the value judgement. and oh my god your right "they cant talk about it yet" wow! thats it! its explained! thats the answer!

R10k

08-05-2010, 04:40 PM

you dont need to be a programmer to demand what is currently pretty standard but thanks for the value judgement.

I can't tell if you're genuinely thanking me, or just being mocking, but... if you read the bit about what Pixologic might be doing to get 64bit stuff happening, you might not die from a heart attack due to stress. You can demand 'what is currently pretty standard' all you like, but some things are harder to drag into the 64bit world than others. A programmer would know that. An artist will bitch and moan out of ignorance, wondering why a jar of magic coding dust hasn't yet been sprinkled on the program.

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 05:05 PM

Heh, I'm pretty sure they're all Z/screen projected.

Maybe they're not aimed at anyone in particular. Maybe Pix just like coming up with new and interesting ways for artists to do things. That was certainly the mentality behind the earlier versions. It certainly wasn't to design a program for professional 3D pipelines.

My point here is- I think after 30 million posts on the subject, we all get your point of view on the topic, BigPixolin. Time to move on, yes? I'm sure to some it'd be great if Pixologic ditched their love of doing things differently and made a plain old app dedicated to professionals and their pipelines, but that's not going to happen. You know it. I know it. We all know it.

Yeah I think they may all be z projected too.
Maybe someone else has a better answer? I was just going off what I have read before.
They certainly do come up with new and interesting ways to do things, and they really hit that mark with version 3, but it seems to me they didn't exactly hit the nail on the head this time around. Maybe they did for zbrush illustrators?
You get my point of view because you are here just as much with your opinion. :beer: but when someone says you are misinformed then clearly states a bunch of misinformation I am sure you will not sit idly by either.

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 05:15 PM

Semantics, Laa-Yosh.

I think I know a bit better what I wanted to say. So I'd rather say bull****.

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 05:16 PM

If an user is unhappy with ZB i don't see why he doesn't go for all Mudbox or other solutions rather than hoping for it to get fixed ?

Doesn't want to re-train a bunch of artists and retool the entire pipeline including file paths, custom shaders, texture formats etc. if it can be avoided?

Nemoid

08-05-2010, 05:22 PM

Doesn't want to re-train a bunch of artists and retool the entire pipeline including file paths, custom shaders, texture formats etc. if it can be avoided?

you can be right, but some issues are there since 2.0 : for example lack of perspective, the UI, zspheres being not great because of topology... its difficult these and other issues or things users don't like because of how the app has being projected get fixed/changed anytime soon...

also its not that Mudbox is SO different from Zbrush.If its different it is even easier since it makes less things. Plus, it has a nice UI users seem to like alot, it has layers for painting and 3d environment too...

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 05:24 PM

Could you elaborate a bit more ? Me courious about topo brush and animation features ! :buttrock:
Well I didn't get to see too much because I was working at another booth, but the topo brush allows you to fix how uneven your topology can get when sculpting which is an incredibly useful feature. Don't know how else to elaborate on that besides saying everyone will be using it.

I didn't see a huge demonstration of the animation, but what I did see was some morph target examples. What was show was incredibly fast and responsive but I'm sure they were demonstrating on a beast of a machine. Still it was a sight to see all those polys deforming. I'm wondering if it can be used to clean up animations and sculpt in stuff like muscle and skin deformation after the fact.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 05:25 PM

You do realize that Weta decided to develop Mudbox because they were having serious issues with the development direction of Zbrush? So, if they were right in one case then they should be right in the other as well?
Weta has their own proprietary sculpting application they were showing minimally at some of their demonstrations at SIGGRAPH. I guess Mudbox wasn't cutting it for them either.

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 07:29 PM

Never heard about that anywhere else. I'm pretty interested, any links?

Laa-Yosh

08-05-2010, 07:32 PM

also its not that Mudbox is SO different from Zbrush.If its different it is even easier since it makes less things. Plus, it has a nice UI users seem to like alot, it has layers for painting and 3d environment too...

You must pose your characters and models in a way that there aren't any chances for overlapping parts and missed rays for the displacement/normal map extraction. You have to re-tool the shaders and such for different texture formats (we've fitted everything for the 16-bit integer ZB2 maps a long time ago). And I'm talking about artists here, painters and sculptors who can't and won't want to understand the underlying principles and it took a loong time to "train" them on what they are and aren't allowed to do.

But now that we've got to spend more and more time on fixing stuff that Pixologic broke in the newer versions, it's getting close to the point where it'll be easier to migrate.

PorkpieSamurai

08-05-2010, 07:34 PM

yeah that's pretty intriguing. Just to make sure, are you positive it was a sculpting app and not Mari?

BigPixolin

08-05-2010, 08:07 PM

Yeah I would love to know more, also that topology brush sounds very interesting too.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 09:27 PM

yeah that's pretty intriguing. Just to make sure, are you positive it was a sculpting app and not Mari?
Well it looked very different from Mari, but who knows, maybe it's a completely re-hauled beta version not available to the public. Saw it in a talk on how they used scaned castings of people's faces to project surface detail on the models in Avatar. It actually looked lot like zbrush at a casual glance, sharing a similar black interface and white tools, but clearly was a different piece of software.

Phrenzy84

08-05-2010, 09:57 PM

Well it looked very different from Mari, but who knows, maybe it's a completely re-hauled beta version not available to the public. Saw it in a talk on how they used scaned castings of people's faces to project surface detail on the models in Avatar. It actually looked lot like zbrush at a casual glance, sharing a similar black interface and white tools, but clearly was a different piece of software.

Did they take actually sculpt on it? To me it sound like a go-between app for previewing what your scanner captured.

crispy4004

08-05-2010, 10:23 PM

All I saw them do was project flat, cut-out, scanned images onto a model like you would do with a texture in mudbox or a stencil in Zbrush. It was in a talk called "An Accurate Method for Acquiring High-Resolution Skin-Displacement Maps". Again it didn't resemble the Mari that we've seen, but who knows maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. It's hard to say because they were only showing it only for very fine surface detailing.

inverse catheter

08-05-2010, 10:35 PM

yes i do realize it, my point is that ZB can be used despite these problems

i have big issues with this sentiment. and lines similar to ' artist x and y have made x and y so clearly it's ok '

that you can work with it is beyond question. that kick ass art comes out of it. again. no question. but the point is and always will be one of speed. stability. sensible / clean / fast workflows and UI comfort

in a fundamental sense if an artist has enough time. patience. and skill they can create epic as hell works simply poly modelling and hand painting displacement and bump maps. the end result would say nothing of the massive undertaking and laborious process of working in that way. similarly you could do 99% percent ( if not 100% ) of all poly modelling starting from a plane primitive and only having a split poly and welding verts tools. just because the end result is met. doesn't mean the process taken to get there is forgiven

at this point in the zb game it has to be about solving these problems. they could feature lock from the current version to v5 and focus solely on workflow and ui development and still be well ahead of the curve. don't get me wrong. i love SCULPTING in zb. between the brushes and the mesh it's F__King sweet. it's just as soon as you leave that context and have to deal with the greater app. well. i could hammer a house together with the heel of a sturdy old boot. but it's pretty damn far from the ideal solution a

08-06-2010, 12:47 PM

I'm more interested in Sculptris, it sounds like they're developing it further. It could become ZBrush a logical interface and without all the 2.5D crap.
I doubt that. I do hope they won't kill Sculptris, but I'm not interested in anything they have to change about it. I wouldn't trust Pixologic to even tie my shoelaces, let alone develop 3D apps... :D
About Z's new tools, they seem impressive, like always, but also, like always, it's a pity they come with Zbrush and not some other app. :P

Laa-Yosh

08-06-2010, 02:51 PM

at this point in the zb game it has to be about solving these problems.

You have summed it up pretty well.

Phrenzy84

08-06-2010, 03:12 PM

by the way, i just wanted to say that im loving this discussion.

I know some might go on how people are bickering and speculating over something that hasn't come out yet. But the past few pages have been really interesting to read and its funny because this thread isn't on the front page.

Maybe that's why there has been intelligent conversation going on and not some zbrush/mudbox pissing contest.

After reading from various people i must admit it stirs up doubt about the future of zbrush, but then again when i sit down and work in it i feel liberated and empowered.

I think in the end it has to come down to this. Who uses Zbrush (the most)? 2d people or 3d?

Its no doubt the 3d development of the program has sky rocketed since v2 or maybe even since 1.55b. So is it time to throw all the chips in and do a complete re-write, whilst having some 2d functionality or keep with the same paradigm and hope they can figure out the problems that keep cropping up ie perspective.

I mean if perspective worked 100% no one would care its on a 'canvas' right?

Anyway i just wanted to say nice discussion and i hope Pixologic see this and realize the value of the discussion going on here.

Now please..... continue :)

CHRiTTeR

08-06-2010, 04:38 PM

You can say what you want about zbrush but fact is it has the most impressive gallery of all sculpting apps. :D

crispy4004

08-06-2010, 04:40 PM

I doubt that. I do hope they won't kill Sculptris, but I'm not interested in anything they have to change about it. I wouldn't trust Pixologic to even tie my shoelaces, let alone develop 3D apps... :D
About Z's new tools, they seem impressive, like always, but also, like always, it's a pity they come with Zbrush and not some other app. :P
Oh common now, it's not like working inside of zbursh is completely intolerable and broken. It's not like this is the first time this sort of situation has happened either. Zbrush has plenty of features like zsphere 2, decimation master, UV master, and hard surface sculpting tools, and a more expansive brush set that should tempt even the most direhard Mudbox users.

And clearly they didn't buy Sculptris for it's neat interface. There is a reason it was so simple, Sculptris is like a Lite sculpting application meaning it has less to hold in the UI. Pixologic bought it for the tris sculpting, and you can bet they are working on getting that inside of Zbrush and not the other way around. If you hate Zbrush now because you don't like working in it but do like the new features, you're going to hate it that much more when it gets unlimited clay.

Cometsoft

08-06-2010, 05:45 PM

You can say what you want about zbrush but fact is it has the most impressive gallery of all sculpting apps. :D

Agreed, plus it's got by far the best feel of any sculpting app I've ever tried. Every time I stop using it for a while I'm amazed at how responsive it is when I come back.

BigPixolin

08-06-2010, 05:55 PM

Agreed, plus it's got by far the best feel of any sculpting app I've ever tried. Every time I stop using it for a while I'm amazed at how responsive it is when I come back.

Yes these are exactly my feelings as well. Silky smooth and responsive. :drool:

DuttyFoot

08-06-2010, 06:27 PM

You can say what you want about zbrush but fact is it has the most impressive gallery of all sculpting apps. :D

you got that right :)

jinchoungforever

08-06-2010, 08:14 PM

i have big issues with this sentiment. and lines similar to ' artist x and y have made x and y so clearly it's ok '

that you can work with it is beyond question. that kick ass art comes out of it. again. no question. but the point is and always will be one of speed. stability. sensible / clean / fast workflows and UI comfort

...

don't get me wrong. i love SCULPTING in zb. between the brushes and the mesh it's F__King sweet. it's just as soon as you leave that context and have to deal with the greater app. well. i could hammer a house together with the heel of a sturdy old boot. but it's pretty damn far from the ideal solution a

the issue with the first part of your argument is that it seems to say that the talent and artistic prowess on display in the zbrush galleries goes hand in hand with outright stupidity. that those talented hands are tied to minds so dim and idiotic that they can't see that they're using a stupid tool to do the job.

that's NOT what you're saying but it's along the lines of what you're implying with analogies like hammering with a shoe. also, it's NOT what you're saying because you say you LOVE sculpting in zb.

so clearly, for the job of sculpting, zbrush is an awesome tool. it is in fact 'best in class'. the sculptors who sculpt in zbrush are not in fact idiots driving nails with the heels of their boots but using the best damn hammer that money can buy - bar none.

so what ELSE does does it claim to be?

and sure, weta had a problem enough with zb to startup mudbox but ILM did spectacularly accomplished work with davey jones and crew using zbrush and this is well after wetas rejection.

imo, the interface for zb is indeed problematic and not ideal for "traditional 3d app using modelers". i think that's a valid complaint. but it doesn't nullify its effectiveness. and once adapted to, can foster a fast nonstandard workflow of its own. its problem is that it's DIFFERENT. but as something that is different, it has an internal logic of its own that is fairly consistent.

zbrush is an odd duck and that much is indisputable. but. it's best in class for what it does. and as such, it has the cache and clout to demand you bend to it. not a lot of apps can demand that of users. but zbrush can.

and people DO bend.

i did. and i find it totally worth it.

jin