Modo 301 Reviewed on Subdivisionmodeling.com

#1

Hot off the press is the review of modo 301.

http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/reviews/software/modo301/modo301.php

#2

“The sculpting is up to par with any other sculpting application on the market”

:S

That’s a bold statement to say the least… considering some of the major workflow limitations I don’t see how anyone can make such a claim.

#3

To clarify my statement means that Modo is capable of creating very highly detailed models that you would expect to see from most other 3d sculpting applications. With image based sculpting you are able to get amazing detail without having to push your PC to the max in order to get the high polygon count needed. I hope that is more clear.

#4

I’ll let Patrick make his statement. However, one does not need to operate the same way as ZBrush or Mudbox to attain the same result. Modo combines the mesh sculpting and image based sculpting, which can attain similar levels of detail of that with Mudbox or ZBrush or Blender or SILO, etc.

I think one needs to be open to the workflow difference to see the results. Does modo handle the millions of sculpted polygons that ZBrush can — no, does modo attempt to do that — no, can modo create similar level of details in skin, scales, scratches — yes. Perhaps not the Ferrari of sculpting, but it still can get you to where you need to go.

#5

Could you elaborate this, please?

#6

I am curious as well. Please elaborate.

#7

The only workflow limitation I can think of is that in the standard sculpting (non image based) you are not able to step up or down in subdivision levels like Mudbox and Zbrush but that is honestly not a big issue. You have your original UV mapped low polygon model from the start (at least you should!) so you are able to bake the high resolution model with the low resolution model with ease in Modo. Image based modeling is something every sculpting application should utilize in my opinion as Modo allows you to create vector based maps (normal maps) or the more standard grey scale displacement maps that work well with rendering applications that support them if you render outside of Modo. I can see how my initial statement might be cause for concern but really it’s not about how many millions of polygons your sculpting application can handle it’s how you can get the best result and save on system resources and I feel Luxology has kicked ass in that area. My opinion may sound biased but I feel that 301 was a great stride for Luxology. If you do not agree with my review then well, that’s life. A review is based on opinion and should always be taken with a grain of salt. I do not expect everybody to agree with me.

#8

. I can see how my initial statement might be cause for concern but really it’s not about how many millions of polygons your sculpting application can handle it’s how you can get the best result and save on system resources and I feel Luxology has kicked ass in that area.

I tend to think the same way. Image based sculpting sounds like a great way to accomplish super detailed meshes to me. Actually I think it’s superior to subdividing to an insane polygon amount in many ways.

Though, I haven’t tried it for myself yet.

Anyway, thanks for your review Patrick, much appreciated. It’s funny that 301 now looks pretty much like my customized 203 layout.

#9

Since i was exporting my ZBrush detail as a displacement map for Modo anyway, directly creating a displacement map in Modo301 is prooving to be a better workflow for me :wink: And now without loosing any detail, which it seemed to do when exporting displacement maps from ZBrush. Maybe i was doing something wrong, but atleast i don’t have to worry about that anymore :slight_smile:

thumbs up for this Modo release :slight_smile:

#10

That is exactly what I had in mind. Not a big issue? I don’t know of any other thing they could have left out of their sculpting workflow that would have been a ‘bigger’ issue. (disabling ‘undo’ would be one I guess)

I know Modo shouldn’t necessarily operate the same way as Mudbox or Zbrush, but It don’t see how anyone who is used to that kind of non-destructive workflow could warm up to the idea of not being able to step down in subdivision levels and do lower level editing. That is instrumental to how almost anyone who sculpts in 3d with zbrush or whatever works.

I don’t believe that is something Luxology left out because ‘users wouldn’t need it’ but because they did not have time/resources to get it ready for this release. (which is normal)

But that alone for me would be enough to conclude that it is not quite up to par with the rest yet…

Anyway, I know it’s too much to expect objective/critical reviews in the CG world. Most reviews for most 3d applications (on the web or magazines) are written by avid enthusiasts of those applications. I don’t really know why I felt the need to voice my opinion for this particular review.

(Oh… and this thread was on the news or general discussion forum earlier right? Not trying to start anything at the Modo forums)

#11

I wish modo did have some sort of construction history so that you could step down through the subdivs. Its not a necessary feature for sculpting, but it makes te workflow a little more rigid

#12

Did you miss the part about vector based displacement. Thats pretty non-destructive. I admit that it may not be the ideal workflow for some. Also, as far as I know none of the other sculpting programs have vector based brush creation and painting implemented.

I think the primary problem is that everyone seems to expect other sculpting programs to be implemented in the same way as Mudbox or Zbrush. I don’t think millions or even billions of polygons are necessary to get a good sculpt.

Anyway, I know it’s too much to expect objective/critical reviews in the CG world. Most reviews for most 3d applications (on the web or magazines) are written by avid enthusiasts of those applications. I don’t really know why I felt the need to voice my opinion for this particular review.

I wouldn’t consider pnoland an avid enthusiast or even a fan boy. I talk to him from time to time and I know that he uses quite a variety of software and likes parts of each. But like he said it is his opinion take it with a grain of salt.

#13

just tried it out.It’s pretty late so I’m going to sleep, but the sculpting seems usable. Deffinitely not zbrush, though to be fair I haven’t tried adding fine details, but the tools are all there and using alphas I’m sure it’ll be very usable.

Interface is much faster. My PC is decent(AMD FX55, 1GB ram, geforce6800GT) and modo203 used to be good but a little laggy. 301 lets me tumble around much faster even with high poly meshes. High poly scenes that crashed modo203 or made it completely unusable are now working fabulously.

Though I was wondering where the shader tree suddenly dissapeared to. That will take some getting used to, but they’ve included the 203 layout in there as well.

A few general UI differences here and there. I’ll mess around more tmro.

#14

The shader tree is now in the properties window to the right. It makes sense to have it there but yeah, that threw me off at first too. :slight_smile:

#15

yeah, i found it, but its sort of buried away behind the items tab.

Oh well, it only takes a few seconds to customize everything.

Speed and stability(atleast for me) are much better now. Earlier modo crashed loading the demo full WMD scene, now it flies.

#16

They left out the sculpting level traversal becouse in Modo much same as in Lightwave every modeling operation is destructive (for now at least). They dont keep anything editable past next operation.

There was an excelent video where Brad showed a opposite approach, a kind of nodal op layout for modo. For now I guess thats just a dream. I sure hope as Modo matures they go the nodal or at least stack based path. Imagine not being able to animate an extrusion as it was for ages in Lightwave.

#17

I know Modo shouldn’t necessarily operate the same way as Mudbox or Zbrush, but It don’t see how anyone who is used to that kind of non-destructive workflow could warm up to the idea of not being able to step down in subdivision levels and do lower level editing. That is instrumental to how almost anyone who sculpts in 3d with zbrush or whatever works.

Keep in mind that there is another way of doing bigger, low level changes by utilizing Modos Deform toolset and custom tool+falloff combinations for example. It’s not quite ZBrushs posing system(don’t know the name) but one can achieve similar effects. This goes further than what’s possible in Mudbox and prevents from the hassle of exporting, re-posing, importing.

I’ll give sculpting in Modo an extensive try on weekend,

#18

It’s not just about posing.
In zbrush if you want to make big changes to the form, you could step down the levels and do it to a very basic model and then step up and find all the displacements have moved as yo’d want them to.

In modo, you’d have to move a lot more points which on hi-poly models could crash the system, and it also means that its not as precise.

otherwise the new sculpting tools are pretty good. I think a lot of people will still use zbrush for sculpting, but i think if luxology build on what they’ve introduced, modo could replace the need for zbrush

#19

I wasn’t talking just about posing, just wanted to point out, that low level changes(such as posing) are possible some way. I’ll do some tests as how low poly one can stay using image based sculpting mainly.

#20

For the record, Patrick is pretty neutral when it comes to modo considering he’s more focused with Blender, C4D and Mudbox.

We (SDM) aim to have the reviews be objective and informative to help someone evaluate the software for their own use. For these reasons we choose to not use a rating system, nor do we rank applications. We choose to have our reviews written from the perspective of not so much convincing someone they should buy the application but rather raise the awareness of the application and where it’s strengths and usefulness lies rather than dwelling on the shortcomings (unless those shortcomings make the application a pain to use).

I don’t want to debate the choice of subdivision levels, but consider the fact that Luxology chose the image based sculpting to subdivision levels as a compromise, and I think it’s a reasonable one. Nevercenter chose to have subdivision levels but you can see how long it took to get it to work reasonably. modo is no longer a modeler focused application, so expecting the be-all-end-all workflow of sculpting isn’t practical and shouldn’t be expected.