Mudbox 2015 Announced.

#1

Details here.

Can’t really say much about this, as there’s nothing really to talk about. The rate of development on this software seems to have slowed to a snails pace.

Certain new features seemed only to be aimed at Maya users…

Could really use some kind of adaptive mesh creation inside Mudbox, but I don’t think it’s coming. It feels like Autodesk are satisfied with Mudbox’s current feature set and are content to let it continue on with it’s inflated price.

It’s hard to not be cynical in light of the features (lack of) announced for 3ds max, and the recent murder of Softimage…

Any positive views? I also notice the MB forums have come to a dramatic stop over the past year.

#2

Definitely some welcome features for a Maya pipeline.

Looking forward to giving the new ptex features a go.

#3

getting Ptex into 3ds Max/Mental ray would be my suggestion.

#4

disappointing IMO… would really like to see something more like dynamesh and other features provided by alternative sculpt/painting solutions.

#5

i agree. a dynamesh type of thing is greatly needed.

there are many problems as well with creating UV’s in mudbox. it really needs a solution for this.

#6

Yeah, Mudbox is great just as it is… But I’d like to think in a year they could have come up with something more substantial than an enhanced caliper tool.

#7

Well actually I think the development is going in the right direction. There is a lot that has gone into interoperability with the Maya pipeline. I know, you use Max, so what, you say. Or sorry if you use Softimage, not getting any love there either. Not to mention other apps.

But I think it is clear by the numbers that people are by and large choosing Zbrush for a stand alone Sculpting app.

Mudbox integration into a Maya production pipeline is where the money is in my opinion. And it is this Maya -centric development that has attracted me to Maya.

So seeing more of that obviously pleases me.

But that aside, I see it as where they think the money should go.

My pipeline includes Zbrush and I use Mudbox to paint and bring my assets into Maya as well as use Blend Shapes. Ptex is another plus.

This is just my perspective. All things have been pointing to Maya for a long time now. So this is yet another step in that direction. And especially now with the new features Maya is getting.

Hate me for saying it if you like. But don’t kill the messenger. I think it is clear this is where they want the money to go first.

But that said, the retopo improvements in the last release and the updates in this release are very welcome. Great time savers for some things.

#8

well, clearly mudbox and maya should work together… both are obviously character animation tools. unless i’m mistaken maya is “The” premiere character software. so i think your points are right on.

But as a Max user, who isn’t going to purchase yet another software package, i look to Autodesk to improve my pipeline every year. Heck i purchase the updates each year so i expect it to be improved with each release.

that’s my perspective

#9

Indeed a point that can not be argued. :slight_smile:

#10

Cineartist, you raise some valid points. I suppose it just depends on different workflows.

I’m a character modeller first, and usually start with a head ( a sphere in Mudbox ), and then retopo in max. This works great. However, it would mean the world if I had some kind of dynamic mesh creation tool ( like zSpheres ) in Mudbox. Sometimes creating a base mesh can feel quite limiting to me. I think this would make Mudbox a really feature complete package.

And let me say I know NOTHING about programming or software development. But I would imagine that the changes implemented would take a few weeks to do. I may be totally off but when I think about how much we as artists have to CHURN out in a year of work, or how much smaller developers like the 3D Coat guys can achieve, it just doesn’t seem to match up. [i]- Apologies if I’m very very wrong here.

[/i]PS. I actually just checked the 3D Coat site, and version 4.1 is being released. Look at the amount of innovation and development that has gone in to that software, with less people and less money.

3D Coat 4.1

#11

To make a dynamic sculpt tool I think would take a lot more work than a few weeks. And actually I do not know how many people they have working on Mudbox development.

But I imagine that the features that they added to this release where no simple matter.

A dynamic tool would be welcome.

But it is far more advanced in Zbrush. There is a lot more to it than just dynamic topology. It is integrated into a lot of other tools that allow you to form, cut into your mesh, insert shapes and freeze them in etc. I mean there is a lot going on there with Dynamesh at the center.

So you have to ask yourself, what is the incentive for Autodesk to put enough work into this kind of functionality to compete with Zbrush?

I don’t think they have that kind of motivation. I think they have to respect reality. And the reality is, that if you want the “best” sculpting app, it is going to be Zbrush.

(Mudbox users please refrain from jumping all over me. I put quotes around “best”. But lets be honest and just look at the numbers. Mudbox is the minority here.)

Mudbox just is not the first choice - by the numbers alone. So the money is better spent making it attractive to a very large Maya user base and strengthening the suite concept. Which by the way I think has taken a huge hit by eliminating Softimage. From my perspective there is much less reason to own a suite without softimage. What’s left? MotionBuilder and Mudbox. Are people really really going to be wanting Maya AND Max? I know I don’t. At least not now.

But here is the point about Mudbox. trying to make it compete with Zbrush would be a loosing proposition. But adding features that enhance a more modern workflow with Ptex, mutli tile UVs Blend shapes and adding other needed features to painting layers is something that caters to the larger user base of Mudbox which is people who use it with Maya.

Money would be better spent going after the Mari market and enhancing the painting features.

Well enough… I know everyone is not going to agree with this. I understand… we all have different uses. But I really do think this is the thinking. FWIW.

#12

There is still one more very important thing that I can’t do with it.
I often sculpt things in the wrong place. And want to slide them around a little bit to reposition it.
Right now I don’t see any way to do that. And I have to destroy all the hard work I did previously and re-do it all again from scratch in a different place. OUCH!:argh:

What I really need the most is a slide tool in MB that lets me move my sculpt details around.
Is there a sculpting app that can do this?

-ScottA

#13

http://mudboxfeedback.autodesk.com/forums/158904-ideas-for-mudbox-forum

In the meantime if you can transfer details with masking you could always duplicate the section and move it, then mask out the other areas and transfer only this part to the mesh. Something you can do in Zbrush but I have not tried it with Mudbox. I don’t think you can.

It would likely also require something like dynamesh to do it right. Just thinking off the cuff.

Another way to do it would be to create a vector displacement map from that area and then paint it on. Look up vector disp maps in the manual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuGDdhSqIhg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GFoH1ET6JE

#14

Using VM’s would be a huge P.I.A.
I typically need to slide my stuff around a lot on a regular basis. Because I rarely ever get things in the exact position I want the first time. Or the second time. Or sometimes even the third time.
It’s the single biggest annoyance issue I have with all sculpting apps.

The grab tool with zero falloff seems to work the best. But it mangles the mesh too much.
If I could select specific polygons of the mesh and be able slide it around (even just a little bit) without making a mess of the areas around it. I’d be in heaven.

-ScottA

#15

Sounds like a cool feature. Have you gone to that link and subitted it?

There is a similar thing in a Zbrush tool setting and it has been a while now, maybe someone who uses it can chime in. But I do remember there is a setting that does something where you can drag the brush around on the surface like that… I’ll look into it.