Help With Polygon Count .

[harlyo]

Hi All , i got a problem with my polygons in Zbrush that i dont understand , I see people can really do some fine sculpt with 3 million polygons and the resolution is great , but i found myself sometimes working with a very high amount of polygons that reachs 12-15 million polygons to get the resolution i want , can anyone explain to me what could be effecting this !! note that the resolution for my document is 2048 should i make it 4096 ? i also make a clear topology and thats square i hope if anyone can provide a solution for this .

[israelu]

I don’t think your document size has anything to do with your resolution problems, but I imagine its all in your topology. I had (and sometime still do) the same sort of problems early on, and kept trying to get around an inability to detail by subdividing again and again. But if your underlying mesh is messy, it won’t matter how small the polys are. Zremesher, in this instance, is your best friend. Keep in mind that if you’re already up to millions and millions of polys zremesher will probably crap out, so its important to stay on top of the topology early on, and consistently throughout the process. Also, zremeshing will sometime lose your polygroups and polypainting, so its a good idea to duplicate the subtool, remesh the duplicate then project the original onto it. That will return much of your higher res detail as well as the polygroups and polypaint.

[harlyo]

I don’t think your document size has anything to do with your resolution problems, but I imagine its all in your topology. I had (and sometime still do) the same sort of problems early on, and kept trying to get around an inability to detail by subdividing again and again. But if your underlying mesh is messy, it won’t matter how small the polys are. Zremesher, in this instance, is your best friend. Keep in mind that if you’re already up to millions and millions of polys zremesher will probably crap out, so its important to stay on top of the topology early on, and consistently throughout the process. Also, zremeshing will sometime lose your polygroups and polypainting, so its a good idea to duplicate the subtool, remesh the duplicate then project the original onto it. That will return much of your higher res detail as well as the polygroups and polypaint.

Thanks for the reply, I do this actually I duplicate the mesh then go tk the lowest subdivision and delete higher then use zremesher so it won’t be slow then reproject high details along with everything from the higher to the lower mesh it does give me a better topology but it doesn’t always resolve the issue

[israelu]

Hmm - can you upload an image of your mesh in polyframe view?

[harlyo]

Hmm - can you upload an image of your mesh in polyframe view?

I Uploaded 2 pics that will show you the topology & how it looks after sculpting on it , even though the mesh is 14m polygons

](http://s1153.photobucket.com/user/nightiwalker/media/Topology_zpszxkdmfv5.jpg.html)[/IMG]

](http://s1153.photobucket.com/user/nightiwalker/media/WF%20Topology_zps1judk1yn.jpg.html)[/IMG]

[musashidan]

That’s pretty bad sculpting topology. As mentioned, it dosn’t matter how high you go, if the base topo is bad. That topo has a huge amount of elongated quads. A definite no for good sculpting topo. There are also lots of 3/5 valance poles. Also very bad in the context of the surrounding topo. Not to mention the uneven-ness of the surface.

Zremesher dosn’t always just spit out perfect sculpting topo. Particularly hard-surface. You have to massage the settings.

[harlyo]

That’s pretty bad sculpting topology. As mentioned, it dosn’t matter how high you go, if the base topo is bad. That topo has a huge amount of elongated quads. A definite no for good sculpting topo. There are also lots of 3/5 valance poles. Also very bad in the context of the surrounding topo. Not to mention the uneven-ness of the surface.

Zremesher dosn’t always just spit out perfect sculpting topo. Particularly hard-surface. You have to massage the settings.

So its the topology then, if I remesh it into square quads using then project all the info on from the high mesh to the low should that do! I was using mostly panel loops to come up with these results, so any more advice on this will be highly appreciated

[musashidan]

Are you trying to do this all from a single mesh?

Personally, I would break off the armour pieces as panel loops into multiple sub-tools and Zremesh each one if needed. you can always merge them back as needed later on. Plus in 4R7 we can now use the ‘keep groups’ function to help with Zremeshing hard-surface.

Trying to do complex, layered armour from a single mesh is only asking for trouble. Plus you’re making too much work for yourself when the topology is so much more manageable with multiple sub-tools.

[harlyo]

Are you trying to do this all from a single mesh?

Personally, I would break off the armour pieces as panel loops into multiple sub-tools and Zremesh each one if needed. you can always merge them back as needed later on. Plus in 4R7 we can now use the ‘keep groups’ function to help with Zremeshing hard-surface.

Trying to do complex, layered armour from a single mesh is only asking for trouble. Plus you’re making too much work for yourself when the topology is so much more manageable with multiple sub-tools.

Of course not, I started every armor piece on its on then merged them together, should I split them now and do remesh using keep groups thats what u mean! I didn’t try any new function yet in zbrush 4r7 I was busy doing this project hopefully zbrush 5 won’t be out while am study 4r7 I guess I will never stop studying, how do u catch up that! I got 3ds max and zbrush and photoshop To study pkuplus vray later for rendering, yes I am managing to study each program on its own then connect them together in one project but is it normal to spend at least 3-4 years until u reach the level of skill you seek ! I know thats not related but i just wana make sure am going in the right direction

[Dillster]

I would be inclined to work with the current ZBrush version without thinking about what version 5 will bring. Daniel is right, that mesh will be much more manageable broken up into subtools.