Hi,
I am new to mudbox and just trying to the hang of it. I created a character and wanted to make some clothes so i started watching some tutorials and ended up on a Zbrush tutorial accidently and they did something really cool where they painted on the character and then it became the clothes in the shape they painted it.
Is there something similar in mudbox. I think it may be called the Zbrush extract tool but im not sure.
Cheers Alex
there is no feature like this in mudbox…
but you could use “duplicate selected faces” to do something similar…
or use “create mesh from curve” to create a new geo on top…
or use the auto retopo and delete the faces you dont need…
None of those options give you any thickness to the new geometry unfortunately. You’d need to take it into a 3d app and shell or extrude it to get thickness.
For me, Zbrush is far quicker for this sort of thing. Mesh extract is great.
this is a good issue to bring up… Mudbox really needs this feature. having to go to another 3d programs to do this is ridiculous…especially considering zbrush already does it.
having to go to another 3d programs to do this is ridiculous…especially considering zbrush already does it.
Then just use Zbrush. Calling this “ridiculous” is what’s ridiculous - every application has its features and benefits. Mudbox isn’t flawed simply because it lacks one feature you want. If you want clothes, model them already.
Oh Please!.. this aspect, that already exists in a less expensive program, is a logical one to want in Mudbox.
One way to do this is to freeze (“mask” in ZBrush) the part of mesh that corresponds to the clothing. Invert the mask. Then used Bulge brush, and press Flood button. That will give you uniform thickness.
There’s a literal shit ton of things Mudbox doesn’t have that Zbrush doesn’t. Mudbox is just easier to pick up and use and has better painting…that’s the only reason I use it. I’m making the jump sometime soon for the actual model creation aspects of zbrush since Mudbox is a little too strict, you have to have the model already created and modifying it will freak mudbox out…I’d only use Mudbox to paint but Mari is quickly changing that view as well.
You should have functional knowledge in all these programs anyways if you’re a 3D artist.
But back to the topic, that bulge solution seemed interesting. You still won’t get backfaces to the extrude but it’s definitely a cool technique.
i can say that years ago i tried out zbrush and found it quite confusing, and to your point, i picked up Mudbox really fast.
and even though i have a “wish list” for Mudbox, i’m pretty happy with what its capable of doing.
We people who like 3d and digital sculpting can talk about the different tools for hours. But somehow my work goes quicker and looks better in Mudbox. The simplicity of the interface suits me. I’m not saying that that will be the same for everybody, and I would never disrespect the quirky brilliance of ZBrush, considering what people accomplish with it.
ZBrush has more features, but how many do I need? Shadowbox? ZSpheres? Dynamesh? All cool, but I never really needed them, since I like to 3d-sketch in Modo. A hundred brushes? I just use five to seven of them.
ZBrush Remeshing? - yes, now that is a wonder to behold - hats off to them there.
For certain, they are both valid and viable tools, and artists proficient with either consistently blow my mind with their amazing work! I prefer Mud for precisely the reasons AndreasWalsh does, with a big bonus for the option of Maya-style navigation. I often sculpt with my G5 mouse and G13 controller in combination, and this makes it a lot easier!
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.