3D-Coat 3.5 updates thread

[michalis]

I find that softness of tools in last beta is OK. I don't compare it with other apps either.

One tool (the most important IMO) still remains hard. The move tool. I can imagine why but any update on this is most welcome. Move tool needs to be as accurate as possible.

I particularly liked the scrape tool (the name is correct), smooth or hard, very handy.

Update same time posting artman.

I agree, this could be helpful.

[philnolan3d]

If you want sharp creases use Surface Mode. Most of the layers in my current project (out of 16 layers) didn't need sharp creases but for those that did, I switched to Surface mode, used the Sharpen tool, and left the layer in that mode.

[AbnRanger]

Please,Yes!!

And also when using this on parent layer it would save the whole branch to a .3b file.

Reason for that is exactly what Don says.Sometimes file are just too heavy for just caching.

Also big advantage is when using "merge tool" with .3b file retain original scale,pos,rot and polycount.

When Exporting and reimporting other file formats you need to readjust polycount/scale all the time...and its hard when you have a lot of accessories.

This is where a thumbnail for .3b files would come in really handy. This way the user could point to a project folder for the models/objects pallet and there is your 3DC version of ZB's subtools (I think that's how they work, anyway)

....all elements saved to a .3b file can be seen as thumbnails in the pallet....just drag and drop your objects from the pallet when you want them (dragging them would by default trigger the merge command). I think Andrew is already halfway there with the current object/model previews.

[3DArtist]

Let me throw this out to see if anyone else would find it useful.

Layers that link to external 3b files. The layer is updated when the project is loaded or when the layer is re-loaded via a menu/key command.

[philnolan3d]

Let me throw this out to see if anyone else would find it useful.

Layers that link to external 3b files. The layer is updated when the project is loaded or when the layer is re-loaded via a menu/key command.

I don't know, I think that would make things confusing. My current project had 16 voxel layers. So that would be 16 files to worry about instead of one. That's assuming I didn't save any revisions. I actually am on revision 13 of the current project now. Also I wonder about auto-saves, I have 3 auto-save files at any given time so auto-saving layers individually would be 48 files.

[3DArtist]

I don't know, I think that would make things confusing. My current project had 16 voxel layers. So that would be 16 files to worry about instead of one. That's assuming I didn't save any revisions. I actually am on revision 13 of the current project now. Also I wonder about auto-saves, I have 3 auto-save files at any given time so auto-saving layers individually would be 48 files.

Things could get a little out of hand if you "dynamic linked" all the layers and maybe the linked layers do not need/have individual auto-saves.

I was thinking more along the lines of a few props spanning several scenes. i.e. Tires, armor, corinthian pillars, etc.

Linked layers and even instances could be used in an intuitive and useful way i think. Maybe I should create a feature request thread...

[AbnRanger]

Things could get a little out of hand if you "dynamic linked" all the layers and maybe the linked layers do not need/have individual auto-saves.

I was thinking more along the lines of a few props spanning several scenes. i.e. Tires, armor, corinthian pillars, etc.

Linked layers and even instances could be used in an intuitive and useful way i think. Maybe I should create a feature request thread...

Yeah...it doesn't matter how many revisions you make to the scene file if the layer is no longer there. Autosave has no bearing, either, on an object/layer that you save out to a .3b file and then DELETE/REMOVE from the Vox Tree (to simplify your tree and scene, in order to further conserve resources).

Voxel Sculpting needs this type of "Subtools" capability and workflow, as it's the most RAM dependent application I know.

[Javis]

I've been toying with the idea of scene referencing in 3DC as well.

I've only had the need for it a dozen or so times... But if it worked flawlessly it would have saved me lots of time and trouble just as many.

I'm not sure how Andrew will feel about that one, looking forward to see what he thinks on the topic.

Don, also that is a stellar idea. Being able to quickly save out an individual vox layer... Genius. I would love that. You should submit that as a feature request.

[LJB]

Sorry I'm not sure I see the point of external referencing in this application. The ability to import external 3B files into layers is already possible. And in that respect exporting say the current vox layer makes a whole bunch of sense but IMHO referencing is far better suited to an animation or rendering application. It seems a little pointless in a content creation application. I think Andrews current priorities are far more important.

[LJB]

Maybe the ability to load from a individual layer within a multilayered 3b file would make more sense.

[philnolan3d]

Yes, I can see loading a 3B file and it presents you with a list of layers or a check box for "All".

[geo_n]

Sorry I'm not sure I see the point of external referencing in this application. The ability to import external 3B files into layers is already possible. And in that respect exporting say the current vox layer makes a whole bunch of sense but IMHO referencing is far better suited to an animation or rendering application. It seems a little pointless in a content creation application. I think Andrews current priorities are far more important.

I do agree that optimization and bug fixes are priorities. I think 3dcoat is full featured as it is and the next paid upgrade should be a silo,modo polymodeller room or a zbrush polysculpting room.

But the idea of referencing is not that bad actually even for 3dcoat.

I used to work with autocad and keeping the files small and manageable with xref was an absolute must. The ability to work on parts of a project without worrying about memory or display and also having the xref objects writeprotected keeps projects organized even if you have 1000 references.

[michalis]

The chaos of scale when importing exporting is my problem. Andrew should fix this first of all IMO. Its a PITA as it is.

But let me think, to keep the scale of an obj when merging leads to unpredictable density, so its not so easy. It should be like "keep scale" check, "keep density of layer" check, voxmesh = 80M faces OK? lol

But when exporting dense quads, scale should be right the same with the retopo mesh. The same when exporting tris from vox palette. Only export scene works now.

[AbnRanger]

Maybe the ability to load from a individual layer within a multilayered 3b file would make more sense.

What I was referring to was the ability to:

1) right-click a layer and have the option available to "SAVE TO .3B FILE"...not just an OBJ. That layer can then be deleted and removed from the scene until its needed at a later point.

2) have thumbnail previews of .3b files much like Andrew currently has for obj's and in so doing, the user essentially has the equivalent to ZBrush's Subtools...all components of an object or scene can be quickly saved out and later loaded from the "Models" Panel that appears when the Merge tool is activated. If it's a .3b file then the object could be merged at the very same state (resolution/position/scale/shader) it was saved as.

[LJB]

What I was referring to was the ability to:

1) right-click a layer and have the option available to "SAVE TO .3B FILE"...not just an OBJ. That layer can then be deleted and removed from the scene until its needed at a later point.

2) have thumbnail previews of .3b files much like Andrew currently has for obj's and in so doing, the user essentially has the equivalent to ZBrush's Subtools...all components of an object or scene can be quickly saved out and later loaded from the "Models" Panel that appears when the Merge tool is activated. If it's a .3b file then the object could be merged at the very same state (resolution/position/scale/shader) it was saved as.

1. That is exactly what I thought you meant. Would be an excellent addition. Excellent.

2. Another cool idea, and definitely same state loading is very important. This could be extended to the vox tree to further extend voxtree usabillity.little display of layer content would be very usable indeed.

Re referencing

I guess I'm thinking about this practically. 3d-coat is rather distant from autocad indeed. I do see the sense in larger project use of referencing, but my quandary would be just how complex is what your suggesting and how complex would it be to setup and manage, versus how complex are the typical sculpts that are done with 3d coat. I personally have many many layers (crab sculpt has like 60layers) in my works but I'm not sure I could benefit at all from the added complexity of referencing. In my work I constantly want to be able to jump between each of these layers and manipulate these layers. Seeing the character as a whole. It's purely my opinion, though, many I guess may benefit. But for me as we can't effect more than a single layer at the same time I don't see the point in locking and referencing files this way.

[3DArtist]

What I was referring to was the ability to:

1) right-click a layer and have the option available to "SAVE TO .3B FILE"...not just an OBJ. That layer can then be deleted and removed from the scene until its needed at a later point.

2) have thumbnail previews of .3b files much like Andrew currently has for obj's and in so doing, the user essentially has the equivalent to ZBrush's Subtools...all components of an object or scene can be quickly saved out and later loaded from the "Models" Panel that appears when the Merge tool is activated. If it's a .3b file then the object could be merged at the very same state (resolution/position/scale/shader) it was saved as.

Those sound great.

1. What if instead of deleting and removing the layer, the layer remembered the 3b file path and with a click of an icon, it would reload the 3b file?

Kind of like the proxy mode but completely removing the data from memory and from the saved project. Only remembering the file location.

2. To avoid a list of many objects, maybe there could be an option to show only objects that were related to the currently loaded scene. Or at least add the ability for a folder structure.

[AbnRanger]

Those sound great.

1. What if instead of deleting and removing the layer, the layer remembered the 3b file path and with a click of an icon, it would reload the 3b file?

Kind of like the proxy mode but completely removing the data from memory and from the saved project. Only remembering the file location.

2. To avoid a list of many objects, maybe there could be an option to show only objects that were related to the currently loaded scene. Or at least add the ability for a folder structure.

That's a good idea and option too, but deleting the layer after a save will help keep your layer panel less cluttered, as they can get pretty complex after a while. Your link would be the thumbnail in the "Models" Pallet that appears when you click "Merge." Again, I like the efficiency of the Subtools workflow in ZB, and this gives you a rough equivalent to it.

Yes, I can see loading a 3B file and it presents you with a list of layers or a check box for "All".

When you merge in 3ds Max, you have that option. That would be nice to have in 3DC.

[3DArtist]

That's a good idea and option too, but deleting the layer after a save will help keep your layer panel less cluttered, as they can get pretty complex after a while. Your link would be the thumbnail in the "Models" Pallet that appears when you click "Merge." Again, I like the efficiency of the Subtools workflow in ZB, and this gives you a rough equivalent to it.

Makes sense. To make this as smooth as possible I would request that the Models palette always be visible (and stay where I dock it like most other palettes). Also allow me to click on the object which would then activate the Merge tool in Transform mode (not On pen).

[AbnRanger]

Makes sense. To make this as smooth as possible I would request that the Models palette always be visible (and stay where I dock it like most other palettes). Also allow me to click on the object which would then activate the Merge tool in Transform mode (not On pen).

+1

[michalis]

Some questions and ideas.

A dense quad mesh is a way to export (translate) the voxel model.

A tri mesh export from voxel palette is another way to translate

When jumping to surface mode, what's really happening? a guad or a tri mesh?

In any case, when I want to auto-retopo a mesh (from zb), why I have to turn it to voxels? Why not directly in surface mode?

Why I can't merge an obj in surface mode?

My point of view is like this: A 3DC with surface only sculpt room. Next to it, as an add on app, a voxel room where we can jump any time. (as today) This will convert any existing topology resulting again in sculpt surface room with a dense quad mesh. All these (as workflow) I'm able to do using ZB too, but it costs money. (except auto-retopo without voxels)

I mean, 3DC seems too complicated as it is now. We have surface mode and another sculpt room. And all these result to a huge memory loss.

Its not a crit, just some ideas.

[philnolan3d]

When you go to Surface mode you're actually using the same mesh, you can tell by holding W to see the wireframe the difference is that in voxel mode the mesh is constantly regenerating in order to keep the polys the same shape / size when surrounding the voxels inside. When in Surface mode it doesn't do this and the triangle polys stretch like they would in mudbox or zbrush. Again, you can see this with the W key.

It depends how dense your mesh is. You don't have to do it with voxels, I did a job once where I had to retopo 13 characters and I just imported the model to the paint room, then did the retopo. You can also use the Import Reference Mesh for this from the File menu.

[michalis]

I know phil, in this case no auto-retopo though. I use it a lot.

But why surface mode has to exist under a voxel grid? Isn't this exactly the reason that the move tool has a hard behavior?

[Psmith]

I also agree with Michalis - 3D-Coat workflow is more complicated than it needs to be.

Surface mode is really just POLY mode. So, what we have are two Polygon Rooms, (the Sculpt Room and Surface mode - which is in disguise as a voxel area).

In my opinion, both should be combined into one POLY Room, and augmented with a full arsenal of polygon sculpting tools, (ala Zbrush). This way, there would be a much clearer road describing the most efficient workflow - from voxels to polygons to finished, detailed model - ready for export:

1) Use voxels for laying down everything up to medium resolution detail - and then running AUTOPO to establish a base polygon mesh.

2) All of the following operations can then be done in one POLY Room:

* Mesh clean-up activities, (retopo)

* Refinement of polygon model, hard surfacing and adding high resolution detail, with the aid of true multi-resolution switching.

* UV allocation and unwrapping, adjustment and application.

This leaves us needing only one VOXEL Room, one POLY Room and one DETAIL Room, (texturing and rendering should take place in the same room or screen).

This way, everything becomes much, much clearer, cleaner and simpler to understand for all kinds of users. Not only so, but all the duplication of commands that appear in both the current Retopo Room and UV Room and Sculpt Rooms disappear.

Actually, there is a 3rd inclusion that would speed up the entire process for all users - small and great - possessing low powered and high powered hardware, alike. But that deserves a topic unto itself.

Greg Smith

[michalis]

Not so simple Psmith, I mean:

We have to go back (to drop into) voxel room from time to time.

Hard surface is great when boolean operations can take place (voxels are great on this)

Its not easy, as a suitable UI its not clear to me. Lot of trouble. The right way to go is to propose some different workflows (even involving other apps) and see what's happening. There isn't one only way to achieve something. But artists always have their methods. There's one only tool for art and its called workflow. What do you say?

Now, lets say I'm working on zb only. I'll do a base mesh, soon I'll add some more subtools (ears) etc. Then "remesh" or "unified skin" (similar). This leads to a ~300k quad mesh to start fine sculpture. But I can't go back (have to start this method again). It works perfectly in some cases though. In the end re-topo (probably in 3DC) etc. Its fine for a portrait or for armatures maybe. But what about a temple like the one I builded (wip topic)? No booleans you see.

I could just sketch a concept on paper, I could just transfer this to 3d world. Clean method. No need of 3DC for this, really. I hate this method. Its wrong. No freedom.

[JamesE]

I disagree with merging sculpting and retopo - and texturing and rendering for that matter. I don't use 3dcoat's poly sculpting room at all as it is so it's nice that I can completely ignore that section and not have to wade through tools I don't need when I'm doing retopology. Same with rendering. I don't use this room very much at all so again, it's nice to not have to deal with it if I don't want to. The current configuration is just fine as it is. Not everyone uses all aspects of 3dcoat. Forcing exposure to the things they don't want or need will only increase negative perception of the app in terms of ease of use. The contextual nature of tool palettes and menus based on the room you are in is more than adequate at keeping things clean and simple.

Where I would like to see more versatility is in the retopo room. I'd love for this to just be a real modeling area complete with polygon editing, transform tools and primitives. Retopologizing primitives like cylinders and flat surfaces is more painful than just slapping down an optimized primitive that represents the shapes you don't want to retopologize. I think this would bring 3dcoat much closer to being an all in one app, as right now I still spend a significant amount of time using a modeling package for certain things. It would be way easier to bounce between different rooms in 3dcoat rather than between completely different apps, just to handle specific modeling cases. I think it would be cool to have a surface snap toggle in the retopo layers palette beside each layer too - that way I could retopo and model at the same time, only using surface snapping for the pieces that need it.

It would also be great to be able to model specific objects that you want to use for booleans, custom spline shapes, or anything else that voxel primitives can't handle as easily, instead of having to make them in an external app.

[AbnRanger]

...Where I would like to see more versatility is in the retopo room. I'd love for this to just be a real modeling area complete with polygon editing, transform tools and primitives. Retopologizing primitives like cylinders and flat surfaces is more painful than just slapping down an optimized primitive that represents the shapes you don't want to retopologize. I think this would bring 3dcoat much closer to being an all in one app, as right now I still spend a significant amount of time using a modeling package for certain things. It would be way easier to bounce between different rooms in 3dcoat rather than between completely different apps, just to handle specific modeling cases. I think it would be cool to have a surface snap toggle in the retopo layers palette beside each layer too - that way I could retopo and model at the same time, only using surface snapping for the pieces that need it.

It would also be great to be able to model specific objects that you want to use for booleans, custom spline shapes, or anything else that voxel primitives can't handle as easily, instead of having to make them in an external app.

Make that a 2nd vote. Like it or not, the Retopo room essentially is a group of modeling tools, and there are a number of additions I've been hoping for, for quite some time.

Dot Ring/Loop is one of them (at the 1:35 marker):

This little tool will make poly reduction a snap, and is sorely needed to cleanup the results from AUTOPO, oftentimes.

Shell (Extrusion) Modifier:

Single Click Points & Faces Tool (starting at the 1:10 mark, you can see that it is just a single click and drag, of a vert or edge, to create a face...whereas Points and Faces currently requires 2 clicks per face...a left click then a right click. Over the length of a model, that extra click = 2X more time spent):

The retopology tools in 3DC are quite good, but with some of these type of improvements it would become industry standard, no question about it.

[Psmith]

James:

This is where "Presets" come into play. In fact, it is a tentative plan to allow users to "turn off" sections of the interface that are not wanted or needed. Combining functions and "Rooms" helps to facilitate and organize things into "modules", which can be turned off and on, at will, (preferences).

If a user wants all the Rooms and functions, just leave them on. If they only want some functions in some Rooms - turn them on.

Otherwise, there's no way to please everyone.

Greg Smith

[Javis]

Sorry I'm not sure I see the point of external referencing in this application. The ability to import external 3B files into layers is already possible. And in that respect exporting say the current vox layer makes a whole bunch of sense but IMHO referencing is far better suited to an animation or rendering application. It seems a little pointless in a content creation application. I think Andrews current priorities are far more important.

For me, the idea isn't simply to "load up a 3B file". The idea I was thinking is that by "referencing" a file, it would load it up akin a reference mesh where the object is not available for editing and would increase performance. For example you have a scene file that references some of trees and buildings, and you would choose which object to edit, this editable object would be the only thing you could edit.

As most of us here know, once you start getting high poly counts in 3DC it really starts to chug, this would help out greatly in the performance area.

But again, like I said, it is something I have been toying with.

[Mykyl]

Make that a 2nd vote. Like it or not, the Retopo room essentially is a group of modeling tools, and there are a number of additions I've been hoping for, for quite some time. Dot Ring/Loop is one of them (at the 1:35 marker):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQOBVaQhe4oThis little tool will make poly reduction a snap, and is sorely needed to cleanup the results from AUTOPO, oftentimes.Shell (Extrusion) Modifier:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWh0p6Kq19MSingle Click Points & Faces Tool (starting at the 1:10 mark, you can see that it is just a single click and drag, of a vert or edge, to create a face...whereas Points and Faces currently requires 2 clicks per face...a left click then a right click. Over the length of a model, that extra click = 2X more time spent): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZvhZ1OwuFkThe retopology tools in 3DC are quite good, but with some of these type of improvements it would become industry standard, no question about it.

That Dot ring loop things is exactly whats needed to quickly reduce the polycount.

Cheers

Mike R

[parel]

I disagree with merging sculpting and retopo - and texturing and rendering for that matter. I don't use 3dcoat's poly sculpting room at all as it is so it's nice that I can completely ignore that section and not have to wade through tools I don't need when I'm doing retopology. Same with rendering. I don't use this room very much at all so again, it's nice to not have to deal with it if I don't want to. The current configuration is just fine as it is. Not everyone uses all aspects of 3dcoat. Forcing exposure to the things they don't want or need will only increase negative perception of the app in terms of ease of use. The contextual nature of tool palettes and menus based on the room you are in is more than adequate at keeping things clean and simple.

Where I would like to see more versatility is in the retopo room. I'd love for this to just be a real modeling area complete with polygon editing, transform tools and primitives. Retopologizing primitives like cylinders and flat surfaces is more painful than just slapping down an optimized primitive that represents the shapes you don't want to retopologize. I think this would bring 3dcoat much closer to being an all in one app, as right now I still spend a significant amount of time using a modeling package for certain things. It would be way easier to bounce between different rooms in 3dcoat rather than between completely different apps, just to handle specific modeling cases. I think it would be cool to have a surface snap toggle in the retopo layers palette beside each layer too - that way I could retopo and model at the same time, only using surface snapping for the pieces that need it.

It would also be great to be able to model specific objects that you want to use for booleans, custom spline shapes, or anything else that voxel primitives can't handle as easily, instead of having to make them in an external app.

Yes- It would be great to shrink wrap some primitives onto the meshes- sort of like pulling gloves onto hands and fingers.