Advanced Member Digital777 Posted January 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 While i don't like to keep paying for updates for the software i own i understand that the developer needs to earn money from this and also the amount of work that must go into this. This is a great app and it can already do a lot of things so it is worth the price and also cheaper than many other apps as said. The fact Zbrush gets free updates is not that good of a point as first it costs more and there has been many free updates for 3DC and it's always getting cool new stuff so it will grow in features over time. For this though Andrew said it would probably be a plugin and maybe even get released free for customers. If it was a plugin it would be optional also so you would only get it if you needed the features but tha main app would probably get more free updates still untill the next major release. For training there is the Tutorials area, Video Manual and wiki so quite a lot of stuff. The main thing i don't see for 3DC as much as with ZB is the walkthrough type stuff but often those don't show how things were done fully but people are starting to do this more here with progress stages images and tips etc. With 3DC/voxels though it's mainly just needing to know how to use the tools which is done quite well already and a good understanding of art/sculpting though as it's mainly down to the users skills also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member pbowmar Posted January 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 I think everyone's threshold for cost is different depending on how they use the software. If it's hobbiest use then any cost is "expensive" except of course people pay $1,000's on their hobbies so why not software? From a professional point of view, $200 is virtually free. We pay $50k or more _per year_ for Maya, Houdini, Nuke etc maintenance. Money well spent since it means new updates to the software, bug fixes etc. I find 3DC a much better deal than Zbrush because even though the ZBrush updates are "free" they're often useless, from a professional point of view. Andrew has been very responsive to user's needs both feature-wise and also the "boring" tech stuff that professionals need. Pixologic, not so much. From a hobbiest point of view, I like the low cost. From a professional point of view, I'd like 3DC to be more expensive so Andrew can hire a bigger team and get more done faster That's really what it comes down to. From what I've seen Andrew is an insanely fast coder, but he's still human and I bet his wife and kids like to see him occasionally Houdini have a great solution to this: For hobbiests they offer Houdini Apprentice HD which is their non-commercial version but at full resolution, with access to the Amazon Render Cloud. It's $99. For professionals, they offer $2k or $7k versions (like Maya complete and unlimited) which lets a studio only buy what they actually need. Anyway, I'm not picking a fight here, I think everyone's opinions here are valid but selfishly, I want more faster and am willing to pay for it Cheers, Peter B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Amber Posted January 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 BodyPaint was expensive as a standalone. They incorporated it within the C4D, and that forces you buy the base version whether you want it or not...Deep Paint is what I used...they have all but abandoned it...never had any video tutorials. And it no longer works with Vista or Win 7. You may not think 3DC is worth it, but ZBrush is $600: http://www.pixologic.com/store/ And Mudbox is $750 If you need a serious 3D Painting application that has top shelf UV layout tools and approaches ZB and MB in sculpting ability...3DC is a heck of a deal at half the price of ZB. 595$ is official price but it is being sold by their official digital etailer for 510$, so if 3DC is priced to 300$ or more it's less than 200$ difference.3DC approaches ZB/MB in sculpting ability but the problem is voxels are nowhere that useful like ZB/MuD polygon sculpting and it's faster on most computers and they can do polypaint and hell a lot of more. 3DC is worth if you can justify buying it, but many people won't be able to justify buying both. You guys bought your 3DC for 70$ or 130$, didn't you ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 595$ is official price but it is being sold by their official digital etailer for 510$, so if 3DC is priced to 300$ or more it's less than 200$ difference. You guys bought your 3DC for 70$ or 130$, didn't you ? Actually if you want to talk about discounts you could buy 3DC during the 30 day trial and get $50 off, bringing the price down the $250 (currently $235) I bought in at $70 originally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Lafs1984 Posted January 24, 2010 Member Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I fail to see the logic reasoning why people would not want this type of tech in 3DC. It shaves hours of work and improves the quality for all who do texturing, and then you wanna sell that as a separate module ?! / Magnus Just wanted to second that opinion in my view it would be against 3dc best interest to make people pay for another module ...worst comes to worst make the price of the soft a tad higher and put everything you can in because a tool like that well integrated can make a huge difference on the user base numbers especially at this time where very few quality tools make use of this and it is in the forseeable future that this way of painting will become the norm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted January 24, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 595$ is official price but it is being sold by their official digital etailer for 510$, so if 3DC is priced to 300$ or more it's less than 200$ difference.3DC approaches ZB/MB in sculpting ability but the problem is voxels are nowhere that useful like ZB/MuD polygon sculpting and it's faster on most computers and they can do polypaint and hell a lot of more. 3DC is worth if you can justify buying it, but many people won't be able to justify buying both. You guys bought your 3DC for 70$ or 130$, didn't you ? Nope...I bought 3DC right after v3 was released. And I primarily bought it as a 3D Painting replacement for Deep Paint 3D (which is essentially dead as they aren't supporting it). It was well worth it just for that...and now, the UV layout tools make it even more so. That's not even mentioning Voxel Clay sculpting and such. So...you're trying to compare it to ZBrush based on sculpting, but that's not an accurate comparison. 3DC is first a 3D Painting application...and in that capacity, is heads and shoulders above ZB and MB. Therefore, your comment about the price difference is only relative to less than half of the toolset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Digital777 Posted January 24, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 One reason i got 3DC was the price point. Being mainly a hobbiest artists i second what people have said about that it can be a bad thing when prices keep going up. I have some software and even though they are great i cannot afford to keep updating them as they keep putting the prices up a large amount each release etc, this i do not like and when i buy apps i usually go for the lower priced things. This is the reason i like 3DC a lot is it's affordable yet still offers very powerful features for my art, the softwares at double the price+ i would rather just buy a new laptop etc with the same amount of money. The point i guess im trying to make is there should always be a max price point (around) for some things rather than just going up and up as then it cuts out a lot of possible buyers when that happens. So with features like this if it is ever going to boost the price a great deal i like the idea of plugins as it's a optional thing rather than increasing the amount of the whole package. To be honest though im not sure why the topic has gone this way, it was on topic then now it's about software prices even though nothing has been said for definate yet. Andrew even said that this could even be free and would possibly be a plugin (so a optional buy if it had a price) and theres been many free updates. Nothings official yet as far as i know so lets get back on topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member GED Posted January 28, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I thought this was a discussion about Ptex not about price points, besides we are just end users what right do we have to discuss business strategy? Im interested to see how ptex would work, especially how well it would bake to a lowpoly model?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted January 28, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I thought this was a discussion about Ptex not about price points, besides we are just end users what right do we have to discuss business strategy? Im interested to see how ptex would work, especially how well it would bake to a lowpoly model?? It was a response to Andrew's mention of adding it as a separate plugin, or making it free to current license owners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted January 28, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 So what does everybody think of the new ipad from Apple? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member 3DArtist Posted January 28, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 So what does everybody think of the new ipad from Apple? Does it support Ptex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 My very first experience with Ptex has been awesome if you haven't tried it yet go run do so now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 The ptex texture res is currently not scalable. So the ptex alpha version is nice, but not more. OK, a little bit more: It's really fast to paint. But I am very curious, nevertheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Sure it is, I'm doing it right now. Just click here: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member stevecullum Posted February 2, 2010 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 This is cool! It would be nice if there was some visual feedback when the res was increased or decreased. When it does come to creating an export and baking what there is to UV's, it would be good if 3D Coat could auto magically determine the map resoultion required to preserve the details. Either that or create a set of plugins for apps you want to support - which could be a useful way to hook in a few more customers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Jake_H Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Looking forward to having play with Ptex - such speed on implimenting this (key) feature - Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member ggaliens Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Wow ... cool. Way to go Andrew. I've been a HUGE PTEX (Texture Atlasing) fan my self, having written a texture atlasing plugin for Wings3D in the past. I lost interest in it when I started doing geometry plugins. Seems like a better fit in your 3DCoat app. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member pbowmar Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Very cool to play with Ptex! It seems very promising. I'm most excited about getting it in Per Pixel mode with loaded .obj files since that's the majority of the stuff we'll use it for. I'm also very keen to get the native .ptx export so I can render it directly in PRman (for example). Thanks Andrew, it's very cool getting this power feature so fast! Cheers, Peter B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Sure it is, I'm doing it right now. Just click here: What?! Have't seen this icon before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 I didn't see that icon at first either. I'm actually just now uploading a video showing it's usage. I'll post a link when it's up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 I didn't see that icon at first either. I'm actually just now uploading a video showing it's usage. I'll post a link when it's up. The usage is very easy and clear, if you found it. The only problem is just "the seeking for new functions" ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 So I'm not understanding how to export the model out of Ptex. I saw Polyxo did it and posted his results in the update thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member spacepainter Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member spacepainter Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 So I'm not understanding how to export the model out of Ptex. I saw Polyxo did it and posted his results in the update thread. Can't be done yet as Andrew states in his update comment, isn't it? How did he export it then? :-) Is he kidding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Can't be done yet as Andrew states in his update comment, isn't it? Well the update release info says "Supports export/import in standard formats" Not to mention, like I said Polyxo did it and rendered in C4D I believe is what he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member spacepainter Posted February 3, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 o yes I see now, sorry. So it must be feasable somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member simmsimaging Posted February 4, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Well the update release info says "Supports export/import in standard formats" Not to mention, like I said Polyxo did it and rendered in C4D I believe is what he said. Ptex looks pretty awesome, in potential anyway. It's a bit buggy for me at the moment, and the documentation is a bit thin on the ground so not really sure how the resolution really works, but cool so far! At this point it looks like some of the best fine detail I've seen out of 3DC - just need top find out how to get it out of 3DC and into Vray to try some render tests. Great work so far Andrew - thanks! b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member pbowmar Posted February 4, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Just FYI for everyone following this, Ptex isn't just a way to texture something without applying UV coords, though of course that is attractive too. Once Andrew adds native .ptx exporting (and presumably importing) then any renderer that supports Ptex natively will be able to render very large detailed texture maps with minimal memory usage and much speed improvements. Renderman is the only renderer right now with official support, I'm under NDA and can't discuss other upcoming renderers that will have this support but at least one more major renderer will support this very soon. There are lots of challenges with Ptex that hopefully Andrew will have time to look into. One of the biggest is topology changes since the texture is tied directly to the topology. It's a solvable problem (Disney's internal 3D paint package has ways to deal with it) but of course it's one more thing for overworked Andrew to fit in Support for Triangles (instead of just quads) is highly desirable as well but not essential IMO. Cheers, Peter B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Support for Triangles (instead of just quads) is highly desirable as well but not essential IMO. Just wanted it to be clear, Ptex in 3DC handles triangles just fine. I purposely made a bunch of oddly shaped triangles on this mesh and it painted just the same as quads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted February 4, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Just wanted it to be clear, Ptex in 3DC handles triangles just fine. I purposely made a bunch of oddly shaped triangles on this mesh and it painted just the same as quads. If your model is made up entirely of triangles then it'll look bad after merging/baking. As you've shown, you can probably get away with just a few triangles here and there. I suppose it'll depend on their location. ps - To answer your earlier question - to export your ptex model you simply go to File/Export? Or did you mean something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.