Question regarding texture painting

[ErichSchreiner]

Hi there,

i am thinking about getting a 3dcoat license. For now i have only a few questions that will affect my decision:

Is it possible to import objects with (for example in Modo and PS created) UVs and texture maps applied, to use those maps as a starting point for texturing in 3Dcoat? Or to give already in other programms created textures the last touches in 3dcoat?

Is the live clay feature comparable to the dynamesh in zbrush? And is the workflow similar (create something with live clay, retopo for basemesh, sculpt details, apply details)?

thanks a lot

Erich

[Javis]

1) It is possible to do all of those in 3DC, it revolves around it, really (but is capable of creating UVs itself, too).

2) I don't know if it is comparable to dynamesh exactly, I don't have much usage of dynamesh at this moment.

3) Workflow in 3DC is a little different, in that you can do it how you want. The workflow you mentioned is perfectly OK, but you could also have your base mesh for retopo before you sculpt, import it for sculpting, sculpt it, bake details to the original mesh. I'd say it's pretty similar to ZB in this regard. You can do it how you want, more or less.

[TimmyZDesign]

I use both Zbrush and 3D-Coat. Both are wonderful apps, and both have advantages and disadvantages.

The "Voxel Sculpting" feature in 3D-Coat is very similar to Dynamesh. Actually I find that it is much easier to use Voxel Sculpting than Dynamesh.

The "Live Clay" feature in 3D-Coat is very similar to Sculptris (you can download the Sculptris app from the Zbrush website for free). Both Live Clay and Sculptris dynamically tesselate your mesh as you sculpt. This means that you can subdivide your mesh only in places where you want instead of subdividing your ENTIRE mesh all at once like you do in Zbrush. There are many wonderful advantages to sculpting with Live Clay that are not possible in Zbrush.

Edited June 14, 2013 by TimmyZDesign

[alvordr]

Dynamesh is similar, yet different. In fact, 3D Coat's way of doing this is much smarter. In ZBrush, if you stretch or sculpt your way into a mess, you can Dynamesh it to compensate for the over exaggeration. However, in 3D Coat, you're never stretching beyond the mesh's capability. It simply adds or removes voxels to compensate in real-time. It's faster and isn't polygon dependent, technically. You can think of ZBrush as being like most 3d apps, in that you're dealing with a shell of a mesh. 3D Coat gives you a solid mesh, making boolean operations and sculpting much more reliable.

That said, I still would recommend using both in your workflow, if you can. Each has it's own strengths and features that the other doesn't. I tend to use 3DC more, even though I started with ZBrush first. It's just faster and easier for a lot of things for me. The "feel" of the brushes in ZBrush work better for me, however, and it handles thin meshes better than in 3DC, from my experience.

Edited June 15, 2013 by alvordr

[ErichSchreiner]

Thanks a lot for your insights.

Bought it today.

Btw i am selling my zBrush license because i think that 3dcoat will be 'enough' for my needs.

I thought about 600 Dollars for the license and i will pay the transfer fee (i think it was 50 Dollars or so)

Thanks again.

Erich

[alvordr]

Personally, I would hold on to both. I feel they compliment each other really well.

[ErichSchreiner]

Coul you give any examples, please? I need 3DCoat 'only' for environment stuff, for example, ruins, stone sculptures, roots etc.

Thanks

[alvordr]

There are times when ZBrush does a better job of smoothing out areas that 3DC tends to destroy and vice-versa. I also prefer the sculpting brushes in ZBrush more. In 3DC, I prefer the control and speed of the UV layout tools and the projection much more than the methods used by ZBrush. Painting is much more like Photoshop and easier to work with in 3DC than ZBrush. I like the shaders in ZBrush more than in 3DC, in general. The rendering for various projects is sometimes better in one than the other, depending on my requirements. Same goes for formats. Many clients will want the standard .obj or .fbx, but if they want it in native format, they'll want it in the ZBrush format more often than in 3DC.

I hope this helps.

[ErichSchreiner]

Thanks! Every opinion helps

[TimmyZDesign]

Yes, hang on to both if you can afford to. I send my models back and forth between 3D-Coat and Zbrush a lot. Mostly I prefer 3D-Coat though because it just seems to be easier to use and makes more sense to me.