Member Chip_M Posted December 17, 2013 Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2013 This isn't so much a limitation as just something about a tool that bugs me. When using the draw along a spline brush mode the little box with the options appears too close to the spline. It very often gets in my way and ends up right where I want to put the next control point. If it appeared a bit farther away from the spline it would be much less obtrusive and I'd open that popup menu by accident way less often.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member John Kearney Posted December 18, 2013 Member Report Share Posted December 18, 2013 A way to lock a voxel layer so that it can't be selected or modified without unlocking it firstly. When I have a lot of layers, it's very frustrating to use the move tool to quickly adjust proportions when certain objects are accidentally selected/moved. This is one thing that's driving me insane so it'd be great if anyone else has a solution in the meantime! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor ajz3d Posted December 19, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 (edited) A way to lock a voxel layer so that it can't be selected or modified without unlocking it firstly. When I have a lot of layers, it's very frustrating to use the move tool to quickly adjust proportions when certain objects are accidentally selected/moved. This is one thing that's driving me insane so it'd be great if anyone else has a solution in the meantime! Doesn't layer ghosting help here? It locks the VoxTree layer and prevents from Pick by click and all sculpting actions applied to it. But if you mean a way to lock Retopo Groups which you can move with the Move tool even when the layer is not selected - I totally agree. But this one looks like a bug that needs patching. Edited December 19, 2013 by ajz3d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member John Kearney Posted December 19, 2013 Member Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Doesn't layer ghosting help here? It locks the VoxTree layer and prevents from Pick by click and all sculpting actions applied to it. But if you mean a way to lock Retopo Groups which you can move with the Move tool even when the layer is not selected - I totally agree. But this one looks like a bug that needs patching. Ah, I wrongly assumed that ghosting was just a visual aid! Thanks a lot, I should have tested it so my apologies. However, I would like the option of locking the layer without having to ghost the object. In my case, the object has an interior so ghosting it makes it all quite messy to look at, making adjustments difficult. As for your suggestion re locking the Retopo Groups - I completely agree! In summary, locking is a good thing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor ajz3d Posted December 19, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Don't apologise, John. We are all learning here. And probably will forever... Locking the VoxTree layer without ghosting it would be helpful, I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Shu Posted March 29, 2014 Member Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 The Lathe function in the Primitives tool could be expanded. At the moment, there are two base primitives: cube and cylinder. I think, it would be very nice if there was a variable one can set for the amount of edges on the sides. For example, if the variable is set to 3, there will be a triangular prism. If it is set to 4, there will be a cube and so on. if it is set to "infinite", there will be a cylinder. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member pbowmar Posted April 5, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 Would love to see (at least) 16 bit int texture support throughout, ideally full float support. I realise this is a major architectural update. It would be very handy to have a "bitmap paint" mode where you could just use 3DC as a bitmap painter. I know this can be faked in various ways by putting a grid in with PPP but easy native support would be nice, especially for Linux users with limited paint options. Cheers, Peter B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Aleksey Posted April 5, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 (edited) i have to second layer support in voxel room. I use c4d. And while its base mesh creation is equal to nothing. It does have great layer support. Which really comes in handy when you want to make multiple versions. For example i was making a shark. And in c4d i can make a new layer, sculpt some gills. hide the layer, sculpt a different set of gills. And then pick the one i like most. Also great for client revisions. I understand that this isn't easy, since in c4d there is no dynamic subdivision. so its just moving the same poly's. But its a feature sorely missed. Ah yeah and locking paint layers would be nice too. Since i keep painting on the wrong layer.. Edited April 5, 2014 by Aleksey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted April 5, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 I agree with layer support (be it in surface mode and voxel), but before that I've a bigger grief: Voxels are awesome for sketching. That said, I don't use them. The reason ?: Tools there suck, big time, nothing like a real "clay building" brush. Clay is eating/adding surface as you massage your mass (therefore you can't really build your mass unless going high in resolution from the start), build is just that: big uncontrolable lump, grow is the same but you have the same issue as airbrush: airbrush makes a mess with the alpha, you can't have fluid strokes, the alpha is repeated like a motif along the stroke. Voxels are awesome, but the tools suck so much you don't want to spend time there... it's a pity really cause even if you can't get the same sharpness as in surface mode you also have the benefit of always uniform geo with freeform building, which in my book is the perfect tool for sketching or blocking masses. If only we could get something as good as rapid 2 in voxels... that would be awesome. Ah yeah and locking paint layers would be nice too. Since i keep painting on the wrong layer.. Oh yeah... this things gets on my nerves so much... you can't sample color without being instantly teleported to the first layer from the top of the stack to contain color... Why switch in the first place, it's to the user to decide on which layer he wants to paint, not the software to arbitrary choose in its place... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 5, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 I agree with layer support (be it in surface mode and voxel), but before that I've a bigger grief: Voxels are awesome for sketching. That said, I don't use them. The reason ?: Tools there suck, big time, nothing like a real "clay building" brush. Clay is eating/adding surface as you massage your mass (therefore you can't really build your mass unless going high in resolution from the start), build is just that: big uncontrolable lump, grow is the same but you have the same issue as airbrush: airbrush makes a mess with the alpha, you can't have fluid strokes, the alpha is repeated like a motif along the stroke. Voxels are awesome, but the tools suck so much you don't want to spend time there... it's a pity really cause even if you can't get the same sharpness as in surface mode you also have the benefit of always uniform geo with freeform building, which in my book is the perfect tool for sketching or blocking masses. If only we could get something as good as rapid 2 in voxels... that would be awesome. Oh yeah... this things gets on my nerves so much... you can't sample color without being instantly teleported to the first layer from the top of the stack to contain color... Why switch in the first place, it's to the user to decide on which layer he wants to paint, not the software to arbitrary choose in its place... I suggested something similar when Andrew re-worked the Surface mode brushes. I don't find Voxel brushing as useless as you claim, but there is now a BIG disparity between the two modes. Essentially, Andrew has abandoned Voxel mode as a sculpting platform. He leaves it as is, because what Voxels do best is construction & boolean type operations. Everything else, Surface mode is far superior. That's why he put the development time there, rather than spread it evenly. I think there should be some level of continuity between them in at least a handful of brushes. But in Voxel mode, you only have 2 or 3 useable ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member lildragon Posted April 29, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 The ONLY thing it lacks is Sculpt layers IN THE VOXEL ROOM. However, you do have sculpt layers in the Paint Room, and it's much more efficient than working with geometry. Sorry for bringing back an old thread but this topic is very important for myself and my colleagues I've asked to give 3dc a chance. AbnRanger do you have a link to a video showing the above? This sounded great when you mentioned it before but I never got around to testing it. thx! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member lildragon Posted April 30, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Hmm so I tried adding sculpting details on my sculpt and it's not doing anything in Paint room... color and such of course but I can't get any sculpt layers going... Would love to know your process AbnRanger, else I'll have to return to Zbrush for this part since it's a client piece that will definitely need revisions as I go. thx for any help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 30, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 It's very hard to explain exactly what is going on, but if you import a normal map or merge from the Retopo room "to Per Pixel Painting-NM (normal Map)" all that normal map detail is very limited in what can be edited. I didn't fully understand this myself, until recently, after raising the very same issue with Andrew. The confusion is because there is really a DUAL Map (Normal and Displacement) paradigm in Per Pixel Painting, that isn't apparent to the user. When you sculpt on a new layer, it works like expected. But if you try to sculpt on the Normal Map that got baked, it's as if 3D Coat locks you out. Turns out that Normal Maps really don't allow you to do much editing. You can blur/smooth and smudge the pixels, but you can't really sculpt. When you create a new layer, you are unwittingly creating a displacement map in the depth channel. And 3D Coat uses that to sculpt with. When you finally export, it will generate either a displacement map and/or a normal map...BASED ON WHAT YOU SCULPTED IN THE PAINT ROOM. Andrew just said he will try to enable that baked normal map (from the Retopo Room) to be edited (I don't know how he intends to do it...maybe convert a copy to a displacement map or something), so it would be a good idea if evryone reading this e-mails Andrew and asks him to allow us to sculpt on the Normal Map layer that gets baked from the Retopo room. There is a solution right now though, and I think this is what Andrew intended to be an answer to this problem...that is to choose "Merge to Per Pixel Paint with Displacement." That layer, you can edit. But apart from that...if you are already in the Paint Room, with a normal map, you can just create a new layer(s) and sculpt on it. In the mean time, try to watch the videos for Merge to PPP with Normal Map, and Merge to PPP with Displacement. It will explain some, if not most, of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 30, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 The Magnification & Reduction brush video also explains some of this, very briefly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 30, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 The super-short answer is....create a new layer to sculpt on. You can sculpt as many layers as you want and you can create a layer mask for each of them, if you want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member lildragon Posted April 30, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) Awesome thx, I'll look at these vids today. Edited April 30, 2014 by lildragon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member lildragon Posted April 30, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Ok so what I'm gathering here is that you have to retopo the mesh before you can access PPP? Hmm, love the way it works but that isn't as ideal as I would hope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member The Candy-floss Kid Posted April 30, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Top of my head - everyday additions would greatly enhance my user experience. With 3DCoat there is a fall off in productivity the further the sculpt progresses i.e the larger to smaller concerns. 1,the inability to be able to hide or ghost the transform gizmo - when working with small details the gizmo interferes with placement. 2, The visual feedback/ perception of sculpting brush marks and behavior is hampered by the current limitation of shader materials. Two additions would greatly help here a, the ability to be able to adjust shadow density for sculpting in occluded portions b, the ability to be able to add sculpting room light settings as presets - and/or the addition of added lights in the sculpting room to be included to make up for the current limitation of materials. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of lesser importance. 3, All brush build/ indent responses switchable either to camera all to normals 4, repeat last action or stroke ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On a broader level which doubtless will make my opinion unpopular. 1, the lock down of further surface mode development in preference for a switch back to voxel development . 2, a broader realization of the rendering environment with regard true light placement and emphasis on ease of use and intuition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 30, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Ok so what I'm gathering here is that you have to retopo the mesh before you can access PPP? Hmm, love the way it works but that isn't as ideal as I would hope Per Pixel Painting is just a mode 3D Coat utilizes to paint directly onto the UV map/texture. If you are painting on a Voxel model, the only thing stored is Color and Spec...not depth. But yes, you do need a retopo mesh, with UV's (even Ptex counts as UV's cause it's essentially an elegant Auto-UV toolset). 3D Coat is basically using displacement maps to generate the sculpted detail in the Paint Room...but once you are there, it's very flexible. The Magnification & Reduction tool is much like using the Morph Targets in ZBrush...and you can do this with as many layers as you like...and use layer masks as well. I'll try to record something showing this kind of workflow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member lildragon Posted April 30, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Ok gotcha, but this unfortunately breaks workflow considerably The tools are powerful no doubt, but the flexibility of returning to your Voxel room sculpt will be rendered moot since this way is a very final. Art Directors, clients and such can be known for wide sweeping changes even if the sculpt was stamped as 'final'. Can you imagine going this route to be then told adjustments need to be made to the final sculpt? I might be ok with working around this since I'm testing the viability of 3DC in a production environment, but my colleagues... not so much :\ This is really unfortunate since I know it'll be awhile yet until Andrew gets to sculpting layers in the voxel room, but imho it should take precedence over most things considering a lot of the program is very functional. Don't get me wrong I can understand the difficulty of adding sculpting layers to a dynamic tessellated environment, but it really is a must. Like I mentioned earlier, even a way to 'morph' back to your original would suffice for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted May 1, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Merging is not entirely "final". A possible workaround is to save your mesh in the retopo room and if, after merging to PPP, a return to voxels is needed, the saved mesh can be massaged onto the revised sculpt in the Retopo using the saved mesh. Just delete the old Object in the Paint room. This is my intention for using a saved facial mesh to use on different faces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 1, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 deleted (wronng section) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted May 7, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Ok gotcha, but this unfortunately breaks workflow considerably The tools are powerful no doubt, but the flexibility of returning to your Voxel room sculpt will be rendered moot since this way is a very final. Art Directors, clients and such can be known for wide sweeping changes even if the sculpt was stamped as 'final'. Can you imagine going this route to be then told adjustments need to be made to the final sculpt? I might be ok with working around this since I'm testing the viability of 3DC in a production environment, but my colleagues... not so much :\ This is really unfortunate since I know it'll be awhile yet until Andrew gets to sculpting layers in the voxel room, but imho it should take precedence over most things considering a lot of the program is very functional. Don't get me wrong I can understand the difficulty of adding sculpting layers to a dynamic tessellated environment, but it really is a must. Like I mentioned earlier, even a way to 'morph' back to your original would suffice for now. Yeah, as Tony said, you're not stuck once you have your low poly model in the Paint Room. You have the TWEAK room to make some basic Transform edits (MOVE/SCALE/ROTATE)...including soft/gradient selections and some basic sculpting tools. But you could also take the (image-based sculpting) work you did in the Paint Room, and export it (with displacement applied to a highly subdivided version of the model). If you have your voxel model still in the voxel room, you could elect to clear/delete all the layers and merge the one that came from the Paint Room. If you had any textures on that model, 3D Coat will bake the color from image maps onto the vertices of the Voxel Model. You may still have your Retopo mesh in the Retopo Room, so all subsequent changes could be baked to that mesh. Plus, there is a feature in 3D Coat that "Conforms Retopo Mesh" to the Voxel model when you use tools like MOVE, TRANSFORM, and POSE...to make large scale adjustments. Granted, 3D Coat isn't really set up, currently, to efficiently to move back and forth between workspaces like this. I have asked Andrew about streamlining the process of sending assets back and forth with as little fuss as possible, but it's another one of those things that goes on the TO DO list and who knows when it will be visited. I think we should consider some kind of a voting system here on the forums, for feature requests. Because there are SO many good and long-standing requests that get passed over in favor of new ones, which I've never even seen on here or on Mantis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted May 7, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Here is the video covering the "Conform Retopo Mesh" feature. It was renamed since this video was recorded, to make it easier for a new user to determine what it does. This is a good way to go back and make necessary changes to both the Voxel object and Retopo mesh simultaneously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member fremachuca Posted May 7, 2014 Member Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 have you guys ever thought of something like trello for voting/new features?i created a little test to show what could be done.https://trello.com/b/TaborzEQ/3d-coat-roadmapand here trello being used in another software roadmaphttps://trello.com/b/UfqlXqXy/2d-toolkit-roadmap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted May 7, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 No use, as long as Andrew is mostly alone on this, making long goal like those is a fantasy. As long as Andrew doesn't freeze the software, and take the time to make it user friendly by reviewing every tool and their use in a cohesive and practical manner, we will have up and downs in the use of the software, just like stusutcliffe is currently experiencing (and many more before him)... Oh and I'm absolutely convinced that as long as he doesn't have an artist on board (as in working with pilgway as an employee or consultant) to guide him in the "how and what" we'll keep falling into pitfalls, andrew does wonder in the tech, but he's not using the tool as we all do collectively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member fremachuca Posted May 7, 2014 Member Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 i agree 100% with you beat.but maybe thats exactly why an organized list of necessary tweaks made by artists using 3d coat on sevaral diferent workflows would be a valuable asset for andrew.right now 3d coat has so much potential but it really lacks coherence and user friendliness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted May 7, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Problem is, even if we did such a thing, Andrew has a limited time to do the changes, he needs to fix TONS of more pressing bugs every week. We tried to adress quite a large amount of issues regarding usability (we were 4-3), we even have a private forum section which hasn't seen a single real message (meaning not me trying to get people to react with stupid emoji's) since august 2012, and not even a third of what was suggested has been adressed. I'm not pointing fingers, I know Andrew has a lot on his plate. In fact too much to even consider a collaborative roadmap/pointers of what the users desire. Just look at mantis, if Taros doesn't remove v 4.x bug reports (he recently opened 4.1 project) I'm sure you can find 2011 (maybe even earlier) bug reports here. He needs help, not remote help, on site, direct help. Most of the time if you kick something to Andrew he either see the immediate need for action and things get moving quickly or he doesn't see the real benefit, and you can talk for a long time before he decide to do something, most of the time not exactly what you need in fact, because he doesn't see what make users tick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member fremachuca Posted May 7, 2014 Member Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 hmmmm i see.well thats a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted May 7, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Problem is, even if we did such a thing, Andrew has a limited time to do the changes, he needs to fix TONS of more pressing bugs every week. We tried to adress quite a large amount of issues regarding usability (we were 4-3), we even have a private forum section which hasn't seen a single real message (meaning not me trying to get people to react with stupid emoji's) since august 2012, and not even a third of what was suggested has been adressed. I'm not pointing fingers, I know Andrew has a lot on his plate. In fact too much to even consider a collaborative roadmap/pointers of what the users desire. Just look at mantis, if Taros doesn't remove v 4.x bug reports (he recently opened 4.1 project) I'm sure you can find 2011 (maybe even earlier) bug reports here. He needs help, not remote help, on site, direct help. Most of the time if you kick something to Andrew he either see the immediate need for action and things get moving quickly or he doesn't see the real benefit, and you can talk for a long time before he decide to do something, most of the time not exactly what you need in fact, because he doesn't see what make users tick. I think it's because he tends to go for the low-hanging fruit, rather than tackle the more substantial changes that should be given higher priority. So, long-standing requests like REAL Sculpt layers in the Voxel room or addressing the slow-as-frozen-molasses sliders in the Paint Room...or a Shell/Thickness tool in the Retopo Room....tend to get tabled in favor of smaller and more recent, individual requests (that aren't even mentioned on the forums or Mantis). And Beat, even if Andrew had an "artist" on staff...their requests/suggestions would get buried in the avalanche of smaller, easier to do requests. Sculpt layers are CRITICAL....utterly critical, to attract more and more good artists from the ZBrush and Mudbox communities. What's ironic is that 3D Coat had Sculpt layers before the Voxel Room was ever introduced. But it involves image-based layers in the Paint Room. There should have been an effort to carry this functionality over to the Voxel Room early on. Having to do without them in the Voxel Room is tantamount to having to paint/edit images in Photoshop, all on one layer. It's highly restrictive. 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.