Jump to content


Notice about Feature Requests & Bug Reports

The bug reporting and feature request forums (except for the Urgent Help section) are going away soon! Please use Mantis to report any bugs and feature requests. the link to Mantis is:
3d-coat.com/mantis/

Read more about it HERE.

Photo

zbrush 4.4


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#21 chingchong

chingchong

    Novice

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:31 AM

I do have to say that this latest release (R4) may have enough Retopo capability (they copied the Strokes tool, essentially) to remove 3D Coat from many ZB artist's workflow altogether. I am perplexed as to the amount of accolades all these new features in ZB4 get compared to the lack thereof when released in 3D Coat. The Kitbashing toolset gets no love...even in this community, but as soon as it gets copied into ZBrush's bag of toys...it's suddenly this totally amazing innovation!


Zbrush has a powerful marketing division. All the new features of 3DC get lost in the short Release-notes., there is no attention grabber in the presentation.
Maybe they plan it for the V4 release, but in this state its no comparision to zBrushs marketing.
However it is a basic rule of economics, that you can have the best products available, but without marketing nobody wil notice or buy your products


btw: whats about this michael irvin vid?

#22 michalis

michalis

    Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,479 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:athens, now

Posted 27 July 2012 - 10:30 AM

I do have to say that this latest release (R4) may have enough Retopo capability (they copied the Strokes tool, essentially)


Don't say this before trying.
These are not the loop guides we are familiar with.
These loops are forcing geometry as much you like! These produce perfect loops, no spiral results, no tris neither ngons.
This tool works perfectly on very complicated meshes, a hand-fingers already posed, touching the body... yes, this Qremesher managed to do it right. No overlapping faces. Not the expected messing. I'm deeply impressed.

You know what I'm thinking? Pixologic is the master of tool making. It was and still is the reference for all other 3d sculpting apps.
They may adopted some ideas from 3dcoat but the implementation is far better and it obviously uses different and very complicated algorithms.

@BeatKitano
+1
Let's stop this and concentrate on making 3dcoat better. We don't need more tools, we need to see refinement of these tools. Latest build became my favorite. Retopology room needs more love now.
MACOSX,
3DC bug reports here:
http://www.3d-coat.com/mantis

#23 AbnRanger

AbnRanger

    Master

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 11:02 AM

btw: whats about this michael irvin vid?

Just a funny clip of someone using the word "Beast," which I used to describe the new generation (Kepler) of NVidia cards.

#24 chingchong

chingchong

    Novice

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 27 July 2012 - 11:19 AM

Just a funny clip of someone using the word "Beast," which I used to describe the new generation (Kepler) of NVidia cards.


ah ok , dont have sound here at work ...lol

#25 AbnRanger

AbnRanger

    Master

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 11:34 AM

BTW, I guess a lot of the accolades also has to do with ZBrush updates being free. So, it's largely just the same users gushing about the new goodies they get. Very similar to how it is around here when there are substantial updates. I would be pretty happy too if I were in their shoes.

...You know what I'm thinking? Pixologic is the master of tool making. It was and still is the reference for all other 3d sculpting apps.
They may adopted some ideas from 3dcoat but the implementation is far better and it obviously uses different and very complicated algorithms.

This is the major dilemma for Andrew. On one hand he is hounded with an relentless barrage of feature requests and then he has us long time users asking for fewer features and more refinement. Once the app has grown enough that Andrew can hire more full-time staff, then there will likely be continued progress on both fronts.

#26 carlosan

carlosan

    Expert

  • Custodian
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,341 posts

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Argentina
  • Interests:Texture Paint, Character Design, Sculpture.

Posted 27 July 2012 - 02:10 PM

Zbrush has a powerful marketing division. All the new features of 3DC get lost in the short Release-notes., there is no attention grabber in the presentation.
Maybe they plan it for the V4 release, but in this state its no comparision to zBrushs marketing.


YES

They may adopted some ideas from 3dcoat but the implementation is far better and it obviously uses different and very complicated algorithms.

Let's stop this and concentrate on making 3dcoat better. We don't need more tools, we need to see refinement of these tools.


YES

------------------------------------------------
There is a man building a house. He digs deep and builds his house on rock. The floods come, and the water tries to wash the house away. But the flood cannot move the house, because the house was built well (strong).

And there is a man that does not build his house on rock. When the floods come, the house falls down easily. And the house is completely destroyed

#27 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 08:22 PM

I, too, have used Zbrush from its first introduction - and used it heavily. I liked its unique approach to the problem of presenting complicated 3D scenes using what was really just "basic" hardware - the software, itself, did the work.

I also liked the original idea that not everything must be "true 3D", but 2.5D suffices well, many times. The software interface made immediate sense to me, although I thought some of the names of things were strange. It was probably the most stable and trustworthy 3D software I had ever used.

The speed and stability were a direct product of its software engineering - meticulously thought out and tested (or it could not have been so stable).

In the first stages of development, I think ZBrush was the work of a single man, Ofer Alon. He put his very different view of things directly into his application - just as Andrew did with his very unique approach to working with 3D content. Both ZBrush and 3D-Coat were fairly simple, to begin with - and grew much more complex over the years.

Pixologic added more talented staff to cope with increased complexity and user demands. Pilgway has yet to do this.

Someone at Pixologic must also be a very talented and efficient product manager. I believe it is impossible to keep up with user demands and product complexity without enlarging a staff, considerably. This of course, cannot happen without increased profits and the corresponding marketing savvy. Pixologic has demonstrated success in both of these areas.

And, I might add, they thoroughly recognize to whom they are marketing their product.

Pixologic has discovered what it takes to survive and to thrive in a consumer driven marketplace. They started by marketing to non-professionals, succeeded in evangelizing some notable professionals, and continue to profit by supporting their original market target and user base, with the recommendations of those recruited professionals.

In the future, we will see fewer and fewer software manufacturers that continue to thrive - and to even exist - without a similar realization and marketing track.

It's unrealistic to think that one man, working alone, could have pulled off what Pixologic has now accomplished by means of its very talented, hard-working and visionary team.


Greg Smith

#28 digman

digman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,697 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas, USA

Posted 27 July 2012 - 08:57 PM

All the below are just my opinions and 2 cents worth.

Photoshop has the biggest share of the market in it's field. There are other programs that work as well but Photoshop is integrated into industry. I use Twistedbrush which I find more artistic friendly. (my opinion). TwistedBrush is a very good paint program and the most bug free software I ever used but TB will never have the same large customer base as Photoshop. That is just the way it works once a piece of software gets integrated into the industry unless they make some really poor decisions.
Even Andrew puts the default editor as Photoshop and supports PSD files for many of the image saving operations in 3DCoat...

Zbrush is integrated into the industry.

The smartest thing Andrew can do is make the upcoming version 4 as free of bugs as possible before releasing so he can capture the share of market that is out there and not lose any of the smaller customer base that is available...

#29 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:32 PM

It is no longer "The Industry" which sustains Adobe Photoshop as a viable product. Just go to any Barnes & Noble Bookstore, go to the "Computer" section and look at the number of Photoshop books which are on the shelf - which cater to the consumer marketplace. And those shelves have been stocked this way for about 10 to 12 years.

Industry professionals are not responsible for the proliferation of Photoshop sales. Photoshop has become ubiquitous because of its extremely large, non-professional user base.

Adobe realizes this trend, which has not influenced all of their software suite with the same success - but has begun to act upon this singular realization by "popularizing" its entire software suite - once the domain of the professional - with the introduction of the monthly subscription. $49.95 per month gets you all of their intellectual property. To use, at least.

This is an act which will influence the entire CG software industry.

If Adobe is going this way, and Apple is going this way (Apple Motion for $99 and Final Cut Pro for $299 - and all of the other consumer priced items in the AppStore) - you can bet nearly everyone will be going this way.


Greg Smith

#30 AbnRanger

AbnRanger

    Master

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:35 PM

All the below are just my opinions and 2 cents worth.

Photoshop has the biggest share of the market in it's field. There are other programs that work as well but Photoshop is integrated into industry. I use Twistedbrush which I find more artistic friendly. (my opinion). TwistedBrush is a very good paint program and the most bug free software I ever used but TB will never have the same large customer base as Photoshop. That is just the way it works once a piece of software gets integrated into the industry unless they make some really poor decisions.
Even Andrew puts the default editor as Photoshop and supports PSD files for many of the image saving operations in 3DCoat...

Zbrush is integrated into the industry.

The smartest thing Andrew can do is make the upcoming version 4 as free of bugs as possible before releasing so he can capture the share of market that is out there and not lose any of the smaller customer base that is available...

I hope Raul is able to make it back from Cuba, and I personally think Andrew needs to bring another clone of himself onboard to handle just the bugfixing duties. That could take a lot of stress & wear and tear off of him, plus enable them to spend more time with each feature/tool, so that it is well thought out and polished.

I agree with Beat on the unrefined nature of things...but in all fairness, I think most of that is confined to the Voxel Sculpting toolset. The rest of the application could thrive on it's own, as a 3D Paint/UV Editing and Retopo app. This might be a strategy that could work with Greg's view of things. Something lightweight, that could be affordable enough to appeal to more ZB and MB users (who don't want or need the Voxel Sculpting tools) and to to the tablet market as well.

#31 AbnRanger

AbnRanger

    Master

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:42 PM

It is no longer "The Industry" which sustains Adobe Photoshop as a viable product. Just go to any Barnes & Noble Bookstore, go to the "Computer" section and look at the number of Photoshop books which are on the shelf - which cater to the consumer marketplace. And those shelves have been stocked this way for about 10 to 12 years.

Industry professionals are not responsible for the proliferation of Photoshop sales. Photoshop has become ubiquitous because of its extremely large, non-professional user base.

Adobe realizes this trend, which has not influenced all of their software suite with the same success - but has begun to act upon this singular realization by "popularizing" its entire software suite - once the domain of the professional - with the introduction of the monthly subscription. $49.95 per month gets you all of their intellectual property. To use, at least.

This is an act which will influence the entire CG software industry.

If Adobe is going this way, and Apple is going this way (Apple Motion for $99 and Final Cut Pro for $299 - and all of the other consumer priced items in the AppStore) - you can bet nearly everyone will be going this way.


Greg Smith

Greg, Adobe is where it is, not because of non-professionals using it...still costs too much for that. It's because it is the defacto standard for so MANY industries. Photography alone could keep it on top. Graphic Design, all 3D related fields, including Compositing and Video Editing. Sign Shops, Ad agencies, you name it...they have a foothold in some major industries. Doesn't have jack to do with non-professionals.

Apple has ticked off a lot of Final Cut users in their approach. Especially considering it had the lions share of the video editing market, in it's segment, and they are upsetting the Apple...Cart (pun intended).

#32 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:44 PM

If you want a direct parallel to what we are now witnessing in the CG software marketplace - you only have to look in the direction of the Music Production software marketplace.

Once the domain of the professional musician - now the playground of every 14 year old with a laptop. Just ask those software manufacturers what has happened to their professionally driven marketplace. (Logic Pro - $199).

Now that "music" production has become so "friendly" to the swelling masses of aspiring stars, it only makes sense to design software that they want and can afford.

Now that creating "3D art" has become so "friendly" to the swelling masses of aspiring CG stars, it should also make sense to design software that they thirst for and have the money to buy.

And, what they cannot buy, they will simply pirate.


Greg Smith
  • chingchong likes this

#33 digman

digman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,697 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas, USA

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:47 PM

@ Greg Smith.
I did not mean that the industry drives the market totally today but they got integrated first, became well know. That is a fact. Ever one has heard of Photoshop and in a lot of cases will think about buying Photoshop first. Though they might buy something else in the end. TwistedBrush does not have that market brand awareness that Photoshop has.

Zbrush is similar to Photoshop in that regards.

@ AbnRanger,
Agreed very much with having a bug hunting, squashing additional programmer added to Andrew's staff. :D
  • chingchong likes this

#34 chingchong

chingchong

    Novice

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:56 PM

this must be the philosophers section, here :D

#35 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 10:00 PM

ZBrush was definitely, from the beginning, not aimed at the Industry Professional. It was aimed and priced for the consumer CG market. Way ahead of its time, in this regard.

Photoshop began as a reasonably priced "semi-professional" tool (even I could afford it back then) which did gain ground as the industry standard - for two reasons: for three, three reasons:

1) Simplicity and directness of use for artists and photographers
2) It was available on the Mac - designed for the Mac - the domain of artists, and the domain of simplicity.
3) No competing product emerged in the marketplace with these attractions.

More than anything, the success of Apple drove the success of Photoshop and made it universally used and accepted.


Greg Smith

#36 AbnRanger

AbnRanger

    Master

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 10:00 PM

Actually, Andrew could eventually and feasibly offer 3 different versions.

1) 3DC Paint (Paint, Tweak, UV, Retopo rooms) $149

2) 3DC Sculpt (Voxel and Retopo Rooms) $149

3) 3DC Complete (Xtreme, Ultimate, Pro...whichever) $349

Now, the reason why the full app would still be a bit more than the two combined would be Voxel Paint and Rendering capability, on top of everything being integrated. Just some ideas to appeal to the consumer and tablet users, as well as making it more affordable for ZB and MB users to get just the tools they may want to use.

#37 digman

digman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,697 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas, USA

Posted 27 July 2012 - 10:03 PM

ChingChong, Yes, we all got big heads here :crazy: :blink:

#38 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 10:11 PM

Yes, this would be a better direction than continuing along the path of the "Swiss Army Knife UBER CG Software".

For one thing, maintaining such a beast is prohibitive to the single genius, working alone. And time, alone, will prove this true.

And, it opens up the market for industry specialists at a very reasonable price, while also paving the way for the mighty "Tablet" of the future - with its corresponding and swelling ranks of consumer-creators.

I'm afraid there will be no viable way to keep 3DC expanding and bursting with features, while at the same time making it stable and affordable.

Greg Smith

#39 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 11:06 PM

By the way, since we're journeying back to the ancient times when PhotoShop was young and "The Industry" was virtually non-existent, (PhotoShop did not even work with greyscale images, at the time, only dithered monochrome pixels) - nobody was an "Industry Professional". There were no schools, no degrees and no market for "CG Graphics".

PhotoShop was designed to work on the simplest of machines, the Mac Plus - which had only 2 "colors" (Black & White). It wasn't really even for photo processing, but really was initiated to help the Mac print out "newsprint" graphics for the newly developing market - Desktop Publishing.

Back then, "The Industry" was anybody who could afford to rent time on a Mac Plus at Kinko's Copies in Berkeley (I lived there) - and eventually, you could rent time all over the place. We didn't know anything - we learned it by the seat of our pants.

In a way, reminiscent of those times gone by, technology has advanced to the point where the most advanced tools (relatively speaking) of the day are available to be used by ordinary people without formal education - and be used to produce content which rivals what "The Industry" is able to produce. Just like we were able - in the days of old - to produce printed pages that rivaled those of many "Industry" B & W publications. As a result, many new publications and publishing firms were launched, composed of those who were not part of "The Industry", and who could do what they did faster and for less money.

It was the time of "The Little Guy".

Its that time, again.


Greg Smith

#40 Psmith

Psmith

    Helper

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2012 - 11:53 PM

Just for a historic reference regarding the original intent of "3D-Brush":

http://www.3d-brush.com/

This app made total sense in the scope for which it was designed. It was fast and simple and economical. It did things in a unique and special way. It had its own niche.

It was practical for one (gifted) man to maintain as it was.

Now, 3D-Coat is a much more complex application - a much more ambitious application - walking into areas and markets dominated by others more powerful than itself. And, it seems to be aspiring to walk even further.

What to do?

Some suggest that the app basically return to its roots of being a niche product. This cannot be done by keeping it as it is - one behemoth of an application, whose closest competitor is ZBrush. I simply speak the truth.

But, its present conglomerate self could theoretically be converted into at least 2 powerful, economical, simple niche products:

1) 3D-Brush (if you like) - with all of the advanced features that have been added since then.
2) 3D-Sculpt (better names are available) - featuring true voxel sculpting, dynamic polygonal model creation and automatic retopology (with manual additions).

Just a thought.


Greg Smith




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users