/3/ - 3DCG

Right Click>Turn "Edit" off. Ctrl+N to clear the canvas.
or
Document>New.

In Settings>Config, you can "Enable Customize" and then hold ctrl+alt to move any element around, and really customize the UI to your liking.

>is there a way to make it start in a windowed mode? every time it starts up its full screen,

I wrote to pixologic asking about this and here's what they replied:
No Z-brush is so good that you don't need all your friends on the IM or any other of your applications to distract you from enjoying thze complete Z-brush experience.
Z-brush is ENTITLED to take all of your screen, so any software conventions and politeness can just go fuck itself and yourself, period & Z-ieg heil.

>>374485
>and really customize the UI to your liking.

Except nothing you really wanna customize is customizable so you might as well use the defaults.

How do I apply something in a regular manner? Say I have an insert brush, how do I apply it regularly across a grid, or in a circle? And how do I make a surface get a regular deformation by applying the same brushstroke in a pattern or a grid? I already know about NoiseMaker but I mean something with more drastic effect, not just a surface pattern.

In 2.5D mode there is a "grid" stroke, but that doesn't exist for 3D. Also there is the "Roll" option but it's limited. Pic isn't really the perfect example, but sort of the right direction, how would you do these regular features like the columns or anything else on a technical or architectural subject?

Another thing, how do you change the spacing of brush strokes, like in Photoshop? The Spacing option is always greyed out for me. I googled but only found other people asking the same question to no avail.

>>374491
What is it you can't customize? You can literally remove EVERYTHING except for the tiny menu bar at the top. You can add any button, slider, material, brush, alpha, etc.. to anywhere you want on the UI. Here's how mine currently looks.

>>374491
What is it you can't customize? You can literally remove EVERYTHING except for the tiny menu bar at the top. You can add any button, slider, material, brush, alpha, etc.. to anywhere you want on the UI. Here's how mine currently looks.

>>374492
I think you need to look further into Noisemaker, it isn't just for surface pattern, it can make full 3D patterns across the surface. Also, look into Micromesh.

>>374495
You can move interface elements around, not customize the things you actualy might care about, it's always hard to give examples as we don't make mental notes
of incidents that has no solution, but if you must have one the thing already mentioned here is one; you can't affect wheter the program starts fullscreen or windowed.

Every single Z-brush session starts with annoying manual resize fo the interface to fit the screen while revealing taskbar.

>>374497
You can move everything around. What else is there to customize that would have an impact on your workflow?

>Every single Z-brush session starts with annoying manual resize fo the interface to fit the screen while revealing taskbar.

Doesn't do that for me. 4R6 starts scaled to all corners, but stops before the task bar. 4R5 doesn't do that to me either, works fine.

>>374500
>You can move everything around. What else is there to customize that would have an impact on your workflow?

What other software do you even use outside Z-brush?

>>374504
modo,maya,3dsmax,silo,rhino,prman,tissue,etc. you know what it is

>>374508
>you know what it is
A list of bullshit since it's quite inconceivable you'd use such a redundant list of packages if you actually knew what you were doing.
Doubly so as it takes years of experience in a package to really get to know them.

I imagine you're a gfx artist wannabe who hoards packages, possibly even one of the sad creatures of this board who assemble lists of
'the god-tier - shit-tier' software ranking.

>>374497
>Every single Z-brush session starts with annoying manual resize fo the interface to fit the screen while revealing taskbar.

Are you a LEL????

>>374588
That wasn't me replying to you. I'm not sure why that random dude decided to reply to you with what he uses haha. I use Maya and Photoshop. Started out learning XSI for a year, then switched to Maya and have been working with that for 3 years now. ZBrush from the start, which is 4 years.

Sure, you could code some custom interfaces for Maya, but again, give me an example of something you need customized in ZBrush that can't be in a way that works alright? Because being able to place any slider, button, shader, brush, setting, etc.. anywhere except in the viewport, is more than enough customizability for me, and a hell of a lot more than pretty much any other popular software provides. You can change a lot of the colors as well if you feel like it.

>>374588
>so as it takes years of experience in a package to really get to know the

from my understanding, and i will admit it is flawed, moving from one software package to another one, takes getting use to the ui, and finding where things are... the bones of why you have is knowing how things need to get done, and what order they need to be done in.

its less about spending years learning one software package and more about learning the process and applying it to a software package.

i can't make much more sense out of that, at least through writing.

ok, i'll be honest, right now i'm just dicking around with zbrush, learning the program and blaa blaa blaa...

now, i want to use it because of how fast it is to allow me to work with high detail things, something other sculpting programs/programs with sculpting don't do.

however, i have sculptris and blender... both of those dynamically increase the poly count... whereas zbrush requires me to subdivide shit as far as i can tell...

is there a setting for dynamic increases to resolution... or is that just something im going to have to live with?

>>374653
Dynamesh

>>374653
You work with Dynamesh instead of local subdivisions density increases, bumping up the density as you get to finer and finer forms, this method is more conducive to cleaner forms and a better end result. Once you've sculpted the main details in Dynamesh, you can just ZRemesh and finish offer the finest details.

>>374655
>>374656

ok, maybe i'm doing this wrong, but dynamesh just kind of seems like its a subdivision... just not calling it one...

here comparison

>>374661
and here is sculptris

detail never bulges out like this

>>374661
>>374663

i have no doubt i'm doing something wrong here, but i just can't see it,

>>374664
You have to Ctrl+drag to dynamesh any changes

>>374664
ctrl+left click drag and release on the canvas. same thing youd do to clear a mask. Updates the geometry wherever it finds stretched polygons if dynamesh is turned on.

>>374666
>>374667
ok, im sorry, i know i have to sound retarded, this is really the first time i dicked around with zbrush... so let me just say what i did.

tool, 3d sphere
press t
make polymesh
geometry
vynamesh, click it
just add a shit ton of clay to one area to fuck push the mesh to an extreme
i get >>374661
i than unclick dynamesh and than click it again...

i get more geometry, it doesn't appear to subdivide, but unlike sculptris, or even blender, it isn't dynamically increasing the geometry like seen here >>374663

ctrl and drag... just adds a mask... i can see uses for it, but its also annoying. and right click i believe is a zoom...

again, im probably missing something basic... well... at least basic to advanced zbrush users

>>374682
You ctrl+drag somewhere off the mesh, not while hovering over it, or else you'll do masking. Double clicking the dynamesh button works as well.

It doesn't do local subdivision like sculptris, as I said, this is more conducive to proper sculpting, not just fiddling around. You really don't need local subdivision if you are sculpting properly, working from the largest forms to the smallest. Dynamesh keeping the density uniform also means your brushes will work the same way across the whole surface, as will your smoothing.

Build your basic structure, increase density, start working in the major forms, increase density, start working in main muscle forms, increase density, get the main details down like eyelids, nose, mouth, toes, etc... ZRemesher, reproject and do any final refinement.

>>374688
ok, i see... click the grey area to do it...
however when i started zbrush up i ran into a new problem... the way i have been building up as in >>374661 to break the mesh to see how far it will let me push it...

well...
its kind of pinching itself now. standard brush and all, doing the same thing, but now the center trys to pinch inwards, and destroys the model till i dyna mesh the thing, its still broken but nothing is see through...

>>374701
Just smooth it a bit and dynamesh it. Dynamesh has a blur slider that determins how much it will smooth out an area when redynameshing. Leave "Project" off.

If you need to pull out major forms, use the SnakeHook tool, not a regular brush. Or, use an insert brush, like InsertCylinder and when you dynamesh again, it will become part of the mesh. As will any other object you append to your Tool/Scene and merge with that subtool. You can also do that subtractively to cut holes into mesh, and a lot more.. but I won't overload you with info here.

>>374705
ok, lets ask one more thing for now...

what are the basic things that i sould play around with and get the feel for in zbrush?

im looking at it, and there is so much shit, all organized in non alphabetic order, and none of it seems all that useful at first glance or first use. i know there is a bunch of shit like alphas that i will have to get use to using later on but let's go this way.

once im done dicking around and learning the ui and how brushes work, i want to try to make a human figure from zspheres.

i know, its hard, and anatomy wont be correct at all, and in all likelihood, it will suck all the dick, but it would be something, and most likely complex enough that it will need many tools i will use on a constant basis, and not just a tool i use in a certain situation.

god i hope i'm making sense with this.

>>374707
For just a basic nude human character, you can get by with just ClayBuildup, DamienStandard, SnakeHook and smoothing things as you go. You won't need much else for that.

Watch some of Ryan Kingslien's videos on youtube to get an idea of the process.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBwbln1dlcc

Here I was thinking about switching to ZBrush instead of Sculptris, but now it's starting to sound like the worse choice.

>>374740
It's not. You're limiting yourself by using Sculptris. It's alright if you just want to fiddle around and make some stuff for fun, but sculpting with local subdivision isn't proper and will lead to really bad forms. Everyone in the industry knows about Sculptris, and nobody is dropping ZBrush for it because it just lacks the various capabilities ZBrush has to make professional looking models and amazing designs. Especially when you take into account things like Noisemaker, Shadowbox, Polygroups and the plethora of functions based around that, insert multi-mesh and Micromesh...

To start in Windowed Mode:
Click the 'Restore' button next to the X on the top right. Adjust the window borders to where you want them. Now go to The Preferences drop down menu in the top center of the screen. Click the Config submenu and click Store Config. Close ZBrush and reopen it, it will now keep the window you wanted.

I just answered the Windowed question but forgot about the rest.
As for getting used to the UI, it took me so long that I took a class for it to actually be able to learn it. It's damn confusing if you're used to other 3D packages which all work entirely differently than ZBrush. I've heard that traditional artists completely unfamiliar with 3D software get into ZBrush much more easily though.

>how long did it take you to get use to the ui?

There really isn't an alternative with a better ui. Some people think mudbox is better but even though I'm an Autodesk shill I couldn't get myself to use it. It's just as retarded and has a lot less features.

But to answer your question OP, a couple of months.
Just watch a shitload of tutorials. You'll pick up more on the interface than on the sculpting.

Question

If I'm a complete beginner should I start with another 3d program first or can I do everything in zbrush?

>>374778
You can do everything in ZBrush except for rigging. Especially with ZRemesher now. But if you want to actually be a good modeler, yeah start with ZBrush instead of fussing around with traditional modeling which is dying out for the most part.

>>374780
>>374780
What about environment/scene modeling? I know it's ideal for sculpting detail but is it good for manipulating the underlying structure of base primitives?

>>374780
>with traditional modeling which is dying out for the most part.

Derp.
It's different methodologies. You can do a human face with box modeling and you can do a car engine sculpting in zbrush. But both of those would be the slow bad ways of doing it.

It's like you're saying painting will replace industrial design diagrams.

>>374782
Use common sense.

>>374782
It depends on if you're planning on modeling scenes for games, or production/film. But in either situation, it's still going to be your most important tool these days if you want to stand out. Even if you were modeling an interior scene for still renders, sure you could model that chair with smoothed polygon surfaces, or those couch cushions.. But if you sculpt it instead, it will have a lot more life since it won't look like this perfect, synthetic object with all mathematically consistent curvatures across the surface. You'll be able to use alphas and noise maker to add physical shape to small details so you get a proper displacement map to use, instead of one shoddily generated from some color texture. Most other stuff that doesn't benefit much from sculpting, doesn't take much time at all to learn anyways, it's mostly 3D rectangles and cylinders with beveled edges and varying size with textures applied (appliance doors, floors, tablets, windows, supports, framing, etc... Anything that's simple enough to not benefit from digital sculpting, won't take you more than a day to learn. So it's better to learn the harder part, the part that challenges your artistic skill and pushes you to grow as an artist, first.

ZBrush has GoZ also, which allows you to one-click send your object/s to your app of choice, like Maya, Max, etc... So it makes it easy to quickly export your sculpting iterations to your scene to check how it all works together well. Or hell, just build your scene in ZBrush, keeping things in subtools and export it all at once when you're done. They will all be separate objects still in your app of choice, color and displacement textures already applied.

>>374786
Or you could use common sense. I'd love to see you create a human face with box modeling, that had all it's fine details like various wrinkles and even pores, physically modeled. It's not feasible.

You can do car engine sculpting in ZBrush a lot faster than pretty much any other program. Is it going to be 100% accurate for manufacturing? hell no, that's what CAD software is for. But will it look real? yes. Even more real than a box modeled version will. I don't think you've kept up with the strides ZBrush has made in hard surface modeling.

But the main reason I say traditional modeling is dying out "for the most part", is because creative freedom is taking the front seat now more than ever, instead of polygonal budgets. The industry is quickly moving towards sculpting first and then retopologizing later. Traditional modeling is literally becoming just a tedious last step to make a model ready for rigging/animation, or to optimize something for games. ZRemesher has taken care of a lot of that work thankfully.

>>374789
>I don't think you've kept up with the strides ZBrush has made in hard surface modeling.

I disagree the strides are marginal and hard surface done in zbrush still looks like clay.

There are shapes I wouldn't try recreating in zbrush because it'd be much easier to do them in traditional. I can always bring the model in zbrush later to add some scratches and shit, but for hard surface box modeling is king and always will be.

That's the way mechanicle items are made in real life to begin with, there really isn't a reason to go out of your way to try to sculpt them when you can model them out perfectly and save some time doing it.

>>374792
After the manufacturing process, they are no longer perfect. Our modeling tools may make perfect objects, but or manufacturing techniques are far from perfect, especially when it comes to welding.

>I disagree the strides are marginal and hard surface done in zbrush still looks like clay.
Then you haven't seen much hard surface done in ZBrush. All you've seen is regular "hard surface" sculpts that are purely that, just sculpting on the surface. (Although with proper use of the ClayPolish feature it can make it look fully not like clay and like a nice hard surface). But regardless of ClayPolish, you don't seem to know about all the tools that are based around creating low poly base meshes from your prototype sculpt and allowing you to easily tweak and iterate on them. Panel loops, Insert Multi-Mesh, Delete edge-loops, NoiseMaker, MicroMesh and being able to create your own hard surface alphas for quickly adding lots of details like bolts, holes and various intricate designs.... It all adds up to an amazing new approach to hard surface once you get used to the paradigm shift.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DemKJ6U4eyM

This shit totally looks like clay, bro.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7twyCgDe-o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtG3yDDDi98

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQSPEMWhNbg&t=63

Cry more.

I would say NEVER choose only one thing to learn. Always keep learning. If you want to choose one thing to learn First, and save the others for later, then that is your personal choice. Make that choice based on what actually holds your interest so that you really learn it, not based on what others say or use. Then learn everything else you can after you're comfortable with that. Learning more will just help you in the long run and make you better at it. If you stop learning because you chose your one method or program and that's all you thought you needed, you'll be obsolete in a few years.

So I remembered from a previous thread of our local furry that "Dynamesh would merge the meshes together if I put the toes and buttcheeks close together so I'm not doing that"
What's the deal with that? Is he bullshitting? Because I've never used Dynamesh before, much less ZBrush all that much.

>>374860
Essentially what I'm asking is how do you do close together geometry in Dynamesh, assuming quoted post is true. I'm going to have to ctrl mask this shit aren't I?

>>374860
>>374861
You would just use different subtools, they will never be merged unless you first merge them into a single subtool

>>374865
Splitting meshes seems a bit counterintuitive to the sculpting process

>>374873
I sincerely hope you are joking

>>374861
You just wouldn't push the asscheeks that close together until you've done a ZRemesh, created your subdivision levels and reprojected your dynamesh details. Then you can start moving things close and working on your fine details.

The higher your dynamesh density, the closer parts can be to eachother though. You can get the ass cheeks quite close enough once you get up past 512 density.

>>374873
Only if you're talking about something that actually should be one whole mesh, like a naked body. But it's always best to keep parts separate, if they actually are separate in real life. This means a more responsive viewport, and local levels of detail dependent on what that specific part needs.

But it's not uncommon to leave the head split and have no hands, then sculpts the head and hands and dynamesh it onto the body.

What's that method where you can place various reference images around the canvas freely and then sculpt on top? I've tried Spotlight but the problem is that my 3D model is behind the images so kind of pointless. I mean references that you don't line up with the model, but just for looking at

>>374741
>sculpting with local subdivision isn't proper and will lead to really bad forms.

Haven't had this problem. If I ever have an issue, I just use the reduce brush to lower the poly count on the affected area. Along with this tool, sculpting over the whole surface in stages (like you do with ZBrush anyway) keeps the density pretty even.

>Everyone in the industry knows about Sculptris, and nobody is dropping ZBrush for it because it just lacks the various capabilities ZBrush has to make professional looking models and amazing designs. Especially when you take into account things like Noisemaker, Shadowbox, Polygroups and the plethora of functions based around that, insert multi-mesh and Micromesh...

Of course ZBrush has more features. That's the whole point. Pixologic bought Sculptris so that it would never acquire the features that would allow it to compete. That doesn't mean ZBrush's approach to sculpting is fundamentally better.

Is there a way to quickly mask by separate mesh or polygroups? I tend to make my stuff from intersecting parts on a single subtool, so I can tweak them together or individually, but I want a faster way of masking for the latter.

>>375064
You can go to Brush>Auto Masking>Mask by Polygroup, then it will only apply the brush stroke to the first polygroup you touch. You can also Ctrl+Shift+Click on a polygroup to isolate it, which hides the rest of the model. You can then use Tool>Mask>MaskAll to convert your selection to a mask.

>>374939
Please respond, now I'm setting up my images in Soptlight, then painting them onto a white plane to keep in the background, is that the correct way?

>>375081
Texture>Image Plane>Reference Views. You have buttons for a bunch of different views that will automatically snap to that viewposition, or store your own view positions. When you have loaded an image for the image plane, hit Store View, and it will store that image for that specific view, then you can choose another like Front, and store a different image. So any time you click back, it will show the back of your model and the image you assigned for back, and do the same for other views.

>>375132
I mean like having a bunch of different images placed in the corners of the canvas

Alright I have a question. What is the recommended way to smooth out imperfections on something organic? Right now I'm using soft polish which gives pretty good results but I'm wondering if there is something that most people use? Smoothing destroys too much detail and form for me.
The situation is that I have a figure with pretty high poly density and sometimes there will be small bumps and cavities all over the place from working. Obviously I don't want to go in and try to correct them one by one, I need something similar to flatten, but that respects the curvature.

Similarly, how do you make an area rounder? So far I've found the Form Soft brush. How would you turn an edged area into something round? Typically I'm using the flatten brush on top of the edges, is that the right way to do it?
Thanks

>>375173
Hold shift, start smoothing and let go of Shift while still smoothing. This changes to an alternate smoothing method that does its best to respect curvature.

But there being small bumps and cavities on your mesh is an example of approaching your sculpt wrong, and is why sculptris is no good in the long run. It means you tried to tweak areas while at too high of a resolution, that should have had their forms done when you were in lower detail. Build your forms and be confident with them, don't tweak them so much at higher resolutions.

>>375186
Thanks for the tip with the shift, I am experimenting with that. The thing is though I am using Dynamesh so typically the mesh has a lot more polys than I really want to have in most areas. Am I doing it wrong? I need those polys in other areas, primarily the face and hands but also to fix stretched polys. The normal Dynamesh resolution is already pretty high. I am not using subdivs with Dynamesh, what should I do workflow-wise? I don't think you can really combine subdivs with Dynamesh, can you?

>>375200
No, dynamesh is right, but the approach is wrong. Start out with like level 16 dynamesh detail and build your major forms like that, remeshing when needed. Then bump up to 32 or a bit higher and start getting more more medium forms in. You work your way up in resolution, don't start high. The face might look bad for a while due to low resolution, but don't focus on that until your at a resolution that can support more detailed facial structures. It will all come together as one really quality piece if you work up this way. Once you get to a certain point where you feel you won't need to do too many major changes to the structures, you can just run a quick ZRemesh with some guides and you'll have a nice mesh to work with subdivision levels on, and just use SubTool>Project to recapture any lost detail.

>>375204
Basically doing it this way forces you not to spend time working on details of one part while the rest of the mesh still needs attention, it's a bad habit in sculpting that every teacher tries to keep students from doing. You want to work on these subjects details as a whole, from big details to smaller, progressively over the whole object, whether it's real life sculpting or digital.

>>375204
>>375208
Thank you for the help, I will definitely start my next project on a much lower resolution Dynamesh and work my way up. I've been trying to follow that principle but with the high resolution you always end up with surface noise from moving things around. I think you could then also just turn off Dynamesh and use subdivisions on that mesh with the advantage that you could go back to a lower level later.

Dynamesh default is 128 but the max is 2048 so it looks like 128 is pretty low when it actually isn't that low. When I try the higher Dynamesh levels 1000+ it takes 5 minutes to do its thing but I guess you wouldn't remesh a lot if at all, at that level of detail. I already have a million polys on level 256.

Is there a way you can scale alphas or brushes only horizontally or vertically? Sort of the same way you would in Photoshop.

It took me about 5 minutes to get used to the UI because I am a professional artist and not an anime spergfag like the rest of you

>>375350
Thanks for being a butthurt fanboi, it's thanks to people like you pixologic will never mend it's broken beyond belief abominimongoloidcrapulation of a UI.

>>375353
Tell me, what would you want done differently about the UI? What about it is holding your potential back?

>>375354
Open mudbox, that's exactly what you expect a sculpting software to be like, it's like a photoshop for mesh with no gimmicky shit or unconventional behavior. You can figure it out just by doing stuff, in Z-brush it's fucking impressive if you can even save a file the first time without having to read the manual.

>>375354

Explain to me why two decades into graphics one company decides that a object is really a tool and that a tool is a brush, what does such unconventional retardation of a labeling scheme add to anything except confusion?
This is the core of everything about Z-brush it's an unconventional oddball in everything for no good reason whatsoever.

>>375356
The only argument you have there is that ZBrush should strip out 80% of it's features that Mudbox doesn't have, and then place the rest in big huge buttons because apparently everyone is blind, senile and needs their hands held the whole way.

ZBrush is aimed at professionals. Professionals customize their ZBrush interface completely, putting all the features they actually use, where the freaking want them. That's all you could ask ask for, nothing else is needed, it's full damn control over the UI.

>>375357
>I have such assburgers that I can't handle a program using a different name for something, that it somehow ruins my whole experience having to get used to another name.

I feel bad for the people you meet, must be hard remember their names.

There is nothing confusing about what ZBrush has done, different =/= confusing. Objects act as tools in ZBrush, they are used as more than just objects. Instead of working with scenes, you work with tools inside a scene that stays the same.

Seriously, who gives a shit if a program calls their objects something different, is the name somehow going to make you sculpt shittier? fuck no, grow up and learn to be professional.

>>375358

Mudbox is very much a professional application, there is nothing special about the features of Z-brush that require it's interface to be what it is.
My argument was not mudbox > Z-brush in capability, my argument was mudbox has a nice interface, Z-brush don't.

A software doesn't become more professional because it's more complicated. Saying that is like saying Chinese Mandarin is a superior language to English because it uses a few thousand characters to say what we say using 26.

>>375362
>Saying that is like saying Chinese Mandarin is a superior language to English

Duur, ofcourse it fucken is, 'professional' means harder and requiring more competence you autistic, autistic aspie child

>>375363
That isn't me >>375358 he's just poisoning the well for me trying to make it look like I've confused professional in a occupational sense with "professional" in as being cool and using the right kind of software sense.

>>375362
z brushes user interface... ill pretend to be zbrush for a minute

i'm a snowflake, and because of that i'm so special, i don't need to open up in a window, i will open up like a game, full screen, and not give you a fucking clue how to do anything without reading countless tutorials, i won't use common terms, i must make up my own, and i won't make it easy for you, i want you to work hard... and why? because i can, its not like anyone else comes close, so i don't have to compete.

and done...
see here is how zbrush works for me right now.

open it, thanks above guy, i got it to not open fullscreen.
find a sphere, place it
fucking hit t, or else it will be picked from the beginning, and than convert to polymesh because reasons.

i still don't know how to save things yet... but as i have yet to make something worth saving, its not a major problem...

defending zbrushes ui with "i can customize it however i want" is fucking retarded... they should give you a ui that isnt so fucked it needs to be completely changed, they should use normal words, and for fucks sake just act like a normal program... you are only special for now.

>I'm such a baby I need dynamesh to force me to refine my sculpt in stages. If I had local subdivision I'd do something retarded like sculpt in the details first and then cry and shit my diaper when I can't get the proportions right.

>>375413
Just so you know, most people learn better by making mistakes than being told "Do this, and heres why". For some reason, seeing why makes you understand it better.

With that said, anyone know of Zbrush tutorials on youtube that don't have a boring as fuck person narrating it that are done real time?

>>375551
Why would you want to watch a tutorial and not have the person explain what they're doing?

But if you really want, you know you can just turn the sound off right?

>>375560
Because, it doesn't take you lets say 10 minutes to explain what you are doing while you are doing it, while talking, many also mumble and stumble over their words to the point i have fallen asleep.

All i would need is them say what they are using, why, then go to it and possibly tell a story or something.

ZClassroom has a lot of good tutorials. Outside of the ZBrush website I like BadKing. Can't remember anybody else specifically even though I've seen a lot of tutorials so I would just recommend ZClassroom for most of it. I think there's a forum post on ZBrushCentral with links to other specific people if I remember correctly.

Can you have a curve that only applies the brush where the curve is, even when you move it around, rather than applying it everywhere you move it to? Also, can you move a curve without applying the brush? The only way I found is to disable Zadd, but that's kind of cumbersome.

Why do small details in my high res mesh in zbrush look good, but when I export a normal map, most of the small details are nearly non-existent?

>>375745
Because ZBrush normal map exporting isn't that great. Also, if you're using a noise feature, or HD Geometry to get that, I think there are some extra things you have to do to get it in the normal map. Plus you need a higher enough res map.

>>375745
>>375746

I gave a program called xnormal a shot for baking the normals instead, and it looks perfect, and was super easy to use.

Its beyond me how zBrush has such a shitty normal map generator when all the info it needs is right there in itself.

>>375871
Because Zbrush is a shit program that we use only because there are no better alternatives. In saying this, that Zbrush is shit, we get people who say "well tell me the better program"... well... there is no better program is the problem. We all know its bad, but use it because for some reason, no one else has come up with better, and in the case of sculptris, they bought up a competitor before it could ever get better.

>>375899
>normal map baking in a sculpting program isn't the best
>sculpting program is shit
Laughin so hard right now. So many silly kids who want software to hold their hands and basically tell them everything, instead of actually having to learn things. It's so sad.

>>375899
>zBrush is shit
top lel m8

>>375907
Goog going m80, it's Chinese Halo, last time I checked American Halo was box-modeled and is currently enjoying international success unless that pile of dung you just presented

>>375899
i dont understand, zbrush has almost all the tools you need and you call it shit. Are you referring maybe to some kind of a program that makes all the work for you, is that your perfection of a program that you so much desire?

can i guess, are you a such a low level 3d modeler that you gone as far as to hate your tools , or you're a simply a cunt?

i still can't get used to how layers work in zbrush it's so fucking weird i dont get it

>>376574
not that poster but i agree zbrush is pretty retarded...sure, you can do good stuff with it but the interface is stupid and what is it written in? Delphi or someshit? why the fuck is there no 64bit version? Now that C4D has native sculpting hopefully I can use it less and less

>>376576
Again, I see people make this comment about the interface being stupid, but nobody actually every gives a god damn reason why they think that. So please, tell me what about it makes it so bad?

You can customize the damn interface ANY WAY YOU LIKE, TO SUIT YOUR NEEDS. That's the definition of a good interface when it comes to 3D work.

If /3/ was some kind of shitty art class, what would /3/ assign to make to get beginners to understand how sculpting works and which tools to use to reach a certain outcome? Because telling people to "make whatever you want" tends to make them overshoot.

>>376611
Start with making a face, and also try making a simple semi-hard surface object like a sword or a bow or something.

Mainly work with the Damien Standard, ClayBuildup, Smoothing (hold shift, start smoothing and let go of shift for the volume retaining smoothing), SnakeHook tool for adjusting and pulling out forms.

>>376612
>hold shift, start smoothing and let go of shift

this is the bullshit from zbrush i hate, holding a key does one thing then holding the key starting to do something then letting go in the middle of it does something else who the fuck thought this was a good idea

>>376616
How is that bullshit? It's more efficient than having to go hit a button to switch to a different smoothing mode, or having two hotkeys for different smoothing modes. This is an efficient way to handle this. Holding shift gives you one smoothing type, letting go of shift gives you another... It's smart. If you're super anal about it, you can set that to be your default smoothing mode. Learn about the shit before criticizing it.

>>376619
uh so shouldnt letting go of shift just give you the original non-shift mode? how does it make sense that if you let go of shift you get some other mode instead of the mode you would normal get if you didn't hit shift? this would be like if you're typing on your keyboard and if you let go of shift while typing you get italics instead of lowercase, it's not intuitive and goes against basically every other user interface of all time

>>376631
See, this shows you haven't even used ZBrush, or else you would know that Shift switches your brush to Smoothing mode while it's being held, or else your brush just does whatever your currently chosen brush type is. So when you hold shift, you start smoothing the surface, and if you let go of shift WHILE STILL SMOOTHING, it switches it to a different smoothing brush that's better for certain situations. It's just a nice TRICK that saves time instead of going and changing your smoothing brush or setting up another hotkey for a different smoothing brush.

>>376612
I'll get to it
Now to figure out how to add orthographic reference images into the viewport.

>>376657
I think it's under Texture>Image Plane, can't remember for sure.

>>376607
>giving you such a fucked up user interface it takes customization to make it useful.

Ok, lets do it this way. without watching a tutorial, sculpt in 3d.

here, lets even do this, get sculptris, and try making something, than save it.

this is not a debate as to what 3d software is better, just a simple do this.

now you probably cant do this because you already know how to, but go into zbrush, and sculpt 3d

now sculptris took all of 10 seconds to open and sculpt.

zbrush took me x long to find a tutorial that was for beginners, as in just opened the software what do, to tell me i need to find 3dshpere, than hit t immediately, than polymesh, before i can do anything with it. i also needed a tutorial to tell me how to save a document, and even than i needed to come here to find how to adjust setting i had no idea could be adjusted.

now, which software is more powerful... zbrush
which one would i rather have seen evolved, sculptris.

this is the problem with 3d as it stands, you need a retarded amount of patience to learn it, because not a single thing makes sense, but even than, zbrush in a leauge of its own for how assbackwards it is.

>>376763
See, what you're not understanding is the difference between casual software and professional software. Professional software's aim isn't to make the program so simple that it can be picked up by any random person instantly, because how is that going to help a professional work faster? It's not, and in fact it is a hindrance because it usually means the system has been simplified so much, it can't meet a professionals demands. ZBrush is entirely configured for professionals, of whom also use graphics tablets. Professionals learn the optimal way to use things, and they customize their interfaces to suit THEIR specific workflow better.

Just learn the damn program and stop whining, be professional, it will pay off in the long run. It's not even that difficult to learn, it's just a few quirks that separate it from your typical software, but those quirks are good once you learn more about them.

>>376766
and that is where your idea is fucking flawed.
"professional software must be hard to use because its for professionals."

3d software is hard because it throws up fucking everything you can do at once, which is a bitch to deal with when you are just learning, and is still a pain in the ass to deal with when you understand all the intricacies.

i have a tablet, i still find zbrush fucking retarded to use. and telling me that "if its not hard than its to simplified to be of any use" can you not fucking think? i went and said 2 fucking basick things,
1) model in 3d
2) save the project.
neither of these is hard to do in any fucking program i have used (granted, the model may not be good, but not the point) but not z brush.

no, you first need to find a sphere, which is tool 31, the most basic one you should have out, but what's this, circles? why do i see those? oh well... what, i can't edit it, oh i forgot to press t, delete that and make a new one because the problem is always there, this time press t, now skip ahead a lesson or two and press x, but what's this, no symmetry? why? it turns out that it places the sphere looking down looking at it at an angle you will never see symmetry from. ok skip ahead again to make a new document and somehow i bugged to program so it won't rotate anything causing me to restart it.

i already call it the best we have, but i will never call the program good. the fact they bought up sculptris so early on in its life proves they know they are living on borrowed time, all it will take for people to drop it is one program that does it better.

>>376773
>i already call it the best we have, but i will never call the program good. the fact they bought up sculptris so early on in its life proves they know they are living on borrowed time, all it will take for people to drop it is one program that does it better.

you're insane.

they ruined Sculprits
shame on them!

So I'm trying to animate a thing with morph targets. Any idea where the track for those are?

>>378299
Nevermind, found out about the layers.

>>376611
Pick a thing.

Try and sculpt it.

Fail.

Pick another thing.

Try and sculpt it.

Fail, but this time a fraction less so because you know how some tools work.

Rinse and repeat until you're a functioning human being.

>>378364
or...

start sculptris....
sculpt
Success

2 days later wonder why the hell anyone pay for Zbrush...

find out the story behind...
yeah.... shame

>>378381
If you think your choice in program is relevant to how well you do on your first project, you are the problem.

>>378386
"how well"
or "how efficient fast and easy"

I remember that time is money...
and you need 1+ years to master zbrush
and 3 days for sculptris

also... while working with it... for basic stuff...
sculptris is about 5x less demanding and faster than zbrush

and in the end is not about "how sculptris is now" vs "zbrush 4.x"

is about "how sculprits supose to be if they did not kill it with fire" vs "any kind of zbrush"

that is the problem, sculptris was faster, better, easier, and even got dynamesh way ahead of its time...

imagine what sculptris could have become if not killed ....by corporate money for fear of competition

>>378390
>imagine what sculptris could have become if not killed ....by corporate money for fear of competition

it would have become more complicated because right now its hatchling level

>>378390
>and you need 1+ years to master zbrush
>and 3 days for sculptris

You're retarded.

Hey, let's hijack a thread about helping someone and turn it into tribal hate of one program vs another! Which camp are you in?

For the non idiots out there, here's some education for you. Pixologic didn't buy out Sculptris to kill it. If they wanted to do that they didn't have to keep it free to download for everyone and even give it a few updates.
They bought Sculptris to get DrPetter to come program for them and he's a good reason why they've had such great advances in ZBrush since then.
Both programs, available from the same small company, not a large corporation, with one very good programmer working on both of them.

>>378395
>They bought Sculptris to get DrPetter to come program for them and he's a good reason why they've had such great advances in ZBrush since then.

he was let go over a year ago.

>>378396
I guess under a nice "legal clause"
they did buy sculpris and put an end to its development

he cannot do anything now... he does not own it anymore

they kill it ... with fire...
as corporations do when money is involved
and that cannot be forgotten about them...

"small company">>378395

yeah right.... check it online...
they are not so "small" anymore

>>378391
actually he already developed quite nice tools there, and with great taste for ergonomics, efficiency and clarity

superb innovations like dynamic mesh, local adaptive subdivision, texture and material projection and creation, posing even...

he did 75% of zbrush with 5% of his interface
for each of his buttons he designed 2-3 functions and share a lot of options with the rest of the buttons...(like local/global switch and such)

the flow, the speed, the ease, the results
all of them superior to zbrush at that time
and with minimal invasive interface, super achievement

on the other hand as a software grows it has a tendency to clutter the interface...

but if you start with a nice light design and keep the focus on clarity and efficiency you will end up with far less problems on the long run

zbrush started bad, and gotten worst each and every new release

their interface, shortcuts, workflow, design and even results are a case study for any kind of interface designer.

a reference point on how to create one of the most hated and inefficient GUI on the planet

of course that was the plan from the beginning, serving a nice hot dish in a horrible puzzle like case

the ones that open the case will get the honey
the rest pay for tutorials, and such

I guess the entire business model is focused on getting money out of "lessons and tutorials" as much as on software sales.

So here you go, a nice efficient software for the user, eaten by the more inefficient and bloated but money-making corporate software.

we seen it before, remember?

>>378402
no, what he made was unusable. Dynamic tessellation only allowed for 7 levels of undo while zbrush now hows hundreds of undo levels. This is a dealbreaker for sculptris and not fixable.

>>378403
actually those levels were designed for early release Alpha

zbrush stopped the real release, where he stated that sculptris will have "infinite levels as long as the memory holds"

remember, sculptris is still in reality... Alpha!
(the real development stopped upon purchase)

so we're comparing an Alpha software with another one that has over 11 years of constant development

so yeah, pretty impressive for Sculptris
actually super impressive when you consider that it only took one man to build such a tool

>>378406
>sculptris will have "infinite levels as long as the memory holds"

thats like saying that a human being will live to an infinite age as long as their body holds. Its meaningless

>>378407
is hardware-dependent
not software limited

unfortunately our bodies are our hardware and software in the same package that is degrading over time

so is logic... not realistic or fun...(in human's case) but logic

Anyone know of some good Zbrush only tutorials of human sculpting, preferably female, on cgpeers the only stuff im finding is digital tutors, and that is... hit and miss in quality...

>>380130
For human sculpting, you should be learning the theory of it, not blindly copying what a tutorial shows you. So male or female shouldn't matter you just make adjustments to convert between the two, the underlying anatomy is close enough that it shouldn't be an issue.

The eat3d human anatomy series is pretty decent. It's male though, so you might turn gay.....

>>380134
Its not a problem of watching a video of sculpting a guy and it turning me "gay" its that when I see a good human sculpting anything, its them doing the human male... and any time its female... well... the results are either shit or its a speed sculpt. If I have to spend hours watching the videos and drilling the muscle placement, what groups should be shown, how they flex and all that shit into my mind, I would rather see it on a female than male.

>>380135
it's theory academics and anatomy knowledge the gender shouldn't matter, hence the stab at you being worried about turning gay. The muscles and placement are all the same.

That said, most people use the male figure because it is easier to get all that info, the fat deposits on any non-emaciated female make it harder to properly understand the underlying musculature. But you have your preference so good luck with it.

>>380401
the nigger brush

What brush is the brush that only makes one pass worth of deformation, regardless of how many times you go over an area until you start a new brush stroke?

>>380401
All brushes if you choose to set them like that. You just select your brush, go to Brush>Samples, and turn off "Buildup".

ClayTubes by default is a good one that doesn't, as well as the layer brush. But any brush can be set to do that.

>>380136
>fat deposits, female
personally, i would like to know more about this, but i've found that information hard to find... the most information is about musculature and the skeleton. for some reason where and how fat forms seems to be not as popular a topic, maybe it's a more complex or variable subject.

>>380406
thanks