Hi Pixolator, very interesting upgrade.
But i have a question:if i understand well to achieve a final model in a low resolution like yours, if i follow yours step, there is a moment which i have a very very dense mesh ( 1,1 million), then if i haven’t a very fast cpu, your gol is hard to reach.
I thought to reach this goal i only need paint over a map around a low intensity model…
If i write somethingh wrong please forgive me.
bye
Leo
Looks truly amazing!
I’m also wondering about the same thing as marciani… I fear that editing a 1.1 million polygon model could be very slow. I got the impression that the displacement map only becomes visible in the Best Renderer mode? Or is it actually possible to paint onto the low-res model’s displacement map in ZBrush - does it have a fast preview mode for displacement that looks like bump mapping or such?
All in all, looking incredibly promising. Can’t wait! 
I’ve learnt from my past mistakes and now I allways have a paper cup handy before viewing Pixolator’s threads. You know… for the drool.
Seriously looking forward to the next version. It is going to be such fun. Top notch paper cup stuff 
As I understand it, Poser’s Firefly is based on Pixels3D Tempest renderer (REYES with micropolygon displacement). It runs only on Mac though and it’s in the same price range as Poser.
Chris
@ marciani
I’ve used programs that allow loads of polys at very usable speeds. I’ve got a mid range PC. I assume Pix have streamlined the code to do this. In any event, you will only need use it while you model…say the facial features on a sphere. Once this is done, back you go to the low poly sphere with the displacement map on it giving you the same look. Displacement maps are now a standard in any 3d program worth it’s salt.
I am confused. That image has been displacement mapped, right? So, what’s the difference between that and normal mapping? Thanks
The new version is optimized to allow the editing of very high numbers of polygons without bringing a user’s system to its knees. So those of you who have voiced concerns about this do not need to worry.
Hookflash: Bump mapping moves rendered pixels along the camera’s Z axis. This is why it is less convincing on surfaces that curve away from the camera. Displacement mapping also allows the movement of polygons or rendered pixels in one direction, but that direction is in relation to the surface of the model – 90 degrees perpendicular to the polygon’s surface, to be precise. Normal mapping, on the other hand, modifies the direction that points face, which in turn affects the amount of light received and reflected by that point. Displacement mapping actually gives the truest representation of the surface.
Hope that clears things up a bit. 
aurick: So, normal mapping doesn’t actually modify the geometry? Doesn’t this result in a faceted silhouette, like with bump-mapping?
hookflash
My understanding is that the use of Normal mapping alone (as is done in realtime gaming applications like Doom III or Halflife 2) does indeed leave you with a low-poly silhouette.
Displacement Mapping adds geometry at render time (conforming to whatever mesh deformations your animation has already applied). This changes the silhouette, but each new polygon’s surface normal mimics that of the low-poly model’s face it’s derived from. Lighting and shader calculations are thus lacking detail.
Used together, you essentially re-create the high-poly reference model. New polygons are created, each facing the proper direction.
There’d obviously have to be some sort of optimization involved, new polys only appearing where more detail would be evident. But, that’s implimentation - it’ll be different in every application.
Don’t quote me on that, though. The science may be very different from my fantasy…
upham
I think the unwrap we’re seeing is based on the imported .OBJ file’s UVW map. Which is great - this process doesn’t interfere with your workflow in that other 3D software.
But, I don’t think it means we should get our hopes up for ZSpheres dynamically unwrapping to an intuitive photoshop-ready surface, much as that would rock.
Hi! What do you mean by hacking apart shaders.Is that like removing the 16 bit greyscale displacement map.If so any tips on how to hack a shader appreciated.
wow! this looks like what I have been wanting to do since I started with zbrush. But the truth is I really don’t understand the concept of maps period never mind displacement maps! I hope there will be a good tutorial with the next version that can explain to me how it works in terms that I can understand so I can use it. So far I haven’t found any information that I am able to assimilate. Maybe I am slow, or maybe I just haven’t caught on yet???
:o
You guys at Pix never fail to amaze me! I do not want to get too excited…I will wait for the delivery day…This is just sooooo good. Thanks guys, you are tops!!!
I am in the same situation Northstarr and want to propose that in this period until the new version release to make in the forum (guiding by the expert team Pixolator, Zuzu,Davie,Aurick) a didactical presentation for update and understand everything related about UV mapping:utility,types ,aplicattion, indication,etc…a sort of “online program update” that begin with the very basic concept each one ilustrated with examples…
I am sure that the “permanent helpers” give us some light in this field because i suspect that new version is a technological revolution in UVmap and animation among other aspects¡¡
This of course has to be considered by the administrator related to the viability od this propotion.
Thanks for your attention
what is the difference betweeen a highend and a low end program, I thought Zbrush and Poser were high end programs?
It’s a matter of opinion, Reyd… 
Generally MAYA, LightWave, 3D Studio, and SoftImage are referred to as ‘high-end’ programs…They cost a lot more, usually thousands of dollars, have radiosity, true reflection, volumetric lighting and materials, animation capabilities, real-world lighting and refraction…You get the idea…
The trade-off is that they are VERY technical, and demanding to learn and use, and can tend to make the process of art more like ‘double-entry bookeeping’ than the immediate nature of the process that ZBrush offers.
On the other hand, the tools in ZBrush seem to work well with most ‘high-end’ apps, and as a LightWave user, I find that it is possible to use ZSphere building for instance, to short-circuit the process, making a quick model for refining elsewhere…Some here, use LW or another package, to do the rough model, and then detail in ZBrush…Sort of ‘use whatever works’ right? 
ZBrush stands on its own as a very powerful application for creating still images. In fact, because it is a paint program powered by a real-time 3D rendering engine it could be considered to be much more “high end” than other paint programs.
In addition, it supplements most any animation workflow very effectively. There are many, many 3D tasks which ZBrush can do faster and/or more effectively than the packages which were designed purely for animation. Since time=money in the world of animation, programs like ZBrush which save time are well worth getting to know!
I’ll second that!
I’ll third it!!
I’ve had Zbrush for like forever. I remember seeing it at an expo and being dazzled by the presentation, and how lovely the apple was.
But it just doesn’t ‘click’ for me. I hang out mostly at Poser forums, and a great deal of users find Zbrush hard to get into & understand. But give me Bryce or Vue or Photoshop or Painter. They seem intuitive in different ways.
The script tutes are nice, but I don’t learn by watching things happen passively… I’ve tried to print out stuff, and sometimes that helps, but I don’t have a printer at home.
I just don’t know. I’ve been frustrated no end, but I hate to give up.
In the long run I’d love to create and texture my own 3d models. In the short run I’d like to use Zbrush with Poser. Morph targets, textures, and if at all possible, hair & clothes.
But at this point… well, it doesn’t seem likely.
But one can always hope for the future.
BTW, Poser 5 was out for the PC over a year before the Mac version came out. hrmph. I’m still using Poser 4, and a great deal of people are hoping that Daz Studio will improve and expand upon what Poser does.
I too found Zbrush a little overwhelming at first, but now feel it’s more like a second appendage that just needed a little execise to build up it’s strength and bring feeling back into it. Perhaps get rid of that horrible pins and needley feeling… You get what I mean.
Most apps out there tend to mimick each other in layout and features, so that, when you know one, you know em all. ZBrush, however, is so original and unlike any other app in features that it would be hard to have it feel and work like other apps, too.
My comment to anyone is always ‘if you suddenly found yourself with a tail, you might not like it at first, but just look at all the cool things you can do with it… Like lifting skirts of gorgeous women without laying a hand on them’.
Actually, I don’t say that, but it does have a ring of truth in this situation.