Does Zbrush completely support modeling in voxels like 3D-Coat does or is it minimal. Thanks for any thorough reply on this.
Zbrush does not use voxels. It has a number of different mesh generation methods. Dynamesh, which is vaguely reminiscent of dynamic tessellation in Sculptris in that it rapidly re-meshes objects as you reshape them, Zsphere armatures, Zsketching which paints in small spheres to accumulate volume, Shadowbox silhouette based modelling, and good old polygonal box modelling which looks as if it’s going to be greatly expanded in the upcoming release.
Thanks for ur reply Spyndel. The reason why I asked this question is because of new company thats entering the modeling industry which are know as Eucledian. Their software is geared towards voxels for the gaming industry and seems alot more powerful then the poly method used today. Can anyone elaborate on this.
Mesh creation tools are just a means to visualize what you have in your head. Your original reference was to a tool that utilized voxels to help establish form towards an eventual polygon mesh. Zbrush has other ways of establishing form. Voxels are just one way to get there. Zbrush has others that are powerful in different ways.
It’s a bit like asking if a jet plane has a helicopter propeller.
Voxels don’t eliminate the need for polygons, by the way. Product hype aside, at some point it’s always going to come back to the polygon level, since the entire gaming hardware apparatus is built around polygon rendering. Until that changes, if you want to work in the gaming industry, you’re going to need to know your way around a poly mesh.
You might be interested in this, if you’ve not already seen it:
http://techreport.com/review/27103/euclideon-preps-voxel-rendering-tech-for-use-in-games
They’re using scan data rather than creating models from scratch, and as yet it is only for enivironments (though they claim to have got animation working). Their approach, or something like it, may well be the future but I’d guess that’s some way off as far as games are concerned.
Those guys have been pushing their snake-oil for years without much to show for it other than photo textures on top of static scans (which isn’t exactly new, and quickly falls apart visually in anything that isn’t a static screenshot). When it comes to games, polygons and physical based rendering seem to be outpacing the results they’re capable of showing.
Yes Ive seen this also Marcus which is why Im trying to decide on what direction to go. Ueclideon also claim 2 games in development will be revealed for 2015. Also nvidia’s new VXGI lighting technology hints on voxels future https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaBCb7pDK_U . Im guessing John Carmack might be one of the developers. Just a guess though =)
I don’t see why there’s any difficult decision as to what “direction” to go. If you want to do work for games any time in the next decade, you’ll need to be capable in polygonal mechanics. Period.
It’s unlikely you’ll see any radical change in that time, and the vast majority of projects will be utilizing traditional polygon based systems for the foreseeable future. As to what form the future will take and what tools will best be suited for that time period, we can only guess. But it isn’t likely to be an issue for some time.
Even the tool you referenced earlier uses voxels towards establishing a polygonal mesh, otherwise it would be useless outside of the app.
Use whatever tools you’re comfortable with to get there, but at the end of the day it’s still all about the polygon.
The reason why I asked this question is because of new company thats entering the modeling industry which are know as Eucledian.
They aren’t new. They’ve been around since 2007.
Their software is geared towards voxels for the gaming industry
No it’s not. They’re trying really hard to hype their tech for gaming, its real potential is in other 3d applications like geospatial and medical applications, mainly point cloud data. They’re trying too hard to push their tech into gaming with their marketing but the reality is they would be so much better off if they stopped focusing on gaming and start focusing on their real strengths.
and seems alot more powerful then the poly method used today.
Not really. Polygon methods are still extremely useful. Even when voxels become more mainstream polygon methods will still be useful and you can easily transfer between the two. There are pros and cons to both voxels and polygons. It’s not going to be like blue-ray vs hd-dvd you won’t have a clear winner. Both will be commonly used in the future.
Euclideon are their own worst enemy. I doubt they’ll break any new gaming ground. They’re too stubborn and close-minded to accept certain things about the industry and its 3d processes. They’ve alienating their own target base in the past. They’ve started to get into a different target base, LiDar and other point cloud data. That’s their real future.
I think games will implement similar type of tech in future engines but it’s a ways off. Bruce Dell is really clueless about the 3D industry in general, especially gaming and content creation. There’s a lot of things, even really basic stuff, that he just refuses to acknowledge or learn. You don’t just decide to revolutionize an entire industry (especially one this big) without understanding at least part of it and its processes.