This looks very interesting! I agree with others that more in depth training material for rendering / lighting / materials in ZBrush would be great! I too would gladly pay for that - given it is from someone as knowledgeable as Pixolator 
Isn’t it great to see someone selling someone elses work under their name and even giving this work to companies to spread the word? Really awesome, the image courtesy of the neanderthal isn’t with Majid Esmaeili alone, it partially is but the final result isn’t only his work, there have been other artists involved and they don’t get credit at all - i really like the new rendering features but this is just wrong.
[ADDED BY MODERATOR]
Please use private channels to resolve such issues.
Thank you for your cooperation.
THANKS ALOT Pixologic !!!
Super Aweosme ! somnething that all we need to Present our models !!
…and it was a great honor to work with Ofer Alon (Pixolator) !
my point was not to change the way/method of how things work in zbrush, merely to take whats there and organise it into something more intuitive.
+1 not follow the logic of other apps?
Is that to say you wouldn’t consider using texture maps and curves to control material attributes within zbrush a plus?
Attributes which already exist, and functions already present.
To clarify, instead of pluging materials into materials, why not plug attributes into materials?
Thats what I’m driving at
Its fine to have zbrush as a totally ‘unique’ app. Just means that for artists with access to other apps for rendering and texturing and most importantly concept and look development. Zbrush won’t be used as widely outside of modeling which is still its strongest feature.
The die hard fans will cling on, but to be honest better and faster results can be acheived outside of zbrush with regard to rendering and texturing even if only for concepting. I dislike jumping from app to app which is why I think pixologic should look at how to upgrade the way materials are used, a ‘less is more’ approach.
Mainly how to utilise less attributes to create a look for your model, be it organic or hard surface. Once you start overloading the amount of ‘tweaks’ and ‘attributes’ you use to develop a look the harder and it becomes to translate, therefore becoming a waste of time.
I think that keeps in check with the philosophy of ‘Artist Friendly’
Would you also say having a 64bit version is too inline with the ‘logic’ of other apps? Coz thats a big draw back too.
FYI all the work is done by me for the GUY who didn`t pay my payment after one year (9300 USD) and We solved the issue this way ! I allways credit the people who work on other part of a work, check my portfolio you will see !
please do not disturb this thread with something that is not releated to ZBrush ! and just drop me a message if you have any more question about it !
thanks
[ADDED BY MODERATOR]
Please use private channels to resolve such issues.
Thank you for your cooperation.
wow! great renders, very impressive.
Awesome !!! spechless!!
I think its perfectly ok if someone doesn´t like the rendering system in Zbrush; it´s just a matter of preferences. I don´t think a render is better because it´s more photorealistic. I think we can agree in things like faster is better, or simpler , or more intuitive… I personally prefer the zbrush render and I think many of the people complaining about it didnt give it a try.
WOW, Amazing work!
I’m really curious about those water droplets at the end. Is that being extremely creative with the current tools or something that’s in the works? Some sort of physics/fields system in place? Hmmmmm…
I understand where you are coming from but at the same time, as long as Z-Brush isn’t slacking in there sculpting tools and workflow, I say more power to them! Sure, most companies aren’t using BPR for production but it’s nice to have that all in one package even if it’s just for displaying your model or concepting and being able to do it quick and efficiently in the same program without having to export or any other hassles.
Wow cool movie. I hope we will get to see how you made this in more depth when the update/patch comes out like the settings you used for the mats and filters and lights. The rain at the end was totally awesome! Thanks Pixo! 
amazing and inspiring stuff! Tnx for showing how far the BPR can really go! I am looking forward to an in-depth movie! My hat down to you Pixologic
So wicked, gotta try this on my next sculpt!
I have to agree with the skeptics here. This is a great showcase for what is possible with the upgrades to BPR, but I am certainly not convinced it is any more practical. While on the surface it seems straightforward, I can’t help but think of how much additional trail and error was necessary to get this look and how complex it would be to re-create. Then there is perhaps the biggest deterrent, not having an energy conserving material to automatically re-balance the shading after making a change.
What I really wish Pixologic would work on instead is a way to integrate GOZ with pre-existing shading networks and materials in other applications. It would be incredible if I could say GOZ a model to Maya, build my shading network with any combination of materials and nodes, then bring it back to Zbrush with all incoming texture inputs listed and editable. Finally transfer back to Maya and maintain + update the network. Now that would be revolutionary.
Not that furthering development on BPR is a bad thing, just that the type of integration I am talking about should be a higher priority as realistically more working artists would find a daily use for it.
Would love to see a remake of “Quest for Fire” or “Clan of the Cave Bear” using CG Neanderthals.
I think everyone would agree with that. But who is to say Pixo isn’t working on those things? That these steps we are seeing are the building blocks for those other things to happen? I don’t recall Pixologic failing to deliver innovative tools for the times. Until that starts to happen then I can start critiquing their judgment. You can’t reach the top of the mountain in one step, you must take the step in front of you. This is extremely complex stuff we’re wanting and I would imagine each program would have to be figured out individually (OUCH!).
I’ve just been wanting some easier specific retopology tools. They may even exist within the current matrix if someone is creative enough to combine the right settings.
EDIT:
BTW, Speaking of retopology; Really nice retopo beta you have there.
Lets hope they are. Honestly I do think BPR is very useful for quick conceptual type renders, but it has reached a point where all I can say is “cool” to these new BPR advancements as I continue working with Mental Ray for the foreseeable future. Naturally, I would love to see improvements to the integration with a typical rendering pipeline instead.
Thanks for the compliment on my Retopo tool!
Crispy4004 - I must agree, very nice topo tools indeed! Maya should have this built in directly. Looks rather topogunish …that is a good thing!
Great render… I haven’t used Zbrush in while I really need to hop back in and tune up my skills
Zbrush already has Fur shader dude you just have to tweak it a lot to get realistic results
Great demonstration of Zbrush power. I’m new to Zbrush, and the more time I invested in this convention-defying creative tool, the more I wish I could just stay within the program all the way to final bake render.
I enthusiastically agree with almost everything Morph Division said in this thread so I will just quote and bold/highlight my emphasis…
The amount of production time wasted in exporting/importing translation between multiple programs is the greatest beast of this industry. Creative Flow and Time are two most precious commodity for artists, pros or hobbyists. In the near future, when shading and lighting and even animation process get economized within Zbrush, the industry will be truly revolutionalized. Hope that day will come soon!