ZBrushCentral

Z4R2 Dynamesh Beyond the Polygon Barrier

ZBrush Artworks
#22

Really cool vids, and nice ideas!

Maybe I’m old school, but I still don’t really see the point in doing non-organic, completely hard surface work in ZBrush… maybe it’s for a new breed of artist who doesn’t like working with traditional modeling packages? For example- in one of the videos there’s a point where you say something like “And to get to this point it only took me 20 minutes”. My first reaction was “only 20!?” Something like that should only take 5 minutes in a traditional modeling app, even taking freeform loose design into consideration. It also takes 4 or 5 tries to get the shape you were after, drawing the ‘create from outline’ or whatever, and then when you weren’t happy with it you used the move brush to tweak it into position- and ultimately ended up smoothing out some of the hard edges (on accident?). It’s somewhat frustrating to watch (based on my own experiences with attempting hard surface work in Zbrush), because I sometimes just want to grab the freaking vert and move it where I want it to go :stuck_out_tongue:

And to be absolutely clear: I’m not trying to criticize- I’m hoping somebody can give me some information that I’m missing… because after all of the Z4 hard surface hoopla, I’m still not sold on its usefulness. I want to be! I want to believe that it’s this super fast and useful way to create hard surface stuff, but everything I’ve seen seems slow as hell (relatively speaking).

For example-

I tried my hand at doing hard surface work in Zbrush, the idea of shadowbox was super exciting… but I found that after all of the masking, polishing, creasing, and smoothing (not to mention the PILES of subtools with no way to organize them), it really didn’t save me any time at all… so I figured maybe it was just me… let’s talk to an expert.

I have a coworker who swears by shadowbox, and has done some extremely nice stuff with it- I couldn’t even tell some of his work was done in zbrush, it looked like it had been done with a traditional SubD workflow. He told me that I’m just not used to it, and that it gets easier/faster to work with- so I arranged a friendly competition. We both took the same design for a gun (not really organic at all, your typical M16GL type of job), and I knocked it out from start to finish in about 6 hours (no UVs, textures, whatever… but finished, and detailed). His was pretty far along as well, but lacked any real polish. It certainly wasn’t to the same level I’d seen his other shadowbox work at… And to top it off, his topology was completely unusable for anything other than a decimated export->render…

So I guess my point is- If the primary purpose of ZBrush’s hard surface tools are to aid in concepting (because the topology is no good for production), shouldn’t they at least be easier/faster to use than a traditional modeling workflow?

I hope I’m not going too far off topic here, and I’d welcome any thoughts on it… I’m quite certain that the sculpting tools in Z4R2 are going to blow me away as usual- I’m just curious why anybody bothers to do completely hardsurface work in it… this video supports my concerns that it takes way too much time to do relatively simple things…

I can definitely see the perks for somebody who is new to modeling- you don’t have to worry about all of the various subd rules… poles, ngons, terminating tris, changing form, etc… you just take two shapes and bang them together et voila. (after mush polishing and masking, obviously :D) But surely that can’t be the only perk of using zbrush for hard surface work, can it?

#23

Hi testure

I agree that some simpler mechaincal shapes are esaier to control witha direct vertex moving approach…this said i found this easy to do when you already know where you going with the design …i guess that when you watch a concept sculpt video you already know where the shape is going since the artist abstracted it for you and you basically reverse engineer it in your head saying “wait a minute i could have done that with a simple box!”

certain shapes are defintely faster to do with few points and manipulations yet the overall design and shaping approach of sculpting is far faster in the long run because of the flexibility of being able to go from simple to complex or complex to simple…

To use your “m16” example you already know what you are doing (an M16 or close to M16 type of shape) and you can already break it down into simpler components as the real thing (cilinders, boxes etc) this way you are not really trying to find shapes but you already found it and you are now reproducing it.

But your point is valid…in fact you could go even further and say…“what is the point of modeling a hand since i can copy and paste an already modeled hand”…the problems arise when teh shapes you preplanned start changing dramatically and needs to be cut, merged stretched or erased…this is when a mesh free approach is valid.
Also all this tools and particularly this realease of Zbrush is clearly aimed to the conceptual stage when often some concept artist are capable of fidning shapes that will become guns or spaceships or nothing or a detail in a creature,at this stage it is very hard to really preplan imho.

#24

as usual ryan i must say…BRILLIANT!! :smiley:

#25

I feel the same way…

-I’d like to use ZB all the time but I still use Maya on and off.
-Its faster for me to do hard surfaces in Maya.
I’d like to see Ryan’s New video on a gun in ZBworkshops, haven’t got around to it yet.

-Thanks Ryan for the videos, most of what i know about zbrush is from your videos, thanks again:+1:small_orange_diamond:+1:small_orange_diamond:D

#26

Thanks Ryan, imformative as always, good to see these tools in action in more depth.

#27

it will revolutionary version. You should pay attention to new ligths properties: enviroments map, light cap, distance… It sounds good for BPR. And I have questions: why dynamesh work with so dark material?

#28

[HR][/HR]Thanks Ryan… these are simply great… and i am sitting on the edge of my chair waiting for my copy…

#29

great work Ryan! :slight_smile:

Was able to tide me over till I get the e-mail. So excited!

#30

Yet again Ryan thanks for opening my eyes to possibilities and thanks to Pixologic for such a good product.

#31

Cool new brushes, nice new additions to the workflow!
Thanks for sharing this, but i have a question - are there any improvements in the subtool organization ? Folders or some sort of stacking ?

#32

I can only speak for myself - I hate traditional poly-modelling. It breaks my artistic flow because of it heavy technical/mathematical side. So beeing able to do more without it is very welcome.

#33

…of a new start of style modeling! :cool:

What will be the next frontier ? :wink:

#34

@Testure
You’re right, any traditional poly modeler will beat Zbrush hands down when creating hard-surface stuff. Maybe not necessarily while reaching a polished model but definitely once you factor in any need for re-topo.
So if you are an accomplished modeler in maya you should stick to it and use Zbrush for additional detail.
But like someone else said - when you don’t have a clear picture in mind yet it might be easier to do it in Zbrush.

#35

as others have noted, some people just feel more inclined to build even mechanical and architectural stuff in ZB, even though it can be tackled more accurately and precisely (and arguably, faster) in other apps.

personally, the inability to snap position objects to centers and by precise ratios drives me batty. it’s anathema for me to “eyeball it” but that’s the kind of thing that you have to get over in order to build in zb (though things like multi-axial symmetry and radial symmetry gives you some of it back).

and in forcing you to “freehand” everything, it is more liberating and if you go with it, can be a lot faster. i’m kind of a stick in the mud about precision, just how i learned it (and i admit in watching some of the workflow used in the demos for the motorcycle and watch, made my neck hairs stand up) -

but nothing that i make needs to function… it just needs to LOOK like it can. if i can loosen up a bit, i’m sure i can get a lot of material out faster in zb - precisely because it enforces freehanding things.

and as ryan’s vids say, it can just be a way for you to sketch in 3d - to FIND a design - whether organic or mechanical, before you commit to actually building anything for real. CONCEPTING in other words. after you nail it down, you can send over a low res version to your modeling app of choice, background it, and go to town, knowing that the structure and the big picture is laid out.

sure, i can kitbash with lwcad, but it never feels like sketching or concepting and feels very procedural and “rigid”. dynamesh certainly doesn’t feel like that.

and while SOME objects can be built faster in traditional modeling apps, you can really ding, scar, gouge and create welds and seams in zb that would be difficult and time consuming in more traditional methods.

if you need to build something very “clean” or industrial designy… like the starship enterprise or even a car, there’s good reason to consider other approaches. NURBS and traditional apps are indeed still out there.

but as seen from example after example, if you need battered and worn or even of natural materials like wood or stone or cloth, hell even stamped metal, it could indeed be faster to tackle in zb. i don’t think i’d ever build a castle in something other than zb now for instance.

finally, zb can and probably should be used in concert with other apps - we don’t have a very robust goZ plugin for nothing.

there’s lots of examples where people use other apps to build the base pieces (sometimes, just using the other apps to build just primitives basically) and detail up in zb.

and other times, peeps just wanna play and do everything in zb.

so whatever floats your boat. everybody’s different, and there certainly isn’t a single right way to do anything (dammit!).

for me, i just remind myself of the ol proverb - “if all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail.” i try to resist that so that instead, i just use the right tool for the job so that everything gets done as well and as quickly as possible.

jin

#36

They build a new one :stuck_out_tongue:

#37

Thanks for the time in making them but awful material choice. Gave up watching as I really couldn’t see a thing.

El-d

#38

Thank you so much Ryan for sharing with us this videos, this is just amazing, a new way of modeling a new way of creating beyond all forms of technical dictature, Pixologic has just redefinied the rules once again!

Thank you Pixologic for this new liberty!!! Viva la revolution! Viva ZBrush!!!

#39

Ryan, thanks a lot man. Dude, is it possible to change the color of the mesh to the standard red clay?

#40

Thank You Ryan…Great demo’s…:+1:…Creativity takes a seat in the front row of the theater, which is where it belongs and should always be,…and overcomplicated takes a seat in the rear of the theater, which is where it belongs…and should always be…Now I won’t have to strain to try and see over those big overcomplicated heads anymore to see the show…:smiley:
Thanks for Sharing Ryan…:+1:

#41

can’t wait to see what you create with it Spirit :slight_smile: seems like the feature set we’ve all needed, indeed.

(and now i go back to waiting impatiently :D)