ZBrushCentral

Zbrush 3 on PowerPC (G5 or G4)??

ZBrush Usage Questions
#1

I’m a G5 owner who’s really anticipating the mac Z3 release. I’m noticing some software being released which is only for intel based macs and causing me to get a bit nervous about the future of zbrush for the powerpc side of the mac user base. I understand Intel is the present and near future for Apple and PowerPC is in the past, but will I be seeing Zbrush 3.1 on a PowerPC machine? Could anyone from Pixologic comment on this?

I know you guys have heard this a lot, but thank you for creating software that lets me be less concerned with polys and vertices and more concerned with art!

#2

According to the last info that I was given, every attempt will be made to allow for compatibility with the older CPU’s as well as the new Intel processors. However, the non-Intel processors have been discontinued by Apple. So if development needs end up allowing us to only support one or the other it goes without saying that the Intel chips will win.

We’re still about 2-3 months away from the Mac release. (At least, that’s what my best guess is.) So it’s still kind of early to be making those kinds of decisions.

#3

aurick, thank you for the information. I understand what your saying is not writen in stone. Be warned though, I will be so fast to order a copy, you’ll feel the wirlwind across the country.
Its so hard to find anything sound out there on the net, just a bunch of rumors, so when I hear something coming from you its very refreshing. I do agree, three months is far off enough for me to realize I should use 2.x more efficiatently and or based on my needs, start using my roommates intel mac for z3 with a liscence trade in.

You guys are great! I know you didn’t have to respond. Very appreciated.

#4

Thanks Aurick, for the update.

I’ve downloaded the trial version on my PC at work.

Z 3.x rocks! I’m still using 2 at home. I figure I’ll get a start on learning 3 in anticipation of the Mac release. I do find 3.0 dauting, yet familiar. It’s going to take a few months to really get comfortable with the interface. At this point, I find it somewhat overwhelming, but I think the new tools are fab. I love the ease of use, the subtools, the move/pose feature. Overall 3.0; it’s great!

The timing for this will work out for me no matter how I decide to get on to 3. I’ve postponed a leopard buy and Vista/XP install to my mini at home. My current plan is to get an iMac in 1st quarter and install 3 as a windows app.

When the mac version is released, I’ll switch my license to OSx. Happy ZBrushing!

#5

you might get me to do something nobody else has gotten me to do. Purchase Windows. I know people who stand by it, but they won’t even pay for it. I don’t care much for it, though don’t hate it, but I never thought I would picture myself standing inline with a microsoft box and then purposely install it on a machine I plan on working on.

#6

I’m a Windows user who is slowly migrating to Mac (OS X Leopard 10.5). ZBrush is one of a few programs I’m anticipating to make a full switch. Is it possible that when ZBrush 3.x is released for OS X that a free license switch will be offered to current Windows users who are wanting to port entirely to OS X?

My Photoshop CS3 Extended license is for OS X, and I would really like to be able to use ZappLink, and all of the other great ZBrush tools solely on my MacBook Pro without any additional cost.

Thank you for any consideration

#7

A while back the upgrade to z2.5, which never occurred (3.0 was released instead), was touted as a Universal Binary and therefore would run on both platforms. I believe I asked this question at the Pixologic booth at Siggraph this year. Will the OSx release be UB. the response was “yes, that’s still the plan”

The reason for 3.0’s delayed OSx release was explained … “we’ve got to have the release ready to support Power PC/Intel Tiger and Leopard.” I’d bet the release of Leopard has played a major part in the delay. When the folks at Pixologic told me this, it was clear that they are DEFINITELY working on the mac release and it is NOT an easy thing to do. My hats off to them. ZBrush is GREAT software and worth the wait.

#8

I’m not complaining, I’m just saying, I may as well take them up on their free license switch until the mac version does come out.

I agree, Pixologic is an outstanding company.

#9

This sounds like music in my ears!! :slight_smile:
Is great to hear this, I was already thinking about selling my 3.0 windows(with free upgrade to mac when available ) license beacause I though that pixologic wasn’t working anymore on the mac version, but hey! there it is! at least some information that helps to keep my faith in Pixologic.
Programming is a very time consuming task and I know I shouldn’t have loose my patience so soon.
It doesn’t matters now, + - 3 months is a considerable time.

thank you so much for not forgetting us mac people!! :slight_smile:

greetz.
R.

#10

I am still a bit concerend about Auricks comment that it is not guaranteed that Power Macs will be supported as Intels may be favoured, when it is finally released. Which made me think.
Just before Intel Macs came out I blew a couple of grant on a high spec G5 with tons of ram and terrabytes of disc. Obviously such an investment needs to last four or five years, possibly longer. Would be a shame if Pixelogic dumped the G4 and G5 user base. :td:
Without jumping the gun I started looking around, just in case, and found that MODO seems a viable alternative. Does anyone know it?
How about Mudbox ($299), though Autodesk may not consider releasing a Mac version. Any other alternatives?

#11

I have modo for the mac and unfortunately its not a viable sculpting alternative. The sculpting is so slow its basically useless. Its a great modeler though.

As for Mudbox, I like it much better than zbrush. The navigation is just like maya. However, unless they decide to make a mac version I will continue to use zbrush forever.

#12

Modo, Silo, Mudbox are great apps, but they don’t match ZBrush’s feature set. Zspheres alone put ZBrush in a class by itself.

I use Silo for some base mesh work. It’s sculpt interface has a long way to go to catch with ZBrush. Multimillion poly meshes are way beyond its capacity. I don’t know about Modo or Mudbox.

#13

Modo is actually pretty good for sculpting, from what I’ve seen. Apparantly if you bake sculpting out at a certain point you can change it to standard displacement which previews quickly in modo and converts to real geometry displacement at render time if you want. Most times people are trying to animate, so it’s necessary to bake sculpting versus bringing down the the entire pipline with an overly dense model anyway. I still can’t wait for Z3 on the Mac, but I think it would probably make sense for Pixologic to redevelop the core so that it’s not nearly as inflexible with hardware. Changes happen quickly with hardware so developers have to write core software that abstracts the biggest part of the app from the CPU and OS it uses during development.

#14

hmmm… see, i think the world should revolve around ZB, and hardware development and innovations should be focused on supporting the current programming structure of ZB–not the other way around.

Wasn’t the entire structure of ZB’s coding just reinvented for ZB3.x? What a demanding assumption that it should be re-re-structured… I don’t know of any software compatible with all possible hardware configurations–that would be an outstanding feat.

I think Pixologic is exerting practical effort to support many configurations and platforms. A program such as ZBrush, from what I understand, is already programmed to be as resourceful as possible… It would have to be. Come on, 1 billion polygons–jeesh!