ZBrushCentral

2D vs 2.5/3D Texturing with Zbrush

ZBrush Usage Questions
#1

OK, after much sculpting and modelling, I felt it was finally time to move on into texturing. The whole process seemed rather simple looking at GUV tilles in Z2 etc, but traditional texturing with UV Layout/Pelting in other apps has me rather frustrated. As a choleric, that condition is not really healthy for me and I am really looking to remedy that. :smiley:

I just cant get used to the idea of laying everything out flat as the best way to get nice texturing done. After all you would not create a latex skin for a real sculpture to then pelt and paint on or for fx-make-up to do anything similar that way. In the ā€œreal worldā€ you paint on/in 3D and I wonder if there are really any drawbacks of doing just the same in CG without really bothering with all the fuss of manually laying out UVā€™s or projecting them in any of the practiced fashions and then cleaning them up!?

From my humble beginnners perspective it appears as ZBrush would do just fine as even a complete UV-Layout/Texturing solution, without having to bother with all the unwrap/relax/overlapping UVā€™s etc etc stress of doing it in other apps. I know, from a 2D point of view the tiles dont really look editable at all, but then a regular UV-pelt texture of a face doesnt really communicate with me either. It feels like working on a dead personā€™s/creatureā€™s skin and as a traditional artist that really freaks me out. I looked into Bodypaint 3D, but the idea of being able to do everything from UV-Layout to finished texture and displ/bump-map in ZBrush really appeals to me. It would seem and feel so much more intuitive and natural, to say the least.

So I would really appreciate some vetā€™s opinions, plus&conā€™s on the subject and some info on how the GUV tile UVā€™s are really usable in apps like XSI, Maya etc.

Thanks a lot in advance.

#2

Anybody?

Just trying to get his back up on the first page where someone inclined to reply or tell me how stupid the question is may actually see it. :cool:

#3

Iā€™m not a vet, but I can tell you that Iā€™m loving texturing (or vertex colouring) in Z3 so far. Itā€™s nice, especially if you plan on keeping your model in Zbrush, to paint without having to even think about UVs. For yourself though, why not run some tests and see how well things work for you?

#4

Thanks a lot for the input!

Yeah, I was going to do that anyways, but was hoping to get some insights and opinions beforehand and along the way.

If I was staying in Z I wouldnt even ask, but the issues in my mind are really pipeline relevant and I was just hoping to get some reports on experiences, pitfalls, limitations etc especially where moving between and compatibilities with animation and rendering in other apps is concerned.

#5

As far as Iā€™m aware Zbrushā€™s UV mapping types work fine in XSI (I havenā€™t tested this personally- I just read about it somewhere, if my memory is correct) but Iā€™m not sure about Maya. I guess itā€™d depend on what version of those apps it is youā€™re using. The olā€™ pipeline test is the best way to go.

On a side note, it might pay to work on your standard UVing skills, despite things like GUV tiles. Itā€™s not the most enjoyable aspect of 3D, for sure, but itā€™ll allow you to apply textures in Zbrush, and then edit them in a 2D appā€¦ and this has advantages, since programs like Photoshop (or even specific 3D painting programs) will provide you with more texture editing power than Zbrush can offer.

#6

Many thanks again! :smiley:

That is exactely the kind of input I was hoping to get, before diving into a production pipeline of my own geared towards efficiency next to my own work preferences.

XSI is actually one of my main tools for rendering and animation and its good to hear the tiles work there, should I decide to stick with ZBrush UVā€™s.

As far as image editing power of Photoshop, goes I am well aware of that, but was wondering if something like Bodypaint or Deep Paint is an adequate replacement where layered painting etc. is concerned and how the UV tiles hold up there. Any experiences with that?

#7

Qwll, I donā€™t have experience with Deep or Bodypaint, but I do have experience with Max. I totally agree with you, wholeheartedly! Itā€™s mind-bogglingly tedious to have to lay out UVs by hand, and it just doesnā€™t make sense for an artist to have to spend time doing this. In a production pipeline with lots of stuff to do, youā€™re adding WEEKS of time for something that could be done with a button click.

Pros:

  • Knock weeks off schedules
  • None of the tedium of doing it by hand

Cons:

  • No easily editable layers (something I was PRAYING would be in Z3)
  • Some seam issues for very high res normal maps rendered closeup

Personally, if Iā€™m working on a personal project, Iā€™ll use ZBrushā€™s tiles every time (because I know Iā€™m going to be happy with the texture). In a production environment, where an art director is going to come back to me and probably ask me to change ā€œthat base colour layer to something elseā€, I have to stick with hand unwrapped maps so I have the convenience of going back into photoshop and just editing one layer.

#8

it all works, i personally use unfold 3d magic.
it will do all your uv needs and quite fast actually, about 5 minutes to generate a uv.

i cant see this type of thing happening in z3, its a small sacrifice to get it :slight_smile:

#9

Donā€™t take my word that things will work with XSIā€¦ you might want to double check :wink:

I donā€™t have any experience with Deep Paint 3D or Bodypaint (Zbrush is my first painting app, so Iā€™m having fun!) but Iā€™d expect that almost any new version of any major app will handle GUV and AUV tiles, since Zbrush has been used professionally for some time now. Deep Paint 3D, not having seen a major update in a while, could have issues, but youā€™d have to test to see. I know for a while not everything worked smoothly with GUV tiles and a few apps, but I havenā€™t heard of any major issues for a fair while. You could also look to Modo (version 301, which will be out in a few months) for another 3D paint solution.

#10

I canā€™t say that Iā€™m a vet, but I can share some of my personal opinions and insight. I know Z3ā€™s poly paint tools seem pretty tempting, but a good uv layout will take you alot further. The biggest drawback I see is that poly paint is vertex based, each vertex acting as a pixel and thus limiting your texture resolution to the amount of polys on your object. I know what your thinking, ā€œbut Zbrush does millions of polys, so that should be plenty to work with.ā€ Yeah, you can get really good results in this manner but you could get better through the traditional means. The problem Iā€™m running into is when working on a full body model. Iā€™m pushing 3.4 million polys, the max subdivisions my system will allow, and the poly paint texture just doesnā€™t keep up with the original one done using more traditional methods. It tends to look very blurred in some areas and loses alot of itā€™s finer details. Mainly because the distrubition of polys isnā€™t even across the surface. For example the face is much denser than say the torso. And thus the torso ends up lacking in resolution and detail. And yet I still need the distribution the way it is for the sculpt. You might be able to play around with HD geomtry, but I havenā€™t yet. As great as Z3 is, photoshop is a far superior painting package so Iā€™m sticking with it. I mostly use Z3 for laying down a base and fixing seams. Zbrush can aid you in creating a phenomanl texture, but I just donā€™t see it as the be all end all solution.

#11

Generally when people create humnaoid characters the head is seperated from the body to prevent that issue.

#12

Great input, guys! Just what I need!

As seanforsyth so adequately points it out, schedule is an immensely important issue, especially in a micro-crew environment, which exactely is a huge concern of mine. Any time saving feature is worth so much, not only in eventually saving money!

I most certainly see the proā€™s of traditional UV layout of course and would very much prefer a one-klick UV generation solution over the unreadable tiles, and combine them with a true 3d paint solution, so I guess Unfold 3D sounds like its really worth a try. (Thanks a lot for that, warpy!) Of course it would be an immense plus to have such a solution available with the option to go into photoshop, if necessary and actually be able to make some sense of what you are looking at and then perhaps do all ā€œregularā€ painting in a full 3d paint solution. All without having to bother with frustrating manual UV layout and loosing plenty of time.

I mean, I have been painting/texturing models and sculpts for as long as I can remember and there is just some sort of connection between you as an artist and the sulpt in your hands that facilitates really nice results, which is just lacking when working on a ā€œpeltā€. Perhaps that is just me, I dont know.

Anyways, great input! Iā€™ll come back with more questions later! :smiley:

reactor: I guess Bodypaint is the way to go as a 3d paint solution then, unless the new 3d Photoshop features turn out way better.

Thanks again all!

PS: Does anybody have some experience with UVLAYOUT?

#13

If thatā€™s Headusā€™ UVLayout, you can view some videos on their website.

I guess Bodypaint is the way to go as a 3d paint solution then, unless the new 3d Photoshop features turn out way better.

Photoshop Extended isnā€™t what youā€™re looking for. Adobe have a long way to go :slight_smile: Between Bodypaint and Modo, Iā€™d go with Modo. It sounds as if 301 will have some groundbreaking UV tools as a part of it soā€¦ Modo is one worth keeping an eye in, in my opinion. Luxology have a video available showing off some of the things in 301, which is worth watching. The only real issue is that itā€™s a gig in size.

Maxon have the oddest pricing scheme on earth, where Boadypaint on its own costs as much as C4D with it included, so thatā€™s one reason Iā€™m a little iffy about buying into Bodypaint.

#14

Reactor: Thanks for that insight on PS Extended. I was seriously considering that expense. As far as BP and C4D, yeah, good question what is going on there. I guess they just want to sell more C4d than BP. :wink: Naw, i guess the core of BP needs much of what is in C4D, so they are really not that different at the heart of the matter and, why not sell them for the same price and this way perhaps get more people to buy the whole product, aka C4D and or course upgrade with some more modules later on. Only their marketing department has the answer to that. :lol:

Iā€™ll keep an eye open for Modo then for sure. Iā€™ve heard much about it, but not enough to really get me interested so far. Looks like that is about to change, especially if it does handle theUV issue well and efficiently . :smiley:

#15

I am currently fiddling with headus UVLAYOUT and Unfold 3D and will let you know my findings. So far Unfold 3D appears the way more mature program and is at first glance very easy and intuitive to use. Uvlayout is less expensive and still in beta, but seems well worth the attention to see what it can do. Iā€™ll see which one yields the better results for the money, effort and time spent in it and let you guys know.

Btw, both can be tried out for free right now and Unfold even has a completely free non-commerical version available.

#16

most professionals use unfold3d, so you arent realy telling us anything newā€¦

#17

Since you are obviously using it in that manner, would you be willing to show me an image of ie a next to perfectly unrwapped head with color coding for distortion and info on workflow and how long it took to get it done?

I am not just writing UVlayout off yet, regardless how many pros do or dont use it, so I need some convincing. :wink:

PS: From what I can tell so far, UVLayout has a neat combination of automatisation and manual control. So you can really get exactely what you want in a lot less time than regular in-app projeciton type Uv-manipulation, but I guess one way or another Unfold is probably capable fo the exact same thing.

#18

There are three very important things to remember, for games especially, that a quality UV layout gives you.

  1. The abilty to edit the map in a traditional 2D app, like PS especially regarding color correction, hand painted details, and related maps, like specularity or SSS maps.

  2. The complexity of the mesh as far as memory footprint, size on disk and rendering is influenced by the number of UVā€™s. When each face gets itā€™s own UV space, no verts, or very few, share a single value, so a model can be 2-5 times large on average without good UV pelts

  3. Mip mapping and filtering can give odd seams across those UV boundaries where there are so many seams.

With ZB3, resolution isnā€™t really an issue anymore. You can polypaint on micropolys at 4k resolution for film (thatā€™s about 17 million polys) or 2K for games (a little over 4 million polys) no problem. You can transfer that to a texture of any size you like using col-> tex. Painting in 3D is great. You can even do so on the .ztl, and then create the UVā€™s later with another app like Max, Maya, XSI or one of the fine stand alone products mentioned above and THEN transfer your polypainting to a texture based on good UVā€™s. Finally, another awesome benefit, is you can transfer your textures to the poys, fix 'em up in 3D, then transfer back to texture with out a loss of quality (just make sure you have more polys than pixels)

Just sharingā€¦

#19

Whoa, great input, royalwin! You bring up a lot of valuable info! Thanks a lot, this is exactely the kind of input I and perhaps a few others need! Itā€™ll take me a while to really digest and absorb all that.:smiley: Games are not that relevant for me but film is. Still all your points really hit home.
To be truthful, I hadnā€™t even thought off laying out uvā€™s after painting on a ztl, Iā€™m so stuck in the traditional workflow-order. That is really something to keep in mind, when considering production workflow. I always appreciate a fresh perspective to incorporate into my own workflow and people freely sharing info on theirā€™s is what makes this forum such a great resource! :+1:
Iā€™ll come back with more questions later.:wink:

PS. A little update on my own ā€œresearchā€. The more I dive into UVlayout, the more impressed I am with it. It really is a neat little program and, at the moment still free!

#20

No problem. Other people may have different perspectives, but thatā€™s what forums are for, right? I just hope the things Iā€™ve come across in the years Iā€™ve been doing this can help everyone make better, cooler stuff.

-Have a good one!