ZBrushCentral

carthography (mapmaking) 2.5d solution needed.

hi all!
i want to use zbrush for map-(cathography) painting.
recently i’m doing lot’s of tweaking, distorting(pulling and pushing) of worldmaps in photoshop and thought:
why not paint this damn mountainrange in zbrush with it’s 2.5d possibilities?!

anyway, easier said than done, because my images (2d) are way over 8k - the document size in zbrush can’t exceed 8096x8096 afaik…
i searched the forum for tiling scripts or something like a bridge FROM photoshop TO zbrush and back… (not FROM zbrush TO photoshop).

right now, i guess i just have to crop the a portion of my map (carthography!) to fit into zbrush dimensions and 2.5d-paint on it.

so, anyone here know a better way? help or tips appreciated.

thanks for reading. cheers!
chem!

Well, I’d first ask if you really needed an image to be that large. An 18 x24 inch poster sized print at 300 dpi is only 5400x7200 pixels. And large format print images often require much less resolution, as they’re viewed at a distance anyway.

But no, Zbrush can’t currently render out larger than that document size limit that I’m aware of. You would have to do maybe half a page at a time then combine them in photoshop. Or simply render the topological elements like mountains you wanted in Zbrush, and composite them in photoshop.

GoZ and ZApp Link work with Photoshop.

This is an interesting question.
I have been working on terrains lately but I am not attached to any map or need superhigh resolution. I have been using subdivided planes so I can work from the top view but also the sides and see how they actually look like, This way I can use my mountain alphas with a proper dragrect that rotates as you drag… So I don’t use 2.5 …
As Spyndel suggested , why can’t you work on 4 tiles of 600x6000 for example?.. I guess you have to be careful not to work on the borders so they match the first time you do it… but you can composite in photoshop and send the cross section back to Zbrush if you need extra work on that areas. hmmm Maybe too much work?
I would rather work with 3D planes and add heighmaps as displacements but Maybe 8000 is too much resolution for this workflow even if ZBrush has HD subdivisions.

I think the question is what kind of tweaking do you want to perform to your heighmap in ZBrush?
Have you heard about the world Machine software?
I have more questions than answers but I would love to see how you work this out and what other users suggest… So , if you find a great workflow for this it would be great if you shared it.

first of all, thanks for your replies!

@Spyndel - the image i’m working on right now is not intended for print.
the possibility to print the whole project would be a nice sideeffect, though… anyway, i guess i have to cope with zbrush’ limitations (it’s not really a limitation more finding of the right workflow… that is…). painting and displacing my terrain for a later composite in photoshop is a workflow i would rather not follow. zapplink is something i’m looking into right now - i’d love to switch the direction, though. like i said, from ps to zb would be so much cooler! but… let’s see what i come up with.

@dargelos - world machine looks nice. almost too nice! i would buy the software and others (terragen?!) in an instant - but: i really wouldn’t buy into any piece of new software at all. tbh, i did this for years - always have to learn a new set of tools and switch between applications for a workflow i didn’t plan in the beginning. i’d rather use the soft at hand, that is: photoshop, zbrush, blender… maybe my ol’ xsi701 will get some love, too… dunno yet. but, let’s get back on topic:

my map is: 9703 x 7767 px large
i want to work at double res: 19406 x 15534 px
crazy, i know that, man!!

here’s my plan for now: (thanks to your input!)
the map is a ‘highly’ distorted pacific-map, to fit all of the pacific area into place that was involved in the second worldwar pacific theatre of operations.
it’s for a game (a wargame/simulation) - rather a mod of a wargame-map, ok?!
the map is to be tiled into pieces of 1500 x 1500 px (3000x3000px working res) and later fit in photoshop to be cleaned and finalized(the edges… i don’t have a solution for the edges of my 3000x3000px tiles). anyhow, i plan to work on a mesh-plane in zbrush - the fit to canvas option is great for keeping the dimensions. since the whole map is soooo large, one can imagine that you’ll have a pretty high viewing altitude… that’s why i didn’t ‘have’ to see the topography from the side(there will be details, but not that fine, tiny and cute kind of details… i’ll leave the palmtrees and wavetops, ok?!) - but it’s a nice side-effect! so, working in full 3d and going between zbrush and photoshop with the help of zapplink shouldn’t be to hard. i don’t need dem-data or the like for displacement, though… i’m going for a hand-made-look here… still a little photoreal but no overkill! just the right balance between good looks AND usability! that’s right, USABILITY: because the map will feature a hexgrid - and every hex contains terrain-information, visual clues to know where do mountains end and rubble begins, deserts start and urban areas end… you’ll get the idea, not?

that’s it for now - i’ll keep you updated - please keep your ideas coming, too!

cheers!
chem!

Well, if it’s not intended for specific print output, I’d avoid working that large if I could. An image in excess of 8000x8000 pixels is quite large. It’s going to be cumbersome (slow) to work with in any program, including zbrush. That’s generally much larger than you would need for even some poster sized prints. I listed an example size/dpi in my original post. Why don’t you figure out what size/aspect ratio you’d like to eventually maybe print it at, and figure out what pixel dimensions you’d need to hit that dpi.

Now, if it’s going to be like a road map that has excessive amounts of tiny, fine lettering, you may very well need 300 dpi to keep that lettering clear even at poster size. For most other images, after a certain size threshold, 200-225 dpi is usually sufficient. Maybe even a bit less for excessively large images that are designed to be viewed at a distance. It’s your call.

Otherwise, I would just work for the intended electronic display size. 19406 x 15534 px does indeed sound a little crazy for your stated purposes. In an age where we can zoom in and work pixel by pixel in photoshop, I rarely find the need to double up while painting 2d work anymore, the way I used to do when I was scanning hand drawn pen and ink. For some 2d pieces, I might paint up to 50% larger for a 300 dpi output, and I’m never certain if I’m really gaining anything by it other than increased system burden, because any real detail differences are lost somewhere between the re-scaling (interpolation) and printing process. For 3D work, I’m usually always looking for places I can cheat and blow stuff up from a smaller size, or composite piece by piece rather than render out as a whole, because of the technical burdens of working that large at render time.

Anyway, that’s just my experience on the matter. Your mileage may vary.

hi Spyndel, your absolutely right here - the full 19406 x 15534 px are overkill for any 2d-application!
i will work with this resolution only in the end, when i’m putting everythings together to check the look of it.
btw, won’t need that much to ‘check the look’ when i think about it…
i’ll go from 3000x3000px per tile and see what kind of fidelity i’ll get from it. in the end, only 1500x1500 per tile is needed…
but! - i want to be able to use close-up whereever possible and having the whole map in double res would be so much nicer.
it’s just a personal project - so, things will change on the way… i’m sure.
right now, there isn’t even a game-engine to support the 3000x3000px tiles for the game in question… why bother?!
because it’s crazy! hell yeah!

i won’t print the map, as a whole, complete map - never ever!
i’m pretty aware of the dimensions(printed) i’ll get from this kind of image.
(freelance lfp-operator talking here - yes! it’s my parttime job. :wink: )

so, yes… please stand by and watch as i push my systems. :smiley:
no really, i hope you’ll stick to the thread and give your input when ever possible! thank you!

cheers!
chem!