ZBrushCentral

Opinion Poll - Navigation

ZBrush Usage Questions
#1

I actually started this topic in a differernt forum about 1 week ago, but I suspect that nobody has even read it, perhaps it was a matter of the time of day that I posted, who knows. Anyway, in an effort to get some kind of responce I thought I should post it again in this forum.

Before I present this idea let me give a quick bit of BG. I’ve noticed on a near daily basis that Zbrush nivigation is a common complaint among artists in the industry, and I feel convinced it has played a big roll in turning many artist that I know from ZB to Mudbox. I still really like Zbrush however (I’ve really been enjoying ZB3) and would hate to see something like navigation significantly damage it’s place in the industry.

So, here’s the idea (please excuse my rudimentary understanding of scripting), I present it with the hopes that someone out there with the ability to do something with it will take up the challenge and make it happen:

As I understand it Pixologic has not exposed the elements of the software that would allow scripters to directly change the navigation functionality. So I propose a workaround. Note that the navigation buttons for moving, rotating and scaling your model can be moved around in the UI, and that ZB3 enables the creation of custom pallettes that the user can drag interface items to. I would like to see a script that would cause a palette to appear directly under the cursor, wherever it be, when a certain hotkey is pressed, the alt button for example (preferably). Within this palette one of the navigation buttons will appear; which button appears would depend on which mouse button is pressed in combination with the activation hotkey. It should be clear where this is headed, naturally the button that appears would correspond with standard navigation methods as found in other 3D packages such as Maya - LMB for rotate, MMB for move, RMB for Scale.

There are several areas of potential conflict here. I’ll address a few of them:

1 - Using the Alt button for this may create conflict with the existing navigation commands associated with it, an alternative may need to be chosen. Another option that comes to mind is the “s” key to correspond with XSI navigation (just to maintain some kind of standard). This would require reassigning other hotkeys but if this can be determined by the user then everyone will be happy. Incidentally I would like to see some of the current ZB navigation maintained; I find it is often much more handy to simply click off-model to rotate rather than find the Alt button first, the real issue is when you get in so close that the model fills your screen and you can’t simply click off-model, and the fact that scale is a little tricky anyway.

2 - I could imagine ZB possibly having an issue with the navigation buttons being permanently stationed on a palette that remains hidden unless called. A possible workaround would be to have them stationed where they normally are, but at the time that the navigation palette is called via the chosen hotkey, the required nav button is automatically, and temporarily moved to this palette, then placed back to its original position once the nav hot key is released.

That about sums it up. Feel free to expand on the idea and refine it, just make sure you post the script :wink: . I’d love to hear what people think of this idea.

#2

Although I didn’t really delve into zscripting or ZBrushs plugin interface, considering how all ZScripts and plugins I know work, I doubt this will be possible. It would require kind of a hookup into the UI core functions, don’t know if there is a way - maybe something new in ZB3, but probably not. It seems at least it wouldn’t deliver an interactive feedback, ie. seeing the model rotating or moving while holding the qualifier key pressed and moving the mouse around. Again, I could be wrong. But then… I am really one of the people who hate when something doesn’t comply to my muscle memory. But surprisingly I got relatively fast used to the ZBrush style of navigation. It’s not quite that hard to learn, especially compared to the funky way how most of the stuff works in ZBrush anyway. :slight_smile: My 2 cents…

#3

Well you have my support on this. I really wish Pixologic would allow us access to the navigation commands. It’s my biggest issue right now.

#4

post deleted

#5

Thanks for the response guys.

Sire, all I can say is I hope your wrong:D But, it’s still good to hear someone’s take on the possibility.

It’s a shame there haven’t been any more responses to this thread. I keep thinking that someone out there has the know-how to make it work but they simply haven’t read this thread or come up with the idea some other way. So, if you guys have any idea’s as to how to get this thread into the lime-light, let me know.

Meanwhile, for everyon’es reading pleasure, a variant possibility has occured to me:

A more crude, but possibly still useful alternative approach could be to assign incremental changes in position, rotation or size, to hotkeys in much the same way that incremental changes in brush size are obtained via the “[” and “]” keys. Naturally this depends on the availability of certain information being accessible, and could turn out to be even more unlikely a prospect than the first idea (not to mention less unversally useful), but who knows - I certainly don’t, and that’s the problem. I really need to take up programming.

#6

.

#7

Instead of yet another hacky workaround to do something that should be an option to the user already, how about petition the developers so they know that having an alternate form of navigation (xsi/maya style) is a high priority for the users. It would definitly get my vote as I’m not so fond of the current navigation in ZB.

#8

I agree with wayniac. I think that the ideal solution would be for users to continue to express their desire for alternate navigation methods, and for Pixologic to then add a menu in preferences with typical combinations (xsi/maya/max/lw).

I have the same (or nearly the same) navigation between all of my 3D applications except ZBrush. Honestly, ZBrush’s navigation throws me every time I import a model into ZBrush, and its navigation has never felt natural to me. (Despite how indespensible it is). I hope Pixologic may consider this at some point.

#9

These “hacky” workarounds are indeed a compromise. In all seriousness I think your guys’ idea of petitioning Zbrush about it is really a good idea. I’m going to give this some serious thought. I know too many people (virtually everyone I know) who have ditched Zbrush for Mudbox largely because of the navigation, not to mention a few other issues. In fact, my cousin is one of the founders of Think Tank Training Center, and I’ve recently learned from him that they are no longer going to be teaching Zbrush, instead they are teaching Mudbox. I’d call that an alarming sign for pixologic. They really ought to pay attention to this issue which, ironically, though “small” is really a huge stumbling block to there success. Indeed perhaps that oh-so-human element you mentioned, stubborness, really is what’s at play here, who knows, but it is sad if true.

#10

I vill do it my way that is the only vay do not oppose my vay of doing things your attemps to foil my plans are futile please go back to your homes and remain silent the scoops are on thier vay

#11

feature requests don’t usually go down too well here. the admins always seem to want any sent directly to [email protected]

why they wouldn’t want their community to openly discuss improving the tools i don’t know. but put the word out amongst the boards and i’m sure there’d be many keen to swamp them with mail concerning this one simple. yet hugely significant concern

#12

I dont think emailing them is going to do anything or a petition for that matter. Pixologic no doubt have heard the countless complaints about the navigation of zbrush and yet they didnt change it. I wish I knew why. I hope there is a good reason for it. And I really hope that reason isnt because they are stubborn. I wish someone who represents them would chime in with some input.

#13

yes. you may well be right there. still. i believe a response in the form of a petition or something similar would at least present a unified voice. as opposed to the many ( so many ) scattered comments on this issue

as an aside. this might not even need to be a point of either / or nav scheme. silo for example employs both methods in its sculpting mode

#14

I’ve been thinking about posting an opinion poll on the subject. The question would be somethiing like this:

“Given a Choice between the Standard Navigation Style as found in Maya, or the Navigation Style Implented in Zbrush, which would you prefer, and why? If there is another navigation style that you prefer please describe it, stating the reasons for your preference and any software that implements it.”

Any suggestions before I start this thread?

#15

I say go ahead and start the poll. I would prefer it to be any key plus the 3 mouse buttons for pan/orbit/dolly. If Alt is a problem then XSI style with holding down S+the L/M/R mouse buttons would suit me fine as well. I dont really care about the middle mouse scroll wheel to zoom in like max or whatever as I typically just hit F in xsi to frame the object up close. If i want to dolly closer/further I use the S+mouse combo. Also, the navigation tool NEEDS to be SEPERATE from the sculpting tools. Like in Maya/XSI/Mudbox etc, when you are over the model and hold down the key combo to pan/orbit/dolly…that’s what happens. In zbrush, if you hold alt+leftlcik and drag you make a big long streak over your model if you have std brush enabled etc. Navigation/sculpting should not be intertwined as they are two seperate functions. Also it should be noted, this would be an OPTIONAL navigation system. Keeping the one that is native to Zbrush is no problem…just having an OPTION to use a different style is what is being asked for.

#16

Francis is right.

I did read the first post, dear Francis.
The matter regards the general charactaristics of such software.

I.e. the strategy points.
Planning the software the creators would think over such points as if to let the child be like others or a Wonder from the start?

Will it contain common features with previous other programs of the sort or may them features be turned into different functions and new definitions involved?

Some features may in reality turn out original (Zsphere). Others will not, thus, to a newbe, producing no discomfort, whereas to a pro a good deal of bother.

And one should think twice before deciding what is better.
All in all there is a tendency to call them things what they have been before you. To unite, not to separate. To make allies among strangers.

:smiley: Anatom

#17

WTF? I mean the industry has decided on a standard… Maya is the most common platform and for a trend setter to argue that their way is better is simply foolish!

Learn from and progress! That’s the idea. So why not include, or at least release a plug-in to allow those who are comfortable with the standard?

This is really a silly argument when you think about it. 3DS Max XSI and Mudbox gives its users the option to change the camera controls why not ZBrush?

Because it’s a better platform? Or a better Standard? I agree that ZBrush is an amazing program but Mudbox is picking up the loose pieces over this issue and with a couple more releases we’ll see Mudbox and ZBrush going toe to toe with features!

OR if no one sees that happening any time soon how about a third party coming along. Maybe someone paying close attention to ZBrushes features/interface and technology. And most importantly it’s flaws!

For most people ZBrush is a standard already. Serious artists use it because it’s such a huge improvement over all the alternatives. But this will be short lived.

Mudbox is young and pretty lame when features are concerned but there are people out there looking for someone who can match it’s simplicity with ZBrushes features.

Because seriously, people, ZBrush is pretty f-ing complex! Come on! Forget the simple “paint on object” feature that has made ZBrush famous! That’s nothing! No one! And I mean NO ONE can explain to me how to export displacement maps and use them in another program with out at least twelve steps!

This is a very basic problem and it needs a basic solution! Mudbox has it! Why can't ZBrush?

Anyway, I’m off topic… Someone out there should be listening though. Listening to a lamans side of things can be quite informative for those who have spent years using this program. There are a ton of wish lists out there. Take some time to figure out what’s important and narrow things down a bit. Right now it seems like ZBrush is trying to incorporate everyone’s ideas with out paying attention to some of the most basic necessities.

Problem: The organization of features can be very intimidating.
Solution: Dumb down the interface by releasing some specialized interfaces for people to work off of. Like the “Rapid UI” - great idea BTW!

Problem: Exporting Displacement maps.
Solution: Release plug-ins for programs like Maya. Maybe it could read the ZBrush files and allow the user to select the models poly count, textures, bump map and displacement map options. No more middle man solutions! :smiley:

Problem: Camera interaction.
Solution: Alternative solutions to camera interaction. Seems simple enough…

#18

Given a Choice between the Standard Navigation Style as found in Maya, or the Navigation Style Implented in Zbrush, which would you prefer, and why? If there is another navigation style that you prefer please describe it, stating the reasons for your preference and any software that implements it.

Hello Everyone. A little while a ago I started a thread titled "Traditional Navigation - A proposal for a workaround Zscript" ([http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=45980&highlight=traditional+navigation](http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=45980&highlight=traditional+navigation)) As a result of some of the conversation that resulted I've decided to conduct this opinion poll on the subject of navigation, I'm really hoping to get the input of a wide range of people here so please, if you are reading this take the time to submit your opinion on the subject. I'd like to point out that I expect many newer Zbrush users to speak up on this subject, but that I also feal that many veterans are less likely to, perhaps because they are already happy with how things are and can't be bothered or have a business relationship with pixologic ... I really don't know; whatever the case may be I'd like to extend a special invitation to the veterans to submit there opinions and insights. You've already seen the question above. For the next two weeks while I continue to have access to this post I will try to keep a running score of votes in the following and additional categories as required. Concentrate on making a well thought out case for your views. Votes in Favor of... Current Zbrush: [color=Yellow]002 Maya-Style: 002 Hybrid; Maya-Style\Zbrush: 001 [color=Yellow][color=Yellow](see post 36)

[color=Yellow]Stylus-Centric 3 keyboard Button Toggles: 002 (see post 47)

This isn’t really a nav style but if you would also like to vote for this option, please do in addition to one other. Just voting for this one would defeat the purposes of this thread.
Several customizable options: 004

Other Categories will be added as votes appear for them.

Due to some of the posts that have been put up in responce to this thread I thought it might be a good idea to place a portion of one of my posts at the top of the thread: "Let me explain a few things. 1st - When I refered to Maya's navigation scheme (alt+mouse based navigation) as "standard" I did so for simplicities sake. Maya-style navigation is present in max and xsi as well, though xsi switches it up a bit. The point was to identify the navigation style that I believe people in the industry are the most widely familiar with, and hence the one that I think most new users of Zbrush are likely to wish for right off the bat. Generally when people talk about Zbrush Navigation my experience has been that they compare it to Maya-like navigation. 2nd - Indeed there are several navigation styles present in the industry, by no means am I suggesting that what I have termed "standard" is necesarily best. Part of the intent of this thread is to get an idea of what styles of navigation people prefer; to give readers of this thread an opportunity to learn of styles they may not already be familiar with, and therefore expand everyone's views of what's possible, and learn a little about the pro's and con's of different nav-styles for the benefit of future developers and artists. Zbrush chose a unique nav-style out of a spirit of innovation, and that is very worth-while, it's a necessary step in the discovery of better things. So, lets share our unique experiences with this object in mind - advancement. 3rd - I am well aware that there are many things about Zbrush that you hear people frequently complain about, but I think that giving concentrated attention to one at a time has benefits that can't be obtained by a more general discussion. As you can see from the posts that have been placed already there is a lot that can be said about any one of the issues. My motive in starting this thread is several fold, but essentially it comes down to this: This is a topic I care about and I think others do too, and I see this as a real opportunity for exploring some good ideas and obtaining some creative input. Further I do think that the current zbrush navigation system has some serious flaws and I hope that this thread might contribute to changes for the better. I will detail my opinions on this topic in a later post. Meanwhile I think it would be helpful if people refrained from trying to prove each other wrong and concentrate instead on making a well thought out case for there views. That would be much more beneficial to this interests of this topic."
#19

I don’t know what “standard Nav” means (after 27 years of making 3D images.) Maya is just one of several schemes. Are you just referring to keyboard/mouse interaction? Some programs don’t even have hot keys by making you twiddle on-screen widgets. Calling Maya (although popular) the “standard” simply isn’t so.

If ZB’s going to bother change, it should be a configurable system (like maybe Modo or C4D) so that everyone can pick their pet favorite.

Personally, I think the current scheme is pretty well suited to sculpting and though it is a bit of a learning curve for newbies, it isn’t that significant a barrier. When I taught an impromptu class to get some guys started on ZB, it took them about 3 minutes to understand the rotate-pan-zoom controls of ZB. The bigger issue was getting them to not accidently drop their object to the canvas through brush picking.

I’d like to see more hot-keys for the new brush styles if anything.

So I have two new categories:

  1. More Configurable Interface
  2. Aren’t there more important things Pix could be doing?
#20

a prefs option to choose between the two. zb style nav. and other. other being user defined from a list of presets. and the ability to customize it from within a hotkey editor. user customization is almost a necessity since a maya style nav ( for example ) would interfere with the default Zsub mode mapped to the option key. and masking is of course mapped to ctrl etc

or the way silo has implemented the nav in their displacement painting mode. which is almost both maya and zb schemes at once

the bottom line is. and it’s a no brainer : allow the user to decide how they’re most comfortable by way of offering a more flexible solution. more options

.

zb’s nav is nice when you’re in the early and middle range of a sculpt and have the mesh at a good distance checking the form but having to go looking for null space to navigate in when your model fills the canvas is not workflow. its hack. testament to the power of zb that you can spend so much time that close to your mesh working in ever finer detail but if i had to hard choose one nav style or the other. without exception. i’d go with a maya like scheme