ZBrushCentral

Pixologic Announcement - The Roadmap to ZBrush 2.5

ZBrush Artworks
#261

I knew IT!!! :grimacing:small_orange_diamond:angry:small_orange_diamond:laughing:

#262

Prepared for self-destruction! 10…9…8…7…:warning:

#263

Groans.

#264

Well, maybe it is because they are about to release it.

#265

I knew IT!!! :grimacing:small_orange_diamond:D

#266

lol, i dunno…i would call that wishful thinking. I mean, zmapper isnt even out yet?

#267

Hope they are implementing boolean functions
( add,merge,subtract,intersect.) for polymeshes.

Zbrush could use this.

#268

Maybe, since they’re “running behind”, they decided to integrate zmapper into the new release and just release them both at the same time. But man…dreaming is a great way to let yourself down. :confused:

#269

It may very well be easier to integrate ZMapper into 2.5’s codeset than to adapt 2.0 around it.

It may also be that getting 2.5 out on or near their deadline was more important than releasing ZMapper, so the plugin’s not seeing another minute of development time until 2.5 comes out.

Either way, ZMapper's continued absence doesn't tell us a whole lot. It's all just speculation. As for unmentioned features, I'm sure Pixologic's got some big ones up their sleeve, but the constant pressure to <i>just release something already</i> will probably force them to pull back on a lot of that until ZBrush 3. And if they've learned anything, they won't even announce ZBrush 3 until it's ready to ship. :roll_eyes:

I try not to get caught up in predicting features, 'cause… everything we’ve seen of 2.5 is amazing. I want to be thrilled with the release, and I want Pixologic to be proud of their accomplishment – why set us all up for the opposite?

That said…

Booleans re-order vertices in a big way (say goodbye to your UVW map), and generally interere with the multi-resolution editing paradigm. You’d have to apply them at the lowest subdivision level (or delete everything lower), and I’m pretty sure your higher levels will take permanent damage as well. It’s not a feature you’d ever use once you saw it. Meanwhile, new topology tools are making booleans obsolete in platform after platform, and we know those are coming.

shrug

#270

True.

#271

lol

I was not promoting competition, and I don’t think anyone else was, the only sculpting program i own is zbrush, i just thought that voxel technology and the way they built human from reference was cool and i would welcome that in zbrush.

On another note, has anyone here used “mudbox”, i think its some sort of in-house sculpting tool that WETA use now instead of zbrush??

#272

I think I found out on CGtalk forum that “mudbox” is a way to refer to claytools, which was referred before in this thread.
In my humble opinion it’s not likely to get some real benefit from voxel processing, I mean the ZGuys have obtained a super program by modelling faster 3D faces by going 2.5D and then back up to 3D, cause it’s less “calculous” to work 2.5D, voxels have another degree of complexity, I mean higher than 3D polygons, it means that they require more memory and more power to elaborate them (even if you work with octrees)…
I’m not totally sure about this and would like some feedback from someone closer to ZGuys (aka the people that created our dearest ZBrush)…
I just had a look @ claytools and feel like I would prefer ZBrush anyway, although the hardware is definitely cool.
Federaik

#273

Your mistaken Mudbox is not Claytools. Claytools has existed as a product for over 5 years. Mudbox in an in house software developed by Weta, after there experience working with Zbrush after ROTK in 2003. It hasn’t been released to the public, and will probably never will be. Most proprietary softwares never see the light of day. You might see a presentation on it at Sigraph, but will likly never use it unless you work for Weta.

It might as well bevapor-ware anyway as no information is avalible on it; and anyone who’s used probable is restricted from saying anything by a NDA. All we know for sure is that one of Weta’s artists thinks that it works better than Zbrush for them.

Personally, I’m more than happy with Zbrush. Its the little software that could. Does it have little gotchas, and annoying traits? Sure, every single software out there does. 100% customer satisfaction is a fantasy. But, there is nothing out there avalible today at ZBrushs price that even begins to approach its features.

#274

I am just waiting for ZBrush 2.5 and Modo 201 to come out… Taking these real does help.

#275

a few in house programs see light and become very big, like renderman, and MASSIVE, the crowd simulation system that weta designed for the battle scenes in lord of the rings, and now its fully commercial,

i also read somewhere that mudbox will eventually compete against zbrush commercially, so i suppose weta are perfecting mudbox and then will release it, like they did with MASSIVE

#276

Im already sold on MudBox, now where can i place my order! :smiley: alittle competition never hurt anyone. Knowing Weta, they’ll probably have a more comfortable GUI, and better workflow for sculpting (IMHO)

Oh, and wheres Zbrush 2.5, throw us a bone or something? its part of my master plan, so i hope to see it in December.

BTW, i just check out the first page again of this thread. it says the elephant is made of 14 million polygons, As i remember it, it orginally said 12 million polygons!? I know im getting old, but im not that old to the put in losing my memory…

#277

Which, would be why I said most proprietary softwares are never released to the public. You named two that were, out of literally hundreds of programs, plugins, and scripts that have never been released to the public. :lol:

If you search google or go to AWN you’ll find that the single mention of Mudbox, by the only person to actually admit to using it; does not say that it will be released commercially. He said and I quote:

<b>On a side note, I feel it is worth highlighting that until MUDBOX, software makers were not offering any serious competition to Zbrush and consequently users had little choice when it came to high resolution, brush-based modeling. </b> <b> Tibor Madjar - Kong Asset Lead Modeler Weta Digital[color=DimGray] <span class="grey"> </span></b><span class="grey">I see nothing referencing a commercial release, no list of features, and no real comparision between Mudbox and Zbrush. Essentially, he did exactly what he accused the author of that article of doing. Mudbox rocks, and Zbrush is junk. That's not, what he said ofcourse; but that's the geist of it. Mind you, he presents know justifcation of why Mudbox is better. Indeed, it might as well be vapor ware. Yes, yes lets all jump on the Mudbox bandwagon, despite having no specifications, or even an Idea of how much it would cost. If...if it's ever avalible.

Meanwhile, ZB2 has already proven itself in production, and cost far less than it Pixologic couldget away with charging for its features set. Oh, and their giving us a free upgrade! :roll_eyes:

Hey, I’m as mercenary as the next artist, I use what ever software get’s the job done with the least fuss. I’m certainly not a Zbrush fundamentalist or something; but come on this Mudbox stuff is getting out of hand. Last time I checked this was a ZB forum…right?!!

</span></span>
#278

“they’ll probably have a more comfortable GUI, and workflow for sculpting”

#279

Mod SonK Flamebait.

#280

.the excitment is starting to kick in! dec is right around the corner now. I sure hope for a fact that ill be able to pose my models in zbrush with ease for. hopefully it will be a MERRY CHRISTMAS GIFT from the PIXO TEAM!

as for the mudbox, is there any screens of it? I couldnt find anything on it.