ZBrushCentral

Scaling a few subtools together

ZBrush Usage Questions
#1

Hello,
Lets say for instance that I have a body with a head which is made out of all sorts of different subtools such as eyes, teeth and tongue, now I realize the head is too small and I want to scale it all uniformly, how can I go about doing that?

I tried group painting them differently and then cloning them so I could combine them all together, scale and then split them up again but clone and insert mesh doesn’t work for me unless I delete all lower subdivision levels which is not an option… :\

Thank you !

#2

scale head how u want then export to maya or max. export lores obj of eyes at level 1 etc.
scale those in maya so the fit the position that matches ur scaled head.

then with (level 1 eye tool) selected import the new scaled obj and they should pop into place. it should retain all your detail when you rez up. sometimes it is better to group the object and scale the group transform instead of the mesh itself. if the scale is a huge distance your detail may be lost if scaling just the mesh
should be doable in zb once subtool master and transpose master are released for 3.5

hope it helps.

#3

Problem is that my model contains tons of little subtools in different locations that fit perfectly in ZBrush, I wouldn’t want to refit them in Maya :confused:

#4

Assuming 3.5 (always specify your version when seeking help), hide all but the subtools you want to group, then hit “merge visible” in the subtool palette.

This creates a new tool in the tool palette made of all those merged subtools. Append that tool to the main tool, and delete all the, now extraneous , individual subtools that were duplicated. Scale the new merged subtool as desired. If you wish to once again split the tools ( you many not wish to, if it is the sort of thing you'd like to make global transofrms to...you might consider keeping them together and simply splitting them into polygroups to hide or mask individually), use the "group split " function to split off the tool into subtools again, by hiding polygroups. Notes: You will lose subdivision levels when merging. Make sure the resulting combined tool will not be to0 large for your system to handle. In fact, it would be better to merge the tools at the lowest level of subdivision, unless you have sculpting detail you dont want to sacrifice. Otherwise, once you split the tools again, you will have to reconstruct the lower subD levels via the "reconstruct lower subD" function in the geo palette.

[EDIT] The preceding paragraph is incorrect. It seems the new “Merge subtools” function in 3.5 will keep the sub D level of the subtool with the least amount of subdivision. If you want to keep all your subdivision levels intact, make sure they are all set to the same level of subdivision before merging.

#5

If you’re using 3.1 then use Transpose Master plug-in. One of the big perks to this is that you don’t loose your subdivision levels.

#6

I tried using Merge Visible but it does nothing… dunno why.
Anyway I did write I don’t want to lose the subdivision levels, if I did I could use the clone and insert mesh tools and I would get the result you wrote of:confused:

Problem with Subtool Master (I believe you meant that and not Transpose?) is that it does delete subdivision levels.

Also, the subtools are in different subdivision levels, how would I go about keeping that?
I don’t think that what I’m asking about is even possible in zbrush :confused:

#7

It works. Remember, it makes an entirely new tool that appears in the tool menu, not in your subtool menu. You must append the new tool as a subtool to the old one.

He was referring to transpose master, which makes a unified low res version of your entire tool for deformation (like scaling), then transfers those changes to your your main subtooled model (with subD intact). You can use this if you are working in 3.1. I have no idea what version you are using, since you still haven’t told us, hampering our ability to help you.

It is entirely possible in any 3.x program. It is simply a bit inconvenient once you have split your model. With experience one tends to plan their projects better, so it rarely becomes an issue.

In 3.1, Transpose Master would be the easiest approach, that keeps your SuB D intact. Subtool Master would basically replicate the process from above, except it creates the new merged mesh as a subtool, not a new , separate tool. *ASSUMING* (since we don't know) 3.5, use the process I gave you above for the *easiest* approach. [Edit] See my following post for how to keep your subD levels when using the "merge subtools" function in 3.5 The "Insert Mesh" command will also let you insert any mesh into another with their sub-D levels intact, as the process demands that each tool have the same number of subD levels, and be inserted at the highest level, but quirks in the process(you have to manually clone each one first) would make it awfully unwieldy for merging many subtools.
#8

Hey, good news! I just discovered something for myself. It appears the new “Merge subtools” function in 3.5 does keep SubD levels to an extent. It seems to keep the number of subD levels as the subtool with the least levels of SubD.

So if you merge 3 subtools, one set to Sub D level 6, one set to SD lv 3, and another set to subD level 2, the resulting new tool will have 2 Sub D levels intact.

However, if you make sure all the visible subtools involved are set to the same level of subdivision, the new tool will have all those subd levels intact. (so if you want to keep a subtool with 5 subD levels, make sure they all have 5).

This should greatly help you if you are using 3.5 . I’m sorry for giving you misinformation earlier…I had no idea Pixo had improved this functionality. :wink: I just kind of assumed it was the same functionality from Subtool master for some reason, and never bothered to look at the subD slider for the merged tool before to see something was going on.

#9

Were is the “merge subtools” button? I see “merge visible” which does not retain levels

#10

Merge Visible is the button but (as Bingo_Jackson says) it will only retain the subdivision levels according to the subtool with the lowest number of levels. In other words, if one of your subtools has no levels then the resulting mesh will have no levels; if the lowest has 2 levels, then the merged mesh will have 2 levels, and so on.

#11

thats what I thought, but no go. as a test I took two spheres each with 3 levels. merged visible go to the new tool, group split an they have no sub levels.

hmmm?

#12

Make sure that all subtools are at their highest subdivision level before doing the merge.

#13

A little off-topic, but… Does anyone know how to mirror a subtool in 3.5? It was easy with subtool master, but it doesn’t work in 3.5… And I never tried without SM. BTW, is it going to be released for 3.5?

#14

This is a fantastic new functionality( or actually a much more friendly, automated version of the Insert Mesh functionality)…can’t believe I didn’t notice it before. Way to go Pixo!

Here’s the mini tut on using the functionality, in case all the discussion on it has been confusing.

  1. In 3.5, Load the Demo Soldier tool.

  2. Open the Subtool menu, and select the “Shirt” subtool. Click the eyeball icon so that all the other subtools’ visibility is turned off.

  3. Now click the eyeball icon on the both the “Vest” and the “backpack” subtools directly underneath it, making them both visible.

  4. Now, divide the shirt for a total of 3 SubD levels.(it has 2 by default.)

5)Select the Vest Subtool, and divide it to 3 subD levels, then do the same for the “backpack” subtool.

6)Reselect the “shirt” subtool. Right now, the Shirt, the Vest, and the Backpack should be the only subtools visible, and they should all be set to SubDivision Level 3.

  1. Press “Merge Visible” in the Subtool palette.

  2. In the Tool menu (not the subtool menu) where you select different meshes, primitives, 2.5 D brushes, etc., a new tool will have been created. It will be called “Merged Shirt” (or "Merged_The Name of the Selected Subtool at the time of merging). Select this tool.

9)In the geometry menu for this tool, you’ll see there are 3 SuB levels (currently at the lowest). Move the slider up to 3, and you’ll see the high res mesh with any sculpting perfectly intact. You can then reselect the original tool, and append the “merged” tool to it as a subtool, and delete the subtools this replaces.

  1. Since, in this case, the merged tool has simple polygroups, with each former subtool being a single polygroups, it is a simple matter to split them again, using the “Groups Split” function. Press the “Group Split” button in the subtool palette, and they will split back out into their original subtools. If you have more complicated polygroups, you can manually hide sections , and use the “Split Hidden” button to spin them off into separate subtools one at a time (you must be at the lowest level of SuB D for this button to work). The new subtools all retain their levels of subdivision.
#15

Sorry, found it under tool -> deformation… It works fine, just like subtool master :slight_smile:

#16

Well I have both that’s why I don’t state the ZBrush version… :slight_smile:

I’m trying out the Merge Visible tool but it really does nothing for me… no new tool is being made :confused:

#17

Put away the tool you’re using, and please run through, in 3.5r2, the steps I listed exactly in my last post.

[attach=161637]mrgVisex.jpg[/attach]

Attachments

mrgVisex.jpg