Are the paint layers and layers fixed?
Waiting for #2, #3, #4 and #5 
I can hardly wait.
meh. yet more features i don’t need nearly as much as an utterly re-built user experience and bug fixes.
Today’s experience checking out status of three 3D tools i own:
i visit NewTek… meh… still nothing accomplished for existing Lightwave users screwed on Mac platform. User base actually rather irritated about general failure to manage the product, but no one cares.
i visit DAZ3D… meh… still nothing accomplished for existing Carrara users screwed on Mac platform. User base finally starting to become irritated about general eternal brokenness of product, but no one cares.
i visit pixologic… meh… repeat chorus… User base … cares about nothing i care about because they all love the product to death just as is while the few dissenting voices are marginalized and yelled at. Users still kissing Pixo’s feet for … meh.
It’s cool that Pixologic provides these version updates for free. It’s actually quite impressive how many “major” revisions have been free to existing users. Thing is, i don’t like the tool, fundamentally, as it was, as it currently is. i cannot, in fact, get used to it. i’ve tried all the documents, tutorials, videos… It’s not worth it to me any more either. Just a waste of money. Apparently it’s not going to change any time soon because the long indoctrinated users can’t see that anything is wrong.
The day that the user experience gets re-engineered to be self-evident (intuitive to users of the last decade worth of industry-standard GUI concepts in most other graphics tools), which is the ONLY “new feature” i actually WANT, that’s when Pixologic will charge me for the upgrade. See, i don’t want ZBrush for rendering. i don’t want to animate anything anywhere. i want ZBrush to be a modeling tool with painting features. You know, the main point of the tool (which used to be 2D painting, but that was abandoned, yet it’s still DESIGNED as a 2D app with clunky workarounds to make it a 3D app)…
i am actually quite pleased with the totally free Sculptris product, because that is designed as… a modeling tool from the ground-up. What a crazy idea. Pixologic gave us a slightly prettied Alpha to play with, thank you. What next? Anything? Ever? i’m using a WINE-ified version on Mac, with half broken GUI… and i STILL prefer it to ZBrush.
i’ll come back & look again in another month or three…
You may not realize it but every single aspect of ZBrush’s interface can be customized to exactly what you need – which combined with a custom Zscript would yield a user experience tailored for your tastes/needs.
I agree the base interface is pretty obnoxious but that is because they are trying to keep everything available for any possible workflow (including ones you don’t use)… but there is nothing keeping you from remaking it in your image.
A great example of a custom interface/user experience is the Paintstop plugin – all the power of ZBrush is behind the scenes and you can only see what you need to see for that particular task.
@dysamoria…
sculptris, the artists best friend! Behavior of sculpting tools is better or similar to zb. And being a macuser as well, wait, a few more days. Thats all.
These are great gifts from pixologic. Pixo respects and serves art more than any other software company I know. Isn’t it?
re: Half Life’s response:
It’s beyond both my willingness and my ability to do that amount of customization. On top of that, customizing the interface at all makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to use reference materials like documentation and tutorials.
More importantly, it’s not just the GUI look that’s problematic. It’s the overall behavior of the entire product. THAT, i believe, is not customizable. It serves no purpose for me to detail the issues because it’s not going to change anything and will waste my time (and yours!). Pixologic has, by now, been told by at least a hundred people, in depth, exactly how “wrong” their tool is in its user experience… and they show ZERO sign of ever accepting said “opinions.”
i AM impressed, to no end, at the incredible(!) work that users have coaxed out of ZBrush (especially people who admit to having originally hated ZBrush’s design, because i’m not able to “get over it” like they did). i’m envious… but… i’ve come to terms with the fact that ZBrush is, in no uncertain terms, not at all for me and probably never will be. The best 3D tool for me would be a “best of” from a bunch of products because NONE of the 3D tools i’ve used are consistently in the realm of “real world” application (ie: DOF and camera stuff in Modo makes more sense than elsewhere because it’s based on real camera stuff and functions more sensibly than in, say Lightwave, but the shader tree in Modo is utter fricking geektastic madness and has ZERO real-world point of reference). Etc.
Admittedly, i really ought to never come back to this website again… but… you know… i DID BUY ZBrush. i should not have done so. That’s $500 less debt i could have now…
Dysamoria,
while your points are very valid im sure that you are overreacting a tiny bit…it will be easy to say that you can do without Zbrush but problems aside and imperfection aside at this point in time there is no equivalent to this tool elsewhere so the Pros definetely outweights the Cons easily no matter how many improvements needs to be done and this is because of the very specific unique toolset (wich is the meat in Zbrush)…of course if you make no use of that particular toolset then your frustration is understandable and being able to do without more likely.
While Maya , LW, Max or XSI have some strengths and weaknesses that balances out and none of these have any groundbreaking new approaches (havent tried Core though yet) Zbrush is not as Michalis said just a realtime 3d displacemnet viewer…that is more the definition of Mudbox wich is production centric in the terms of what production is TODAY…Zbrush is much more than just that and way ahead of this offering unique never seen before tools like shadowbox or Zsketch or 2.5 D illustration tools etc…the truth is that there is no equivalent of those anywhere else.If you judge Zbrush based only in what “traditional” tool are meant to deliver you will legitametely be constantly disapointed as much as someone that buys a Ferrari and doesnt understand why there are only two seats and it is crap for buying groceries as the trunk is ridiculously small… again all your points valid for sure but maybe its not the ideal tool for your workflow?
In the other hand i do see a logic and consistency and It does make sense that Pixo investigates/incorporates technologies like the one offered by Sculptris as it is also a fresh take on how to create shapes…of course a lot of artists wouldnt have really had the vision if before releasing sculptirs they would have been told it was going to tesselate in triangles on the fly (believe me a lot of people will have screamed in horror) but i guess that any progress is welcome by some with fear and anxiety and by some others with a more confident and positive approach or at least with a wait and see attitude.
like any other industry i believe that it is about finding your market and your target…in that respect pushing for a different take on the same problem or delivering new tools regardless of what is meant to be “traditional” is the trademark of Pixo with some success and some failures in the process…but it is definetely a reflection of the personality of that company and probably its core developpers as artists and business people.
there is so so so much of the same in this industry that if i need to feel “safe” in an environment that has the same shade of gray for GUI or the same MMB navigation and where the arrow icon always means “select” to feel at home, that a tutorial made with a different menu in a different place will make me anxious and stop me from learning well then again is like going for Ferrari when it sounds more like you need a Fiat Punto.
When you are leading the way you have to be ready to get your hands dirty and be a bit more experimental and show the way IMHO.You will be critcized and if you fail you will be pointed at in mockery but if you succeed you will be alone in the summit this is what already happened to Zbrush when it switched from “useless toy” in version 1 to Asset creation Pivot toolset in version 2 or 3.
If it could make us breakfast in bed we would all get fat.
GRIN!
As far as the argument/discussion about Sculptris vs. Zbrush goes i would have to say that they are two totally different things.
I got Sculptris one lovely morning and by the end of the day i was 100% hooked, I still am, but I was in fact so hooked I went and bought Zbrush, at first i wondered if I had made a hideous mistake, that much money if not trivial to me and Zbrush is not something you learn in a day.
I did not make a mistake, I love both programs and use them together a lot.
Sculptris is not Zbrush, Sculptris is Sculptris and I recommend it to everyone, Zbrush is not Sculptris, its not intended to be and its not even aimed at the same group of people I dont think, but the fact is that despite a steeper learning curve (and for me it is still a cliff) its one of the most fantastic things I have ever used.
So:
I love both, Sculptris is more… well, warm and fuzzy to me but that is just me, Zbrush is like a strict but excellent teacher “Do this and this and this and you get these, but not those, and here is why” where as Sculptris is like a cheerful anarchist “Go nuts! Do what ever you want!”
So, Since Alpha 6 is about to pop out of Doctor Peters amazingly large mind, and the people at Pixologic are smart enough to see to it that he gets paid for being a flippin genius, why not cheer up and get ready for some cool new stuff?
I betcha a heap of stuff its going to be awesome.
Cheers!
Mealea
The new lighting and Shading is awesome, BUT don’t just limit it for Still-image creators BUT think ahead of time for more.
Dear Pixolator,
Rendering looks awesome and I am sure with mulitple passes we can make this set of feature a “GREAT” Look development tool. Rendering Billion Polygons in lightning speed for a single image…no…no… what an underused feature… buckle your seat belts…and let us fly.
If you could include the following “little” things it would create big game changer in Animation, visualFx and compositing.
1-Match Camera animation (Import and Export Camera data to and from Maya or Nuke).
2-Match Direction, Spot and Point light parameters of Maya and Nuke
3-Aside from current great passes include passes like Point pass and Motion Vector pass which maps Space/Time changes which lets us do deep compositing and post motion blur.
Voila! With above simple additions I can suddenly able to bring in the new “Animated” render layers of Billion Polygon sculpted models without worrying about Topology, UV mapping into my scenes and composite in Nuke.
Let us remember this popular math:
20% of features make the 80% of the difference.
Above are such features that would lead users to ZBrush MORE than Mari or future Katana. I am sure implementing such Rendering feature that would help FX animators and Compositors coming to zBrush would make zBrush the leader in Rendering from “production stand point” like how zBrush did in the Modeling standpoint way back.
Hope to see these vital features in light.
Bye bye Mudbox…Bye Bye Mari…Bye Bye Katana…
I am sure Pixologic listens. Thanks for your time and effort.
zBsolomon.
MealeaYing:
You stated that a new version of Sculptris will be available soon… i wasn’t aware of this. i went to the forum and didn’t see anything much (i admit i didn’t look very hard). Can you point me to where you heard about this news?
Gasoil:
As for Ferrari, etc… i don’t like car analogies for software. i don’t think they’re really valid for multitude of fundamental reasons. but, for argument sake… If i were to use your analogy, i’d say that buying a Ferrari, i would expect luxury, not great discomfort! ZBrush is agonizing to me! :lol: i wouldn’t buy a Ferrari because it’s impractical for daily use… etcetera. 
@ Dysamoria:
Oh my god… its from July of 2010…
Im going to have a meltdown…
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?t=96408&page=5&pp=15
Second to last post on that page…
crap crap crap… thats almost a year ago…
where did I stash that vodka?
heh heh heh… thanks, though :lol:
July 2010 was the date DrPetter joined ZBC. The post itself is only four days old.
thanks Aurick! i had not seen those posts when i went looking. Good news indeed!
wait… what?
so…
ITS TRUE???
ok…
wait…
um…
Ok Aurick you saying I was right the first time and that Alpha 6 is in fact about to be released?!?!?!?!
If this were IRC I would type this:
/me grabs you by the shoulders and screams “Speak to me!!!”
But its not.
ZBC is an emotional roller coaster at the moment, Im going to spike my vodka with booze.
Dysamoria… I haven’t the faintest idea whats going on, I hereby discredit my self and shut the hell up.
I want GoZ to link Zbrush and Alpha 6 or… more…
my god I am a greedy little thing
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Hey, no problem, i have no credibility either, from what i’ve been told As for greedy… heh, we all want what works best for us 
(and yeah, i guess i’m greedy, too… i’d love to actually get work done with 3D tools based on what they advertise is possible, not based on the reality of how much you must fight your instincts to adapt to insane tools 
). i guess i should spike my booze too…
Hello everyone I’m new to the forums here and quite late to this thread, I haven’t read the whole thing yet so I’m unsure if the following simple fixes/features have been brought up but I guess this is the place and so they should be mentioned.
Contrary to what some people may think about the “usefulness” of HD geometry, you can export out HD normals & displacement from subD level 1 with the multi-map exporter, and the maps do indeed retain that fine HD geometry with no seams or render issues. BUT, correct me if I’m wrong, if you try to export out from SubD level 5 or so (say, the top regular level with about 4M polys) with the multi-map exp, you get the exact same normal/disp maps that you would from a level 1 export!
I know that in the online documentation it says that if the slider is greater than or equal to the highest subD, it’ll go to 1, so in other words it doesn’t consider HD geo subdivisions the same as regular ones. Technically they’re not, but I wish it did. You may say, well just sculpt one level higher with the normal Ztool- say 16M, but if you do that, regardless of your system specs, it’s just enough to crash ZBrush on export if you check something barely more memory intensive like “adaptive.”
However, select a UV patch/polygroup and go into HD mode, crease, clone it, transfer your UVs, export from level 5 and there you have it- normals or a displacement that perfectly represent your sculpt from 4M onto whatever your HD geometry sculpt is. The new disp map is for texture purposes only so I can channel mask and modulate the color through sort of a cavity look in Mari, and the new normals so that, added with displacement up to 4M- can represent whatever sculpted details I want onward when I render in Maya & Mental Ray.
The problem is that this work around creates those infamous seams from the need to dissect your model to get these extra but what I feel are necessary maps, and while relatively easy to clean up in painting software like Mari or Mudbox, the task becomes far more tedious when you’re working on a model that’s 256M HD polys (4M regular ZTool + 64M HD sculpt, + 1more HD SubD for smoothing on normals export) and has it spread out in over 50 UV tiles. While I get almost pixel for pixel detail on even 4k output, I have to then repaint over all those normals and edges of the mid displacement. It’s not difficult, but would be just so much easier if that “SubD level to export” slider worked (with HD geo on the model) without needing to break up the model into separate Subtools by UV patch. I’m doing a personal project for animation with a close up/for demo reel purposes, and I’d really like that “scalability” as part of the tool set.
Also, while HD geometry is really great, what about the overall RAM limitations for regular sculpts anyway? I have a 64bit machine with 16GB of RAM, but none of that matters. Go above a certain limit without using HD geo, say 12 million polys, and while you can sculpt, it will fail on export if you chose to process adaptive rays, which is just enough to push it over the limit from what I’ve experienced. I think that ZBrush should REALLY go 64bit, the kind like Mudbox (and almost any modern app I can think of) has, where you can test sculpt a model that has say, 64 million real polys, and do so comfortably even though you’re using 9GB of RAM- which limits the need to even invoke HD geo or it’s funkiness in the first place, which then would eliminate any time consuming hacks or work-arounds that I’m having to do right now for my extra maps.
It’s amazing how much just a true 64bit upgrade would do for ZBrush. Like most, I chose ZBrush for the intuitive natural feel when sculpting that’s hard to compare to other packages, but it really needs that basic but FULL 64bit upgrade to enable and satisfy those who wish to go as far as they want, without hassle or a software limit regardless of local hardware.
Also, mentioned earlier, ZBrush really needs vector displacement- much more than PTex at this time. It’s unfortunate but appears that Mudbox has heard all these calls and has been VERY agressive, especially with the 2012 version, and is quickly becoming the new Vray of sculpting/texture painting for true generalist use. It would also be nice to bring back the options for UDIM naming conventions on exported maps that Mari & Mudbox are using. Anyway sorry to all for the rant on my first post here, I absolutely love ZBrush & Pixologic, but I really wish the developers would look into these things if they haven’t so already!
In short, make Z truly 64 bit, and if possible make that slider in the multi-map exporter count HD geo subdivisions like regular ones please. These are little things that can go a long way!
We got a lot of new users with low post counts talking mean in this thread. It makes me sad.
It’s not the tool, It’s the artist! (Zbrush is one hell of a tool!)
It would be nice to have a topology editor that’s a 50/50 mix of Wrapit and Topogun. Both programs are great, but they are by no means perfect. What if my mesh has some good topology in certain areas- Why do I have to redo the whole mesh all over again, why not mask off the areas that are bad while keeping the good zones alive as an editable start point.
My opinion on Sculptris. It’s cool but I don’t need it if my low poly base mesh came into Zbrush with a correct topology flow. Sculptris would mess up that models topology. If Zbrush included it as a on/off feature. I’d be down. 99.9 percent of the time it’s unneeded for the way I work.
My opinion on Voxels: Most of my meshes are morph difference shelled objects. I don’t think Voxels do this well. Voxels eat a lot of memory. You still have to redo the topology on them near the end in order to export them as a polygon object for use in other 3d programs and rapid prototype printing.
My wish list is getting shorter with each new Zbrush update.
I would like a hair and fur app, but it’s not a priority.
I would love a camera lens distortion app like the one I requested in ZB4 wish list.
Above all else I really want a new topology tool that does everything Wrapit does with some of the features Topogun has.
As others have said Topogun and Wrapit are great workarounds.