I’m in complete agreement with most here. Great improvements, but the bugs described above should be fixed first.
Oh Great, more things I don’t need
Seriously, I used to be able to retop in Zbrush, but now I’m forced to export, go into Topogun to retop.
I can’t even bake to a low poly model in Zbrush anymore - I again, need to use another external program.
For UV’s too, I use an external program.
So basically, If all most of us use Zbrush for is modeling, WHY Don’t Pixologic work on Streemlining it for…uh…modeling?
Sure, rendering is cool, but your Retop is Broken, baking from a high to low poly model is impossible, and there are a lot of bugs to be fixed 
Make it stable for modeling and make it 64-bit, thats all we ask.
Don’t get me wrong, every new update is welcome. But i feel that lately Zbrush has gone the wrong way. It adds features that restrain the workflow only in Zbrush and do not allow further implementation on other animation packages. The turntable, the new rendering, the animation, shadowbox, all of these restrain the whole process in Zbrush. Most of us go back and forth between Zbrush and other applications such as Max, Maya, etc and we need features that will allow better implementation of Zbrush’s features in those programs. Mudbox seems to be on the right way as it’s workflow is connected to such applications (the recent addition of ptex and vector displacement prove this).
What i would really like to see in the new release are:
- A 64bit verion
- Better implementation of the layer painting with blending modes etc.
- The ability to directly paint on the model while painting on it’s texture and not polygons (polypainting).
- Vector displacement maps support
- Ptex support
That HDR image looks like it’s being shot in Scheveningen ( I live in the Netherlands so it’s fun to see stuff like this )
With regards to the features I have to agree with most here, although I do like Zbrush, it has it’s annoying problems :
- Please do something about the UI, Although I applaud your bloody strive to be different, please don’t be different just for the sake of being different, in my opinion the interface could use a big facelift structurewise, making it a bit more conventional
-Update the layer system, because at this moment they are quite a pain in the ( bliep), discern between paint and sculpt layers, under paint layers make it possible to paint the specular/transparency/sss etc besides just color.
To make it absolutely clear I don’tmean painting the black and white values, but actually painting specularity which can be seen in the Zbrush viewport
-Conform file managment to somewhat normal levels so get rid of Ztools/projects, maybe even make it possible to hook a zbrush file to your Maya/3ds Max/C4D project creating a link between the 2 packages so that every change you make in Zbrush in color/Displacement get’s updated in the background to the 3d app of choice and files get placed in the correct folders
-
Make it possible to import a shader or mimick a shader from a 3d app into Zbrush and be able to paint the colormaps in zbrush so that it looks as near as possible in Zbrush further reducing the back and forth stuff.
-Shelves/marking menu’s/floating windows:
Don’t know if you know Maya, but there is a great functionality which is called a shelve where you can store your most used tools for quick access the same goes for marking menu’s when you press SPACEBAR in Maya you get a pop up(hotbox) where you have the same stuff you have in the regular viewport, this way you can turn of all interface buttons and have the whole screen as your " playground" ( in Maya you can turn of all UI elements by pressing CTRL+SPACEBAR), it would be great as well if you are able to rip out certain menu’s and make them floating and put them on another screen.Now you guys have a functionality where you can click on an icon so that it import the whole menu to the right, at least make it possible to be able to drag submenu items to the right instead of for example the entire tool menu only the layer and subtool submenu, this way you can keep the interface clean.-Lightbox:
Just get rid of it, I know no-one who uses it at least turn it off by default if your fond of it ;).-Brush editor:
I know this isn’t in the package right now, but I would like to see a feature/functionality like a brush editor which you can open in Zbrush, where you have this preview swatch like a mini viewport with a sphere on which you can paint and once you painted a stroke it disappears, it would have the same function as the brush modifier but more intuitive with all the controls to edit the brush properties
It would surprise me if you weren’t working on it.
It’s all nice and well that there is an update to BPR and such, but you have to realize that your tool is most of the time only a part of the pipeline, not the pipeline, ad competitors like Mudbox, Mari , modo, Qudam to the mix and you are really in a tough spot especially when you look at those 1st two they both have big companies behind them of which one owns basically the entire 3D application market and is really streamlining their workflows between the packages. another thing is that an application like Mudbox is easier to get into because of the interface and have outdone you guys in some area’s ( PTex support, vector displacement) and if my hunches are right on the way they are heading they will kick you out of the market in the long run.
My main " advice" would be as suggested by some other people who posted before me: Focus on the core and if there is time left sure fix that HDRI functionality, but making sure you keep in the world pipelines should be your main priority and I believe that means fixing the stuff mentioned by me and others, which in short is conform 3d functionality to the main industry used packages Maya and 3ds Max and use the 2d functionality and workflow of a package like Photoshop, then people will pick it up more quickly( keep in mind that most people in the industry need to learn a wide variety of packages and if they have to choose between 2 packages where one is using a whole different workflow then what is to be expected, they most of the time will pick the other which uses a certain common sense)
I just thought of something:
It could be totally impossible to implement, but what about deploying Zbrush to Maya, basically having a Zbrush viewport in Maya, which hooks into the whole projectstructure of the maya scenefile ( and creates a backup copy incase of a crash when creating the link).
Zbrush is open in the background and has a livefeed to maya, but when you are in the viewport of Zbrush you can paint displacement/color maps and such in realtime ( I mean actually painting the maps and not sculpting ).
create a toolbox and a shelf in Maya which you can dock with the channeleditor or keep floating and has all the neccessary controls/hook ups with Zbrush.
I say maya because that’s my main app of choice the same stuff could be added for 3ds Max and C4D.
The SmoothUV button is broken and has been for a while. As is the layer system when importing old ZBrush 3.5 R3 files into ZB4.
SmoothUV’s (Subdivided UV’s) are handy for allot of things. Than compared to Linear UV’s. I recommed a Google on the topic.
Cheers
you guys rock. to be able to incorporate HDR lighting in Z would be so epic. Thanks for pushing innovation.
PS: please try to come out with an auto-retopology feature like in 3D-Coat. that would be sweeeet.
Im just a casual artist who uses this software and PS to make large prints and have no need for other software (thankfully). Been using Z since 2.0. Would love to see some core issues resolved to make casual users enjoy the experience as well.
Wish list:
1: Floating menus with multi screen support ( menus all on one screen and a whole screen of viewport.
2: 64 bit support
3: Improve retopo
4: Hair and fur would be handy
You can already do this. That’s what MatCap is – Material Capture. The simplest method is to (in your other package) make a 1024x1024 render of a sphere with your desired material on it. The sphere should be just slightly larger than the render, or you’ll get a black ring around objects when you create the MatCap.
Now in ZBrush, import the render into the Texture palette. Select any MatCap material. In the modifiers, replace the current light sphere image with your imported one. (Just click it and select your alternate texture.)
Save your material. You now have something that looks exactly like the shading in your other program.
There’s a lot that MatCap can do, such as sampling information from a photograph. See Here
I won’t suggest any change…but I hope that users would be more interested in the rigging-animation stuff inside zbrush.I think rigging with zspheres has a lot of potential and i would love to see some improvements in that direction. I dont wish zbrush to change to behave like other apps that are already in the market I am happy its navigation system and UI. i dont need many changes in retopo , right now its simple but powerfull.
Hay,Thanks Pixologic. Its relay good stuff…!
it really isn’t.
All this talk of redesigning ZBrush to fit into one pipeline or another is completely wrongheaded. No ZBrush is NOT mostly used for film, its NOT mostly used for games, its NOT mostly used for jewelry design, or for this or that. It’s an artist’s tool. It IS imperfect but it is not meant to simply reinforce the status quo of factory floor style production for any one particular industry.
Yeah, I wish it they could fix things like 3D layers and retoplogy as well and they know that and I believe they are working on it (I hate that goddamn QuickSketch button and why is it Lazy Mouse? shouldn’t it be Lazy Brush?)
I got my own laundry list of complaints just like everyone else (my ZBrush list pales in comparison to my list of Maya+mental ray complaints BTW). For good or ill I know Pixologic is going to treat ZBrush as a tool designed by artists for artists.
They want to change the way art is created not satisfy some lazy bitch who can’t be bothered to spend 10 minutes laying out UVs or create decent toplogy.
if they start redesigning ZBrush to please one segment of the user base then the will alienate the rest. Game studios have very different pipelines than film studios which are very different than commercial studios and so on. What if ZBrush is redesigned to work seamlessly with Maya? Yay for Maya users, too bad for 3ds max or Modo users or Cinema 4D users other users. How many programmers do you think Pixologic has? what happens when Autodesk makes a change that breaks the integration? what happens when one day Maya goes the way of Electric Image? Its true that most of my students are Maya users but a good 20% of them are not and I’ve even taught people who have never touched any kind of digital art software before (these people also had 20+ years experience sculpting with something called “clay”).
ZBrush is not a Maya plug-in. It never will be and it never should be. ZBrush should not be made to conform with one particular pipeline because, as has already been pointed out, pipelines change constantly and are often guided by economic concerns not artistic ones. Pipelines are designed for maximum efficiency - not a bad thing at all but the goal of a pipeline is to use the individual talents of a pool of artists to produce the best possible commercial art at the lowest possible cost to maximize profits (for a bunch of jerks with MBAs). Pipelines are just like assembly lines. ZBrush is not meant to be a drill press or a robot arm or a spot welder. It is an artists’ tool. Yeah, its gonna piss you off sometimes but you can try and use an ounce of creativity, ingenuity and initiative and learn your tools.
Sorry about the rant but if I hear one more newbie complain that ZBrush needs to be integrated into Maya or needs to be more like Mudbox or whatever I’m going to puke.
And I love Lightbox and I use it all the time.
Couldn’t agree with you more. 
gasoil, robotball; couldn’t have said it better -> if some of us didn’t think outside the box, we would still be living on a flat disc… .
quote:“Both LightCaps and MatCaps, can be utilized by the real-time preview renderer, this means that you will be able to use ‘fancy’ lights, backdrop and materials while sculpting your mesh!”
How cool is that! Getting closer to WYSIWYG - Woot 
.
Brilliant work as always Pixo!
This is very interesting. Make better autoretopo in new release.
As a noobie user I look forward to all the exciting new FREE updates.I haven’t got around to rendering anything yet as I am still struggling with the fiddly topology. I am sure those clever clever people are taking on board everyones comments and doing their best to make Zbrush the most user friendly awesome product they can.
I look forward to the next update and fingers crossed for some magical topology wand:)
Keep up the good work and keep pushing those boundries.
xx
totally agree, some people seem to think zbrush was made for their industry and nothing else
having said that… a better retopology tool would be nice, preferably one that does it all for me 
This watch is a brilliant render. A useful r-engine for some presentations! Just a minute… where are refractions?
mmm better export it and render in a decent engine now. Good luck. :lol:
This robot is also great, and great modeling !!! I’m sure the artist used all the ‘boxes and remeshing’ features of zbrush.
The render isn’t convincing of course. Better export it again but after some re topology. I can imagine. Something close to re build this excellent sculpt in a decent spline modeler. :rolleyes:
Real serious detailed sculpting happens after re-topology, so, pixologic, do what you have to. Meanwhile, a year ago, I bought 3DCoat, what else could I do? And still ZB is my major and favorite sculpting app.
ll this talk of redesigning ZBrush to fit into one pipeline or another is completely wrongheaded.
But you also agree that we need some decent retopology system and this only is almost enough to zb fit in any pipeline.
As always, Pixologic is cutting-edge and offering an amazing value. Thanks for the previews!!