To each their own, Hit Dirt.
No need to start a discussion here as we both know it will lead to nothing.
@Spyndel: thanks. Yes, that poly selection using Alt is extremely handy.
Selecting edges can be done by clicking, yet the Bridge technique you show to cut a poly can help a lot also. It is a mental game to visualize how to keep tris and quads.
Exciting.
I canât see where I started a discussion. I expressed my opinion, which I think is objective, and some expectations.
@HitDirt
All of those programs you mentioned have been polishing and layering functionality over a dedicated polygonal toolset for over a decade. They didnât come out of the gate with the toolset and features they have now. And Iâm not aware of any of them being able to cope with 80 million polygons per subtool on even modest hardware. Itâs a matter of program focus.
Itâs the wrong way to look at it in any event. Itâs not a case of âZmodâs first generation only has 75 functions, instead of the 100 I wish it hadâ. Itâs a case of âThese 75 functions which Zbrush just added interact with ZBâs existing features in some really great ways.â How many times have you wished you could just click on polygons to assign polygrouping , rather than play âhide the polygon rodeoâ ? Now you can. How many times have you wished you could use transpose on specific tiny elements with a click, rather than going through some convoluted masking procedure? How many times have you wanted to be able to add a crease to some geometry without gymnastic hiding/unhiding procedures? Thatâs all possible now as a side effect of ZModeler.
ZModeler was never going to replace a mature polygonal modeling toolset for work that absolutely requires it. But it does multiply Zbrushâs creation potential many times over, and cuts down on a huge amount of casual back and forthâfor me anyway.
Besides, efficiency is just what youâre used to. No one whoâs only been using the toolset for a day or so is going to be an expert with it, or have an expert opinion on it. I agree that the space bar interface is too congested to be as fast as it could be. It really needs an entirely separate dedicated interface with hotkey functionality. Again, thoughâfirst generation. I find that mapping the ZMod menu to my forward pen button helps a lot, because then it functions like a radial menu with minimal gesture/hand travel.
Once you get used to it, wellâŠthe grass is always greener. Like lots of things in Zbrush, itâs just a different philosophy. Some things are faster than traditional workflows, others are slower. When Iâm using ZMod, sometimes Iâm like , âGod, why canât I do X ?â Then, when I go to a program that can actually do X, Iâm like âGod, why canât I Qmeshâwhy do I have to create and get rid of these polygon chunks in such slow and unintuitive ways?â
No program does everything perfectly. If it did, weâd all be using it.
more tips please and someone know to fix the B-Z-M secuence shorcuts?
thanks
@Spyndel
And again, no need to make a defensive stance, Iâm not attacking anyone. Or Zb.
And I canât recall when I said something about other new features - the ability to align transpose is useful. But itâs not a part of zmodeler functionality, itâs a part of transpose functionality. About interaction with other ZBâs features - thatâs exactly what I meant when I said that itâs good to have this tool at hand.
Please donât go this âover a decadeâ road - it doesnât really matter how long this stuff was developed since itâs done, which makes it possible to use the commonly known results of these decade-long developments as a base to creating new tools, and it seems strange to me when developers ignoring this. Iâm talking about very basic stuff here - custom hotkeys, zmodeler menu customization, poly-by-poly modelling. All of this can be coded within Zbrush.
I realize that ZB have different logic comparing to other software and thatâs why Iâm not ranting about, for example, lack of âcutâ tool, or ability to apply action to multiple vertices at once (which is obstruction in a lot of ways actually). But hotkeys?..
âZModeler was never going to replace a mature polygonal modeling toolset for work that absolutely requires it. But it does multiply Zbrushâs creation potential many times over, and cuts down on a huge amount of casual back and forth⊠Again, thoughâfirst generation.â - isnât this what I said? So we do agree, you know. Except of âmultiplyingâ and âhugeâ, maybe. Zmodeler definitely adds to Zbrushâ potential, my only concern is that it just could add a lot more if the basics were covered.
Sorry for my english, btw.
calm down this is a amazing thread and I love what you guys are bringing to it
Both you guys are right in your own opinions. Spyndel is a zbrush junkie, so I can see why he jumps to defense about zbrushâŠ
I think zmodeler brush is amazing, but needs a lot of work, but this is pixologic first stab at itâŠBoth of you guys have valid pointsâŠ
Big thanks for opening this thread!
BIG THANKS FOR THE TIPS!
1.-The B-Z-M secuence por ZModeler dont work, how i can fix this Ătem?
2.-I will love if the Gem Team fix the N-Gon issue adding a Clean_N-Gon bottom(one click)
3.-In this step that im plaiyng with the ZModeler i put in the imageplane the ZModeler popup to make exercise more easy,for me:
you are welcome, Spyndel has putin a lot of work in here, I wish you could post videos in here
Well as long as you think your opinion is objective, it must be so. 
Iâm not really sure why some people think the ability to express an opinion makes you immune from criticism and commentary on that opinion, especially in a thread where it wasnât solicited. This is a thread for posting tips and tutorials on new features. It doesnât really seem like you have much to contribute here.
So in your âobjectiveâ opinion, just because something exists already means itâs a zero effort/time/design proposition to replicate among disparate frameworks. Interesting. So even though the pyramids were built with years of labor intensive addition, every shopping mall built since then should be a pyramid since theyâve already been built. By your logic each of the tools you mention should be able to sculpt effortlessly with many, many millions of polygons even on modest hardware. Why canât they? Itâs already been done after allâŠ
There was a time Zbrush couldnât break double digit polygons. There was a time it couldnt polypaint, or dynamesh, or retopo, or unwrap uvs. And there was a time when it couldnât model with individual mesh components. Itâs a process, and you only see how far youâve come, by looking at where youâve been.
Look, I donât want to argue with you, especially as itâs not on topic in this thread. I can only encourage you to go see some of the amazing things the Zbrush beta testers have already done with the new program. Itâs in some peopleâs nature to be negative and myopic. Itâs in other peopleâs nature to learn, adapt, and look for ways to be exceptional. I donât really care which you decide to be, but this thread is about learning.
Now if youâll excuse me, Iâm putting together a doghouse tutorial.
please stop this thread is being hi jacked
Hy Spindel many thanks for your contribution! hope you ca share more tips as soon as you can, these one help me a lot!
keep on the good thread!
@Spyndel
>Well as long as you think your opinion is objective, it must be so.
It comes with argumentation.
>This is a thread for posting tips and tutorials on new features. It doesnât really seem like you have much to contribute here.
I actually got here because I wanted to find out if thereâs a way to customize my hotkeys for zmodeler stuff.
>âŠmakes you immune from criticism and commentary on that opinion
Didnât thought so, didnât said so. Your criticism and commentary are welcome. All Iâve said is that it wasnât my intention to start a discussion. And I wasnât the one who actually started it. It started from your reaction.
>So in your âobjectiveâ opinionâŠ//and so on
Youâre blowing this out of proportion and putting out of context. In Zbrush thereâs already possible to assign custom hotkeys to most of the functions and customize menus, but somehow not for zmodeler. Same goes for working with surfaces without thickness and operating on individual polygons, edges or vertices, which is a base for poly-by-poly modelling.
Iâm not negative about Zb - itâs my favorite software so far. But like you said, Iâm not really sure why it makes Zb immune from criticism and commentary.
@Thebest12
Sorry for that. Again, wasnât my intention. Donât worry, Iâm done.
HitDirt is wrong, Spyndel is correct. Letâs move on.
I would of course too love to learn more and hope that even more people are sharing their approaches with Zmodeler. 
Meanwhile, thereâs actually is a way to inset group of polygons, kudos goes to LeoAMD
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?191398-ZBrush-4R7-Released!&p=1124821&viewfull=1#post1124821
Still mourning for everything else that was listed above though, would spare tons of time.
Itâs actually a very good idea. Itâs simple to grasp for beginning users, shows off a number of features and some of the ways that using QMesh gives you more options than traditional box modeling, and throws one wrinkle into the mixâthe classic doghouse design mixes in a curve with hard angles, something that can be tricky to pull off at times with polygon subdivision modeling.
Please bear in mind this isnât the only way, or the best way to model this. Itâs simply the first way that came to mind that conveys all the aspects I wanted. Namely:
-One piece, for economyâs sake
-Is hollow on the inside like a proper doghouse
-Gets that curve on the doorway.
There are tons of other ways to do it, and probably many better, but try not to give me too much, âWhy didnât you justâŠ?â 
I toggle symmetry on and off, but mainly rely on Mirror and Weld. If it looks like Iâm only working on one side of the model at times, thatâs why.
Tip: Some of the ZMod tools will behave different depending on the tile of the surface towards the screen, which component you choose to base it off of (two adjacent parallel edges might give different results), and which direction you move the cursor in. MOST of the time itâs fairly intuitive, but you might scratch your head sometimes, and need to take a different approach.
Then I tap on the forward plane of the object in Move (W) mode, which auto-draws a perpendicular Transpose action line (3). By Ctrl-Shift dragging on the middle inner circle, I duplicate the object along the forward axis (4). Since the outer ring of polys in the duplicate share the same number of verts and are perfectly aligned, I can just Qmesh that island (4) into the original seamlessly, and QMesh will snap it together (5), leaving it hollow inside.
Simplify my polygrouping again, and QMesh inward on the door polygons to knock those out. (4-5). Now you can see my nice hollow doghouse interior.
So I hide the back of the model to make the archway more accesible (2), and I use Edge > Crease > Single Edge while holding down ALT to uncrease 3 edges at the top of the door(3), while leaving the borders creased. This now results in a curve at the top of the door when previewed in Dynamic SubD.(4)
Unfortunately, I donât really like the shape of that curve, and donât think I can adjust it with only a single âcontrol pointâ. So I add in another loop (Edge > Insert > Single) on either side (5).
However, in this case I just went with the old standby of masking that little pair of verts, and inverting the mask by Ctrl-clicking on the canvas. Sometimes itâs just easier, especially if you have a difficult to select cluster of verts, or you want to âselect throughâ something to get at things behind as well.
The transpose line with the model snapped forward in the screen plane gave me the fine tuning control to get a curve someplace I was happier with, previewing with Dynamic SubD as I went. Normally Iâd obsess over getting that transition as smooth as possible with bevels and edge sliding, but this is good enough for what weâre doing here. And there we go. Your basic doghouse.
Now, what you do from here depends on your goal. If you want an economic finished model, youâd clean up and simplify geometry you dont needâdeleting loops, merging points. If you want to use it as a base for sculpting or painting, youâd do the oppositeâadd in more loops at regular intervals, so when it subdivides the polys arenât too distorted. Or you could continue to model in finer detail.
Or, you could do do what Iâm going to show you in my next tut:
BUILDING A BETTER DOGHOUSE WITH NANOMESH.
Brilliant tutorial Spyndel thanks a lot! I would point out exactly what the most useful part of the tutorial is by saying: All of it! :lol:
Thanks Spyndel you are helping a lot with your tuts!
This **** is hard
Before I do the Nanomesh one, I thought Iâd put up a quick thing about cutting holes in various situations.
Any square can become a circle in the subdivision process if smoothing is on and the perimeter, but NOT the corners, are reinforced with geometry or crease tags. An 8 point square with equally distributed points is usually ideal. Sometimes we want to cut holes in off center locations, or places where the geometry isnât ideal.
You can also easily connect / convert individual polys to a bigger poly result.
First you click to an one poly with a simple click, then to the other neighboring poly with a simple click:
