Personally I would be very happy if we could bake out HD geometry in 3.5, the bumpmap bug will be fixed, just like the smoothing when deleting hidden geometry issue, and if 3D layers would affect every SDiv level, also the ones you add after creating the 3D layer.
I would be very happy if they could just smooth out the workflow of the features that 3.0 introduced. It’s like you have to do a little dance for some of the features to work - some nice, one-click improvements would be nice 
I think we will see Zbrush 3.5 soon… Because Mudbox 2009 will be released on October 6th. I hope Pixologic shows amazing stuff before or same time with Mudbox release.
…they now put those illusive “make pretty 3d” and “make 3d pretty” buttons in it. Rocks !!! :lol:
Sorry for the late reply. I was at siggraph and attended a lot of the ZBrush seminars. While there I got to talk to one of the Pixologic guys and he gave me the news about ZBrush 3.5. Wouldn’t tell me what the new features would be but did say that they wanted to offer a complete modelling solution with this one. And he pointed to the seminar going on about creating houses in ZBrush (it’s on the pixologic site). To which I said, hard surface modelling and I got a smile and he said that he couldn’t go further into it…
Speculations?
Cheers, M
Thanks for the info Maxim_fleury. 
Well I’m just adding fuel to that speculation, but in the ZBrush Demystified book that is now not being published, I read on some site (forget which one) the contents list for it. A chapter in it was titled ‘box modeling’. Not sure if this was directly in ZBrush or in another app as a comparison to ZSpheres or what. Probably just my brain working overtime 
Anyway, box modeling in ZBrush would be great. Not only would all your model prep and sculpt be possible just in ZBrush (meaning just exporting for animation and rendering only) but hard edge modeling too. In terms of modeling it’s an area it currently lacks, but for Pixologic to implement it into ZBrush would be invaluable IMO.
It’s probably referring to the operations already in Zbrush that it calls “box Modeling”, even though it doesn’t have near the ease or utility of what we think of as box modeling in a traditional subdivision modeler.
Zbrush can already “box Model” after a fashion with its controls in the geometry section of the tool menu, by hiding selected polygons and extruding new polygons from there, which you can then specify crispness and number of divisions.
Its no substitute for basic polyface/edge/vertex operations in other modellers, and I doubt we’d see those type of operations any time soon in Zbrush, though it would certainly be nice.
ZBrush has always had a box modeling feature, actually… well at least it has since I first started with ZBrush 2… it’s just never seen much attention from users because it’s not very intuitive and doesn’t offer the kind of exact control that traditional box modeling software does
I’ve used it a few times to make small modifications to a zsphere base mesh… and the old ZB2 Practical Guide had a whole tutorial where you box modeled a standard claw hammer beginning with a cube primitive
Edit: beat me to it Bingo
Oh well, that’s my theory out the window then. Just wishful thinking.
(Skulks off)
Hard edge modeling would be very nice. I personally would like to see integration with XSI and its ability to handle high polygon count ZBrush models. Speaking of which, am I right in assuming that among the 3DCC apps, XSI would be most able to do this?
well, of course hard edge modelling is possible in ZB, but workflow isn’t exactly handy!! :rolleyes:
you can do simple models and enhance z sphere based models too , add edgerows , move points and such but you don’t have any advanced modelling tools nor precise ones. the main focus of ZB is sculpting and painting and much more, but not exactly modelling.
IMO what is more needed is an even easier workflow in several areas, real mesh painting - not polygon vertex painting, which is resolution depending and maybe aslo UV unwrapping - even if its not fundamental it would help alot having this inside ZB too)
i would also like to see posing tool as previewed years ago for 2.5 release. it was more similar to real character rigging you find in 3d apps. you can do something similar in 3.1 but with a somewhat convoluted workflow and has some probs too.
since ZB has also quite good rendering, a real dream feature would be to move zb towards character animation.
it woud be really interesting to see what pixologic could invent to make us able to create scenes with ZB tools and complex animations from within the app.
They already display control necessary for a radical UV unwrap under Zmapper -> morph UV option. I mean they could pull something that really would put headus and pelt in their own backwards place…who the hell draws the gui’s for headus anyway…a monkey?
Also…if Zbrush ever pulls out some sort of rigg capability say…with a streamer plugin from motion builder (like other apps do) and compatible bones/skeleton for maya/3dsmax/etc you would see some real workflow improvs for everybody and more people would not have to stare at ridiculous low poly characters while capturing/animating.
Hardedge modeling workflows in 3.5 are essential for the improvement of the software, IMO. Of course, it’s really just a pipeline sculpting app, but more and more you hear about people requesting it. It would enable you to bounce back and forth between your organic and hard edged shapes on the fly right in ZBrush, creating tools that compliment each other well. It would get rid of some of the bulk work in each app and allow you to develop the contrasting shapes together gradually during the workflow. The great thing about ZBrush is that you don’t have to plan so much, it’s very free, and that would make it even more liberating.
i can agree. it would be really awesome, but i actually see complex hard edge modelling as a dream request for ZB, (just like my animation request auah)because it would require too many things… element selection (vertex, edges and faces) and other commands to model properly.
But, after all,even using cheap apps like silo, or wings or other, you can model all geometry you want into other apps and import it inside ZB with not so much problem.
Yes, but given what a great app Zbrush is, their solution to hard-edge modeling would likely be just as clever as the rest of the program.
It’s the bouncing between apps that sounds like it hinders the creative process. Being able to create both types of forms would spark a lot of experimentation. Those that plan, plan, plan rarely get to just play around and see what they come up with. I personally think Pixologic is keen on offering these kinds of tools soon. ZBrush does in fact have many hard edged tools at the time, so they have put some thought into it. This app will only get better…well, for modeling, maybe not animation…
Yes, especially for the 3D-challenged such as myself. I often get the “try the demo” advice, but it means I have to try them all with equal concentration over a looooong (for me) period of time to get any real familiararity. I’d rather learn one completely after having gotten knowledgable advice from those with experience on forums. For me, it’s between ZB and modo, or I may get both mainly due to the fact that modo has a hard-edged modeling toolset and because ZBrush is, well, Zbrush.
would love to see a Save and Import Layer function included in either Zbrush 3.5 or 4.
I like to apply Two Layers to my models now.
One Layer is used to apply the Texture and the other Layer is used for Shape Changes using the Standard Brush.
Having a Texture on my model gives me a better idea of the models overall Shape verses using the Smooth Flat shaded model with various Matcaps.
If you only have one Layer added to the model for the Texture and you do normal sculpting with that layer turned on. Those shape changes you make are trapped in that Texture Layer.
That is why I make an extra layer strictly for Shape sculpt changes, so I can keep the Texture Layer turned on while I sculpt. It eliminates trapping the Texture Layer to the models reworked Shape changes.
I love having the Texture Layer turned on as a visual guide when I Sculpt on my model. It really lets you see the Shape work better. Problem is this causes the models files size to skyrocket.
The ability to save these layers separately from the model would be very useful. Since your’e only really working on one Layer to do the Shape work.
The Sculpt Layers is the only Layer you really need to save each time you rework on the model. Granted you could turn off the Texture Layer and 3d the Sculpt Layer to the model before you save, but thats an extra step, and what if you wanted to make and save several Layers for alternative shapes and textures effects?
Wouldn’t it be much easier to import and save these Layers to pull stuff like this off.
One more wish.
Lets say I have two layers applied to my model. One layer is the texture stuff the other layer is the shape manipulation stuff.
When I use the Smooth Brush on the Shape Manipulation Layer. It smoothes over the Texture work on the Texture Layer (It also bakes that smoothed out Texture in that area into the Shape Layer. This is noticeable when you turn off the Texture Layer)
It shouldn’t be doing this.
If I wanted to Smooth Out the Texture work on the Texture Layer. I should go to that layer and apply the Smooth Brush on it.
Sorry for the long rant. Very difficult to explain stuff like this.
How about a auto brush stroke, creating one and then being able to click where you want it as many time as you like, something like Painter has, this would be for modeling and painting…
Any new as to the realease of 3.5/4?