Well let’s make a game of it Ryan.
Would reposing of character inside of ZBrush be an additional new feature?
To be able to change the position of the characters geometry inside of ZBrush would be great. And then have it return to original pose after you’ve editied the surface texture, geometry etc.
Just a guest… and a wish 
A personal favourite hope of mine will be enhancements to the fibre stuff. Perhaps spline hairs to stop the hit and miss of adding hair to your characters? lol.
I can dream cant I!
Cheers
Mike R
What about a full featured Hair and a cloth plugin that be made to fit models by gravity controls via any X Y or Z directions.
Also a material channel that support texture maps
like XSI, Max and Maya built into the core would be great.
I hope something like this is being built into 2.5
All these new features are absolutely incredible. But because competition is on the rise, it makes me wonder if we’ve been shown the best of the new features, or does Pixologic have an ace up it’s sleeve…? Just wondering out loud and purely speculation. Doesn’t matter though. I’m just stoked about what we’ve already seen!
Well I am sure I heard that if you wish upon a star your dreams come true. Cant wait till tonight. Hoping for clear skies. Not likely here in Scotland. Maybe someone else can do ti for me. 
lol.
Mike R
Well, if Pixologic DO have another ace up their sleeve, I’m hoping it’s some form of basic poly-modeler - allowing for easy poly and edge extrusion. With that, and the ability to place polys/lines/vertices numerically - there would open-up a whole new world of what ZBrush could be used for.
Yes agree that would make zbrush a true out and out modler… Would make it possible to create non organic modles like bikes, cars e.c.t.
While talking about wishes a better renderer would be fantastic, improoved light system also. I was looking at Modo renders today and they are jaw droping. Renderer built from ground up.
What Zbrush really needs is a LSCM UV layout system.
Ryan could you guys make it possible to draw out our uv layout via the
new topology pen over a flat template. This would make it posible not to ever leave Zbrush.
Cool Idea Eigh!
i don’t think oldschool polymodelling and numerical input is in the z-spirit. if you’ll open your eyes you’ll see that the zbrush goal is to never to use again the standard polymodelling method. however i agree with that, you we will need some uv tools if the goal is to never leave zbrush.
You are absolutely right about that Blakshep. I am sick of pushing and pulling vertices. I will be really happy when this crap doesnt exist anymore. ZBrush is heading in the right direction which is GREAT.
Just to clarify here:
I’m not talking about a fully-blown poly-modeler. Just something that gives the basics, because it’d increase possibilities enormously - for example:
Building a car in ZBrush would be a nightmare, but, by adding something as basic as the ability to numerically place your polys/lines/vertices, you’d be able to take that new Re-Topology feature and literally SNAP a complete shell over a VERY basic (but numerically accurate) poly-cage in no time at all.
Dunno 'bout you lot, but personally - I think it’d work wonders
It won’t do ZBrush any harm, that’s for sure. And while on the subject, I’m crossing my fingers 'cos if Ryan doesn’t include the ability - hopefully someone will produce some sort of script.
i don’t understand why do you want to be “numerically accurate”. if you want to make accurate modells i would suggest you to use nurbs. otherwise i would suggest you to use your eyes for accuracy. i don’t think a brush based software with alphas and so would be the right choice to make exact curvy surfaces, with lots of tiny parts.
Why?
Well…accuracy, because it opens up hard-surface modeling - and that usually includes the need to input accurate data taken from real world objects.
Unfortunately, I don’t like NURBS - I prefer SDS. And of course, you should never underestimate the power of SDS poly-modeling when you combine it with ZBrush style SDS (see the upcoming Silo 2 for proof).
I’ll be using Both Silo and ZBrush for my modeling, but even so, I’m hoping to be able to decide which modeler I want to use for a particular model. I just don’t like hopping from one modeler to the other on a single model.
If we get even a basic poly-modeler in ZBrush, I wouldn’t need to.
ok then use sds it was a long ago i made a this type of modell. the thing i still don’t understand, what are the main zbrush functions, that will help you making these type of surfaces. displacement mapping? 2.5d alphas? projection master?zspheres? the brushes? this program is actually designed to make illustrations in it. i think the last thing they will add is support for exact, clean hard surfaces. i think it would be easier for you to make it in a software that was designed for these types of modells.
however i’m thinking about using the retopology tool for these types of object too, but the least thing i want to be precise
zbrush is designed to be a creative software. i don’t see any creativity in copying exactly smtg. i don’t want to say it’s a bad thing beacuse not, you can learn many things with copying, but it’s not creativity
Just about all (if not ALL) of these features are precisely why I want to want to poly-model in ZBrush.
To give you an idea what I’m getting at, heres an example workflow:
1 - Create a VERY basic (but precise) poly-model, to be used as a snap cage.
2 - Use the new Surface Skinning tool to ‘snap’ a perfect shell over the cage.
3 - Use Mesh Extraction to extract further edges you could use as formers.
4 - Use Masks to Project detailing into the panels, or to displace vents etc.
That’s just the tip of the iceberg.
There’s nothing non-creative 'bout wanting accuracy.
For example, to knock-out a reference snap mesh for the grill of a car, you might want the gills to be placed repetitively 20 units below each other. As things are - it would be a nightmare, with numerical input - it would be a breeze.
ZBrush clearly isn’t designed for this kind of work - I know that. But that doesn’t change the fact of how useful it would be to have such a basic feature. It’s something that would compliment the other amazing tools in ZBrush, and makes a LOT more possible.
MOVE X,Y,Z (for Polys/Lines/Vertices - with numeric and interactive input)
ROTATE X,Y,Z (for Polys/Lines/Vertices - with numeric and interactive input)
SCALE X,Y,Z (for Polys/Lines/Vertices - with numeric and interactive input)
That’s all it needs to REALLY boost the possibilities. Simple but true. And with this feature you would see a greater variety in the type of models ZBrush is used for.
Anyway, 'tis just my opinion.
It realy depends on how pixologic what their software to fit into his or her pipeline. We all know what zbrush is realy good at and for that its gained respect in the CG world. I was lost without a conventional modeler as I wanted some basic tools to make precice hard serface objects. The simple tools that I thought id need soon extended to many tools to get the job done in a external modeler. Even Zbrush zsphears didnt meet demands due to its method of topology used.
If pixologic added these vast tool sets to become a mechanical and organic modeler then yes it would be simply great, but I dont think it would do zbrush justice to put a half attempt at trying to do somthink els unless they where very solid and could compare to other 3d modelers. longer wait ppl.
Pixologic would have to have more that one view port with real perspective views. They would need to implement a modifier control, X,Y,Z one like in hexagon would be perfect. You would need grids, numberic cords input, Extrude, split polys. full control over faces, points, edges just to mention a few of common tools and methods used. Its would take a long time to put these features in, maybe v3, 2 years or so from now.
My point is software is better to excell in somthink than be another clone to what other software can do at its best. zbrush looks to keep this trend in v2.5 originality.
Just a few reasons for somone like me to perchase zbrush 2.5 over other software.
Price
Great community and support.
DVDs , Gnomon, Digital Tutors, and free tutorials avalible here.
Zscripts, plugins
Free flow ,artistic ,intuitive and fun.
High poly sculpturing/ detailing.
3D texturing plus use of alphas in full 3d.
Zspears to create extreemly fast base meshes.
Ability to re-toplology the serface, rig and pose the serface.
Reposing the model with ability to deform mesh at the same time.
Mesh extraction to make clothes and armor.
Did I mention fun!
For the hobbiest new to 3d this is a nice start too. The fully coloured printed manual is simply top class. exsamples, tutorials and zscripts will keep you wanting more. Any added feature we dont know about is a bonus as zbrush has already push the boundries with the features seen so far.
It’s hard to put forward in words what I’m meaning here. The whole point of wanting numeric input in ZBrush is so that I can use it in conjunction with the unique tools that ZBrush already has (and others don’t).
I have it planned out in my mind, how I could manage just about any modeling task using actual ‘ZBrush’ tools - if only it had numeric input to help it along. I really am not talking about adding all those standard modeling tools found in other programs.
If I understood ZScript, I’d write the thing myself.
How hard can it be to take the transformation data of a polygon/line/vertice, and allow adjustment of it through a numeric input?
To those here who understand ZScripts, would you say it’s possible?
I forgot about this thread. Kind of easier to understand how its done with our current information of Zbrush 2.5. Cant wait. Keep going through the entire thread to see how that model developed. Absolutely stunning.
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=22871&page=1&pp=15
Cheers
Mike R
It’s certainly a great piece of quality ZBrushing 