Any way to make this skirt NOT bumpy on MD?Even on MD quads the skirts look bumpy.I know we can retopo but I'd like to know if there is a way to generate a better and smooth skirt, without needing to add more geometry, and only usind MD.
>>541139you need more subdivisions before simulating. meshsmoothing it afterwards(if its made of quads) also pretty much fixes out the ugly jagged edges and gives you a smooth cloth mesh.
>>541139bump up and frezee?i mean sure, it might looks smooth due to the normal smoothing, but in reality its still a low res triangulated mesh, there are no miricles
>>541139Unless you crank the polygon resolution up to insane levels before exporting it you'll never get rid of the bumpy look. MD has great cloth simulation but the topology it exports is garbage. Nothing to be done about that. Even their quad topology it trash because they just subdivide a random tris mesh to turn it into quads.
>>541147>. MD has great cloth simulation but the topology it exports is garbage.And the fuck you expect it to do?Re triangulate the mesh every frame based on the vertex normal flow?Not only would it make the software run like complete ass even at the smallest resolutions it would also introduce insane artifacts and clipping due to new vertexes getting spawned inside the topology of another mesh, per vertex collision would become impossible to calculatepeople just need to stop expecting MD to do magicyou can go really dense before freezing the geo and exporting, and your job is to cleanup the mesh
>>541155A number of people on the MD forums had demonstrated ways the software could export a superior mesh but MDs response has been "Me no speaky engrish".
>>541176You taking a fucking piss?The software could have an automatic retopology normal based algorithm to create a nice clean quad topology, the point is .. its not what this software was made forIts a clothing design and simulation software not a fucking automatic retopo oneMd users can be industry veterans so obviously they would have legitimate advice and actual solutions for some of its problems, dosnt mean the devs could ever implement any of itThere is no magic, cleaner export meshes would require higher sampling for every vertex position to not create bizarre fucked up outputsImagine having a nice clean model, and then exporting a discovering in max that half of the edge geometry is blown out all over the scene, i would be more pissed than with some triangulation artifacts So i ask again, what is the magical solution for the mesh resolution you expect here, i cant think of one
>>541139There's a setting called "particle distance"...i guess it's sort of like MD's version of subdivide. I think when you decrease the distance it should give a smoother cloth. Here's a good video. There's some videos on Youtube as well that have pretty good tutorials.https://vimeo.com/28331473
>>541178>taking a fucking pissDo you mean >taking the piss?
>>541178>You taking a fucking piss?Korean typing detected.
You should be exporting your mesh from MD with around 2 million polys then import it into Zbrush and retopo it. MD's mesh is garbage and not meant to be used on anything important. Personally I prefer to just sculpt clothing directly in Zbrush. I find it faster and easier than constantly pushing and pulling on the cloth in MD trying to get it to fold and drape the way I want it. MD is basically for people who don't know how to model but know how to sew. It was designed originally to be a fashion industry program.
>>541139are you using bump or displacement map? from the look of it it may be over subdivided. does your software have a cloth physics? it should be an easy loft, cloth relax, then subdiv if necessary
>>541187MD is used by all the top professionals right now like Adam Skutt, Gilberto Magno, etc and was extensively used in top tier games like Witcher 3. Using it has nothing to do with not knowing how to model, it just gives better, more realistic results than sculpting gives.
increase the density of the skirt mesh, it will fix
>>541265Game models are low poly and non subdivided. It won't be an issue for that. Good sculptor will get better results than a cloth sim.
>>541401The hell you talking about? So if you want to animate a walk cycle of a chick wearing a skirt you prefer sculpting frame by frame rather than using Md?Everyone uses Md. You make the thing in md add micro cloth folds and details in zbrush and then you retpologize it., that's how everybody in the industry does it.A good sculptor might get good results but getting folds to look realistic just by sculpting them is super rare, especially when you have a complex drapery and is usually not worth the effort. And in the industry there are very few top professionals who still rely only on sculpting(like Steve Lord)
>>541187>Personally I prefer to just sculpt clothing directly in Zbrush.Yeah, and it probably looks like ass.Unless you are very good producing any good looking clothing in zbrush is out of a question.>>541401>Good sculptor will get better results than a cloth sim.bullshit, he might match it with good reference material, but nobody is perfect
Newbie question, how to export MD dresses onto my character (for animation) to Maya? Does the dress rigged automatically? If possible, youtube video would be much helpful than a text.
>>541187>Personally I prefer to just sculpt clothing directly in ZbrushYeah that works wonders for animation.
>>541450You export just the avatar to Maya, you animate it then you import the animation to Md and animate the clothes there
>>541147The problem with cloth simulation is that it's a simulation and thus is limited the computational restraints of the simulation system. This means simulation will be "glitchy" when it comes to fine detail. So yes a talented sculptor will always be able to produce better results than your desktop computer running a simulator.What you are failing to account for however is 3D is a business. Time is money. And while yes it's true that the best 3D sculptors will be able to sculpt better cloth than a computer can simulate they will never be able to produce that cloth faster than a computer will simulate it and the simulation is "good enough". Yeah there will be glitches but who is going to notice them? Maybe 1 in every 20,000 people? For the majority of people there will be no difference between a computer simulated cloth and an expertly sculpted cloth so why expend capital on sculpted cloth, especially since 3D sculptors who are capable of sculpting a better cloth are rare.And that's the thing with MD. It gives your average nobody mediocre talent 3D artist the ability to create a cloth mesh that your average person won't be able to tell the difference between it and a sculpt by a high end talented 3D artist at a fraction of the cost.I doubt there are two people on this board who could sculpt a superior cloth than MD can produce with its simulation yet anyone on this board could produce a cloth mesh that is good enough with MD.So in short, fuck your art school elitism. Simulated cloth is good enough.
>>541912Its not either, you use both .Do a cloth sim in MD ,retopo and then sculpt some details on top.