Hello, Max user here, learning 3D sculpting in ZBrush.This is a Monitor suggestion thread for ZBrush. I'm following two tutorials, one Pluralsight with Pierre Roggers and one more in-depth Uartsy with Ryan Kingslien.I have a Wacom medium Pro and two 27" 16:9 FHD monitors. I have 600 euros (yes Eurofag here) and thinking on investing on a 34" Monitor for ZBrush training and later work.Kingslien is using a Cintiq and a pretty default UI layout. Roggers on the other hand, is using a more WIDE UI layout, pretty much a 21:9 one, and I personally found that more pleasing.Would a 519 euros 2560x1080 LG 34UM68-P 34'' ULTRAWIDE FHD BLACK be a good choice for present and future ZBrush needs?You ZBrush users, guide me.
1. Seriously - try Mudbox before ruining your life with Zbrush. Really, I'm not being flippant - Zbrush is just a horrible, miserable experience, especially compared to Mudbox. The fact that you are considering purchasing a new display in order to compensate for the design of the Zbrush UI should be a huge red flag about whether this software is right for you.2. Your superwide monitor may help you in Zbrush but it will be a total pain in the ass for every other piece of software which is intended for 16:9 displays. In photoshop for example - your toolbox on the left will be annoyingly far away from your palettes on the right. Setting your Wacom to behave nicely across multiple displays of varying aspect ratio will also be a major headache.3. Ask yourself a bigger philosophical question here: are you doing your best to keep shit simple? When you find yourself considering wacky solutions to solve common problems, (especially when these wacky solutions involve making purchases), you may be going at things the wrong way - your tools are beginning to master YOU, and not the other way round as it should be.4. Seriously dude - Mudbox.
TL:DR version of >>572319>>I have a Wacom medium Pro and two 27" 16:9 FHD monitors.No dude. You have a perfectly good hardware setup. You have everything you need - you do not need to buy anything else to get your work done.
>>572319Other anon here, but - how much is Mudbox used in the industry? Everybody uses Zbrush and I want to be relevant.
>>572345>>Everybody uses Zbrush and I want to be relevant.Outside of the main hub platforms (Max or Maya) there's a lot more room for maneuver when it comes to individual artist's preferences than you might think. The thing I keep hearing again and again and again from industry insiders is that - if your work is good - they don't care what you use, and within reason, they'll support you in order for you to do your best work for them.I mean, yeah, a developer is not gonna all of a sudden switch from Unity to Unreal just to suit you - but something small and self contained like a sculpting app where all you're really generating is a normal map? Yeah, its not much of an issue.These are, after all, companies that offer relocation assistance. They will literally help move you and your family from one side of the country to another so you can work for them. They're not gonna freak out because you prefer Mudbox.
>>572346TL:DR version, again;Weigh up the two scenarios:1. Zbrush: more widely used, but takes years to master and produce good work.2. Mudbox: not as widely used, but you will be producing your best work within months, if not weeks of installing it.Total no-brainer for me. Ease and speed of use wins every time.
OP here, >>572319 your answer seems very reasonable, I actually downloaded Mudbox and an introduction tutorial for it I started watching just some minutes ago, the "Mudbox Basics - by Chung Kan" just to get informed about the features of the app and have a basic understanding about it. But my concern is as >>572345 's.
>>572353Use whatever you think you can quickly make your best work with. If you think the work you will make with Zbrush will be better than the work you will make with Mudbox, and that the difficult interface is not gonna slow you down - then go for it.For me, Zbrush is confusing and unpredictable - and therefore the work I do with Mudbox is better. Your only consideration should be the quality of the work you produce. That is literally all that matters.
>>572294You want a 34 inch monitor to look at low res zbrush sculpts. Anything above 27 inch is overkill.
>>572346>>572347Thanks, I'll at least try Mudbox. I don't really have a great need to switch since I got used to Zbrush more or less, but I won't disagree that the controls are pretty weird.
>>572294It's like all the losers crying about maya vs blender etc.Blender requires you to learn a bizarrely set-up menu and tool layout. ( Takes a week at worst to learn it. ) Thing is dedication like any artistic endeavors. Both are nearly equal, but most will say ( For those who are dreaming they can find careers good luck you won't. ) Will say Maya hands down.The reality is. Blender > Maya or Maya Blender doesn't matter its what makes results for you.Zbrush > Mudbox or Mudbox > Zbrush same thing. Don't worry about the fucking tools equipment. This shows you lack resolve and are too worried about hardware and software.Like new artist learning to draw. You don't need a wacom. They're shit and overpriced. You can easily learn to draw digital or sculpt with xp-pen they are 1-to-1 with wacm work exactly the same and cost 60% less on average.Common-sense 101. And if you give up, you spent less cash instead of buying a 3k pos or spent months learning zbrush only to discover mudbox work best or maya works for you despite blender doing the same job.It's all just what works for you. Save cash, try more then one fad and see what happens.Cheers
>>572365Hey anon, you may think this is a bait post, but it's not, i actually wanted to tell you that you're right, because i took that decision about the equipment, and it was right, let's hope you have an amazing future.
>>572365thisalthough i disagree on the wacom section and he could have mentioned that a lot of software has free student versions (except zbrush so mudbox gets a point there even tho im a z guy)