[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 29 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Meta on /qa/ only.
All meta discussion of boards is to be redirected to /qa/.


Redpill me on the key differences between ZBrush, 3DCoat, Mudbox and Blender as sculpting programs.

Not asking which is better, just what are the differences.
>>
ZBrush
___________________the bad line___________________
3DCoat
Blender
Mudbox
>>
>>588028

This.
>>
>>588023
>ZBrush
Shit UI, but if you can work around it, has hands-down the best sculpting tools and ability to handle massive models. Doesn't use the GPU, so even an old shit computer can run it without major glitches, but will be sluggish. Painting and UV features are bare-bones at best.

>3DCoat
Jack-of-all-trades that's constantly implementing features that basically already exist in some of the other programs, so it won't offer anything new if you're already using ZBrush + Painter. Has pretty good retopo tools.

>Mudbox
Stripped down to the basics, if you need a fast sculpting or painting program without fancy features, this is the way to go. It doesn't feature a dynamic sculpting tool like dynamesh or voxels, so it's more focused on detailing models exported from another package than creating from scratch.

>Blender
>implying
>>
>>588040
Blender's sculpting is pretty good tho. It's also nice that you can very quickly switch between modeling and sculpting, whereas other software require constant exporting and importing.
>>
>>588040
>Jack-of-all-trades
Not really.
>>
zBrush's interface is shit, but it is hands-down the best sculpting software out there. Tons of tools, easy to import new scripts and brushes, dynamesh is bae for making any sort of organic form very fast, object history is handled very elegantly and can supposedly backtrack up to 10.000 steps, zRemesh trims your models down fast ans smooth, incredibly versatile and doesn't need a GPU, so it's more accessible in a way for artists vaguely interested in digital sculpting and only have something like a laptop and tablet.

Mudbox isn't really a fair comparison, it's almost as if the two packages aren't made for the same purpose: with zBrush, you can start and finish an entire model without ever leaving the software. You can't say the same about Mudbox, you have to import a base mesh first. Autodesk knows this, that's why Mudbox and Maya have a really good software inter-connectivity. It's also much less capable in the brush department, though you can still import your own alphas and use those. Retopology is a more involved process and much slower than in zBrush. Map baking is still there and it's pretty alright, though xNormal is probably better than both software packages in this regard.

They're both used in different ways for the same goal. Comparing them is like trying to compare a sports car to a hybrid: the sports car is fast but is more demanding to use, the hybrid is slower but you can start halfway up the hill with it. They'll both get you there eventually.
>>
File: 1472444179826.webm (1.83 MB, 960x720)
1.83 MB
1.83 MB WEBM
>>588286
>he uses automatic retopology
>>
>>588289
Why not? Beats the hell out of doing it manually if all you're doing is posing a model for a static pose. Decimation Master will make the ugliest goddamn geo you'll ever see but it'll do a killer job at managing your polygons, meanwhile zRemesher and Mudbox retopo will give you something workable and more manageable to keep sculpting.

It's not the greatest solution for a model meant for animating or whatever but it saves you a lot of time and gives you very nice results. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
>>
>>588289
posts like this are how i know most people here don't understand anything.
>>
>>588040
oh boy, shitting on blender.
Blenders sculpting tools are great especially for free software. It's dynamic topology gives zbrushs dynamesh a run for its money to the point where i could see zbrush starting to take pointers from it.
OP i would say you should learn blender now because soon it will be up to or surpassing other sculpting programs.
>>
>>589108
As much as I think blender is an amazing piece of software, I don't think the sculpting tools are better than the other three options. For most uses, the tools are more than enough, but most certainly not as good as or polished as ZBrush.
>>
>>589117
They aren't ofc better. the best thing is you have everything in one program tho. Base model? Blender? Sculpting details? Blender UV? Blender Materials? Blender Rigging? Blender Animation? Blender

Cinema 4D too.
>>
>>589108
I prefer Sculptris to Blender sculpting, simply because it is extremely more lightweight.
>>
>>589290
Naturally a dumb ESL would think this.
>>
>>588028

Ayyy.

The main issue comes down to their optimization. Blender and Mudbox both have a lot of features, especially blender with the ability to switch to normal box editing on the fly if you need it. The problem is Zbrush just handles way better than both of them. It handles almost 20X the amount of poly before slowing down regardless of your computer specs, and since Zbrush has a full tool set on top of that it just instantly makes it better.
>>
>>589323
How many polys to choke Blender? I have a ryzen 7 1700 and a gtx 1080 ands its very smooth in the millions
>>
>>589324

Blender chokes way before the 1 million poly bar, it's a piece of crap.
>>
>>589326
Now thats just plain wrong
>>
>>589326
Who cares about your input, toasterboy.
>>
>>589331

My computer eats yours for breakfast. I never had any performance issues with all the other 3d packages even with millions of polygons. Only shitty blender chokes like a bitch.
>>
>>589335
>My computer eats yours for breakfast
No it doesn't, toasterboy.

Blender runs 5-10 million polys with ease. If you're slowing down after 1 million, your computer is trash.
>>
>>589338

Blender is the ONLY software of the bunch that slows down with a high poly count. Maybe Blender isn't using my GPU by default or something (I didn't play around with the settings), but I guarantee you that Maya and Modo never choke even with 10 million polygons.
>>
>>589350
>didn't select his GPU
>Omg this software sucks

And yet another case of "Blender sucks" turning out to actually be a case of "I am a computer illiterate retard".
>>
>>589326
>>589335
>>589350


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT_hkSbK8Iw

This is with an ancient PC from 7+ years ago.

And you are telling me somehow it chokes with half a mil? Fuck outta here
>>
>>589359
Bullshit.
>>
There's this course that I'm thinking about going through. Pic related is supposed to be the end result. Is this good? That chest seems a bit anatomically wrong for me, but idk...
>>
>>589376
It's CG Cookie so it's guaranteed quality. Whatever anatomical decisions he made he'll explain in detail.
>>
>>589355

Blender still suck.
>>
>>589355

All other softwares use my GPU by default. It's not my fault if Blender is too retarded to do this by default.
>>
>>589399
All you're arguing is excuses and logistics though.
>>
>>589397
That character is not as realistic as they are making it to be, and a big part of the tutorial consists of timelapses. He doesn't go from start to finish with a character and he doesn't explain every step of a process.

Is there a better in-depth 0% to 100% photorealistic character course out there, which also has an excellent end result?
>>
>>588023
zbrush
+fastest
+brushes have best behavior and huge variety in how they work
+some new fancy stuff like fake live Booleans that you can urn into real geometry and really 3d brushesh
+- awful polymdoeling and hard edge tools, but if you get used to how they work, they are serviceable and wont force you to keep swapping between maya and zbrush every 5 minutes
-no gpu acceleration
-no perspective and no materiel shading options
-awful dated ui
-no vertex editing tools outside of a clunky slow do it all brush
-awful broken texturing tools

only for sculpting, requires a third party software for anything else

mudbox
-much slower than zbrush
-less sculpting tools
-lacking in features considering how long its been around
-autodesk
+more everything else
+ui not designed by a blind monkey

for sculpting texturing and preping low poly models, used to be better than zbrush in every regard, since autodesk buyout its practically dead and on the list of products its planning to drop

3dcoat
-slower than zbrush
-less sculpting tools
+more everything else
+no autodesk


a great alternative for zbrush, in many aspects better than it and decades ahead when it comes to modern 3d package solutions
perfect for everything from sculpting to retopo to texturing

Main difference is the polycounts you can work with, 3d coat is slow and only slower if you use more advanced shading, forget about 100mln quad models
Its basically simple, you want to only focus on pushing your model as far as you can and dont care about retopo or anything else? Go with zbrush, if you planning on doing more with models in one software try 3d coat.
Still if you ask me best solution is to use both 3d coat and zbrush, you get texturing and retopo of one and speed and brush variety of other.
>>
>>589512

Why do people hate autodesk so much, aside from the murder of Softimage? They seem to be a fair company, and I'd rather be in trouble with them than being in trouble with the foundry.
>>
>>589528
Their list of discontinued canned and bought companies is longer than the EA kill list.
>>
>>589530
Not sure why a company buying another company for their software is such a big case to get assblasted over said company for. Software development is ultimately a business, if something will make them more money, then the only smart thing to do is acquire that and throw what you don't need away.
>>
>>589571
>Not sure why a company buying another company for their software is such a big case to get assblasted over said company for.
It is when it stagnates the industry and leads to lack of competition and monopolistic tactics of one company
Also nothing fucking better when a company buys out right to a software you use and forces closure of all forums and communities based around it to push users into using their own site.
The mudbox forums purge still fucking pissses me off, fucking same way gametrailers was killed, one of the biggest gaming forums in the industry casually purged to make room for Viacoms idea of a gaming site. What happened then? Gametrailers closed down not soon after after its community moved to youtube, ign and everywhere else.
>>
>>589593
Maybe the people taking up the offers and selling the software shouldn't be greedy fucks then. What is Autodesk guilty of when they make an offer a software developer based off of his garage on his undies can't possibly refuse?

Let's not pretend that this is a one-way felony here.
>>
>>588023
Creating volume and form from scratch is beat done in 3d coat, it uses voxel tech to create forms from scratch, it's different from dynamesh, much better imo as you dont have to update the mesh every time you want to create a change. Also topology tools are p dope

Zbrush has best performance and features hands down, ui is shit but it's also industry standard for a reason. New z modeler and Boolean tools make it the top choice imo, worth slogging through learning the ui

Haven't used mudbox in quite awhile so I don't know what's new, but o remember it being super easy to learn and fairly simple and straightforward but def lacks a lot of features

I haven't really used blender for sculpting but it seems p good for free software
>>
>blender sculpting is bad
>>
>>590173
better hide that before the shills really come out in full force. they don't want to believe they're software will soon be obsolete.
>>
File: 574gj.jpg (184 KB, 797x853)
184 KB
184 KB JPG
>>590184
>the shills
>>
>>590173
thats zbrush background. didn't you know that?
>>
>>590184
Where can I get paid to promote Blender? Please do tell.
>>
File: Capture.jpg (91 KB, 1241x896)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
>>590173
Nice bait faggot.
>>
Will I burn in hell if I create my base mesh with modeling instead of doing it from scratch with sculpting? I downloaded this exact reference and I want to try out skin modifier in blender with it, just like in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjbRPfr1Vok

I know that people mostly don't model with polygons their base meshes anymore, probably because it is faster when you know what you are doing, but for a beginner in character art I think this would be a much better method, since at least I can't completely fuck up base proportions.
>>
>>590255
Don't get restrained with what other people do, especially since you know your stuff and, as you say, you are starting out. Try this method and then try sculpting it! Use what's best for you but do research different methods.
>>
>>590223
>he did CG Cookie tuts for blender
>now he does his work in zbrush
What did he mean by this?

First program I used for sculpting is Zbrush, currently I'm playing a bit with Blender's sculpting option and honestly I really like it. It is obviously easier to navigate in it, since Zbrush is made with tablets in mind anyway. It is definitely more basic, but all the tools I need for most of my work are there, and I can always export to Zbrush and do what I need in there in the end. I don't know, It just seems so nicer now to sculpt in blender, I can make base meshes with polygonal modeling easier, configure my gui to my likings, everything seems so comfy.
>>
>>590255
>Will I burn in hell if I create my base mesh with modeling instead of doing it from scratch with sculpting?

No, it's two different ways to get to the same outcome. If you know zBrush inside-out, then use zSpheres. If you're not that confident in it yet, do the base mesh elsewhere.

If anything (!!in my opinion!!), having a base mesh is preferable to starting from zSpheres, as it is very likely your base mesh will be lighter than whatever you blocked out in zBrush. So if you decide later that you don't actually want a sculpt, you can UV unwrap the base mesh, bake the maps from the zBrush sculpt and slap them on the base mesh for a light, trim, great-looking model. It just gives you a lot more versatility in your pipeline.

You can technically do the reverse process, retopo a hipoly mesh on zBrush and UV the result, but that seems like a bit of an unnecessary hassle to me.
>>
>>590293
>now he does his work in zbrush
Wrong. That's Kent Trammel and he's confirmed on numerous occasions he sculpts almost exclusively in Blender.
>>
File: wat.png (276 KB, 1374x853)
276 KB
276 KB PNG
I have a "problem" with blender sculpting. I know that detail size is supposed to control the resolution, but for some reason, with dynotopo turned on and detail size set to very small numbers, I still can't get enough resolution - actually it doesn't seem to change at all when I sculpt on my model. I know it depends on pixel size, so as I zoom in, I should keep getting more and more resolution, but that just doesn't happen at all. It's always the same and I just don't have enough polygons now to keep sculpting. Wtf is happening?

Pic related, I'm trying to sculpt the neck, but now I can't create all those muscles when they are super low res for some reason.
>>
>>590315
You're set to collapse edges, which is like a geometry eraser. Change it to subdivide edges for optimal detail.

You should also never need to set it to 1. For Blender, 5 is as high as you should ever go. If you want things like skin paws, that's the point where you should move to ZBrush.
>>
>>590310
2/10
>>
>>590318
Are you an idiot? Watch his streams. He even says he has a copy of ZBrush and barely touches it.
>>
>>590319
Yeah you're right. The thing is that artstation page (>>590223) is full of ZBrush sculpts, but now looking at his webpage and other places I see he works in Blender.
>>
>>590317
It works, thanks!
>>
>>589324
My computer eats your for breakfast faggot. 1080Ti sli 64gb ram 3200
>>
What material/matcap is the best to use in blender? Some of them are flat and don't show many details, while some seem to increase the amount of shadows everywhere, thus everything looks better and more detailed. Currently I'm using the metallic red one (2nd from the top row) and my model looks awesome with it. I used some light blue one before. So I'm not sure if that red one is showing my model correctly or if it is exaggerating details. Maybe it just seems like it because the blue one was too flat?
>>
>>590411
ill use the purple one if i have to, i don't like the color but the material itself is nicely defined

i like making my own material if i need something special
>>
>>590412
That purple one is also nice, similar to that red one. Lots of details. I actually also like that skin tone matcap. I think it's a good middle ground, so it won't make me go in the wrong direction, and it also helps imagining the end result because it already looks like I textured my character.
>>
>>589338
>If you're slowing down after 1 million, your computer is trash.
i have an i7-7700k, and a 1080ti. Blender absolutely starts to choke after 2 million.
>>
>>589326
Bitch, I've seen models in the 2 mil. range, only slowdown I've seen is when the program starts up.

And I don't even have anything fancy like a graphics card to work with.
>>
>>589512
>zbrush
>no perspective

wut
>>
>>589528
From what I've seen, it's largely how they treat their programs, with Maya getting more and more broken post 2015, 3DS not getting much (if any) love and other programs getting their support dropped.

And people say the Blender Foundation is bad, at least they're trying (key word here) to improve.
>>
>>592662
i'm running a 2009 emachines with an amd athlon 2 x3 and a 1gig gt430.

blender is fine at 1 million poly for me.

your either lying because you hate blender or your computer is filled with bullshit that you don't need like weatherbug.
>>
>>592665
Blender improves all the time, imo, the problem is that the project lead is ADHD or something and is constantly shifting his focus onto something else rather that focusing on the main toolset.
So we get small improvements all across the board constantly, but huge leaps are rare.
Also autodesk went into that stupid
>subscribe to a program
business model.
>>
>>592688
>project lead is ADHD
I think it appears that way because he's running a nonprofit and he has to work on features that will be popular with the public. Compare this to a commercial product that is listening to investors/shareholders, competing with other products, etc.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.