>Start using Blender for sculpting>Its actually not that bad Why the hate, Zbrush is ofc better but blender is completly fine
>>642096people will jump at any opportunity to feel superior, especially if it involves paying money.
>it's free>it must be shit
>makes meh quality alien head>renders with basic color contrast and vignetting to make it look polished >WEW guise Blendhurr ees totally fien for sculpting durr Try making a whole detailed creature that didn't look like babby's first sculpt in Blender without ripping all of your hair out then come back here.
>>642102post your work
>>642096Yeah it's not bad but it's absolutely bare bones compared to all the competition. Sculpting is by far one of the weakest features in Blender when you consider how important sculpting is to character design process.
>>642104>...when you consider how important sculpting is to character design process.Or you can just, you know, actually draw like normal people do.
>>642096Congratulations, 2008/2009-tier stuffGreat moves, blendur. Keep it up!
OP pic pretty demonstrates how much more skill is important than the tools.
>>642096Looks incredibly amazing, at first I thought it was zbrush, how did you manage to make it so even ? When I try to sculpt no matter how hard I try it always ends up looking unclean
Nice basemesh you got there, OP. Now it's time to sculpt some detail on it.
>>642096the hate towards blender has always been aimed more at the absurd, cult like behavior of its user base than the actual software
'blender is bad' meme was invented by jews who want to convince normalfags to buy their shitty autodesk subs etc. I won't be surprised if industry artists are paid by them just to make a post shitting on blender
>>642096Blender is fine but lacks the tools compared to zbrush in terms of sculpting.
>>642127Hey look, skill level ca. 2010 in 3ds max
>>642134I would switch to zbrush if its ui wasn't nightmare fuel.
>>642163ZBrush's UI is pretty comfy, to be honest.
>>642163its not that bad once you get used to it.
>>642096Of course you can get similar results in Blender but why bother if you can get the same result in 2 hours instead of 5 when using Zbrush. Time is the most relevant issue for a professional artist when it comes to programs. I mean Blender is really good for traditional modeling yes, but there are better programs for everything else since they allow you to do the same thing more efficiently.TL;DR Blender does allow you to do almost everything other programs can do, but it's more of a hassle and takes longer.
>>642207Blender is unironically one of the best programs for pure modelling tho
>>642102Oh come on now, Blender is a good sculpting program, all the basics are covered, good brush feel, good enough performance, it has dyntopo which offers great freedom and work great with the increasingly prevalent kit-bashing style of 3d content creation.It does not compete with ZBrush, but of course NOTHING compares to ZBrush, be they free like Blender or commercial proprietary software, it's simply in a class of it's own.But beyond ZBrush, Blender is quite competitive, I think it's major drawback is the lack of sculpt layers, if it had that then it would be nearly on par with Mudbox which is expensive sculpting specialized commercial software.
Sculpting in blender is fine but i wouldn't want to use it 8 hours a day professionally if zbrush was available
Note how the people saying blender isn't bad are the only ones posting any workZbrush fags are just shitposters and shills who don't actually do anything, and if you ask they'll probably come up with bullshit about "muh profeshinul work"
>>642271This is what blendlets actually believe
>>642271Not everyone wants to get doxxed just to prove some 13 year old Blendfuck on 4chan wrong who is too fucking stupid to accept the reality of things.
again, its autism that you shouldn't pay attention too.sculpting in blender is fine if you know how to navigate smoothly. and its even better if you know have past experience with the software.but, blender is only proper for "quick sculpts" and not anything too serious.
>>642287>doxxed by posting a modelCringe
Blender is a fine 3D program but barely anyone uses it for professional work.
>>642287You have to be somebody worth doxxing in the first place.
>>642102if the op hadnt told you the sculpt was made with blender you probably wouldnt think it was shit because you're biased
>>642096I've never 3d sculpted anything but that constant scales material all over its skin is just cheap man, change that up with some detail and it'll be some fine shit mang
>>642517What scales? It's just foam.
I've never been a fan of blender but that new 2.8 interface is sexy as hell and finally makes sense. I might give it a try soon.
>>642163>using the ui in it's out of the box state instead of customizing the shit out of it in order to fit your own needs>imagine being this much of a brainlet
>>642597Blender UI's is not very customizable, at least in comparison with Maya or ZBrush interfaces. So there isn't much room to improve it according to user needs, unfortunately.
I'm going to get crucified here but I think for basic sculpting Blender just feels better. For the life of me I can't get used to the Zbrush controls and workflow. For more advanced stuff like skin pores and such I'll definitely use Zbrush.
Is there a way to sculpt while viewing eevee materials in 2.8?
>>643219> t. someone who hasn't learned how to use zbrush
>>642604I disagree, there is a lot of customization, you can dock windows and stack them on top of others. you can have a UV window docked on top of a Node Editor window on the right while you work on a larger third Texture window on the left. Then you could have an entirely separate full view of the 3D viewport on a second monitor to keep track of the progress.As far as I know you could just code an entirely new interface if you wanted to if that's what you meant. I don't bother with that because I dont code though.
>>643309Yes that's my point. I can switch between any 3D program there is because the basics of any program is more or less standardized. If you know how to use Photoshop you know the basics of Gimp, substance painter, quixel and so on. Zbrush workflow isn't necessarily difficult from the way I see it but I can't rely on past muscle memory and intuitive knowledge of any other program to help me. The whole thing is just bizarre.
>>643362>I can switch between any 3D program there is because the basics of any program is more or less standardized.I'd like to just butt in here: Blender's basic controls are so far removed from "the standard" it's annoying whenever I switch through programs (or even games with any sort of 3D camera [RTS titles, top-down stuff, etc.]). My brain manages to switch on the fly but only if I've been hopping between them frequently. Stop using one for a good week, and suddenly a mound of frustration as muscle memory can't cope.
What's the best sculpting software that isn't zbrush?
>>643374well, wouldn't it be mudbox?yep, that's mudbox
>>643381>>643387Wottabout 3d coat?
>>642494Nah, even if it was zBrush, he'd still find a way to call OP a fag for making things in a "non-realistic style".
>>643392a tier below mudbox
>>642322Only NASA and various Netflix productions.
>>642096give me the best blender sculpting tutorial video there is and I'm going to switch to blender for the first time.
>>643423Plenty of companies use it, just not as the main 3D DCC software. Seriously if you put "game studios that use blender" into google you get a shitload of credible results and youtube is filled with talks on this stuff. It's got a shitload of killer plugins that make it worthwhile in the toolkit.
>>643562addendum, one of the main reasons why big production houses dont commit to blender as their main software, is lack of customer support. if you're running a multiple million dollar production you want a hotline where you can yell if shit dont work.
>>642096I'm guessing you pirated Zbrush, right? To justify paying $700, a user has to convince himself that his software is $700 better than whatever he can get for $0. Even thinking his software is better isn't enough. The free alternative has to be unusable, non-productive, and career destroying. If someone makes something that looks good in blender, they will become enraged, and refuse to acknowledge that it looks good. They'll make up thousands of excuses to explain why, despite what you might think, it _actually_ looks really bad. For $700, it has to be the _only_ possible option in the their mind that will let them make good things. They'll blame blender for their past failures, and they'll work 20x as hard to justify their huge purchase.
>>642604He was defending Zbrush, not blender, but blender's UI is infinitely customizable. You could, hypothetically, edit the source code and make it into a 1:1 recreation of Zbrush. Obviously, it's absurd to ask a user to fix your UI though.