Is there a reasons to use ZBrush instead of Blender sculpting tools if you already blender user?
>>654920Don't forget about the more advanced masking tools, clip and slice curves, polygroups, performance that let your imagination go wild, very good auto retopo, shadowbox, projection master, the list goes on. Blender is fine for free but if you want to reach top quality then Zbrush is the way to go.
>>654918I think the highest difference is performance. ZBrush is specifically built to maintain large amounts of polygons on screen, and this is the gist of modern sculpting workflow. Disregarding other Blender capabilities, it or any other competitor simply cannot hold their ground compared to something that can hold and smoothly operate on billions of polygons.
>>654918yes there are tons of reasons, too many to list them all.And most of them have nothing to do with Blender, ALL sculpting programs are fucked when compared to ZBrush.
>>654918If you are already capable of doing the job in blender then I would say no.However, if you want to expand your skills then you should always try alternative tools.
>>654918ZBrush has a better viewport that can handle incredibly dense meshes; this is pretty much it's only "100% no arguments best thing that no other software does" feature. And it's a big featureAll the brushes, tools, techniques, etc in Zbrush can (with a lot of effort) be pretty closely emulated in Blender either with built in features (that most people don't know about), or py scripting (that most people don't learn), or addons (that most people don't bother to look for even though they're free).Blender is really fucking terrible "out of the box", it is the least "it just werks" software there is; you have to take the time and effort to learn how to customize everything and find add-ons / scripts / user provided tweaks to get the most out of Blender
>>655013That's no argument for Blender its one against it. >All the brushes, tools, techniques, etc in Zbrush can (with a lot of effort) be pretty closely emulated in BlenderI seriously doubt it. >you have to take the time and effort to learn how to customize everything and find add-ons / scripts / user provided tweaks to get the most out of BlenderWhich is a non-option for me and many others. I just use Zbrush and forget all that shit.
>>654918Blender is not for sculpting.Blender is for modelling.
>>655198Sculpting tools can still aid in regular modeling workflow though.
>not moving each vertex by hand
>>654918Blender is a slow piece of crap with no real retopo capability, good brushes, and with a trash dynamic topology sculpt compared to Sculptris Pro. Other than that, nothing much.
>>655198>Blender is for modelling.thats a bit of a stretch
>>655561We're talking about stuff that comes with it, developped or funded by the devs themselves. That means that if CG cookie suddenly decided to drop support and not release it for 2.8, it just wouldn't exist anymore. Maya, Max, Modo and Houdini all come with good retopo tools out of the box.B..but blender is much bettah cuz muh greave pencil and shortcuts right?
>>655574At this point (well it's been here for a long time) Blender's like the Skyrim of DCCs. Only playable / usable because of a rich modding / addon community.It's not like the devs don't occasionally annex addons into the main branch, but when they do they're always disabled and hidden away until you go and browse the addon list yourself. And it's always small menial stuff, maybe one or two genuine quality of life improvements. They'll never think about adding in the really big and gamechanging addons.
Blender has better scrumfells but ZBrush has an accurate ratio-to-points curve delimiting pencils. ZBrush is still the first for generative vox/pox. ZBrush has some history with handling ablaic toruses particularly well, though Blender just unveiled their Veil(s)-like tech.Ultimately the question is the following: ZBrush, or Blender? And the answer can only be one of ZBrush or Blender.
>>655581>They'll never think about adding in the really big and gamechanging addons.I suppose they don't want to "disrupt" the """market""". What other reason could there be?
>>655590Houdini does vox a million times better with vdb nodes
>>654918Yes.Blender's a Jack of all trades kind of program, but doesn't do a lot all that well without the aid of addons or plug ins- sculpting is but one of those areas. Whereas zBrush is a specialized sculpting program.
>>655623Laziness, unwillingness to ask, incapable of incorporating it into Blender with it turned on by default (if at all).Lots of possibilities there.
>>655623>>657927I suppose the main reason is copyright. Unless add-on developers grant their copyright to the Blender Foundation, their add-ons won't be integrated.Of course I know of no official statement regarding this, but since the Blender codebase is copyrighted by the BF, I'd assume that's pretty much the main reason. It's how it works in some other free software projects -- you either give copyright, or your patch lives only in your own fork.
>>655574thats silly, Blender comes stripped out that way its light weight and not full of bloat that you don't need.That is literally the fundamental of open source software. By your ridiculous standard all the addons that come preinstalled and enabled don't count either? It is just a different way of doing things , it doesn't magically disqualify addons from the conversation
>>658017>its light weight and not full of bloat that you don't needYou mean like making a PBR viewport optional?
there is lots of biased posts in this thread.the truth is blender gets better with every version and you should stick with it for sculpting so you will be most familiar with it when it becomes the best at sculpting. even now it is on the heels of zbrush. by the end of 2019 it will surpass zbrush.once that is happening you can bet it will be well on its way to the new industry standard.