Can Zbrush completely replace maya or max for modeling.....
Okey here is the deal. Can Zbrush totally replace maya with modeling? I have seen people do retarded stuff in Zbrush, that from their opinion, would pain in the ass to do it in Maya or Max.
What do you think
What do you think
Replies
I used for awesome way. They do incredible things in Zbrush.
What do you think not for production
I only want for example very very complex hard surface shape in Zbrush or something else, and imported it to Maya, to retopo? Can i do that?
the production process for a game or a film can be very long, requiring the artists to make large scale changes over and over again to please the art directors, company management and marketing experts. These kind of changes can be very very hard to do in zbrush without going all the way back to blobby dynamesh shapes.
and personally I believe no Zbrush will not completely replace maya for modeling. At least in its current form
I want to try without it. At least to put all reference in my second second monitor. And to try to model with poly. Because i don't understand NURBS>
There are actually grids in ZBrush - you can turn them on under the Draw palette used for setting up image reference planes. Near as I can tell you can't actually snap geometry to them though.
A lot of blueprints are off on the web I've found. So that could be your problem but you can re transform it in some cases.. Anyways I assume you mean you want to try to model by sculpting and you don't understand high poly modeling (NURBS is another method of the idea). But you shouldn't really skip the foundational elements such as that, especially if you want to work with hard surface objects. You need to at least understand why subdividing does what it does to sculpt.
Course if you're a medical illustrator or 3d concept artist you could just dive straight into Zbrush and kitbash and play around to your hearts content but you're talking about replicating modern vehicles which requires a little finesse!
[ame="
and some more organic mixed with hard surface stuff.(for concept work)
[ame="
@WarrenM
Are we speaking only for hard surface in Zbrush or also with characters? Because, i think people start first in Zbrush and then retopo in other programs, piece by piece.
So no one, is making hard surface in Zbrush first and then retopo in other programs why? Should i use Maya for only for hard surface and Zbrush for organic?
But then there will always be someone who does exactly that who pops up to tell me I'm wrong. Should be any moment now ... :P
If you don't mind, can you tell me the workflow for building characters or hard surface.
I know this.
1.Getting concept art.
2.Start in Zbrush get the high poly model or start with base mesh in Maya or Max and do the rest in Zbrush.
3.Separate whole body from the character, and have each part as a subtool. Use GoZ to import for example let's start the head, in Maya or topogun. Retopo, get nice retopology, edge flow etc.Do this for rest including accessories.
4.What comes next, i am confused from this part.....
Well you going to have to UV your new topology if you want to texture it and bake down some of the hi res details. Basicially:
4. UV your new topology
5. Texture and bake your hi res details.
6. Render in some 3d app like Maya or 3ds Max using mental ray or other render engines.
The process will work, it's nothing unexplored.
What things are better to be done in Max or Maya? Yes i know, i am not limiting only for Zbrush. But i love the program. Just i am curious about, does things like hard surface is better to be done in Zbrush or Max/Maya for production. Either way, i'll use for personal projects.
From what I've seen with stylized diffuse only work, it adds about an extra day of work but you do get the benefit of a more unified texture look
There's a LOT Of people in our industry who can do it, and do it very very well.
I personally don't like excluding any tool from a pipeline on principal, but I very much prefer to simply use Zbrush for organic detailing only.
But yes.. it CAN be done.
Yes it can.
In some cases you can build a high and low assets entirely in Z, using maya/max only for setting up proper scale. It's not always the most productive way of building your model, but Zbrush been evolving rapidly over last few years, hell, even Zremesher was introduced not long ago.
If working from a set concept, some people prefer to jump straight into a 3D app and model it out, rather than sculpting as you can be a lot more precise.
I would use both max and zbrush/sculptris when it makes sense though. I think creating texture would be a lot more faster in sculpting programs but if I want something simple as a soda can, creating a Cylinder in Max and making chamfers is better.
I think what it boils down to is the level of tolerance of different artists... For instance, I know I personally don't mind the Zbrush interface - I actually find it to be pretty cleverly thought out. Some hate it tho ...
However I cannot, and I mean, I really can not stand manipulating a 3D model in a viewport with inconsistent viewport performance, with a framerate dipping down under 10 fps the closer one gets to a model ; and furthermore, I find the input scheme requiring to click-drag outside of the silhouette of the model to rotate it to be completely counter productive. Does that mean that great things can't be done in Zbrush ? Absolutely not
I often sat in awe watching colegues showing the greatest amount of patience and care when dealing with completely convoluted input schemes for selecting/hiding/unhiding objects and layers. Personally ? I know how to do it just as well as they do, but it pisses me off every time, and it makes me dislike the program - regardless of how wonderfully powerful it is ... which is a bit of a shame really.
And then there is some production requirements that just cannot be ignored. If you work by yourself, doing only sculpts for illustrative purposes or for 3D prints, you might actually never run into these issues. But the lack of features like grids, units, grouping, snapping, or proper modeling and UV mapping tools will always require the game or VFX artist to couple Zbrush with another 3D app.
Anyways - with these few examples I just want to illustrate that at the end of the day, what only matters is that if you feel like you can use it for your needs, go ahead and use the tool the way you want it. *However* don't be reluctant to use a clearly faster or more efficient approach when instructed to do so by your boss/lead in a production environment.
Simple really !
It's a clever technique, it sure works, and I actually used it a few times in production. *But* it is a nightmare to use and requires so much tweaking and fiddling that it makes it more of a chore than anything else. Some artists are okay with it ; some cannot stand it because they know that in any other program it could be done in a few clicks without any issues or unexpected results
Not to mention that the subtle yet noticeable pinching that can be seen in the final result might not bother some artists, while for some others it would be a total deal breaker. Again - it's a matter of level of tolerance.
What specifically do you want to see?
http://pixologic.com/zclassroom/homeroom/
Should get you going! No speed videos, all informative.
As far as I know I have only seen one video showing someone doing exactly this , and that is this one :
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?174353-NEW!-Character-Assets-Update-7-(12-12-12)-quot-Viper-quot-Ghillie-Suit-Creation-Videos
Near the end of the list there is a 3-part series called "Building Game Resolution Mesh" ; this is probably as close to what you ask as one can get.
Now I think this is worth taking with a grain of salt. In a way, the fact that this artist managed to do all that without leaving Zbrush is pretty impressive. But it comes with some big issues too : the automated UVs are extremely wasteful and would (probably) only work for a film project, but not for a game at all. And his retopology process, while producing a decent mesh, is very slow by industry standards. Last but not least, the normalmap being generated inside Zbrush in not synched to any engine out there, so that's not production-friendly either (I would have given it a pass had he generated an Object Space normalmap to be converted to TS later tho !)
So, while this video series claims to be covering ingame asset creation, I don't think that any studio anywhere would ever follow such a pipeline, as it is very, very slow and produces sub-standard results. While the retopo mesh is acceptable, everything after that would need to be re-done with a more proper, controlled approach.
Now don't get me wrong, I am not trying to talk you out of trying to use a Zbrush-only workflow for game content creation ... you are more than welcome to try it ... I am just trying to save you from a lot of frustration
And I agree with you about the proliferation of very fast timelapse videos - I find them very annoying too
For example, if there is hard time for me to build something in applications like Maya or Max, i want to do in Zbrush, Might be easy or harder. I don't know.
The rest of the pipeline. Like:Retopo, UV, baking,texturing. etc. i want to use proper programs for that.Like Topogun, Photoshop for paining, UVLayout.
I only want to use Zbrush for extreme details, shapes, complex mechanical shape and of course organic sculpting.
For example something like this: Viper Hood from http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?174353-NEW!-Character-Assets-Update-7-(12-12-12)-quot-Viper-quot-Ghillie-Suit-Creation-Videos
How can be done this in other way for game production
The retopology tools in other software have improved substantially though, which I think makes it a lot more reasonable to create a base in ZBrush, and GoZ into another software to lay on new, cleaner topology for hard surface, then back to ZBrush for detailing the highpoly.
Unfortunately the retopology tools inside ZBrush itself have gone untouched for many years, and are pretty garbage at this point. Virtually the worst of any major software, along with the UV mapping and baking.
With open source software in combination with ZBrush I cant really imagine the necessity of doing everything in one package.