New Software - PhotoSculpt - What do you think?

Spatz

PhotoSculpt Textures Software


Creates 3D models and 3D textures from just two photos of the same subject.

http://www.photosculpt.net/


What do you think ?

Sandro

Results looked pretty ugly, blobby and distorted...

Not sure about gameart, but might be useful for camera mapping stuff where only illusion of depth from certain angles is required.

pior

Used wisely it could be really awesome
Claymotion games ... 3D scanning scale models for backgrounds ... delicious!!!

Hazardous

Damn thats not half as bad as I thought it would be.

rumblesushi

Agreed, unless they were particularly good examples and not representative of the average result you'd get from it, it's a pretty clever piece of software.

Frump

I've seen software like this before that created similar from dozen of photos. Pretty impressive for only two. Not enough that I fear for my future though.

throttlekitty

Looks interesting, although it looks a little tricky to get a good height reading from watching the demos. Maybe with some careful lighting and camera angles it could be improved- the images in the demo were pretty lax in those departments. I'd reckon piecing together multiple objects to get a full-depth model would be quite a chore though; everything seemed to be pulled from a plane.

At the very least, it's an awesome start for speed sculpts I'm sure!

hipe-0

Hello Guys!

My name is Hippolyte Mounier, French, 34 and I'm new to this forum. I saw quite a few hits on my website www.photosculpt.net comming from this place (thanks spatz for sharing the info ), and I thought you guys might be interrested to have me in your discussion?

about the soft:
I created the PhotoSculpt Textures for CG artists like you in mind. I know games and I worked with game devs do do this software so I understand some of your needs. But there are many things I don't know . (my background is CAD, not CG)
My goal: I would love to see ultra HD graphics in games very soon.

There are also many things that I would like to do with this software, and I'm really pleased to have the opportunity to discuss that with you:). Where shall we start?

Info : Trial Demo has been relased today, see www.photosculpt.net for details

hipe-0

PhotoSculpt v1.0 is now available for purchase (at EUR 99.00) since a few minutes :poly121:

I really can't wait to see you guys play with this new toy!

see www.photosculpt.net for more info!

hipe-0

Hi guys,

don't forget to check out this new full featured 30 days demo of PhotoSculpt and make your own 3d objects and textures today!

www.photosculpt.net

hipe-0

You can apply for the Challenge today and win a full PhotoSculpt license (value 99.00 Euro) !
see http://www.photosculpt.net/challenge/

Good luck!

renderhjs

Don't you think that it's a bit pricey for something so limited and not yet production proven. I think that the average user here might be more interested if it was affordable for rather pocket money say like 20 - 40 $ and if there would be user input controls to tweak the results.

A package such as Silo 3d is available for 99 $ as well and its a really attractive price for many artists to actually consider purchasing next to what they already have at work or at home. Crazybump has also a great value for its price. But 99 $ for a rater limited tool is imo. not realistic.

hipe-0

renderhjs wrote: »

Don't you think that it's a bit pricey for something so limited and not yet production proven. I think that the average user here might be more interested if it was affordable for rather pocket money say like 20 - 40 $ and if there would be user input controls to tweak the results.

A package such as Silo 3d is available for 99 $ as well and its a really attractive price for many artists to actually consider purchasing next to what they already have at work or at home. Crazybump has also a great value for its price. But 99 $ for a rater limited tool is imo. not realistic.

Thanks for your time. PhotoSculpt is a new software and it will improve over time (see http://photosculpt.uservoice.com), but I think it's great as is :poly121:. It does superb models and it's a real time saver for texture work and base sculpting. No other software does the same as it's based on binocular vision. Textures just look better than other softwares. Have you tried it for yourself ? Just try the samples or go out for 1h shoot 100+ texture shots and you'll see how much time you save and how much nicer your textures are with all maps in 3D HD. (tileable, normal, depth, ao, ...)
Note that if you never have to create natural objects like stone, vegetals, fabric, skin, wood, then it's maybe not the right software for you.

I have a doubt, I like CB but CB is only 2D, dont do seamless tileable and is 299$, so it's much more expensive than PST. Does this makes sense?

sama.van

yeah a little bit strange...

Do you have any wireframe + texture it will create?

Basically if your software create hipoly model with texture.
I will need to create the low poly model, Uvs, to bake your hipoly on my low poly hoping the hipoly is ok and will not create any bug... I will probably modify the texture as well.


Then yeah... I do not really understand how we can use it on game production.
I think screenshots in the gallery need to show more technical view from the result.

hipe-0

sama.van wrote: »

yeah a little bit strange...

Do you have any wireframe + texture it will create?

Basically if your software create hipoly model with texture.
I will need to create the low poly model, Uvs, to bake your hipoly on my low poly hoping the hipoly is ok and will not create any bug... I will probably modify the texture as well.


Then yeah... I do not really understand how we can use it on game production.
I think screenshots in the gallery need to show more technical view from the result.

For games:

1st option
PhotoSculpt can do hi-med-low(user defined) poly + all maps you need (normals (very nice ones!), depth, ao, spec, diffuse) all in one function (menu/file/save multiple)

2nd option
You can also save your high res model with texture into your 3d software (i love zbrush) and export or bake maps from here.

for both 1st and 2nd option you can have it "perspective croped seamless tileable" (one click) :thumbup:

"gallery need to show more technical view" : excellent idea ! I don't do games myself, does anyone can help?

renderhjs

A few cons I see compared to for example CB:

• Requires 2 taken photos which eliminates sources such as stock art, DVD texture collections, illustrations, free sources such as cgTextures.com. Because of that it takes more time to get the right 2 pictures for the particular project. This is a big deal for many CG artists as they do not always have the time and equipment to take those photos (nor do they always have the right environment around them).
• In comparison with CB there are less sliders to really adjust the output - artists want control in order to improve and to do something different compared to others or last time. A single button tool will never sell to artists because they feel to much limited with the tool, obviously to much buttons aren't good either but I think you tool needs a lot more controls and tools to satisfy the price. CB is great because it gives real time feedback and lots of knobs that are easy to understand.

I guess in the end your tool is in my eyes more of a technology than it is a real app - I think it needs to evolve more into something. For example I could imagine your technology more as a Photoshop plugin, the way it is now.

I also would like to see more examples in the gallery - it looks all very tech art. Maybe you are lucky and can get some good artists that like to take pictures and that know what to do with the resulting data in a engine or render.
If you want to sell a product to a artist a gallery is the most important feature - without quality examples people won't be impressed with it's possibilities.


Not the same type of app but somewhat related: I think this guy created a nice GUI, website and example screens on his page:
http://www.atangeo.com/examples/dragon
http://www.atangeo.com/screenshots/ferrari
he even had his thread here as well:
http://boards.polycount.net/showthread.php?p=1020422
I don't know if he is successful with his app (I hope so) but I think its a great example one how to start up something, have a good informal and structured page and a attractive price for what it does.

catstyle

wow really cool! yeah I can imagine used wisely this could be such an awesome time saver and a way to create some models that would take ages to recreate by hand

hipe-0

renderhjs wrote: »

A few cons I see compared to for example CB:

• Requires 2 taken photos which eliminates sources such as stock art, DVD texture collections, illustrations, free sources such as cgTextures.com. Because of that it takes more time to get the right 2 pictures for the particular project. This is a big deal for many CG artists as they do not always have the time and equipment to take those photos (nor do they always have the right environment around them).
• In comparison with CB there are less sliders to really adjust the output - artists want control in order to improve and to do something different compared to others or last time. A single button tool will never sell to artists because they feel to much limited with the tool, obviously to much buttons aren't good either but I think you tool needs a lot more controls and tools to satisfy the price. CB is great because it gives real time feedback and lots of knobs that are easy to understand.

I guess in the end your tool is in my eyes more of a technology than it is a real app - I think it needs to evolve more into something. For example I could imagine your technology more as a Photoshop plugin, the way it is now.

I also would like to see more examples in the gallery - it looks all very tech art. Maybe you are lucky and can get some good artists that like to take pictures and that know what to do with the resulting data in a engine or render.
If you want to sell a product to a artist a gallery is the most important feature - without quality examples people won't be impressed with it's possibilities.


Not the same type of app but somewhat related: I think this guy created a nice GUI, website and example screens on his page:
http://www.atangeo.com/examples/dragon
http://www.atangeo.com/screenshots/ferrari
he even had his thread here as well:
http://boards.polycount.net/showthread.php?p=1020422
I don't know if he is successful with his app (I hope so) but I think its a great example one how to start up something, have a good informal and structured page and a attractive price for what it does.

Thanks for sharing!

• Requires 2 taken photos: you're right all the way you need to shoot your own. But on the other side, you can imagine yourself in vacation of in a museum shooting stuff around in 3D, without any planning or complex setup hassle. "Oh I want that, let's shoot that in 3d now" and 10 s later you're done.
• more sliders: some PST users require more sliders too for displace maps. There will be more soon (with new bump map and displace map tabs). It's done and under testing. Thanks for sharing.
• real time feedback: I with I could test my normal map directly renered with photosculpt. That may come later?
• Photoshop plugin: good idea.
• "Maybe you are lucky and can get some good artists": I hope too :poly121:
• Atangeo: thanks for sharing!

hipe-0

catstyle wrote: »

wow really cool! yeah I can imagine used wisely this could be such an awesome time saver and a way to create some models that would take ages to recreate by hand

Thanks! I totally agree with you. :thumbup::thumbup:

Do you want to give it a go? Note that the 30 days trial has full save options, so you can test it with your own workflow.

If you come-up with something, you can share it here for others to see and there is a challenge you can apply your artwork to if you want . (win a full version)

hipe-0

Hi guys, hoping everyone is doing good?

Hot news: Here is a full review of PhotoSculpt Textures, featured by 3D World.

This is a great article by Ed Ricketts! What do you think?

http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010/7/10/read-now-the-full-article-from-3d-world.html

renderhjs

texture and modeling tool? oh dear

I still think the app. is useless as it is now because it comes with just 1 feature for a hefty price. Heck any artist here would use CB over this or max maya's included projection based modifiers to do related things but for the real deal and not as a gimmick.
It's just that I don't think that people here can't relate to your app much, it just doesn't offer enough value yet regardless of the price.

r_fletch_r

what confuses me about this is the 2 photo limit. Texture libs aren't going to provide suitable pics for this apps so you need to shoot your own, which means your not limited to 2 photos.

If this could take more than 2 photos it could get more interesting. the head demo is a good example of where you get a nearly but not quite result and you think if I had more photos this could be cool.

hipe-0

renderhjs wrote: »

texture and modeling tool? oh dear

I still think the app. is useless as it is now because it comes with just 1 feature for a hefty price. Heck any artist here would use CB over this or max maya's included projection based modifiers to do related things but for the real deal and not as a gimmick.
It's just that I don't think that people here can't relate to your app much, it just doesn't offer enough value yet regardless of the price.

Hi thanks for sharing this point of view and letting me answer this. :thumbup:

I think you may not have seen how different this software actually is. That's the first and only solution where you can have scanned "for real" 3d object or texture using 2 photos.

You're comparing Photosculpt with other software that FAKE:poly141: depth effect using only one image. PS uses two photos and complex computer vision algorithms. It's much more than "one feature". Under it's apparent simplicity it is much more complex than it looks.

Hoping this made sense?

hipe-0

r_fletch_r wrote: »

what confuses me about this is the 2 photo limit. Texture libs aren't going to provide suitable pics for this apps so you need to shoot your own, which means your not limited to 2 photos.

If this could take more than 2 photos it could get more interesting. the head demo is a good example of where you get a nearly but not quite result and you think if I had more photos this could be cool.

I agree with you.
This is just the beginning. PST was in beta for half a year and has reached v1.0 status since only a few months with a lot of work.:) I know (because I tried) that making it with more than 2 photos is more complex for many reasons so this explain my decision I took a year ago= I'll focus on 2 photos for now but it has to be good!

But don't worry, many people love the software already and what you'requesting is the number one improvement that people ask, so maybe in the future? Please be patient!

ceebee

Cool little piece of software dude. Keep us updated.

EzMeow

In my opinion, this tool is more suitable for post-production setup (3d matte painting with some relative movement..) than video game work flow. But even there, it has a big restriction : usually you create a matte to get something you couldn't film.

And about the fact that it would create a 10 sec texture, it would be....if you restrict yourself to keep the same lighting brightness/orientation as on the picture (or there is a "remove shadow" algorithm? O.o).

SHEPEIRO

i could imagine using this for heightmaps to use as zbrush stamps for details etc but i agree that atm it is too expensive and some of the results look very similar to CBs heightmaps if you put them through zb or similar...just doesnt seam worth it for the slight lack of accuracy

mortalhuman

If I tried to use this, my teammates would behead me :P Very "real art ONLY" :P For me, a tool is a means to an end. I would use it for generating stuff to help me make assets from scratch, but I don't think I would use it to generate any final model or final hi poly.

hipe-0

mortalhuman wrote: »

If I tried to use this, my teammates would behead me :P Very "real art ONLY" :P For me, a tool is a means to an end. I would use it for generating stuff to help me make assets from scratch, but I don't think I would use it to generate any final model or final hi poly.

Hi Mr "real art" , I may have something for you!?

I've just released a pack of 10 FREE :thumbup::) 3D Material shader with corresponding textures on my web site:

http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010/9/1/the-best-quality-seamless-tileable-3d-textures-ever.html

They are beautiful and of high quality standard (created with Photosculpt Textures v1.0 in minimal time)
see them here:


I don't think they are "too real art" for me. I just feel creative looking at them! :poly124::poly142::poly142:

You can download them now, but I recommend to simply start creating your own today with the 30 day trial of Photosculpt Textures. It's easy and fast. :thumbup:(www.photosculpt.net)

hipe-0

Hi again guys,

I'm posting some news about my software Photosculpt www.photosculpt.net.

New this month: my web site features a very nice :poly124: Flash 3D viewer in front page (see it at www.photosculpt.net) featuring some great models and textures created with my software.

This month I've also uploaded new FREE 1024x1024 textures for download. see them here: :thumbup:
http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010...s-10-pack.html

Here is a tutorial I made on how to create them / use them:
http://www.photosculpt.net/dump/2010...osculpt-t.html

I created a small library of textures now (46 at the time I'm posting).
http://www.photosculpt.net/gallery/3d-materials/

Also new this month: I'm selling now some of them here
http://www.photosculpt.net/buy-3d-textures-now/

Oh yes and don't forget there is a challenge every end of the month. http://www.photosculpt.net/challenge/
you can win a free license of Photosculpt (value Eur 99.00)

neolith

hipe-0 wrote: »

This month I've also uploaded new FREE 1024x1024 textures for download. see them here: :thumbup:
http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010...s-10-pack.html

Here is a tutorial I made on how to create them / use them:
http://www.photosculpt.net/dump/2010...osculpt-t.html

Unfortunately these links don't work.

hipe-0

neolith wrote: »

Unfortunately these links don't work.

oops, by bad, thanks Neolith ! Here are the corrected links:

Free textures :thumbup::thumbup:

http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010/10/7/download-our-free-textures-10-pack.html

tutorial: :thumbup:

http://www.photosculpt.net/dump/2010/9/3/tutorial-7-create-your-3d-material-shader-with-photosculpt-t.html

renderhjs

found today a similar tool:
http://www.heliconsoft.com/heliconfocus.html

its main focus is no sharpen different focused images though, 3d seems to be just a side feature. The main difference seems to be though that you can shoot with this tool from the same perspective but with different focus settings in your camera. So you would capture objects and things like this:


Sample 3D generated model:

and sample 3d video:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY7krV9sgjI&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

hipe-0

renderhjs wrote: »

found today a similar tool:
http://www.heliconsoft.com/heliconfocus.html

its main focus is no sharpen different focused images though, 3d seems to be just a side feature. The main difference seems to be though that you can shoot with this tool from the same perspective but with different focus settings in your camera. So you would capture objects and things

Wow they made a 3d model of it! I'm watching their progress since a year or so as a forum user pointed me to this. To be honnest I wasn't expectig this. And I love it. It's a bit of a crazy/novel/innovative :thumbup: idea to use differently focused photos with same perspective to obtain a 3D model. It's for sure quite cumbersome to do but, hey? Why not?

I'm not sure it will work well for large scale objects as depth of field is usually larger though but it's maybe very valid for macro objects. :thumbup:

I get to understand what they are doing as I've done focus stacking myself in the past using a photo retouching software using layers. It's really good for photographers to have a tool for that. :thumbup:

The funny thing is that the more unfocus the photos are and the more detailed the depth of the object must be (That's at least what I expect, I havent tried myself). Witch is really opposite of photosculpt (witch works better with sharp photos)

Good catch renderthis! :thumbup: