![]() ![]() ![]() It is probably possible to leverage vertex colors for that, but it probably isn't as fast or smooth as what can be done in Mudbox or Zbrush. If anything, the weakest aspect of Blender sculpting is not really sculpting itself but rather the lack of polypainting/ptex. I know that a lot of people are fine with the "bruteforce" approach of sculpting in a separate program, but being able to work non-linearly on both a low and highpoly model is really fantastic. There are two performance reasons for that : 1 - Blender is not able to edit/deform/manipulate models as dense as what Mudbox or Zbrush can do, and 2 - while functional, the multi-level subdivision/sculpting modifier is not stable or responsive enough once past a few subdivisions. I've never used MudBox and am not sure how it processes geometry but believe it is similar to ZBrush. Overall I find the benefits of being able to sculpt directly into one's main program far outweigh the lack of special features found in Mudbox or Zbrush. Both serve their purposes, but the primary difference is the different way models are processed which allows ZBrush to have an edge specifically in sculpting high-res geometry. I still have to investigate to see if there is a way to setup a dedicated upres/downres brush to work faster - but even without that, one can get great results out of the default brushes. Is like the one on 3DSMAX, but in Mudbox would be much more usefull and powerfull. While mudbox and 3Dcoat have a quick to pick up UI and Navigation I find them lacking in many areas of trying to create something. I find Zbrush to be much more artist/sculptor friendly than mudbox or 3Dcoat. The one tip I would give is to use the Nudge brush gently over an area in order to increase resolution when/where needed. We have a few people in the office that use mudbox as well. It sounds painful at first, but I find that this actually leads to very clean and lightweight models, looking as good if not better than the very dense models done in either Zbrush (dynamesh soup) or Mudbox (needlessly high levels of uniform subdivision). The good side effect of this is that it will force you to work in a very efficient manner, upresing (to add detail) and downresing (for clean surfacing) regions of a model as you progress. With that in mind, you will have to embrace Dyntopo sculpting. There are two performance reasons for that : 1 - Blender is not able to edit/deform/manipulate models as dense as what Mudbox or Zbrush can do, and 2 - while functional, the multi-level subdivision/sculpting modifier is not stable or responsive enough once past a few subdivisions. Where is Zbrush used, Is Zbrush For Free, Autodesk Mudbox Mudbox is a 3d sculpting software offered by Autodesk and, the Zbrush., ZBrush ZBrush is a state-of. ZBrush isn't really a true 3D sculpting package. One thing to take into consideration is the fact that Mudbox is solely meant for sculpting high resolution models, and perhaps baking them into a low resolution mesh. I think the biggest paradigm shift lies in the fact that Blender will force you to work on raw sculpts as opposed to working with levels of subdivision. ZBrush has a lot of features that I never really used, nor did I have any reason to. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |