They are more predictable when posing and can be reposed without worrying about deformation unlike Voxels which when deformed cannot return to their original shape. Polygons are easier to deform and pose due to the fact that they have structure. Also if you bend a limb using voxels the overlapping voxels would intersect causing the intersected areas to fuse or weld together wouldn't they, unlike polygons which keep their shape and stay separate.
For example I don't see how it is possible to pose a voxel model and then have it return to it's original shape. The problem with voxels is in their ability to hold a structure when bent or shaped. I love Voxels for their ability to "unite or weld" 2 separate meshes together and for their ability to allow you to sculpt freely without worrying about deforming polygons or poly count. Below I have written what I see as the benefits and weaknesses of both polygons and voxels but I am in no way a technical person so my understanding of these technologies is limited.ĭo you think you might use ZBrush for ZSpheres and 3DCoat for Retopology, Painting and UV's? I have to wonder if ZBrush has made the right move to stick with using "Polygons" rather than adopting a Voxel type system, but then again Voxels have their own set of problems with Posing and deforming when posed, so I am really interested in the best approach. The ZBrush method of using polygons and ZSpheres for posing or the 3DCoat method of using Voxels? As an artist it is essential to pose my models and the ZSpheres look so tempting but in the ZBrush ZSphere II video am I correct in thinking they are adding muscle mass using a type of spherical polygon tool and not voxels?
That Video is really impressive but I am still torn between what is a better working method.
ZBRUSH ZSPHERE CODE
There's much to do and we should try to get the best out of 3DC with getting ideas also from other apps and help Andrew to code them the 3DC way.
ZBRUSH ZSPHERE FULL
3DC is full of fresh new Ideas but interface and functions feels a little bit cluttered. That's exactly what the new Zspheres will do but much much better.ĭon't think it is my intension to hype ZB no! But it is a great app and 3DC too! The advantage of ZB is speed and functionality because they're in the market of sculpting for a long time and wrote the fastest OpenGL engine I'd ever seen. If you familiar with ZB you know you can create an "Adaptive skin" with Zspheres and then after extracting it you can use your Zspheres as a rig for this mesh. And no I think Zsphere 2 is not only a muscle volume system but a muscle volume system to build AND deform meshes upon like Zspheres already do. Yeah you're right.the possibility of merging Volumes together in Voxel Sculpting is great!īut ZB Coders have announced the merging of Subtools with welding for next ZB release which is nearly the same. Hopefully he will take my advice so he can stay ahead of the other apps. One thing I mantion to Andrew a while back is to really build a basic rigging bone system for posing models like this. With Voxels I can bring in any model and merge it together and blend it into one solid model or a layered model with mant parts. The Zspheres 2 is nice but it is not Voxels and still is limited it is just a muscle volume system
0 kommentar(er)
