3dsMax2021 Auto-Retopology, nice

Autodesk has just released ServicePack3 - I know we have had here discussion about Retopo, this may be interesting for you. I must admit, this looks really excellent…



The best available retopology algorithm looks quite alright indeed. Sort of a blend between Quadriflow and Quad Remesher / ZRemesher.

I still think Autodesk should make a macOS version of 3ds Max. There’s an interesting amount of 3D creators to be gained there if they would optimize it for the new ARM Macs.

1 Like

“The best available retopology algorithm looks quite alright indeed. Sort of a blend between Quadriflow and Quad Remesher / ZRemesher.”

I do not know if one can so simply “blend” program algorithms, especially when they are not available. I think they have hired someone (apparently a very, very good, experienced algorithmic guy, there is only a handful of those sort who do Retopology on this planet) to create the technology from the scratch. I find the moment, when they show the hard-surface retopo, probably the best result i have ever seen. It is not only well done for photogrammetry trash, it has, in a classic Autodesk manner, a real CAD production value.

“I still think Autodesk should make a macOS version of 3ds Max. There’s an interesting amount of 3D creators to be gained there if they would optimize it for the new ARM Macs.”

When I see how much time we need to convert Exr-IO from PC to Mac (and we are by the way far from finished) and how much money we would need to get someone to port even the most banal stuff like help-dialog box or reading&writing/accesing files and rights on hard drive (all those stuff where different OSs have completely different way of dealing with) - it makes simply no sense to do it. It will never pay off - never.

For that reason, i think, AD has so far no intention to invest in a minor user base against a promise one day a huge profit will come out of this -> in the time where free Blender wracks havoc on the market and attract more and more people.
But who knows, AD seams to wake up 3dsMax lately…

Are you going to make some test to compare the results with ZRemesher/QuadRemesher?

1 Like

Looks very good. Especially the cad import :ok_hand:
and all non destructive with max modifier stack.

The whole non destructive modifier stack in max is something I really miss in b3d.
Hopefully the node everything project will improve b3ds workflow


My guess is that AD will merge Maya into 3DsMax at some point. It is possible that most of their user exodus happens from Maya to Blender, not from 3dsMax to Blender.

1 Like

That’s undoubtedly what they’ve done. With “sort of a blend” I meant that the result has characteristics of both ZRemesher / Quad Remesher and Quadriflow.

And yeah, a ‘3ds Mac’ will probably never happen. :neutral_face:

Haha, I’m afraid not. I don’t own 3ds Max anymore, and although I could install a trial version (?) I’m reluctant to install Autodesk bloatware on my PC. :slightly_smiling_face:

My thoughts exactly. 3ds Max currently still wins when it comes to modifier-based modeling. Blender misses essential things like Edit Poly, XForm, UVW Map modifier and many other Max modifiers.


Besides that, I think I did read that Max is a bigger moneymaker for Autodesk than Maya is, and has a larger userbase.

That is also not to mention that Max is incredibly extensible and is probably the app. in the best position to receive Houdini-like simulation and procedural features. Autodesk can only gain by no longer having their developers split between two full-fledged DCC apps.

1 Like

I doubt that that’s going to happen for a number of reasons: Maya and Max have different features, where Maya is more focussed on organic modeling and Max has a larger focus on the CAD side of things (e.g. Inventor, Autocad & Revit importing workflows). 3ds Max’ devs stated in their recent Q&A, if I recall correctly, that they do not plan on porting features over from Maya, since there is already quite a lot in the works. Besides, users would have to request those features on the ideas forum first.
Now then, consider what happened to Mudbox, it’s still dead and hasn’t been scavenged into Maya/ Max. Same thing, the tech is there, but nope.
Features aside, Max’ core is 32 bit precision, whereas Maya is 64 bit. For this reason, the fact that it has a much more matured Nurbs based toolset and that it originated from Alias| Waveform, which also made Alias. Maya is marketed towards the automotive industry with a tight integration with Alias. That’s just something that won’t easily transition into Max. Besides, the automotive industry has such a high revenue that it’s not a client worth losing.
Don’t forget the shitstorm Autodesk created when they killed XSI, you definitely don’t want to do that with such a large userbase as Maya or it’ll spell the end of Maya users’ “loyalty”, if any, towards Autodesk.

Actually, Autodesk seems to be using modular development. While cross platform communication could certainly be improved, when a team creates a module in Maya, for Bifrost for example, it is easier to port over to Max. At least, that’s my understanding of things. And yeah, Max sells most, probably due to being shipped with AEC bundles…?

Who uses Maya NURBS nowdays? No one. Almost all Car visualization you see is made with Max. Maya don’t have much businues in the car industry.

Anyone who model in Maya is idiots. Only reason they are using Maya is because that all they know.

I do use NURBS all the time and only don’t use it in Maya or Blender because they never got updated.

For many tasks subd is just not enough or even remotely useable and visa verse.

1 Like

Heheh, I haven’t seen this pop up for years now ! about fifteen to twenty years ago is when I read a lot of theories about “Mayax”. However you don’t blend two software like that : they have vastly different architectures and best you can do is probably share algorithms for modifiers/deformers, but you don’t simply “add max’s modifier stack” into Maya (or walk into Mordor).

That was not my point what so ever. It is silly to recommend that I suggested that one can take two softwares and blend them together. Not a constructive counter argument to note.

The point is, the pressure from Blender and Unreal will be unbearable for AD to keep Maya around after some time, therefor they will need to dissolve it, whether integrating some of the tech from Maya into Max, or dissolve the Maya team and utilize them in other AD products or just stop updating Maya.

The reason Maya is still around because Maya was the most advanced 3d application suit ( I started using Maya in 2000 for games and I believe it was v2 then) for a long time and a lot of game companies and studios developed a lot of custom tools around that pipeline, and there are some other specialized 3d applications (like simulation apps ) and renderers (like Renderman) that are well integrated into Maya. Some of those subscription customers will keep Maya alive for a while but not for too long, which was my original point.

The other alternative for AD is to rewrite Maya to make it a more modern software architecture and hopefully to make it cheaper to maintain, which will most likely not happen.

Cool it, that’s what I thought I read, you can just tell me respectfully I misundertstood. I didn’t mean to sound dismissive or belittling, sorry.

1 Like

Maya sucks anything other than rigging and animation. I’m still amazed to see people model in Maya.

Yes, nowadays that is the case but historically its toolset generally offered more. Imagine Blender vs Maya in year 2000.

1 Like

This looks really good but I have learned to become a bit wary of impressive auto retopo demo videos. But hard surface auto retopo really is the new Holy Grail it seems.

The reason Maya caught on so quickly and has held the top spot for so long in the animation and VFX industry’s was because right from the start it was aimed specifically for them. It was always designed to be highly customizable and work brilliantly as part of a bigger studio pipeline. It is great at packaging up and organizing huge complex blocks of data and efficiently and reliably flinging them around and mixing them about between multiple users and departments. Maya was always the big studio pipeline king. As a stand alone app and individual user experience it’s not so great. Especially working in a generalist capacity. At least from my personal perspectives of having worked often with Maya and Max in a generalist capacity for many years.

Pipeline integration is something that Blender more recently has really needed to catch up in. But studio pipeline integration is clearly a very big priority for Blender now and it’s really coming along recently. Maya however was originally designed with that as a major core objective.

Max was always much better as a stand alone generalist app I think. So more ideally suited for smaller teams and individuals looking to make high quality work with very tight time limits and budgets. So for me Max has always been the ultimate generalist artist tool. At least until Blender has matured so much in the last few years.

Max traditionally wasn’t ever so great for bigger sized animation productions. Especially anything involving character animation. Specifically the referencing system was just never there. I’m not sure if it has a robust animation rigging referencing system yet ? But it never did when I used it the most. So many agonizing hacks and jumping through hoops would always be needed. It was a whole skill set in itself. Although I always thought the actual rigging tools in Max from version 4 onward were superb and had some big advantages as well over Maya in general speed flow and ease of use. And the animation list controller in Max is just sublime. Fast efficient and and infinitely adaptable.

All the best to everyone. Stay safe and take care.

1 Like

There are more videos.