You’re welcome!
Inspiration-control is an art by itself. If you manage to control it, you’ll have maximum success!
There is no point to continue this conversation, as it seems you prefer to guess and make quick conclusions in a personal level instead of asking, while you don’t seem to respect the other person’s views at all. Goodbye and thanks for chatting.
I dont know how you can prove someone copied you or not, or that you created/invented that “look” via displacements.
I can’t, I don’t have to. I don’t claim copyrights on displacement. (LOL) But I did write a tutorial, I did post it in zbrush forum as well, before others start posting similar things*.
-No, zbrush doesn’t provide a decent control on UVs.
You keep posting nonsenses about zbrush, on how better it is than blender.
You are posting mealea Ying’s 2.5d work without having her permission, obviously. Which is quite irrelevant to any UV based displacement. You also posted a UVmaster map. What this has to do? Impressive auto UV tool with minimum control. Align these UV vertices to a geometrical pattern and I may change my mind. (group Uvs is the most you can do -GUV)
I prefer blender than zbrush, I have them here, working on both of them (and 3dcoat actually). If you don’t like my opinion don’t start spoiling my methods.
*simple base meshes, with nice UVs and ready to export! No retopo. In ten mins work. Topology is as clean as possible. You don’t get it, you don’t understand the method I proposed. I shared it with all blender And zb users. You are just spoiling my work.
You are deeply confused. Or, you have a plan on posting all these. I don’t get it.
I hope you can see this more as a friendly discussion and dialog, rather than a debate about who is right or wrong.
No, I can not.
A personal favorite of mine is called Roadkill UV (its free) (stand alone or as plug in)
See:
As I was afraid of
You don’t know much about blender, obviously.
Zbrush can control UVs and generate them based on polygroups…or didnt you know this?
You keep avoiding the information I am SHOWING YOU, and the pictures where I SHOW you the difference. At this point all I can do is write off what you say as egocentic and stubborn, an unwillingness to be objective or mature. If you cant show me otherwise, you resort to selective reading followed by what I can only perceive as a clear superiority complex.
You keep posting nonsenses about zbrush, on how better it is than blender.
What is nonsense? You keep saying that but you havent PROVEN or shown otherwise. You are not meeting me half way here. All you do is say “nonsense, no nonsense, you dont know anything”. The difference is I am showing you, and yet you still want to dictate discussions about sculpting while writing off everything else as nonsense. Now that IS nonsense.
Zbrush is a better at SCULPTING details especially where alphas are concerned at the moment. You refuse to accept what should be a clear and obvious fact. I didnt say Zbrush is better at everything, but I did focus on detail levels when sculpting. Zbrush is a better sculpting program!!! It is not a cg generalist application, but it does specialize in sculpting. Sorry you are in denial about this.
You are posting mealea Ying’s 2.5d work without having her permission, obviously.
- I can post any video thats made available to the public and allows itself to be embedded on websites and forums. If a user does not wish for this, there are option toggles in the youtube controls.
But thats just a straw man argument on your part because… - The point of the video was to SHOW you how 2.5d in zbrush can be used to generate that level of detail with precise CONTROLS and even, yes, bake a displacement map from it.
You were implying it couldnt be done outside of blender.
I proved you wrong on that front and you now just making up excuses. Cut it out. This isnt a competition.
Which is quite irrelevant to any UV based displacement. You also posted a UVmaster map. What this has to do? Impressive auto UV tool with minimum control. Align these UV vertices to a geometrical pattern and I may change my mind. (group Uvs is the most you can do -GUV)
Did you even bother watching the video? Apparently not. The UVs are broken up on the low poly mesh via polygroups… users can select the faces in which to convert to polygroups. Then the user can mark the seams, just like in Blender. When they are ready, the uv islands can be moved around, rotated, scaled…ect
But yeah according to you thats not having control over UVs.
I prefer blender than zbrush, I have them here, working on both of them (and 3dcoat actually). If you don’t like my opinion don’t start spoiling my methods.
Well obviously you like Blender over zbrush, no one is saying you cant. I prefer to eat pizza over salad, but I wont go around arguing Pizza has more vitamin A than a salad. Its calling being objective. You can like Blender, I like blender too, but the difference is I wont lie to myself and say that Blender is better at something when its not. How is blender supposed to get better if you keep up that bias and that level of denial.
Its simply not being intelligent.
No one is protesting your opinion. You on the other hand are protesting mine and ignoring the information, pictures and concrete information I am proving. Show how its wrong if you dont think its right, or say “I dont THINK its right”. Instead you make claims of “nonsense” and leave no room for your word choices to be seen as opinion. I like that you have an opinion, but know how to present them in a constructive manner please.
*simple base meshes, with nice UVs and ready to export! No retopo. In ten mins work. Topology is as clean as possible. You don’t get it, you don’t understand the method I proposed. I shared it with all blender And zb users. You are just spoiling my work.
You are deeply confused. Or, you have a plan on posting all these. I don’t get it.
For complex and detailed sculpts, you generally need to retopologize and UV that retopology. You might have a method which allows you to render some guys head in cycles as a static image, but you have to realize there are limitations to this. Animation, exporting to real time rendering engines, workflows that require more than one application. You seem stuck on one method, one style, and want to insist that its perfect for everything else. So no you dont get it.
But see, this isnt a conversation about your work, or your style. Thats just a tangent that has no value in regards to the larger subject of my post. The focus is on the detail and interpretation of how an alpha in one applications conveys far more detail information than in another. You might not need that for your style and type of work, but dont go around assuming everyone does what you do, or that your needs are their needs. Its just silly.
No, I can not.
Then that is sad, both on an intellectual level and on a maturity level. You said you dont like the Zbrush forums because of competition over there, yet here it seems like you want to turn this into the same thing.
I have no ego to confirm here, just a dialog. If I can learn something new from it, all the better. If my examples are wrong, and theres a fix im not seeing, even better again. I’m not stuck on “being right”, I just want to find information, talk about an obversvation, and hope that the sculpting tools get better BECAUSE I do like blender and working within it.
I am sorry you cannot share in that mentality.
As I was afraid of
You don’t know much about blender, obviously.
I could say the same about you, your knowledge of zbrush and professional level pipelines.
Though you know what? It doesnt serve a purpose other than confirm whatever bias you might want to prove. If you just want to shut others up and pretend you are right, then your comment is telling enough, and you can walk away with that assumption if you choose to.
xrg, I dont think myself or Michalis would have started this “dialog” if there wasnt something to care about. If you personally dont care, then dont read it and dont respond.
Simple logic.
Trust me, if this was the “Zbrush vs Blender Quote Salad Extravaganza” thread I wouldn’t even click on it out of morbid curiosity – you’re hijacking the Blender 2.67 thread though. :mad:
QFA 
Guys, get your own thread and continue your marriage quarrels there 
Nonsense, have you read the last 6 pages? There are multiple discussions happening left and right. Furthermore it wasnt supposed to be a zbrush vs blender discussion, but an alpha behavior discussion. Some people just have a bad habit of turning into extremes of black vs white.
I think its kind of childish when you start implying that discussions, when slightly drawn out, are quote unquote “marriage quarrels”. Dont like it, dont respond. Because what you are doing is trolling as a means of response.
Anyways, I think its great that with the launch of 2.67, users can have the ability to discuss where it goes from there and any implications of what could be in 2.68, even to the point of inquiring about further development.
I think the problem isn’t so much that you are discussing, but rather that you seem to have different ideals in a sculpting program? Like, Michalis seems to prefer a certain way blender does things, and SaintHeaven feels that same workflow can be achieved in zbrush, and even if not zbrush is still very superior in certain workflows…
Also, psychoanalysing people during friendly debate isn’t very diplomatic. Rather it’s more like intimidation, and will be received as such.
I also don’t think salad actually has more vitamin A than pizza, considering it’s a vitamin that resides in fat. Vitamin C would be more appropriate.
deleted. can´t be bothered.
actually a 14" thin crust cheese pizza only has around 8% daily value of vitamin A whereas a green leaf salad of lettuce and kale with some grated carrot and a sprinkling of dried herb will provide upwards of 300% DV of vitamin A
@briliantApe and all other BA friends here.
If someone tries to spoil another’s quotes or work, you should notice and comment it.
If someone tries to spoil any ideas on blender development, well, nevermind.
@SaintHaven & Michalis - Guys, guys, let’s just chill and step back for a sec, see if we can’t come to a win-win 
Yes, the core subject was an important one, being ultimately based on how Blender and ZBrush handle different things like Alpha-based detail sculpting and how they handle UVs - though please correct me if I’m wrong, I lost track of your discussion slightly at one point - which could result in some improvements being made to everyone’s favourite FOSS 3D program. But the problem is it’s turned into a giant game of Pong. And yes, I know what Pong is
In the end I think the best you can both do in this situation is agree to disagree and leave it at that, regardless of whether or not someone is ignoring proof or doesn’t know much about Blender.
Also, I think the “marriage quarrels” comment was mostly meant to be taken as a joke. It definitely eased the tension slightly for me as a reader
To go off topic from recent posts and post something about 2.67 thread … - what is good new tool is convex hull.
Quick easy way to make base mesh for deform modifier and to create lo-res mesh from hi-poly.
It seems to be accessible from space bar only, is there a menu select somewhere???
Oddly, it seems it’s only in the space bar search, not really good for someone simply ignoring this usefull function exist if it’s not available in any menu.
How can I select an edge in edit mode and ask for being 2meters ? In edit mode, right?
I can’t find a way except of P it, object mode/resize. Which is rather ridiculous.
Yeah, only in Object mode you can rescale an object to a precise number from the N panel.
But when it comes to rescaling edges in Edit Mode , there’s nothing when you need precise numbers, you need to calculate everything yourself.
Edit Mode Blender can display the length of an edge ( N panel -> enable “length” , with the recently added Ruler can measure the length of an edge too, but there’s no way to rescale that edge to a precise number without having to make the calculations manually
So i take as an example Blender tells that your edge is 4.992 meters but you want it to be exactly 2.25 meters, so you’ll need to divide 2.25 by 4.992 = +/- 0.4507 , and so press S then type 0.4507
A functionality to allow this kind of scaling in edit mode would certainly be really helpfull at gaining time
Indeed so.
I’m just learning my cousin blender, she’s interesting in architectural modeling. This is the first she asked.
Is blender a cad app? Every 3d apps should be.Why not?
So, if we have to pay someone to do this, please say so. Ask money for blender and turn it to a productive app.
If you happen not believing in a capitalistic economy system, please say so. Everybody is accepted in a democratic community anyway.
A community that wants to survive, please don’t you ever forget it.
You could also select the edge, press S and immediately click to confirm. In the bottom left you will then get this panel in edit mode:
However, even with this panel, you can not enter the exact number you want. You would still need to type the calculations you described above in the field of the axis (and potentially change the orientation to local), so it’s not really better then just calculating manually.