A Brand New Way to Concept Sculpt by Kane Robson aged 6 1/2

You see this 6 yr old little monster above? That's my son Kane, who besides seemingly trying to send me and my wife crazy... is obsessed with art and has come up tonight with an amazing technique to break out of the box when concept sculpting. It's not often I see a technique that literally changes the way I sculpt them, but also I feel is so good that I am compelled to share it.

The theory behind it (that I'm sure Kane had no idea of when he come up with it tonight) is similar to when a 2d concept artist maybe use a series of random shapes and then similar to a Rorschach test 'see' the idea within it and then flesh it out. Sort of in a similar to one of my favourite apps 'Alchemy' does in 2D. The beauty of Kane's idea is that it's exactly the same thing but in 3D.

If you take note of the 1st few seconds of the video above, you'll notice I create a random shape in Zbrush (as Dynamesh works perfectly for this), and then use a series of random placements of lips and noses to create and interesting shape. Then I see in this some things I meld together with the clay build-up. I keep this up until the sculpt 'emerges' from the randomness. Then it's just your usual concept sculpting / speed sculpting.

Obviously this is not just limited to using noses and lips..you could use any low-ish res shape at all, but I urge you if you're a sculptor to give it a try. I ask only one thing that as my sons came up with this wonderful idea that he does get credit for it and not ripped off wholesale as has happened to idea of my own in the past. He's 6 years old and to be honest it'd be a bit fucking harsh if the 3d world starts using this and then 'forgets' the little boy who came up with this wonderful idea. I'm sure many will lay claim to this technique, but the bottom line is this...no one shared it with the digital sculpting world.period.

This could be done equally as well in 3DCoat as well of course....although not as easily in Mudbox as you'd be reduced to using vector displacement stamps and stencils.

Now in my workflow at the point this video gets to mid res / locked down(ish) I'd export to Mudbox and continue from there and only retop if the design was approved. (Until if / when mesh creation that could be used for this appears in Mudbox, which i would hope it does.) The strong part of this technique is that as artists we can often get locked into a family of shapes and forms that we find ourselves treading out time after time and that can lead to staleness. I often feel that models done in a group can end up feeling stale to me using the same shape language. This forces you kicking and screaming into new shapes and forms. To me that is probably the biggest change to my concepting workflow I can get!

Hopefully many of you can see the power of this way of concepting once you give it a try. I'm calling it The Kane Technique.

Wayne's review's :: Zbrush 4 R2(D2??)

The name of the next service pack???? lol

So what's the point in doing a review of software that's been out a fair few week's you may be asking? Personally I think if you're going to do a review of anything the lest you can do is use it for some length of time and give it a good shot. Now I know some of you think you know the content of this review and my feelings about r2(d2 lol) in advance...pretty easy to guess right? Wrong.

Some of you may not remember back in the dark mists of time I used Zbrush a lot from the early days of version 2, I released 2 DVD's teaching it (don't hunt them out they are crap and out of date...and also the company responsible hasn't paid me a royalty in about 7 years lol) and a massive brick like tome of a book on it. (That's worth hunting out as there's a lot of stuff in there you won't find anywhere else in regards to little tricks....but I warn you it's a heavy read.) Basically I know it well...it is only an idiot that lets his knowledge drop of an application, even if you 99.9999999% of the time use another such as Mudbox like I do. I always say to new guys and gals coming into digital sculpting that you really need to know both (and a bit of 3d coat won't hurt either!) as you don't want to wall yourself into one software or skill set. Being able to use more than one makes you more attractive to employers.

Normally each time I dare to write or mention the 'Z' word I get roughly the same amount of hate emails as a serial killer. But after all these years I have came to the conclusion 'stuff it, I have an opinion just as valid as everyone else, in some ways maybe a unique one. Although the following review means no more and no less than anyone else because opinions are like arse holes...we all have one.

So anyways.....on to the actual review:

As I've not reviewed anything since version 2 ...there is a fair bit to catch up on. But for the sake of length I'll keep to features from r2 and version 4 that I feel work well together in a workflow. So the model shown here (one of a number of doodles I did to test the features and workflows), uses most of them. I've ignores the new matcap lightcap stuff as its as much use to me as a chocolate tea cosy.

The good:

Dynamesh is a very cool feature, one that could almost have been made with the way I work in mind (you'll understand this if you've seen any of my timelapses). Its also a feature it would have been very easy to turn into a chore if anything other than the ctrl + drag in open viewport space was used to operate it. It responds well, although I found it needed tweaking for my needs, although I've yet to find a software that doesn't. Although most people seem to be obsessed with starting from a sphere, I find it much more powerful to start for either a very, very low poly cage or a Zsphere rig. This may be ironic to come from the guy who basically invented speed sculpting mostly from spheres lol.... but it makes more sense to start from a very basic sub 200 poly armature if it's a more complex shape.

Now i always loved Zsphere's so the new features they added last time did not go unnoticed by me. Although the 'new improved Zspheres' are not as intuitive as they could be out of the box. But I've always found Zspheres easy to control (even more so if you bear in mind how they actually work behind the scenes). The strong point of Dynamesh is the fact it gives you an even sculpting topology that's mostly quads. Although it does through in some triangles in there and some odd T shape intersections.

Now if you a person who wants to say sculpt or do your concept roughs in Zbrush and your main sculpting or texturing in Mudbox your going to have el problemo! Mudbox does not like T shaped intersections in your mesh and will warn you about this bad topology. You can import them but it increases the change of map extraction errors. Obviously an interaction with other sculpting apps is not top of Pixologic's list of priorities (although if it's to be a serious pipeline orientated app then it must, as there is more than just Zbrush used in major pipelines! But apps have been removed from pipelines for lesser problems.) My suggestion would be to improve het remeshing used to make it more pipeline friendly as you can bet you arse that Mudbox won't be the only app Dynamesh models will prove troublesome for. I wrote a plug-in for Mudbox to solve this automatically by remeshing...no I'm not making that available as it means I have a solution no one else has

It amazes me how often people forget the clip brushes, they are a very useful tool and as many of you are aware makes hard surface sculpting a no brainer. In contrast to Mudbox where it's certainly possible (I've done it many times), but requires far greater degree of brush control.

The boolean stuff (or stuff I asked to be added around version 2 lol)..

Like the lathe brush a Boolean feature was one I banged on about to Pixologic years back. chances are they ignore me, forgot, then came up with the idea themselves. I count this as part of the Dynamesh feature set, it's a very powerful feature and I'm surprised no one has discovered how it can be used for joints when making toy figure proof version. (A little Wayne hint there). Although it goes without saying that you're not going to want to do a Boolean operation between two very high meshes or that's asking for trouble!

So if you combine the whole Dynamesh toolset with Zspheres clip brushes and hard surface brushes it can be used very easily to come up with concepts for later refining. This to me is R2(D2)'s strength right now. It also now has a far more useful feature set for those working for eventual 3D Printing.

The bad:

yep you knew I would find some stuff bad or annoying...so here's the things I feel that are either weak areas or need improvement on.

The Viewport:

yes it looks very ice and all, but often the model bears little resemblance to how it will look at render time in a dedicated app such as Maya, Max or Softimage. This is sort of a biggy as I do not like having to guess how my model will turn out. At very least it needs a less flashy more accurate presentation version you can switch to. If you do not believe me, do a famous persons likeness then switch to you main rendering app.

Texturing:

Jesus Christ that needs a total revamp! For texturing at high level Zbrush isn't going to cut it these days with Mari, Mudbox and 3D Coat all able to outperform. Its needs dumping and a proper texture based workflow added with multiple channels.

Topology / Retopology:

With all this Dynamesh stuff retopology is becoming more and more a must have, and it must be easy for users to pick up and do without needing to spend either ages doing it, or read a manual the size of the encyclopaedia Britannica. Topogun does it well, 3D Coat does it well... Without good topology stuff out of Dynamesh isn't much use, you wouldn't want to animate or rig and skin a mesh it produces. The current method of retopology in Zbrush is widely accepted as total crap. I agree with that opinion, no one in their right mind would use that as their chosen method of retopping unless they were forced to....at gunpoint .....by Seal Team 6 lol.

Final Thoughts....

I would say to new sculptors don't think that Dynamesh will act as a get out clause forever having to learn proper poly modelling or good topology as those are vital to any pipeline. Some stuff is just easier to poly model accurately. It is not the be all and end all, and pipeline will not adjust to fit a single program (all be it a popular one such as Zbrush).

This is a good solid release and to be honest Dynamesh and its related features make it worth it alone as it frees you up when concepting. Yes I'll certainly be using it for my concepts as I'd be stupid not to until a faster or better way comes along. But the big secret it's in no company's interest to promote is that instead of using sculpting apps on their own, if combined you find they are much more than the sum of their parts. You can then have some unique things in your pipeline that none of the apps are capable of on their own.

So while I'm still a Mudbox guy for sculpting, yes I will use Zbrush (and 3D Coat) to get models done and use each application to its strengths. I see the competition between the sculpting apps as a positive thing as it mean they are all forced out of any temptation to stagnate and to provide us with new and better tools. That's makes us the artist the winner. Life would fast become boring with only 1 sculpting app around, plus it keeps all the developers on their toes. Which is exactly where development teams should be. If they are too relaxed, then that's bad for us. If I were a carpenter I wouldn't limit myself to just a saw, I'd also want other tools as well. I'd want to be competent with all my tools so I could do my job better and more easily. To be frank all the 3 sculpting apps are more than capable these days and all are used in production pipelines every single day around the world. What you choose ifs up to you and what you need to do at that moment. They are all capable of good art in capable hands.

Hopefully this is as even handed a review as is possible. I have done my best not to be biased one way or another. Yes the new release if very good, no its not perfect and won't make the lame walk or the blind see. But if it did...well that'd be boring for any app and the instant death knell to all development. I don't know about you, but that's not something I'd like to see. Its the imperfections that often help us to produce the best art.

Lastly Pixologic should release a service pack...called R2 D2 just for shits and giggles.

Mudbox Life Saver Mini App

okay dokey boys and girls time for a nice little life saving app for all you mudbox users.

Now you know the one thing annoys all of us that have used mudbox and has can be a right old nuisance in production? When the mudbox preferences get corrupted and can cause all manner of crazy errors and bugs to crop up that use up your time, my time, autodesk tech support's time...time better spent in a much more productive way, so when it crops up basically everyone is the loser.

So what casues it?

the preference files can become corrupt from time to time for any one of a shed load of reasons. Wher they do mudbox can have one of about 200 hissy fits throwing what seems like bugs but are actualy due to the preferences being corrupt. Hence the #1 rule if your having a problem with a bug in mudbox is you'll be asked if you have 'deleted the mudbox folder in your documents folder' So that this is then recreated next time mudbox starts up and usually 90% of the time solves theproblem you may be having.

So as I had a couple of mins spare, I've knocked up a very simple EXE that'll work on win 7 and delete the contents of the Mudbox folder in your Documents folder (I've been using a varation on this since the 2009 version and just never got around to sharing it.) Yes you can do ths by hand, and no its not very hard at all to code. (its simply a fact that I don't think anyone bothered to upload it for anyone to use lol.) One good thing is its both 'future proof' and 'past proof' and doesn't matter what pc version your running 2009,2010, 2011 subscription advatage pack, the latest one...whatever...it does not care.

DOWNLOAD

So to remedy this, here ya go,....it comes complete with absolutely no tech support at all (so please no emails if you are having issues) and if you can already set up a batch file instead to do it, go right ahead. This is for those of you who want a quick 1 click fix and who maybe aren't coders, chances are if you are and your a mudbox user, you've probably wrote your own anyway.

Just stick it on your desktop, double click on it when needed and it will come up wiht a promot asking you if your sure (just in case you hit it by accident) , proviign you say 'yes' it will then proceed to delete everything in the "Users\Documents\Mudbox" folder along with the folder itself for the current user. (so please remember to back stuff up if you have other stuff in there if you want to keep it, you shouldn't really be storing models etc there anyway!)

I also have a far more elegant solution that restores your brush prefernces and settings but alas it'd be a nightmare to convert so it'd be useful for everyone else on the planet except me. Should I ever get time I'll be sure to upload it.

'Cathedral' ::: Interior Establishing Shot mock up

A very rough mock up using a still of the 1st interior establishing shot. with roto as rough as a donkeys arse. Final will be full animated,tracked & cleaned up. There will be about 15-18 shots in all in my version of this.

Now, see if you can spot the hidden 3d max teapot ;)

Wayne's Reviews:: Render man pro server & Renderman for Maya

To most digital sculptors Renderman makes them think of one thing....fast rendering of displacement maps. So it may surprise you to learn that for me that's not the thing I like most about it. My favourite feature in the pro server / Renderman for Maya combo I'm using is the Renderman relighting controls. As I mentioned in my last review lighting a scene can be a pain sometimes if you're not getting the right feedback from your viewport. Renderman has a nice way around this by bypassing the viewport altogether if you wish and relight fairly fast. This mean you get to see EXACTLY what you're going to get at render time and not a viewport approximation.

So the ability to change your lights settings, colours etc is a great boon, although there are certain times when you will need to rebuild your shadow map. One thing would say is that for a scene such as the cathedral you really are going to have to wait a fair old bit. Because even though there is no displacement at all in the cathedral render in either Renderman or Mental ray version (its basically a game model on steroids), when your pushing that much information around even Renderman is going to take a while to catch its breath.

When Pixar were nice enough to let me have a free copy of the latest Renderman for a while I have to admit coming from non Renderman compliant render engines it was a culture shock. Renderman is at its best when arguably it's at its least 'intuitive' to a non coder. If you are prepared to write your own shaders, you can really make it do tricks as can be seen on virtually 80% of all major Hollywood films. If you don't then you are I feel almost gutting th heart out of the render engine in some ways.

While I was using Renderman for Maya, I was also using Renderman pro server alongside some apps of my own that aren't available publicly such as Exodus. This enabled me to take a look at pro server in a less modicodelled environment and use it 'in the raw (and by that I mean without a UI...not naked lol).

I did find both a bit of a pain to set up, although some of that was due to my extremely flaky development machine which is renowned for throwing errors no other machine on planet earth seems to. The one area I would like to see improved is the installer as messing around with environment variables if something goes wrong is no one's idea of fun! But again Pixar came to the rescue and managed to get me up and running in no time with some of the best customer support I've seen anywhere .

So how did I cope with having to use Renderman in Maya when I am mainly used to 3dmax and as a Mental ray user? I'm not going to lie and say it was all very easy , there was a lot of information I needed to take in, in what was a very short time. If you're looking to pick up Renderman and use it in a day or two to its best from nothing then you'd going to be mistaken.

Renderman needs time to be learned and does to some degree at least ask (rather than demand) you to do some coding to get the very best out of it. It's not the fastest ray tracer out there and physically accurate lighting and shading out of the box while not impossible is far harder to achieve than mental ray. But comparing Renderman and Mental ray, although both are render engines is like comparing a fish to an apple. (While both apples and fish are good at being apples and fish, but you wouldn't want a fish on your fruit salad.)

There is no 'best render engine' the best render engine is the one you have and the one you can get the results you require out of it the easiest. I wouldn't call Renderman a good engine for a beginner to learn unless they have a lot of time and are prepared to go quite deeply into rendering theory. Its only as good as the artist behind it and not a magic wand. Overall I like Renderman and can see m using it for jobs that fit it best, the same as I use mental ray for jobs that fit that best. (Plus a little secret...no one ever said you can't mix and match passes from both engines.)

Renderman's renowned fast displacement times are not ironically as big a deal for me as you would think, as that's a very small piece of a larger puzzle that is your rendered frame. But a nice plus is that Renderman can render a Mudbox vector displacement map without any special shaders or complex set up. It's a tried and production tested industry standard render engine an as you would expect it does what it says on the tin.

Wayne's Reviews:: Autodesk Maya 2012

When it comes to the big 3 apps (3D max, Maya and Softimage) I'm a max guy. It fits well with me and I know it very well. What's less well known is I actually stated in 3d (if you discount Bryce etc....) in Maya back in version 5 I think it was. After a brief flirtation for 2 weeks with 3dmax years earlier and famously throwing it at a wall in my flat and tell a mate 'it'll never catch on', when I came back to 3d I went for Maya.

Why did I choose Maya? It has a very simple and very stupid reason as its answer: because It was used by ILM lol. As I was (and still am) a massive star wars fan, if ILM used it, then to me 'not knowing a thing at the time' 3d mind, it must be the best. So I went on to use it for about 3-4 years and became back then rather proficient with it I like to think. So I can hear your brains asking...why did you move to 3dmax then? well actually I didn't I moved to Softimage 1st, because I'd worked out that while knowing 1 3d app was good, if you knew all 3 big apps you were far more marketable as an artist.

The move to 3D Max came only after realising that it was the only one of the big 3 left that I'd not went in-depth with, and I had kept putting it off until I had no choice. I still had bad memories of it back before there were any tutorial on the internet about 3d max (if there were I never found them!) To put this into focus, back then the internet was seen as for star wars fans, porn and scientists...in that order.

So although I use max more than any other app (yes including Mudbox), I have also kept a hand in with the ones I use less often, because only an idiot learns something only to let his skills fade away. Maya when it comes to films is seen as king of the hill. Part of this seems to be that clients ask firms to use Maya as they probably think like I did that if ILM uses it 'then it must be the best and do shit nothing else can'. So firms use it because their pipeline has evolved over years to be based on Maya and that's not an easy thing to change, and maybe because everyone else also uses it.

Maya and me are like brothers...in that at least twice a week I want to tear its throat out lol. Maya can do some crazy things at times that seem to be for no rhyme or reason. Yes it does a lot of things well and to be frank I'd far rather be painting skin weights in Maya or Softimage that 3d max, ut there are still many things that make you want to shake it until it bleeds to ask why it does crazy things that are so easy. (Don't get me started on its 'selection highlighting that doesn't highlight until your bloody actually ON a vertex...near won't cut it...it has to be ON, which negated the whole idea of a visual selection aid really. So bottom line is that in many ways like my brother, from time to time Maya drives me insane. The rest of the time we get on nicely and it does its job.

The viewport support for PTEX is a very good idea and one 3D Max should steal blatantly for a future release. As mentioned weight painting in Maya is far more painless, and it works far better with a graphics tablet than the max ui does in my opinion. With MEL and python you have powerful control over scripting to help your pipeline and even develop your own tools using that or the SDK. Also a side effect of this is that it's easy to get help or information if you're stuck on something with MEL as there are a lot of people with high end knowledge of it.

Maybe it's just me, but the UI seems 99.999% the same as when I used it back in version 4 or 5.... there is an argument for 'if it isn't broke don't fix it, but some tweaks would be nice guys. I also far prefer Mayas control of render passes over max's, some stuff more complex passes are far easier to do (althoughn3d max scene states also help vastly in this for max users).

When people ask me which big app to learn I always say 'all three' as in this financial climate you don't want to make yourself unattractive to an employer as some places still refuse to let the artist choose their app they use. So I would say to the Maya dev team listen to your users biggest complaints and address them as you are able to, this is advice for app dev teams really. it's far too easy for heads to go down and almost a siege mentality of 'us against the users' to start. ...and that never ends well for anyone.

Maya has some nice viewport controls and although some could use further refinement its nice to see some parts of it heading in the direction I personally would like it. But not everyone may want Maya to head in the direction I want, I'm only 1 bloke sitting here typing , not a demigod. So while there is nothing to make me want to change for max to Maya 2012, if your a Maya user then it's all probably good...baring that crazy shit it does every now and again of course.

The next review's will be Renderman and Zbrush, (and I won't be approaching it in anything other than an even handed way I can promise you that)