Mudbox's Future...

[Shawry]

hey guys, i was cruising around the usual 3d channels ( websites ) and saw that Zbrush has now released yet another version " R3 " as it has been labled.. with lots of kool new plug-ins / additions etc..

now.... its starting to make me wonder, what is the future of Mudbox going to be like?? Mudbox 2010 has no-Where near the amount of functionality that Zbrush does or can do, and one wonders whats next for mudbox..? i mean, im not trying to turn this into a debate of what software is better because there are certain things about Zbrush that i hate, hense why im using mudbox but, u have to admit.... Mudbox has some pretty big shoes to fill if it wants to catch up with Zbrush and be an ON-PAR competitor..

How are we supposed to use a program that isn't keeping up with its competition..?

just curious what you all think? I could be completely narrow minded but.. yeh.

[oglu]

the last mud version was more about texturing... and it does a great job on that part..
the uv tile feature is really cool... but most of us dont need 25 uv tiles for our work...

there also the mac version they had to port...
and now they are working on an linux version to...

so mud is coming along...
there is a long way to get close to z featurewise...
im shure they have a plan what to do... :D

i dont need most of the fancy z features anyway...

[beelzeboss]

The main things I miss from Zbrush are transpose master it is really nice to be able to pose you characters within the app without jumping through hoops and also subtool master a no fuss way of copying and mirroring you subtools as well as going up and down the division levels.

Things like the new Zspheres and the planar brushes are cool but I could take or leave it.

I am hoping there will be better tool management and some way to pose your sculpts in future versions of mudbox. Something that will make me want to upgrade from 2009.

[Pat]

Let me tell you what I think of Zbrush:

Yes, it has a million things it can do and yes, it has a transpose thingy and everybody who can operate a torrent download has it sitting on their hard drives but what is anybody doing with it?

1. How long does it take anybody to start getting used to Zbrush? A week, two weeks? I've watched people with little modeling or sculpting experience walk up to Mud and turn out amazing work within a matter of hours.

2. Why is everybody so nuts about transposing? Who cares? You can make posed statues... whoopdeedoo! Importing to Maya, rigging and animating... making your models useful for production is a considerably difficult process when Zbrush is part of your workflow. Either your models don't turn out, the OBJs crash Maya or Mental Ray just laughs at you and spits back a spikey mess.

Mudbox already has one distinct advantage over Zbrush; Mudbox is a sculpting application, it always has been and it always will be. Zbrush is a 2 1/2 D program that was developed in order to take advantage of Z-Depth to give 2D images more 3D qualities. The fact that you can sculpt with it turned out to be a fluke and instead of redeveloping the architecture of the program, they just started adding sculpting tools. It's like using a screwdriver to nail your pictures to a wall... you can figure it out but it would save you some time and grief if you just used the right tool for the job.

Don't get me wrong, Zbrush is cool, Zbrush is powerful and Zbrush is very, very popular but Mudbox is a completely different kind of program and each of them should be treated as such. As far as digital sculpting is concerned, I will choose mudbox over Zbrush, right up to the day that Autodesk buys Pixologic ;)

-P

[beelzeboss]

Sort of missed the point there. It is not a case of which is better it is a case of what can mudbox offer in the future what would you like to see added. I was a Zbrush user for years and have recently moved over to mudbox as my primary sculpting app as it is a great tool to use and has a perfect blend of sculpting and texturing tools for game character and environment work. But it is still lacking in certain areas.

One of those areas is the ability to start from nothing and create a finished posed piece without the need to go back and forth between apps.
This is suitable if you do work for 3d print. Zbrush offers this which is why I would like to see something along the lines of transpose in a future mudbox where I can take my sculpt and pose it for print or just a turntable without the need of taking it into maya/max, making a rig, skinning it, bringing it back into mudbox and fixing the issues then going back and forth to fix the pose if it is required for a client or I just decide I don't like it.
What transpose offers is the ability to do this on the fly with all of your tools at the same time and don't get me wrong this is far from perfect but it is a nice solution and something mudbox is lacking.

I am hoping 2011 may offer something like this as it will give me an excuse to upgrade from 2009 I have been playing with the 2010 demo and from what I have seen so far it offers some nice new features unfortunatly just not enough to justify the upgrade price for me personally.

[Shawry]

yeh...i never intended this thread to be a what program is better.. those debates are endless and pointless, every artist will always have a different point of view and no one can satisfy everyone.

To put it bluntly..... Do you guys think that if becuase someone like me wants to learn mudbox and knows bugger all about ZB, would that limit job opportunities, regardless of what ZB was origainly or built for or whatever, companies still use it more than Mudbox unfortunaly.

now.. at no point in time am i trying to P*ss anyone off, this is a personal question i would like some help with... I love mudbox, and i hope it takes over the competition, because it has the potential, i just want to see it happen.

[beelzeboss]

I don't think it will limit you I have always felt if you have an eye for art and 3d and are able to recreate forms moving between packages shouldn't be a problem.
The only hurdle you have is learning a new user interface, a new set of tools and customizing it so it works for you. The core principles will always remain the same.
Moving between companies you will usually find most companies will use different software and art pipelines anyway you just need to get yourself familiar with them.
So in short no it shouldn't limit you if you have the artistic abilities there.
Hope that helps.

[Pat]

I feel like you guys only read so far. With all due respect, I sidestepped the primary topic, yes, but the introduction leaves an open secondary discussion. I addressed the fact that the programs are different and one should use whichever they feel is necessary but my point is that one shouldn't be looking at Zbrush's present when thinking about Mudbox's future and using Zbrush as an introductory example when asking about Mudbox's future installments is akin, in my mind, to asking why Mudbox isn't like Zbrush.

Besides, the Software Suggestions (http://www.mudboxhub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129) thread already accomplishes the primary topic.

I don't mean to be argumentative, I just think there's more to a topic than the obvious.




To put it bluntly..... Do you guys think that if becuase someone like me wants to learn mudbox and knows bugger all about ZB, would that limit job opportunities, regardless of what ZB was origainly or built for or whatever, companies still use it more than Mudbox unfortunaly.



Most of the companies that come through to do presentations at our school (LucasArts, Pixar, Dreamworks etc...) have a long list of software they would like to see you being comfortable with and in the last few slideshows I've seen, Mudbox has been sitting there right next to Zbrush. They tell students that ultimately, they use proprietary software and all they really want to know is whether or not you have experience using software similar to their own.

Know what you know and be good at what you do as well as being personable and confident and you'll do just fine :)

[beelzeboss]

I read the full post maybe it was the way it was worded but all I got from the post was a rant against Zbrush and most I would have to disagree with. Were the questions there to be answered or rhetorical?

With regards to your recent post I half agree with you. The reason I used Zbrush as a point of reference is it currently has some useful features which Mudbox lacks so it is only natural to use that as a point of reference. But I agree that we should be hoping Autodesk are trying to think beyond what Zbrush has now and push its digital sculpting and its software further.

[Pat]

I guess my post reads as a little heated and for that I apologize. I spent ten weeks being hammered on by the Zbrush students and I let that slip a bit.

My point is simply that there's no point in worrying about what Pixologic is doing, Mudbox is a different program and will develop differently.

My statement for Shawry's question still stands, though.

[Shawry]

Thanks for the reply's guys.. it was only ment to be a simple question, and i appoligise for asking dumb questions and again appoligise if that singular dumb question has already been asked in another forum..

Now i don't have the luxury to read every single post on this entire forum, and if i have a question, i will ask it. and because im situated in a really small coastal town in Australia, we don't get to have big American Companies come to our extremely limited and half useless training colleges if at all for 3d.. its very hard to get decent training over here, and as a result we aren't very informed on what company uses what, all i have to go by is word of mouth from my other friends in different companies... their for thats how my dumb questions arise... lol

I agree on everyones points and have my own views, and i thank you guys for sharing them..
I think i can answer my own question now..

cheers guys.