Mudbox

Yeah, I meant to post about this earlier on today. Heard its better than zbrush too.

A lot of our guys swear by it, and I think we’re considering getting it for hi-poly stuff.

How did your guys get on the beta program?! :evil:

Good question. I will find out. Watch this space.

I don’t think he’s coming back lol.

does anybody know any good tutorials for it i know its so new but just the basics????

Ok, I’m back. Right… the um… ahhhh… what was the question again?

I think most folks problem with ZBrush is that the interface is confusing and counter intuitive, its an amazing app also. Mudbox was designed by artists for artists from the ground up, and it shows, its a joy to work with and easy to get to grips with from the get go. There is now a fully functioning trial version up there to try out too. Good price point too, all thats missing is texture painting and we’re away!

Hmm… ZBrush is altogether a bigger app than this, comparing the two head on seems a little strange. Mudbox is pretty much a sculpting tool only, whereas ZBrush has so much more to offer than that. I’d been using ZBrush for a while now, and it really is great. I’ve downloaded the trial of Mudbox, and it is more intuitive than ZBrush admittedly, but hardly "better" just because it’s a little easier to get to grips with. Almost like calling MS Paint better than Photoshop because it does a subset of the job Photoshop does, but does it well and is intuitive about it. They both do sculpting very well and there’s not much to choose between them on that front.

The difference is: Mudbox costs more than ZBrush and has a fraction of the functionality.

Mudbox is worth the extra money IMHO because it is far more usuable for production artists who don’t have time to learn overblown new interfaces and nomenclature to do basic high res sculpting, which most 3D artists will use it for. ZBrush doesn’t have a true perspective viewport, Mudbox does aswell as standard orthographic views. Mudbox supports 3D Photoshop style layers which is an incredibly powerful asset when modelling especially when used to generate normal maps. As far as I can see, all it is really missing is the texture painting tools of ZBrush and we have a winner, from an artists point of view.

I learnt pretty much everything I needed in order to sculpt and generate normal maps in ZBrush in less than 2 weeks. It was finicky, but worth it once done. Seems strange to me to have a sculpting tool that doesn’t have texture tools as a lot of people sculpt and paint as they go along. Paying more for a product that does so much less because of a week or two learning curve seems … well…

The lack of perspective views IS annoying, and the 3D layers is also very cool. Having said that, ZBrush 2.5 will be free to owners of 2.0, and will have all that and more. Now it’s just a matter of waiting for it to be released! (taps fingers on desk)

I agree though, I think Mudbox will get a lot of converts from ZBrush from all those who are put off by the interface, which I also agree is appalling at best. Horses for courses. Think it was just the line "Everyone seems in agreement that Zbrush is very bad compared to it." which surprised me as Mudbox has a tenth of the functionality of ZBrush.

http://206.145.80.239/zbc/showthread.php?t=42491

Enough said.

Everyone seems in agreement that Zbrush is very bad compared to it.

[/quote:4fdb144c65]

Who is ‘everyone’? Z-Brush is a fantastic app. Have you seen the new Z-Brush 3 videos? I have used Mudbox, and despite the fact that I never got it working properly on my laptop because it was incompatable with my top of the line nvidia card (in this day and age) I found it to be far too simple in its design. Now that Z-Brush will have perspective viewports as of May 15 (Z-Brush 2 owners get a free update) I can’t see the popularity of Mudbox lasting. It is a Gucci tool, all style, no substance.

Those ZB3 vids look great! With the full backing of Weta Digital I can’t see Mudbox disappearing quite that easily though.