Mudbox definitely used a more familiar layout that I was accustomed to, being part of the Autodesk Software. This meant there were a lot of shared traits with 3DS Max, and I had also learned my way around the software during the first few weeks of my project.
However, while ZBrush lacked this familiarity, it made up for this in the intricacy that it allowed one to sculpt. An array of brushes were available with precise settings for each brush, and any deformations and modifications one wished to make on the model.
Setting up Reference images was intuitive, integrated into the scene so that the sculpting was easily comparable to the source images at any point during the sculpt. This is in contrast to the limited projection settings provided by Mudbox.
In terms of learning this new software, ZBrush was the more popular among 3D Modelling forums and websites. The tutorials available were more in depth and plentiful, especially on Lynda.com, my preferred means of tutorials.
Next Step
The test that I want to undertake makes use of the sculpting software, so after learning it, I would like like test some assets out in it to determine this area of the workflow I am wanting to follow. By doing this, I hope to assess whether it is preferable to sculpt from scratch in ZBrush, then retopologise, or to create a poly model in 3DS Max, then sculpt in ZBrush and return to 3DS Max to retopologise.
The method of retopology also needs addressing, as many programs are capable of doing it, but I need to figure out which is the most efficient, effective and professionally used, if applicable.
No comments:
Post a Comment