Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Or if/since it doesn't make sense supporting it anymore, they should provide it for free, as is, a thank you to the community, in the same ways Pixologic provides Sculptris. Not shut it down.
Don't kill it, just start updating it. Make it the Zbrush competitor again it once was. It may take some time. Add features similar to Zremesher/dynamesh. Sculpting hair/fur like fibermesh, but in the trusted Mudbox environment. The controls and layout of Zbrush make no sence at all.
Looking forward to hear a plan that will allow Mudbox to exist and benefit everyone in the 3D community, with or without updates. Great news either way!
Well, this is good to see. I just found it and I'm in the 30 day trial, but I know from my experience with it so far and the how-to videos I've seen that I want to use it. But worries about it going away soon (rumors on the internet, and the fact that it doesn't have it's own channel or new videos on your YouTube page) had me wondering if that was a good idea. I wouldn't mind the ten bucks per month, but if I invested all the time to learn how to use it well, and then one say it just didn't work anymore, that'd be not so nice. 😉
2018! So happy right now. 🙂 My trial ends in 12 days, then I'll be subscribing. I have a student license for Max, and I suppose I could include Mudbox in that, but I want to subscribe to Mudbox to support it, and to use it in videos and stuff that might generate revenue 🙂
From what I can see, Mudbox really could be a serious rival to Zbrush and PBR packages like Quixel Suite and substance painter.
As a game artist (mostly hard surface modeller)
I feel that its missing current practices like a PBR work flow. Material presets are lacking especially as they are not based on curvature.
Its texturing process is good but long winded and is really geared towards character modellers. Photostamping is great but relies on a massive library of photos.
In this day and age with serious budgets involved in studios, we need to make things as fast and as accurate as possible.
The modelling is seemingly good for character artists but lacking for hard surface modellers. The retopology tools are great.
I find that the amount of tutorial support for it is lacking. If you try to look for tutorials on Autodesks you tube, they are OLD and not arranged in to playlists so also really difficult to locate.
Which means if you cant learn a program that has alot of functions and isnt being taught, then it will fall behind.
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the feedback! You make some good points. The PBR workflow is one of the ideas listed here, be sure to vote for it. Booleans would be a help for hard surface modeling, and could facilitate cut and slice tools, so you might want to vote for that one too. As for the tutorials, you are right that we need to make them easier to find. The old ones are still valid, but you certainly shouldn't have to search for them. We'll see what we can do.
Jill
I might be alone on this one but the way I see it, if you want to compete you shouldn't just follow, instead you should invent (again).
I'm not saying that pbr would hurt, or copying features of zbrush is a bad thing ( they do that as well ), I just don't see how would that bring in new users.
Although I sometimes use mudbox for texturing, I wouldn't do complex stuff in it, cause mari is far more superior. Game texture artists ( i know of ) wont leave substance, because it's way ahead, and/or don't care about sculpting.
I'd keep the original mentality of mudbox, aka having a place in the pipeline, implementing features in ways that makes sense, keeping things organized and keeping it focused on vfx.
I'd look into things no one does (yet), such as shot/time-sculpting on alembic files, straight export into atomview, mari compatibility on uv tiling is a must, blendshape workflow enhancments, python, material x and alembic support of course. Just pick up where you left before modo was acquired.
As much as I love Mudbox, and as much as I will use it as part of my texturing pipeline, I have to agree that I can't see anyone moving from Substance Painter to Mudbox just for texturing.
But nobody would want Mudbox just for texturing.
Mudbox is not just a texturing tool like SP. Mudbox is a complete organic modeling toolset.
For the first new version, bug fixing, compatibility and a couple of improvements would do, (i.e. improved game export and pbr support) as long as Audodesk doesn't pull any stunts with the price.
