Zbrush 3.0

Have they actually sorted out the interface? That's what I want to know

Compared to mudbox, Zbrush2's interface is convoluted IMO

Hmm so I'm thinking of starting to learn zbrush or mudbox in a month or so. Maybe by the end of this thread you guys will have argued it out and can tell me which to go for?

I have yet to try it out.

For me the interface never was that much of a deal either. I mean you learn it once and you know it.

Sure it's not what most people would like to see but once you learn it you will have no problems working with it.

I've tried Mudbox way too little to give a fair comparison to Zbrush. But what really bugged me was that it was really slow working with when you get quite a lot of polies to work with (and that's compared to Zbrush on the same computer). And as I heard they even improved the poly handling in 3.0 I really think it sounds very interesting.

Will return once I've tried it out enough, meanwhile I'll use ver. 2

That might be one stupid nooby question:

I never worked with zbrush but I know that's possible

to polypaint. but before i invest in such program - is it

possible to export the painted uv to a targa-file?

more precise: modeling a character in XSI 6 -> export this

into zbrush -> polypaint -> create tga out of the uv -> then

make it all ready for getting it into source engine

possible?

I'd like to see some opinions on mudbox vs ZB3.

=)

After using it for some time now I really gotta say I dig it.

You don't really need the projection master anymore now which is good (at least for the stuff I do) and it handles polies INSANELY good.

It also renders stuff very beautifully.

I've only used mudbox very briefly so it's not fair I compare them but I will sure stay with zbrush since I feel it handles large amount of polies so much better. But in the end it's up to what you're used to. And since zbrush has quite a difficult interface I guess it's a lot easier to get into mudbox if you've used other 3d applications before (especially maya I believe).