What does /3/ think of Mudbox? What are its advantages/disadvantages

Poor mans Mari

Don't bother. I'm one week into Zbrush after 4 months of Mudbox and there's just way more functions and tools.

For basic sculpting I guess there's not much of a difference. But overall Zbrush is years ahead.

Go read the list of released features for Mudbox 2016 and you'll understand.

>>508513
Mari got so fucked up and horrible in its last updates. Fuck mari.

The only thing that mudbox has over Zbrush is the non-cancerous UI and apparent need to give new names to everything.

Forget about ever hearing the word "mesh", "extrude", "faces", "vertices" and get used to the new names Zbrush gave to them, for no good reason. List non-exhaustive.

It's like they gave to the devs a list of banned words. It's ridiculous.

>>508518
ZSave
ZOpen
ZImport
I would pay 500 bucks for a plugin that renamed all of their niggery diggery and fixed the UI.

The program is good, just have to come to a compromise with how much UI and name cancer you can handle

Better interface and texture painting. That's about it.

It's on life support anyway. Hopefully it's death will bring some sculpting tools into Maya and Max. Well, maybe not Max since it'll probably get canned as well.

>>508512
ZBrush actually works better between Max/Maya and itself than Mudbox does, which is sad. GoZ works wonders. As for texture painting, you shouldn't bother with zbrush or mudbox for that. Quixel and Substance Painter are far superior tan anything else for model painting now.

Long story short.

>Mudbox isn't a particularly good sculpting program. Zbrush is better.
>Zbrush is kind of a shitty texture painting program. Mudbox is better.
>Substance painter, Substance designer, and Quixel have revolutionized texturing. Texturing tools like those in Mudbox, Zbrush, Modo, Blender, etc are all irrelevant now, thanks to PBR rendering.
>Mudbox does nothing that isn't done much better by a different tool.

I really liked using Mudbox too.

>>508531
>>Substance painter, Substance designer, and Quixel have revolutionized texturing. Texturing tools like those in Mudbox, Zbrush, Modo, Blender, etc are all irrelevant now, thanks to PBR rendering.
u what now?

File: 1451999785012.jpg (225KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 800x533px

>>508518
>>508520

This. This, so much.

>>508512
Mudbox is just a really nice and well designed application. If you know Photoshop you will pick up Mudbox straight off the bat.

It's not as powerful as it's contender Zbrush in absolute terms, the ways you can edit geometry in Zbrush far out-perform Mudbox.
Also the complexity of geometry Zbrush can handle before losing performance is much higher than what Mudbox can handle.

Depending on what you do you may not need the power of Zbrush tho, like perhaps if you only need 10 million polys for your sculpt, not 50.
And not hating your life and the application you make your art in can have a positive effect on the quality of your work and your work ethics.

>>508821
>If you know Photoshop you will pick up Mudbox straight off the bat.
again, it doesnt have adjustment layers, something thats absolutely VITAL to photoshop. On the other hand, even lowly mari has them.

Zbrush + mari is the way, kid

>>508825
I'm talking about the mesh edit side of things. It's true mudbox for some od reason lacks proper blending modes, but the flip side of that is that if you actually
do heavy texture work inside a mesh painter with the assorted shit-tier sampling CRUCIAL to photoshop quality you are a complete nablet anyway Mr.kid-child-juvenile-toddler-brat.

A huge infant I name you, now go change your diapers before you crap urself again anon.

>>508825
Sorry, but Mari is outdated. Quixel paints 8k textures no problem and has a procedural workflow, as does Substance painter. Procedural generation of effects aid you in creating more life-like effects that would otherwise take ages to try and do by hand and still not look as good.

>>508832
how is it outdated? look at the latest update. Its the #1 most used in the industry for a reason. Procedural generation? Thats piss easy and you can extend mari easily with its api.

File: why not own both.jpg (31KB, 419x261px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 419x261px

>>508512
Mudbox is pretty easy to learn and use right away, imho if you are not going all mad out sculpting it feels totally fine adding a detail here and there. The technique to create brushes via alpha-channel like photoshop to create custom brushes is a plus.

In the end better to have all the tools in your box when the need calls for it. Can you imagine going to another artist and saying bah humbug yous shouldnt be using that TOOL..

>>508842
>Can you imagine going to another artist and saying bah humbug yous shouldnt be using that TOOL..

Of course they can. People without skills always focus on the quality of their equipment instead of their own performance.

>>508852
>People with skills
Any monkey can be re-trained to use another tool if they show proficiency in the first place regardless what they learned first.

>>508834
Mari is not the #1 most used in the industry dude. Quixel and Substance rapidly took over in the past two years to the point where it's very rare to see Mari on the requirements of a job posting now but you almost always see Quixel or Substance.

>Thats piss easy and you can extend mari easily with its api.
Then please, show me an existing tool that extends Mari to give you the same sort of capabilities as Quixel/Substance. Since it's so piss easy.

>>508885
Wrong.

Mari is way better than quixel and substance for movie, commercial, and cinematic purposes.

For games you are right, but mari can handle an emmense ammount of maps and extreem resolutions that neither quixel or substance can touch. Have you tried painting 20+ udim 16k maps for bump, spec, diffuse, sss, reflection, ect in thoes two programs because it wont work

>>508885
>Then please, show me an existing tool that extends Mari to give you the same sort of capabilities as Quixel/Substance. Since it's so piss easy.
if you're even asking for proof of this you're not ready

>>508885
>i have no idea what I'm talking about

>>508890
>if you're even asking for proof of this you're not ready
That cop out. You know you're wrong, but you don' t want to admit it. Either the tools are out there to use for Mari already, or they aren't. You can't expect a person to just program every fucking feature they want.

>>508887
Quixel can handle 16k pretty fine and manages your various maps a lot easier than Mari does. Not to mention it has baking/export profiles for nearly all the popular renderers and engines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWoYLfaAvOA

>>508894
You're right, you don't.

>>508895
>That cop out. You know you're wrong, but you don' t want to admit it. Either the tools are out there to use for Mari already, or they aren't. You can't expect a person to just program every fucking feature they want.
If you're not part of a team with at least one half awake person who knows cg and how to work with an api like mari's you don't need mari. You sound like some lone artist type making game maker type games. Am I close?

>>508896
No studio is rolling their own procedurally aided texturing addon for Mari that rivals Substance or Quixel. Stop talking out of your ass.

>>508905

What this anon said. The only time studios actually do something like that is when adding an existing tool to their pipelines would cause problems in the pipeline. Substance is integrated into most major DCC applications, and Quixel is a photoshop plugin, so integration into a pipeline would be a non-issue.

>>508909
almost all the major programs at big companies have massive changes made to them and are exclusive to that company.
they dont even upgrade that often because it will fuck with their shit, many are still using maya 2012 since they have an ass load of major changes already worked in.

i would be surprised if a company didnt have some shit to make mari better

>>508910
>i would be surprised if a company didnt have some shit to make mari better
Obviously they make small little scripts and tools to aid their pipeline workflow, but there is studios aren't developing complex software like Quixel's for Mari. Very few studios have the resources to put money into such complex software development unless they are massive like Disney/Pixar or are partnered with a software company like ILM and Weta are with Foundry. Otherwise the most you're getting out of custom tools is scripts to automate certain tasks and custom solvers for certain things. The kind of shit you see on CreativeCrash at best.

>>508917
get this through your head you noob : procedural texturing tools are NOT complicated.

You've demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about and are almost certainly some baby level game maker artist.

>>508928
Stop pretending like you know shit all about programming. You think that about me and I think that about you. You call me a baby level game maker artist, so then prove you're otherwise, since you are acting like you are.

>>508931
Are you seeking further attention, noob?

Give 3D Coat a shot. It's cheaper than both of them (assuming you're buying it), has tons of features, and has PBR texturing.

I learned Maya in college and I was able to jump into mudbox without any teaching or tutorials. it felt just like maya and photoshop had a baby. Zbrush you'll need to take the time to learn

>>509093
If I were you I'd simply just keep making stuff with your program of choice. It's the time spent that always show the difference of skill level when looking at a final piece.