Do you still need use the 3D Print Exporter to readjust the size of your model?
One thing you might need is a Wacom tablet or Cintiq, to better articulate your movements within Zbrush. Also Zbrush just updated to version 4R7 with an enhanced feature set .
1 Like
I usually bring in an object that is the right height and just match itā¦
If the figure has to fit in a specific size box I go to Rhino to make a box with the right dimensions and bring that in.
If exact size matters I can measure with 3D print exporter and adjust with the size slider under deformation, which is very accurate.
How much is this dependent on having T-Splines?
T-Splines is definitely a requirement to go through that particular tutorial. It relies on T-Splines heavily and without it, the ZBrush/Rhino workflow isnāt an option.
See this recent topic to see why:
Thanks for the info mcramblet, much appreciated.
Iām still experimenting with this workflow and havenāt figured out what the āsweet spotā is when trying to keep as much detail as possible (if there is one). Has anyone else made any progress in this workflow?
In working with this Minion sculpt coming out of Geomagic and exported as a triangle mesh, this is about the best Iām getting so far:
Which isnāt bad, but I still have issues keeping the fine details. The higher I push the resolution to keep the detail, it becomes much slower to convert and the surface starts getting pretty dense. Just wondering if the other experimenters who are playing around with this have come up across any tips worth sharing.
1 Like
For reference; here is the surfaced file, which was created by the company who did the sculpt. Iām not sure what software was used to do the surfacing. I do know that it was a very manual process, it wasnāt the auto-surfacing function of Geomagic.
You were really much better served with a mesh-milling workflow. This brute force Nurbification will always be lossy and time consuming + building molds for thermoforming for these toys shouldnāt cause any issues with CAM software that can handle meshes.
As I guess you will still go on with the Tsplines approachā¦What you could do to improve the outcome had to start on the Zbrush side. Make sure that Zremesher outputs a symmetrical mesh from your sculpted mesh, the one on the screenshot isnāt. Duplicate the source subtool (probably a Dynamesh model) and Zremesh with very moderate resolution - on the guy with glasses I would try a few hundred faces. Create polygon groups for each model feature ā create them in a way that the patches could be Nurbs surfaces.
Subdivide the remesh output (make sure that Keep Groups is checked) and reproject it against the source subtool (Project All) Repeat the steps until you have a resolution which looks reasonably close to the source and yet is not too high res. Export to Rhino as obj. with Keep Groups checked.
Rhino 5 can not deal properly with polygon groups so your obj will load as separate meshes. Merge those patches with Tsplines. That way you give Tsplines some topological information it can use when converting to Nurbs. With symmetrical input and well chosen Polygon groups the program should create a more logically structured Nurbs model.
Thanks for the reply. Iāll keep bringing up the possibility that we should look into the mesh milling workflow, for at least some of our work. Until then, yes, Iāll continue to look into T-Splines approach, or other methods, as itās my only other option.
Looking into the use of poly groups was something I and was thinking about, but youāve confirmed that this would be the next logical step. Iāll start playing around with this and post some results. Thanks again for the tips.
Hi jean77flip,
I donāt have T-Splines, but I watched some of your Rhino and ZBrush training on Digital Tutors. They are very good. Thanks for doing them.
Bill
thank you sir.
im happy they help you in some way