O, and if you want to know a but how that looks like: this article Glendon Mellow wrote about my botanical renders show it rather well. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/symbiartic/2014/07/29/mieke-roth-botanical-art/the Ceropegia follows the workflow I described perfectly. The render is done in Blender with a small touch-up in Photoshop (the 3d model can be seen here: https://sketchfab.com/models/9cb91c0dd8eb4059af16301a5a40c66e ). The galanthus also, but is rendered in ZBrush and the wheat is completely (so modeling *and* render) in Blender.MiekeOp 7 aug. 2014 om 17:14 heeft Mieke Roth <[log in to unmask]> het volgende geschreven:Hi Taina,
I use both. They serve different purposes. How does my workflow with Blender and Zbrush looks?
First I make a base model in blender, I have a lot more control in Blender regarding the topology than I have in ZBrush (although one can do that completly in ZBrush). If I have a model that is good enough I export my model, as small as it can be, as an obj that I then import into ZBrush. There is also a plugin that does that for you, so you can go back and fort with the same model in Blender and ZBrush but I keep forgetting that ;-). Next I start dividing the mesh in ZBrush and start sculpting, and later painting, the model. That is the place Zbrush is still superior to all other applications: you can sculpt, if you know the drill, almost anything you can imagine in Zbrush.
Most of the time I sculpt as far as I can go on the model I imported. If I need to go further, I copy the model as a subtool, use dynamesh within ZBrush on a high resolution so I can get further into details. Later I copy the details back to the model I copied from.
If you are very experienced with 3d modeling the model you start with doesn't need a lot of adjustments topology-wise if you are on a extremly high detail, but the adjustments I do in Blender.
I also do the uv mapping in Blender. the uv maps stays on the model imported into ZBrush and by copying the polypaint into texture, the normal and displacement maps to get the details, one can get a fairly low poly model back into Blender where one can do all the other stuff needed.
Blender had two great render engines: Blender internal that is a "normal" 3d render engine and cycles, an engine that uses natural fysic laws to make real world renders.
Further more: if you want to do animation you use Blender.
Blender has a perfect compositing platform where one can tweak materials and even renders to levels that ZBrush can't compete with.
Why then use ZBrush?
Although Blender is getting better and better in sculpting, ZBrush is the industry standard regarding that part of 3d modeling. And it pays of: you really can sculpt anything you want to in ZBrush, never having to worry about restrictions you do have in other 3d applications.
And although ZBrush is about 800 dollars to begin with you never will pay for an upgrade
Both have a steep learning curve though. if you want to learn Blender, please look at cgcookie.com. Kent Trammell is a hell of an instructor for example. Blender has a great community. cgcookie also has some Zbrush tutorials, but I would look at the pixologic
community for that one.
Hope this helps ;-)
http://miekeroth.comOp 7 aug. 2014 om 15:48 heeft Taina Litwak <[log in to unmask]> het volgende geschreven:Hi all -I want to get started (finally) with doing some scientifically accurate 3D modeling of very tiny stuff. I'd like to use Zbrush - based on what I saw at the AMI meeting in Rochester. First request to get it was turned down, and I am tasked with doing a justification to my agency (USDA) on why I need Zbrush vs Blender, which is free. Does anyone in the profession use Blender? Any pros and cons for me?Help appreciated.Taina--Taina LitwakLitwak Illustration Studio13029 Chestnut Oak DriveDarnestown, MD 20878tel: 301-527-0569mobile: 240-750-9245Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at