Leaderboard

Have been using it since 2004 (R9.5) and zBrush since 2005

Thanks as always for the help on this bit of a step learning curve but worth it. Thanks CBR for detailed info very helpful indeed tip on the way. 👍🏻

Couple of problems here. Sculpting is working, but parts of your mesh are not ! 🙂 The first is the normal direction of the polys in the waistcoat, which are wrong (blue), and therefore you won't be able to sculpt on the front sides of these meshes until those are fixed by selecting the wrong polys (I think it's all of them, so Ctrl-A) and finding Reverse Normals from the r-click menu. The shirt has a similar problem caused by it having no actual thickness, which means we see in the inverted normals in the folded collar area as well. Secondly, because all these meshes are a single object, sculpting them on an individual basis will be extremely difficult and it will be almost impossible to avoid one section intersecting another. I would seriously suggest splitting the model into its various parts to allow you to sculpt each mesh alone, which will get you much more control over the individual parts and should prevent you moving other bits unintentionally. I also notice you have activated sculpting but only at Level 0, with no subdivision, which is unusual. Lastly, you are making life very difficult for yourself by having mesh inside mesh inside mesh. The rather superior approach is to not have any body mesh under clothes unless those clothes will be removed during any subsequent animation. So, there is no need for actual poly arms, chest or torso if it is hidden by clothing. Likewise there is no need to model the whole shirt when the vast majority of it is covered by waistcoat ! So really, the body mesh here should consist of the head, down to just under the neckline, and the hands - the rest of it is covered by clothing or shoes, and all the time it is there is just an additional intersection risk for you with every modelling or sculpting tool you deploy on it, and when it moves later when rigged, if that is what you will be doing with it. CBR

Sure, will get the exact details either today or tomorrow. But these are super basic. Just a sphere with an emitter tag in a smoke solver with a radial field, outputting as external OpenVDB files and rendered in Redshift using the blackbody option in volume material. I intend on making a video showing all this when I have time.

Yeah - you leave a quite a lot to chance if you try and do this with displacement. I would suspect it is going to be tricky to get a flawless result using this method because displacement requires even geometry which your base mesh is not providing at the moment. The layout of your UVs, where you have appear to have relaxed the polys that make up the sides of the strap holes into the space where the hole should be - I bet that is causing at least some of the problems - I don't think the ridges should extend to the sides of those holes, yet are being told to do so by your UV. So one suggestion would be to split off the UVs that comprise the sides of those holes, and move them somewhere on the UV map where displacement is not applied, which should leave them smooth. Without your files I am uncertain if this is the complete solution. What I would do, on the other hand, is just bin off the displacement altogether and model it properly, grooves and all, meaning that we can very specifically direct the topology to get a much nicer / more predictable result. If we use sufficient poly density we can probably get away without control loops, or can handle those with edge weighting instead. Modelling it might not be as difficult as you may be imagining - you can use symmetry so you only have to model half, and the only thing you have to pay attention to is that your topology around the hole allows the continuance of those grooves - I modelled a single section below so you can see what I mean... CBR

I think your company needs to redefine its vendors. You need to lobby for that, otherwise you will be paying for it every day, unless you're on a hourly rate... 🙂 Your productivity is going to be lower and the PC more expensive...

Adding Fields support to the Smoke Solver. Here are a couple of renders. These are both using a radial field. smoke_sphere_vortex_render.mp4 smoke_sphere_vortex_2_render_i1.mp4