ZBrushCentral

Scaling images

I’m thinking about buying the full version of Zbrush (I’m very impressed with the demo), and have a question or two about some of the features that are disabled.

The most important one is scaling–I do a lot of my work at print resolutions (probably towards the upper end of Zbrush’s 4000x4000 limit, and was wondering how all the tools and textures handle on very large canvases. In traditional 3D programs, the final render size is independent of the scene–that is, when I render the scene, I can render at any size I want–the picture just scales accordingly.

In Zbrush, thescene is composed of pixels (well… pixols), and I assume that creating a scene at a lower res and then resizing the canvas would produce an effect similar to scaling up a 2D image in Photoshop.

So I assume that you want to set the canvas size at whatever you want the final render to be from the start. My question is this: how do the tools and textures handle at larger sizes? At 640x480, a 200-width brush can paint half the canvas in one swath. At 4000x4000, a 200-width brush would be really, really small. How much can the bruses be scaled up, and if I paint with a texture, will it also be really, really small?

The experience has been to actually work at a canvas size that is about 50% larger than what you actually want your final scene to be, then resize down in Photoshop when you’re done. This results in very nice antialiasing.

Of course, working on a 6000x6000 canvas, you’d better have one heck of a computer!

In terms of brush size, those numbers are in pixols as a radius from the center point (a 100 pixol brush paints a swath that’s 200 pixols wide). Which does mean that a 100 width brush on a 600x600 canvas will paint a swath covering 1/3 of the canvas while the same width on that 6000x6000 would paint only 1/30th. However, in the Preferences palette near the top there is a setting for Max Brush Size. You can raise the slider to as high as 512, which then lets you paint with a brush twice the size of what is normally available. That brush size is actually larger than the whole default canvas!

Most people set up the 3D elements of the scene using a small canvas size (with dimensions that are scaled from the final planned size) and placing markers. This requires a fairly small amount of processing power. When the scene is laid out just right, then they finally clear the layers to leave only the markers and scale the scene up. You then activate each of the markers to put the pieces back in place exactly as you had them laid out. The markers will scale up with the document, so everything gets instantly drawn into place with the proper size and without any distortions caused by sizing up the canvas. It’s a very nice feature! Also, if you use the Markers palette you can activate various other pieces of info that the marker stores, allowing you to actually recall such things as material and color with the marker – this allows you to plan all of that stuff at the smaller size, which again requires less processor heft.

A final note is that ZBrush exports at 72dpi. I have found that when I use Photoshop I can do a little cheat: I first increase the dpi to 300 and at the same time size the image down by 25%-50% for antialiasing. I can then turn around and resize the image back up a surprising amount without losing image quality appreciably. I’ve actually gone as large as 25% larger without any noticeable loss, and 50% with only marginal loss. It’s pretty amazing, because when I first started with ZBrush I was continually challenged by how to get clarity without having enormous filesizes. Using this technique I can make a scene at 1200 width, resize to 800 for antialiasing, and then increase it again to 1200 before making my jpg. Since Photoshop allows much higher in dpi, I imagine you could apply it to go way beyond print resolution and then scale the dpi back down again when you’re done with your image dimensions.

Hope that helps you out!

Thanlks for that info Aurick–It may very well come in handy! :+1:

Interesting. I have a GeForce3 Ti 500 and lots of RAM, so working with large canvases shouldn’t be a problem. But I thought the program was limited to 4000x4000?

It could well be. I honestly haven’t tried that high because I only have the Ti-200. :slight_smile:

The largest I’ve really pushed things is about 2500. But I did do a high density mesh at that resolution and my graphics card handled it beautifully.

I’m looking forward to seeing your work in here!

How does canvas size affect settings like depth cue, shadow blur, radious of lights, ect…

I am working on my first 3000 pixol wide image and I can’t seem to get the same amount of blur from depth cue that I got on smaller images.

Are settings like these measured in pixels, or are they a percentage of the canvas?

Thanks,

Shaun

I have worked with canvas sizes of 4096 x 4096 on a few occasions in ZBrush. All features should work fine as long as you have sufficient ram. If you are working at the max size then 1.5 gig of ram or more would do you well. At the max size my little 512 meg of ram makes things chug along at a really sloooow speed.

Elery I believe what you are seeing is created by brush size limits. A 128 pixel brush on a 3000 pixel image is very small compared to say a 1000 pixel image. Try changing the maximum brush size in the PREFERENCES menu. Be aware that you should have large amounts of ram if you are going to affect such a large area (with larger brush sizes) with blur and smudge tools.