Deep Paint 3D For Texturing?

[sounds Turner]

Anyone working with deep paint 3d for general texturing?

I just tryed it again for the first time in years and i like how it feels.
Only loaded one of the default models but it seems nice enough to work with.
I remember a few years back painting some fairly realistic skins & fur on models and wanted to try this software again.

Would it be a good choise for creating custom skins?
Any advice on using the sl avatar meshes in it?

Thanks

[Chosen Few]

I haven't used Deep Paint 3D in several years.  I remember I had a mixed review of it at the time.  While it was certainly adequate to the task of applying color to a surface, it was lacking in a lot of ways, mostly in terms of its then quite limited tool set.  Everything I made with it, I had to enhance or refine in Photoshop afterward.  But 3D paint programs have come a very long way since then, with Zbrush and Mudbox leading the charge.  I'd be surprised if Deep Paint 3D hasn't learned a trick or two in the time since I last used it.  Even back then, if all you wanted to do with it was paint skins and clothing for SL, it was sufficient.

If you've already committed to Deep Paint 3D, then I'd say keep using it.  No doubt you'll develop your technique with it, and do just great.  But if you're still shopping around, I highly recommend Mudbox.  It's hands down the best 3D paint tool I've ever used.  I absolutely love it.

Most other 3D painters I've tried get all kinds of confused whenever the UV layout is particularly sloppy (like it is on many parts of the SL avatar), but Mudbox just doesn't ever seem to care.  The paint goes where you tell it to go, and that's that.  You can also paint in 2D and 3D at the same time, which is great.  Give it a whirl.

[sounds Turner]

Nice.. think i might test the mudbox trial, seems to be more videos related to sl.

This video sort of had me interested in trying out deep paint

Decided to try 3d painting when looking at some realistic skins.
I'd prefer working in a 3d program than flat images in photoshop.
If the program's any good, i shouldn't have to go back to editing in 2d.

[Chosen Few]

Cool video.  Looks like Deep Paint 3D has indeed had quite a few bells & whistles added to it since I last tried it. 

I like the technique the artist was using (although the end result did look a bit creepy).  Mudbox approaches projection painting slightly differently, but you can definitely do the same kind of thing.

 

Allow me to respond to your last comment:

 

---

sounds Turner wrote:

If the program's any good, i shouldn't have to go back to editing in 2d.

---

I have to take issue with that notion, for two reasons:

First, if your intended purpose in getting a 3D paint program is to avoid 2D work, you're going to be sorely disappointed.  You're always going to have to do at least some 2D editing, no matter what.

How you should be looking at 3D painting is as an enhancement to your existing 2D techniques, not an outright replacement of them.  Notice the video you posted was chock full of examples where the artist went back and forth between 2D and 3D views, to paint in both.  That's how a 3D paint program is meant to be used. 

No matter what you're texturing, there will always be lots and lots of points throughout the process where working in 3D just isn't efficient or practical.  2D work remains essential, always.

To put it bluntly, if you don't want to work in 2D at all, then don't be a texture artist.  I wish there were a gentler way to say that, but there really isn't.

Second, I'm a little troubled by your choice of wording, with "if the program is any good".  In this particular context it's not about how good or bad the program is.  It's about how good you as an artist are at using whatever tools you've got.  I could hand you the be-all-end-all of 3D paint programs right now, but if YOU are not (yet) good at texture painting in both 3D and 2D, it's not going to yield good results for you.

Conversely, I could hand you a total piece of crap, like MS Paint, and if you're a good enough texture artist, you'll be able to make fantastic skins with it.  It'll take you a lot longer with worse tools than with better ones, of course, but the end results will be the same either way.

Consider this.  5000 years ago, Egyptian stone masons were producing some of the finest works this planet has ever seen (before or since), with nothing more at their disposal than hammer stones, and the occasional copper chisel for the very lucky.  Today, sphinxes and ka statues can be turned out by the truckload, carved en masse by CNC machines.  But are they better sphinxes?  Better ka statues?  Absolutely not. 

The modern tools merely increase the speed of the work.  What used to take 40 years now takes 40 minutes.  The quality of the results is an entirely different matter, which has little if anything to do with the specific tools.  I doubt there are a whole lot of people who could tell the difference between a hand carved statue and a machine carved one.

It's the same thing with whatever 3D paint program you end up choosing.  It'll speed up various aspects of your work, vs. doing everything in 2D.  But it won't make your textures look any better, all by itself, and it certainly won't eliminate the need for 2D work, no matter how good its 3D capabilities.

Again, what it really comes down to is you, not the program.  If you're good at 2D painting, chances are you'll be good at 3D painting, too, whichever program you use.  But if you're not yet as good as at the one as you'd like to be, the other isn't going to do a whole lot for you, again regardless of which specific program we're talking about.  It may well turn out that the excitement of having a new fun tool at your disposal will prompt you to practice more, and the practice will make you better.  But understand, it's you doing the practicing, not the program.

Artwork is 99% about the artist, and 1% about the tools, always.

 

Add those two points up, and here's the better way to have phrased your last sentence. "If the program is good, and I find I enjoy using it, then once I get really good at 3D painting, I won't have to do all that much 2D painting."  I hope that makes sense.

[Naergilien Wunderlich]

Thank you! (I made the video ;-) )

About not having back to go to editing in 2D if 3D is good enough:

I can only speak for myself (and I've worked with DeepPaint3D since 1999!), but...

When photosourcing in DP3D, your result on a mesh (no matter if it's an SL avatar, a sculptie turned into an *.obj or any other mesh) will only be as good as a) your reference photos from which you're photosourcing and b) your knowledge about the software. Neither can be substituted in any way.
Your reference photos are good, your skills are bad? Result will be mediocre at best.
Your reference photos are bad, your skills are good? Again, mediocre results at best.
Your reference photos are bad AND your skills are nonexistent? Don't hope for the resulting textures being even just mediocre.
Your reference photos are good and your skills with that particular software are good? Great, that should result in really good textures.
Note that DP3D isn't really simple to learn. It took me about three years before I could use it the way I'm using it in the video. So you'll need time to learn how to use it.  This will be frustrating at first, last not least because of the lack of tutorials. I recommend reading the manual that comes with it at least twice before even starting to use the software.

Plus it still takes a lot of time. If you've seen my notes on the video, the texturing of that head took four hours, not a few minutes (the video is time lapsed). An entire skin takes about 40-60 hours. As I already said, bring time - not just for learning the software, but also for working with it.

Also, you'll still need 2D image editing software (like Photoshop) after your textures are finished; for example to change the color of your textures, do some touch-ups etc..
That is something DeepPaint can't do - then again, it's not *supposed* to be able to do that, it's a 3D texturing software and not an image editing software ;-)

That having said, despite its age and the steep learning curve, I think that DP3D is STILL the best available software for 3D photosourcing. I've tried quite a few other softwares, but none of them was like DP3D. I also own PS CS4 Extended but the photosourcing results in *that* software are just disappointing to me.

Just my 2 cents as an old user of DeepPaint ;-)