Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=889708

That's killer.

Zbrush Is cool, Yet after seeing this handy tool, I want one, haven't spent much time investigating though. Well first here's the link to the Image (Which blows me away) Here's what he used to model it. Cool Tool

that tools looks like fun. Couldn't see any prices on the site though. (but I'm sure its way out of my range!)

Cool Image, although I would love to know how to do that with Zbrush I no longer have the time or brain power to learn how to use a new tool.

2995$ or 1995$ if you own the little device...

Attached Link: http://206.145.80.239/zbc/showthread.php?t=20310

Microscribe used to make those kinds of tools, ICM. Even then, they started out at $2,995, five years ago or so... Those Z-Brush guys are really top-notch. Amazing work, it just blows my mind, every time!

I've been thinking of purchasing Z Brush in the near future. I demo it when it first came out. What it did then I could accomplish in Amorphium much easier. So I didn't buy into it. But this version has jumped leap and bounds especially in the texturing department. And that's mainly what I would want it for. But I hear it can be used for making Poser morph targets to.

ZBrush has long since outgrown Amorphium, alas... I've seen it used in conjunction with other character software, and it's amazing...! I'm not certain Poser would handle Z-brush geometry very well, but it would depend on how well the displacement mapping in Poser 5 works. I've only used it a couple of times...

Poser 5 will handle ZBrushes models and displacement maps. VERY unfortunately, Poser 5 will not accept 16-bit grayscale displacement maps (which is what ZBrush makes). Poser 5 will only accept 8-bit grayscale displacement maps. 8-bit grayscale = 255 levels of gray 16-bit grayscale = 65,535 levels of gray Just a "small" bit of difference there.......lol. So, while it works, it TRULY needs 16-bit support (Just like Bryce) ;o) AgentSmith

(grumbles) Too many bit-discrepancies, if you ask me... On top of all that, NONE of these applications deals with hardware acceleration. It's simple enough to make UT2003 (a three-year old game) Direct X 8 compatible, but nobody inthe industry can remotely keep up. It's where the money's at. UT-2003 made more money than any version of Bryce, Z-brush, or Poser. Sad, but true. Even the "big dogs" like Maya and Lightwave offer nearly NOTHING when it comes to hardware support, leaving our NV-17's and NV-25's almost completely unused...

Last I heard, DAZ will be (or, at least wants to be) talking to Nvidia to have Bryce 6.0 take advantage of a users video card gpu for help in rendering. Which is, beyond optimizing code, the one other way to speed up Bryces rendering times, (without changing the type of renderer it is). AS

I don't care about using the GPU for rendering. All I'm saying is that, considering how good video games look these days, there is NO reason that our preview screens can't look that good. Wait, there is a reason : Money.

Ah, I see what you're talkin' about now. OpenGl is one of the aspects being worked on, even for Bryce 5.5, you've probably seen the OpenGL shots from their "Studio" program. But, I WILL say not much technology at all touches Unreal's engine. I would say that would be just about the pinnacle for everyone to shoot for. ;o) (But, then I'm biased as a big Unreal Tournament fan) AS