Years ago, in my early, early baby stages of learning about 3D programs... someone jumped down my neck and practically *threatened* to me about learning zBrush ("Ooohhh, you'll be SORRY if you learn zBrush, don't do it!" was along the lines of what they said). It had something to do with polygonal modeling being supreme or what have you, though I can't remember what it was exactly. But after getting some experience laid out with 3D Studio 9, I now ponder again what zBrush can do for me. So then what's the deal guys? Tell me again why zBrush is bad?

well the person must have been hyped up in his elitist opinion about other programs i quess it was because he couldnt learn how to use it. i use 3dsmax have been for past few years tried bit of zbrush and well found out that it makes making believable character models easier than just good old fashioned polygon modeling does. but if anyone tells you what programs you can and cant learn just take the closest blunt object and whack them couple of times with it. since well that ive seen the ones that only learn one program and stick to it till the end dont do that well so it wont hurt to learn more than one program. even thou im working in 3dsmax i try to find time to learn C4d, bryce, rhino3d, motionbuilder (for character animation mostly) and other programs including zbrush.

Digital sculpting is getting more and more mainstream now, but there has been some mixed feelings in the past. Now it's become essential for both games and CGI. Some prefer Mudbox, but the games industry seems keen on ZBrush.

I was under the impression that ZBrush made "2.5-D" images that could be used for extremely high-detail texture maps on mid-high range polygonal models made in other programs. I've never used the program myself, though.