When comparing Substance Painter vs Mudbox, the Slant community recommends Substance Painter for most people. In the question“What are the best 3D texture painting softwares?” Substance Painter is ranked 2nd while Mudbox is ranked 12th. The most important reason people chose Substance Painter is:
Since Substance Painter allows users to paint in full 3D, it can be used not only to paint full textures, but can also paint masks which can then be used in other tools (like Substance Designer) for material filter generators (like the ones used to make edge wear and dirt)
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Allows you to paint in full 3D
Since Substance Painter allows users to paint in full 3D, it can be used not only to paint full textures, but can also paint masks which can then be used in other tools (like Substance Designer) for material filter generators (like the ones used to make edge wear and dirt)
Pro Painting and procedural editing of textures
Pro True 3D and projective painting
Pro Supports UV-less PTEX painting
Pro Subscribe for as little as $10/month, $80/year
Pro Artist-friendly tools
Mudbox offers intuitive, easy-to-learn and use sculpting and painting tools that are a joy to use.
Pro Easy to use
Pro Unlimited 8K paint layers
Pro Academy Award-winning toolset, originally developed at Weta Digital.
Cons
Con Expensive and impossible to run without an expensive graphics card
The free trial is the only thing free. You'll have to pay a lot of money for the full version, and even if you do get it, you will have to pay for an expensive graphics card to use it, which means a lot more money flying out of your wallet and/or bank account.
Con Cannot export in a procedural format
You can not export substance (sbsar) files in Painter.
Con Its from Autodesk
Nobody should use Autodesk derived products.The 3d industry is really contaminated with Autodesk monopoly and abuse of inflated prices that everybody seems willing to pay. Enough is enough.