It looks like your sleeve is sunk in. Use that Target Inflation value on the shrinkwrap to alleviate this. And as SnowInChina mentions, Transfer Attributes can help with normals, but not much in the case of two cylinders like this. If you're after a perfect bake, you'll need a lot of geometry for a completely perfect match. Also, smooth mesh preview generates its own normals anyway.
In my example here, there's three meshes, the two basic cylinders and the sleeve to make them appear joined.
A note for bakes: If you rotate the view around, especially if the objects have a shiny material on, the seams become plainly visible. However, so long as the view looking down the normals appears seamless, it's good to go for a bake.
thanks everyone, @throttlekitty but your example will show the seam if you bake it right ? when I try transfer normals it's not working, but it's fine with flat surface. I added more geometry and it's do the trick like the image below so this method only works if I really want a perfect bake. otherwise will show the seams. with flat surface or little bend I don't need to add many geometry but with cylinder the best choice to add more geometry.
@throttlekitty the last part I didn't get what you mean: "However, so long as the view looking down the normals appears seamless, it's good to go for a bake." what do you mean by that? English my second language so sorry sometime I want to make sure to get all the topic :P and thank you for taking your time.
update** I don't need this huge geometry I just add 2 division with more loops on the bottom.
I don't always type well, so I'll try again. Baking software looks at each vertex of the low poly, using each vertex normal like a camera angle. With many models, you can easily see the seams while rotating your perspective camera around. But if you position the camera to look down the normal, or "straight down" at the seams, there should be little to no visible difference.
I think your bevel is too tight for a game asset. You don't have to zoom out very far before there aren't enough pixels and it starts to look like a sharp edge.
Also, I gave some bad advice regarding using a lot of geometry to get a perfect bake, and I should know better. Sometimes more geometry is the better or only solution, cylinders in particular can cause headaches. Other times it's not even possible or worth the time.
Can someone elaborate on this please? this was a simple few steps walkthrough in creating an interesting shape. I follow along to this and get some crazy results, all of them hideous and nothing like this! my biggest issue is with creating the circle from the square, especially as it's on an angled / curved plane. Is there a simpler way to achieve the same result? Image credit – John Dickinson / Motionworks
Any alternative approach is welcomed as I cannot fathom this way however many times I try...
@ChrisJones75 Friendo, post your attempt and we'll be able to help you out, buddy. Otherwise, no, that tutorial shows pretty much the simplest way of doing details on curves. You could stop at his third step, unwrap the thing and do a heightmap with displacement.
@iacdxbM8 you've spent all that time trying to make that detail flow nicely into the flat quads, Just cap the area off with double edgeloops and you can do whatever you want in there as long as you triangulate any ngons that pop up.
Note: The lip errors only pop up in concave ngons. As for the shape of the snakey bit, make sure you have the required control points to secure it's curves. To control a curve properly you'll need 3 control points. The more you have, the harder it is to control.
@iacdxb@Thanez just know that while this method works and get you results I would also suggest looking into making same shape with quads too as it will give you more edge in modelling.. *it may get rejected by TD or AD if even in game environment this will be used for deformations *it is insta no no approach in Film VFX department, this thread is for learning how to model shapes so its best we learn both ways as our industry is limited and we never know where life takes us could be games could be movies or both!
@iacdxb@HAWK12HT Sure, for a deforming or sculpting ready mesh you'll have to have the topology to be ready for that. I shouldn't have worded my post in a manner that can be read as "Ngons are always fine". I would like to specify my solution to "Ngons are fine for details around flat areas on non-deforming hardsurface meshes that will only be used for baking, specifically where the highpoly won't be added to a portfolio, showing your ugly solution" iacdxb: There are pros and cons to each and every method out there. Next time you run into a problem like this, try a different method than I showed you. You should learn all of the methods to be the strongest artist you can be.
Hey guys, just a quick one. I'm trying to add a minor light to the bumper of this car, but I don't feel like this is the right way to implement it into the mesh. Any tips on how I could make this come better into the mesh? Ref picture:
Ah!...missed this one, bit late with a reply.
So just a thought for future reference, I'm a great believer in keeping things simple because...well I think pre-empts unnecessary reedits down the track. Now even though your approach works, my suggestion is to basically sketch out those insets such as directional light and grill in the front facia first then simply bridge the edges. For further workflow insights take a peek at these, they're examples of IMO helpful automotive modeliing tips that'll be useful to keep in mind as your project develops.
mmh a tool to project normal from underlying object might be useful. I was thinking about it for max. Normal Thief takes the normal of the closest vert, but normal of the closest point on face would be more accurate. An that would fix that kind of "artefact".
Having trouble with the topology for this one. How would you guys do it to have a nice smooth intersection between the cube and cylinder? I would also like to have thin rounded corners.
Creasing the edges and smoothing in Maya resulted in pinched corners =/.
@GlowingPotato This is the quickest and cleanest way to do the intersection (IMO), but also adds extra geometry, for better or worse. I'd like to point out that I started out by deleting faces off the cylinder and created the box from the edges I extruded, plus a little cleanup and shifting to resolve the edges,
Having trouble with the topology for this one. How would you guys do it to have a nice smooth intersection between the cube and cylinder? I would also like to have thin rounded corners.
Creasing the edges and smoothing in Maya resulted in pinched corners =/.
This is a pretty common kind of problem. I can't mock this one up right now, but you should be able to find plenty of other examples in this very thread- maybe search for the word "offset" or something.
The solution is not to subdivide, but rather rotate the cylinder slightly so that its vertical edges are not in line with that of the cube where it intersects, but slightly offset.
This freely provides the supporting geometry that will give a sharp division at the intersection.
@GlowingPotato This is the quickest and cleanest way to do the intersection (IMO), but also adds extra geometry, for better or worse. I'd like to point out that I started out by deleting faces off the cylinder and created the box from the edges I extruded, plus a little cleanup and shifting to resolve the edges,
Thanks a lot for replying back, I also though about adding extra geo to my cylinder, but for now, is something that i wold like to avoid. Trying to have a nice low poly mesh, if no success, than i'll add extra geo. Thanks again.
This is a pretty common kind of problem. I can't mock this one up right now, but you should be able to find plenty of other examples in this very thread- maybe search for the word "offset" or something.
The solution is not to subdivide, but rather rotate the cylinder slightly so that its vertical edges are not in line with that of the cube where it intersects, but slightly offset.
This freely provides the supporting geometry that will give a sharp division at the intersection.
This is very interesting, I'll try that but I already have some questions about it. if the cylinder is slightly offset, would be possible to mirror half of the model after? Probably yes but i'll need to figure it out.. maybe if i offset it until the cube edges stays exactly in the middle of two vertical cylinder edges ? Thanks a lot. I'll dig further.
I'll try this, but, Iam still scratching my head on how to mirror half of the geometry if i want the cylinder to stay in the middle of the cube...maybe if offset it away from he cylinder? lets see...
By the way, people were mad at each other at the post i took this image from, so ignore the last phrase in the image.
So, Its much better now, but I`m still have problems in the marked spot, any suggestions ? also, there is a N-gon at the Structure image that i don't know how to properly solve it.
EDIT:
So, my result is very acceptable for my standards. But i still have issues that I would like some inputs from you guys. There is a n-gon, pinched edges and the shading is not perfect.
So, Its much better now, but I`m still have problems in the marked spot, any suggestions ? also, there is a N-gon at the Structure image that i don't know how to properly solve it.
EDIT:
So, my result is very acceptable for my standards. But i still have issues that I would like some inputs from you guys. There is a n-gon, pinched edges and the shading is not perfect.
See where your wireframe is discontinuous in the second image? That suggests to me the two sections of this mesh haven't actually been merged.
I'll clarify the instructions. Without references to Greek mythology, I promise.
@Zablorg I don't see how that will do anything other than collapse the mesh into a blob.
What will?
Your subdivision image shows the edges aren't flowing into each other, which tells me you've either got two meshes, or a single mesh that isn't sealed. I'm saying you need to seal it up.
@Zablorg I don't see how that will do anything other than collapse the mesh into a blob.
What will?
Your suggestion will lead to the following. A blob, or "melted" or however you wish to describe it.
Ah, you're correct inasfar as the corners of the cube will be blobbed out, yeah. I forgot that this flow isn't good for that. The only difference between what I've got and what you've got is that the extrusion to the right in your image is not going to be co-planar when interfacing with the cylinder.
Not really an issue though, right? They've just gotta maintain the current edge flow on the cube's outer corners.
I got something like that, but i think the result is not equal.
That looks pretty good to me! Which parts are you concerned with? You should be able to tweak the cylinder radius, etc, pretty easily to fine-tune the result.
I got something like that, but i think the result is not equal.
That looks pretty good to me! Which parts are you concerned with? You should be able to tweak the cylinder radius, etc, pretty easily to fine-tune the result.
Gonna need to move a little bit down the front cylinder, thats why i guess.
I got something like that, but i think the result is not equal.
That looks pretty good to me! Which parts are you concerned with? You should be able to tweak the cylinder radius, etc, pretty easily to fine-tune the result.
Gonna need to move a little bit down the front cylinder, thats why i guess.
Can you not simply change the direction of the spline to achieve this?
I got something like that, but i think the result is not equal.
That looks pretty good to me! Which parts are you concerned with? You should be able to tweak the cylinder radius, etc, pretty easily to fine-tune the result.
Gonna need to move a little bit down the front cylinder, thats why i guess.
Can you not simply change the direction of the spline to achieve this?
Is not an editable spline anymore but yes, my bad watching the reference.
I had a crack at that faucet for fun. I did it with just an 8 sided cylinder and subD.
The intersection was just a bevel and some sliding of the verts to make a round shape, which i then extuded and then did a spherize/circularize on it to make it a perfect cylinder. When you use subD with that low level of sides it's pretty forgiving with hand massaging verts. For clean hard surface modeling I usually avoid hand tweaking stuff and instead rely on the tools to get mathematically perfect surfaces, but for something this simple it's honestly fine.
I had a crack at that faucet for fun. I did it with just an 8 sided cylinder and subD.
The intersection was just a bevel and some sliding of the verts to make a round shape, which i then extuded and then did a spherize/circularize on it to make it a perfect cylinder. When you use subD with that low level of sides it's pretty forgiving with hand massaging verts. For clean hard surface modeling I usually avoid hand tweaking stuff and instead rely on the tools to get mathematically perfect surfaces, but for something this simple it's honestly fine.
How's the lighting on that six-sided pole btw? Looks okay from this angle and the surface seems relatively flat so I guess it's okay here?
From the concept sketch it looks like the angle from horizontal to down-point is more like 75-80deg, not 50-60deg.
Also there is no seam just after the bend.
The interior angle (underneath the bend) is sharper.
The flip back at the nozzle end is a single radius, rather than having a flat end.
All details, but they'll have a material impact on the methodology and topography of building this, especially if you want the surfaces to be really close to what they should be.
I'm not sure you can get mathematically perfect with sub-d on very much. To even do a simple constant radius arc you need 5 (iirc) verts... one at each end, and then a centre point, and then ones either side to guide the curve (and even then it's not perfect)
I've been screwing around with this model of my tomos' brakeshoes the last couple of days and I can't seem to get it quite right.
Tried keeping it as quaded as i can
I get these kinds of errors
Also tried with a boolean
But I get the same thing, I'm having trouble adding these details and keeping the curvature of the object intact. And im not quite sure why this pinching occurs it goes away when crease the vertical edges but then I get a hard crease of course.
For anybody wanting to take a look at the file I've enclosed it in my post. Its a blender 2.8 (which is coming along great!) file.
EDIT: realizing that there are three planes in play here like a cube, I ended up doing this:
I think I'd need a singular subdivide to have enough density to counter the subsequent creasing (due to the two new edge loops running to the bottom), but I actually like the effect it creates in this case.
Hi guys, I have to model this thing, at the start I thought, ohh yeah it`s easy, but actually is not I really don`t know how start with this part. Have you some suggest ? Thx guys
Hi guys, I have to model this thing, at the start I thought, ohh yeah it`s easy, but actually is not I really don`t know how start with this part. Have you some suggest ? Thx guys
I think you have misunderstood the comment that directed you to this thread. This thread is for posting your own examples of existing topology to ask for help in improving them, not asking for topology from scratch. As I remember, the link you received to this thread was for a specific comment which showed the topology of a project similar to yours, intended to give you a sense of how you might start.
I would recommend making a start with this as best you can, and then coming back to ask for feedback when you have a model to show.
Decided to give this a go from old pages of this thread and I am wondering if this sort of optimization is still a thing? I had to do couple of manual tweaks to get the desired result and wondering if this can be achieved other way rather than bend modifier and tweak. I tried it on a plane too but was unable to get even spacing like @perna
You shouldn't have to do anything by hand (that will mess with the perfect curve), just start at the highest segments, and collapse edges as you go inwards/down.
You shouldn't have to do anything by hand (that will mess with the perfect curve), just start at the highest segments, and collapse edges as you go inwards/down.
While this is probably true of the vertices in the collapsed area (closer to the curve center), the vertices in the slightly expanded area do appear to be adjusted slightly in the reference image.
I did try edge collapse again and it worked, I must be drunk the last time I tried so on left non adjust verts at expanded area, on right slightly adjusted verts with edge constraints on. (I just selected the verts and scaled them)
I just hope Perna dont see this at all or anyone in admin otherwise this post of mine will go in a hall of fails XD
I'm recreating Princess Peach's crown as a small side project in my free time. I'm having trouble modifying the topology in order to get a smooth shading. See the pictures below: Does anyone know a way how I can get rid of that little bump? I tried making the support edges follow the entire edge loop, but that created a hard edge where I'd want the roundness to be preserved.
I'm recreating Princess Peach's crown as a small side project in my free time. I'm having trouble modifying the topology in order to get a smooth shading. See the pictures below: Does anyone know a way how I can get rid of that little bump? I tried making the support edges follow the entire edge loop, but that created a hard edge where I'd want the roundness to be preserved.
I thought something like this might work:
Unfortunately it has an undesirable effect on the profile, and the valleys become absolutely insane:
Replies
should it be a texture or geometry?
I don't always type well, so I'll try again. Baking software looks at each vertex of the low poly, using each vertex normal like a camera angle. With many models, you can easily see the seams while rotating your perspective camera around. But if you position the camera to look down the normal, or "straight down" at the seams, there should be little to no visible difference.
I think your bevel is too tight for a game asset. You don't have to zoom out very far before there aren't enough pixels and it starts to look like a sharp edge.
Also, I gave some bad advice regarding using a lot of geometry to get a perfect bake, and I should know better. Sometimes more geometry is the better or only solution, cylinders in particular can cause headaches. Other times it's not even possible or worth the time.
https://i.imgur.com/5pavtKy.jpg
Can someone elaborate on this please? this was a simple few steps walkthrough in creating an interesting shape. I follow along to this and get some crazy results, all of them hideous and nothing like this! my biggest issue is with creating the circle from the square, especially as it's on an angled / curved plane. Is there a simpler way to achieve the same result?
Image credit – John Dickinson / Motionworks
Any alternative approach is welcomed as I cannot fathom this way however many times I try...
Thanks.
You could stop at his third step, unwrap the thing and do a heightmap with displacement.
@iacdxb M8 you've spent all that time trying to make that detail flow nicely into the flat quads, Just cap the area off with double edgeloops and you can do whatever you want in there as long as you triangulate any ngons that pop up.
Note: The lip errors only pop up in concave ngons.
As for the shape of the snakey bit, make sure you have the required control points to secure it's curves. To control a curve properly you'll need 3 control points. The more you have, the harder it is to control.
*it may get rejected by TD or AD if even in game environment this will be used for deformations
*it is insta no no approach in Film VFX department, this thread is for learning how to model shapes so its best we learn both ways as our industry is limited and we never know where life takes us
iacdxb: There are pros and cons to each and every method out there. Next time you run into a problem like this, try a different method than I showed you. You should learn all of the methods to be the strongest artist you can be.
Edit: Here's a different approach:
PolycountCounter said:
Hey guys, just a quick one. I'm trying to add a minor light to the bumper of this car, but I don't feel like this is the right way to implement it into the mesh. Any tips on how I could make this come better into the mesh?
Ref picture:
Ah!...missed this one, bit late with a reply.
So just a thought for future reference, I'm a great believer in keeping things simple because...well I think pre-empts unnecessary reedits down the track. Now even though your approach works, my suggestion is to basically sketch out those insets such as directional light and grill in the front facia first then simply bridge the edges. For further workflow insights take a peek at these, they're examples of IMO helpful automotive modeliing tips that'll be useful to keep in mind as your project develops.
http://www.carbodydesign.com/article/59531-modeling-cars-in-polygons/
https://polycount.com/discussion/184989/mini-cooper-classic-wip
Cheers.
Having trouble with the topology for this one. How would you guys do it to have a nice smooth intersection between the cube and cylinder? I would also like to have thin rounded corners.
Creasing the edges and smoothing in Maya resulted in pinched corners =/.
This freely provides the supporting geometry that will give a sharp division at the intersection.
This is very interesting, I'll try that but I already have some questions about it. if the cylinder is slightly offset, would be possible to mirror half of the model after? Probably yes but i'll need to figure it out.. maybe if i offset it until the cube edges stays exactly in the middle of two vertical cylinder edges ? Thanks a lot. I'll dig further.
EDIT:
@Zablorg I found what you said.
I'll try this, but, Iam still scratching my head on how to mirror half of the geometry if i want the cylinder to stay in the middle of the cube...maybe if offset it away from he cylinder? lets see...
By the way, people were mad at each other at the post i took this image from, so ignore the last phrase in the image.
also, there is a N-gon at the Structure image that i don't know how to properly solve it.
EDIT:
So, my result is very acceptable for my standards. But i still have issues that I would like some inputs from you guys. There is a n-gon, pinched edges and the shading is not perfect.
As for edge flow, try this:
Not really an issue though, right? They've just gotta maintain the current edge flow on the cube's outer corners.
So this would be the solution, I suppose?
The intersection was just a bevel and some sliding of the verts to make a round shape, which i then extuded and then did a spherize/circularize on it to make it a perfect cylinder. When you use subD with that low level of sides it's pretty forgiving with hand massaging verts. For clean hard surface modeling I usually avoid hand tweaking stuff and instead rely on the tools to get mathematically perfect surfaces, but for something this simple it's honestly fine.
Also there is no seam just after the bend.
The interior angle (underneath the bend) is sharper.
The flip back at the nozzle end is a single radius, rather than having a flat end.
All details, but they'll have a material impact on the methodology and topography of building this, especially if you want the surfaces to be really close to what they should be.
I'm not sure you can get mathematically perfect with sub-d on very much. To even do a simple constant radius arc you need 5 (iirc) verts... one at each end, and then a centre point, and then ones either side to guide the curve (and even then it's not perfect)
I've been screwing around with this model of my tomos' brakeshoes the last couple of days and I can't seem to get it quite right.
Tried keeping it as quaded as i can
I get these kinds of errors
Also tried with a boolean
But I get the same thing, I'm having trouble adding these details and keeping the curvature of the object intact. And im not quite sure why this pinching occurs it goes away when crease the vertical edges but then I get a hard crease of course.
For anybody wanting to take a look at the file I've enclosed it in my post. Its a blender 2.8 (which is coming along great!) file.
File:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/ehj033k9h2yqrhy/brakeshoes.blend/file
obj: http://www.mediafire.com/file/x0s0kxzyiydli4r/brakeshoe.obj/file
Don't like this pole! Anything I can do about it?
EDIT: realizing that there are three planes in play here like a cube, I ended up doing this:
I think I'd need a singular subdivide to have enough density to counter the subsequent creasing (due to the two new edge loops running to the bottom), but I actually like the effect it creates in this case.
I have to model this thing, at the start I thought, ohh yeah it`s easy, but actually is not
I really don`t know how start with this part.
Have you some suggest ?
Thx guys
I would recommend making a start with this as best you can, and then coming back to ask for feedback when you have a model to show.
I tried it on a plane too but was unable to get even spacing like @perna
I did try edge collapse again and it worked, I must be drunk the last time I tried
so on left non adjust verts at expanded area, on right slightly adjusted verts with edge constraints on. (I just selected the verts and scaled them)
I just hope Perna dont see this at all or anyone in admin otherwise this post of mine will go in a hall of fails XD
Does anyone know a way how I can get rid of that little bump? I tried making the support edges follow the entire edge loop, but that created a hard edge where I'd want the roundness to be preserved.
Unfortunately it has an undesirable effect on the profile, and the valleys become absolutely insane: