I am trying to wrap my head around modeling this shape around this cylinder shape. A boole method is the easiest but of course results in terrible geo. Any tips or ideas on how to model this? The fact it wraps around I find more difficult, if it were flat I would have an easier time.
I'm trying to make this form which is part of a drill press. I'm having issues with one of the areas during smoothing after bevelling. The problem area is actually hidden in the final model, but if I know it's there then I won't be able to move on from it. Apologies for the number of images.
The form before any bevels.
The edges to be bevelled.
Post bevelling.
The problem area before smoothing.
The smoothing problem. The circle is no longer circular on this side as the form smooths to the bevel. It also pinches where the bevel meets the circle.
No problem, I'll run a holding edge on the inside of the circle to contain the problem.
The circle is good now, but now I've got a really big pinch. This is the problem.
More holding edges to contain the pinch, but obviously...
This also stops the circle from forming correctly on that point of the circle. Everything else looks fine though!
I'm sure I've been looking at this for too long now, and the solution is right there! Any help is much appreciated!
Ok, got a breath of fresh air and came at it again. Doubled the circle segments so that it didn't deform as much. Then welded two verts together on the bevel. It's not perfect as I would have liked the bevels to transition into one another without a gap and would have preferred not to have a load of extra edges, but it's workable.
I am trying to wrap my head around modeling this shape around this cylinder shape. A boole method is the easiest but of course results in terrible geo. Any tips or ideas on how to model this? The fact it wraps around I find more difficult, if it were flat I would have an easier time.
This is what I'd do:
Model the 'internal' ring (the bit with the cut-outs) flat. Don't forget to use symmetry. Then use a bend modifier to turn it into a cylinder and extrude the top/bottom edges to make the chamfered edge.
I'm trying to make this form which is part of a drill press. I'm having issues with one of the areas during smoothing after bevelling. The problem area is actually hidden in the final model, but if I know it's there then I won't be able to move on from it. Apologies for the number of images.
The form before any bevels.
The edges to be bevelled.
Post bevelling.
The problem area before smoothing.
The smoothing problem. The circle is no longer circular on this side as the form smooths to the bevel. It also pinches where the bevel meets the circle.
No problem, I'll run a holding edge on the inside of the circle to contain the problem.
The circle is good now, but now I've got a really big pinch. This is the problem.
More holding edges to contain the pinch, but obviously...
This also stops the circle from forming correctly on that point of the circle. Everything else looks fine though!
I'm sure I've been looking at this for too long now, and the solution is right there! Any help is much appreciated!
Question: How would one subD model a hexagon into a curve? My brain can't do it. I've tried a few different ways straight modeling. My thought is maybe subd the curve surface. Then Boolean/cut in the hex hole on the high poly handle. I would like to do it low poly and let the subD do the work if possible. The actual application is a hex bolt in a sloping organic knife grip casing.
Application Model:Link All but the hole near the pommel are supposed to be hexagonal.
Sorry AnimatedApe, I mucked about with it for a while, but I also was not able to fix the issue. :< I've posted my test files if anyone else wants to mess with the issue.
Question: How would one subD model a hexagon into a curve? My brain can't do it. I've tried a few different ways straight modeling. My thought is maybe subd the curve surface. Then Boolean/cut in the hex hole on the high poly handle. I would like to do it low poly and let the subD do the work if possible. The actual application is a hex bolt in a sloping organic knife grip casing.
Application Model:Link All but the hole near the pommel are supposed to be hexagonal.
wirrexx So you fixed the pinching by adding more geo and spacing it to support the subD form?
Precisly Keyword for stuff that curve, Spacing! And i added enough geo, Because every side needs 2 supporting loops (+1 the one thats already there) 6*3 = 18. Did not like the spacing so i added 4 extra edges where there were to big spacing apart, so in total 22.
I've been trying to model a car for a while now but this specific bit is giving me trouble, I need it to be fairly sharp but I want to avoid a visible crease running along the body, what would be a good way to approach this ?
@earlgrey Hey, you can find examples on how to deal with that in page 162, basically you have to use one of the vertical edges of the cylinder to support the extrusion.
@earlgrey Like Udjani said you want to try and land your intersecting shapes between the vertical edge loops on the cylinder. That way the cylinder's edge loops become support loops for the intersection. Switching from a 12 point cylinder to a 16 point cylinder might cause the intersection to land between the loops on your mesh.
I think this comes up a lot because it's easy to select the side of a cylinder and extrude. This extrusion technique only works if you have a very dense mesh. Otherwise you'll just end up with stretching and pinching artifacts. The technique shown below works on most meshes and isn't so dependent on mesh density. (Within reason: you still need enough geometry to hold the shape.)
@Chryseus without context, I'm unsure what you're trying to accomplish. Is this modelled from a reference, if so can you post a screencap please?
I took a closer look at the references images I have and there is a visible line running along the body so my problem no longer exists, still I would be interested in knowing how you would model it so there is no visible line along the body, for clarification this is the line I'm talking about coming from the two edge loops:
I needed the two edge loops to hold the corner where the headlight fits, is there a way I can do it so there isn't a visible line in the body yet maintain the corner, here's what I was originally going for but as you can see the corner is no good with just one edge loop:
@earlgrey Like Udjani said you want to try and land your intersecting shapes between the vertical edge loops on the cylinder. That way the cylinder's edge loops become support loops for the intersection. Switching from a 12 point cylinder to a 16 point cylinder might cause the intersection to land between the loops on your mesh.
I think this comes up a lot because it's easy to select the side of a cylinder and extrude. This extrusion technique only works if you have a very dense mesh. Otherwise you'll just end up with stretching and pinching artifacts. The technique shown below works on most meshes and isn't so dependent on mesh density. (Within reason: you still need enough geometry to hold the shape.)
thanks for replying , can you show how the top view looks like?
I took a closer look at the references images I have and there is a visible line running along the body so my problem no longer exists, still I would be interested in knowing how you would model it so there is no visible line along the body, for clarification this is the line I'm talking about coming from the two edge loops:
I needed the two edge loops to hold the corner where the headlight fits, is there a way I can do it so there isn't a visible line in the body yet maintain the corner, here's what I was originally going for but as you can see the corner is no good with just one edge loop:
One option I'd suggest, is to evenly space both edges (...your initial posted image) so that smooth shading is preserved along the body shell side panels, whilst at the same time both vertex points will maintain that corner for the front light cluster.
On a side note, a few things I try to keep in mind when especially working on automotive stuff:
- Use as few vertices as possible
- Maintain even edge spacing
- Only when base mesh is finalised, add trim and panel cuts
I took a closer look at the references images I have and there is a visible line running along the body so my problem no longer exists, still I would be interested in knowing how you would model it so there is no visible line along the body, for clarification this is the line I'm talking about coming from the two edge loops:
I needed the two edge loops to hold the corner where the headlight fits, is there a way I can do it so there isn't a visible line in the body yet maintain the corner, here's what I was originally going for but as you can see the corner is no good with just one edge loop:
One option I'd suggest, is to evenly space both edges (...your initial posted image) so that smooth shading is preserved along the body shell side panels, whilst at the same time both vertex points will maintain that corner for the front light cluster.
On a side note, a few things I try to keep in mind when especially working on automotive stuff:
- Use as few vertices as possible
- Maintain even edge spacing
- Only when base mesh is finalised, add trim and panel cuts
Cant wrap my head around this problem, I also have to apply Opensubdiv on this too but the artefacts are pretty annoying (Max) With Crease and Opensubdiv applied -> Result The weird lines wont go away The ngons will be removed though, the center one is an LCD screen which I will detach.
@DeathstrokeFTW might want to generate those shapes using 'floaters' (floating geometry)
I could but I also need some depth for my lowpoly Sometimes floaters give less information on some angles so I wanna fully make this first in HighPoly. I was going for a midpoly+floater workflow earlier.
A while back someone in here (I think it was throttlekitty) really helped me out by pointing me towards the chamfered edges + weighted normals workflow for low poly models. The one situation I haven't been able to figure out is what to do when you have an intersection like the following:
The high poly represents two separate parts coming together to form a concave angle, but because they're two separate objects, there isn't really a 'chamfer' or smooth transition between the two surfaces on the high poly.
So what do I do? Do I still put in a small chamfer on the lp, but enough for face weighted normals?
@DeathstrokeFTW might want to generate those shapes using 'floaters' (floating geometry)
I could but I also need some depth for my lowpoly Sometimes floaters give less information on some angles so I wanna fully make this first in HighPoly. I was going for a midpoly+floater workflow earlier.
I`m working with 3D software for a lot of years now, but I only did some packaging related stuff. But for some time I want to learn new things and start creating more creative artworks.
I know that I will be never professional modeller, I`m not even trying to be, as I work in different industry which I like and where are my money:)
I want to create science fiction related artworks, so I thought that I should expand my knowledge of subdivions modelling, especially in hard surface topic. I`m still struggling between learning the hard way (SUBD modelling) and going for some shortcuts (for example Zbrush or 3D coat).
I`m trying to be ambitious so I bought Elementza course on Hard Surface Modelling, but unfortunately it doesnt give me all anwsers.
My biggest question is how to make all the little details using subdivions modelling. At first I would like to create spaceships similar to those from Elite Dangerous, but I`m completely intimidated by all the little details. I know that at this point all this details are baked, but at the begining someone had to model them. How, I ask?
Images from google. I know that those are low poly models, But I`m reffering to design of the ships, which I would recreate using SUBd modelling.
From what I read after I establish some general shape, I should dens my mesh. But to make all those little details, I should make it a really, really dense. I'm starting to think that there is some other approach to such modelling, and I wonder can you give me some hints about it:)
Or maybe, I should give up on learning this and jump into only creative process using zbrush?
Hi, this guy worked in a lot of blockbuster movies modeling spaceships with a mix of subdiv and non subdiv, he has a youtube channel an is also streaming on twitch lately. You should check it out, is probably enough information to get you started.
Any ideas on how to approach various bevels in Maya? The train pic is very similar to the results I want. It seems to be two beveled edges joining into one smooth beveled corner.
@sacboi, it looked fine, but I wanted the bevels to be more in line with the left side. Here's what I ended up going with. It's going to be stylized, so I'm not copying verbatim. @Jousef cheers for the inspiration!
I'm trying to model a recessed dual microphone input on an akai gx-646 reel-to-reel machine. The unit itself is flat, so I would be cool with tris and ngons. My question would be: Is this considered a "good" mesh or is this trash? I need these support cuts close to the middel so the shape holds up. The mesh itself does look strange though and I'd like it more minimalistic and clean.
Thing I'm trying to model:
My attempt (before subsurf):
How it renders:
/Edit: I've just tested a more minimal approach and the shape seems to be holding up relatively well:
Hi, I use Blender and have been trying to make these diamond shaped spikes (see Figure 1) on the back of this revolver's hammer. So far I haven't been able to find a solution that creates them without causing massive smoothing errors. The final model will be baked down to make a game-ready asset.
Figure 1 - Diamond Spikes on Revolver Hammer
At present, I have tried projecting a grid of squares onto my geometry and remaking this part of the hammer with the correct kind of geometry and bending it to shape. So far I've been going for a couple hours and I can't think of anything else. I would be grateful of any help (see Figure 2 for current state). If you happen to use other software I am well versed enough to translate some techniques into Blender.
Figure 2 - Current State
In addition, I would like to ask if using subsurf modelling is the best way to go about creating hard surface models. This revolver project has been going on for a while, and I spend most of my time struggling to fix all the issues so that the subsurf algorithm won't mess up the smoothing rather than actually creating the shapes. The boolean workflow sounds promising, but I know it has difficulty making smooth curves easily. Sculpting is very versatile, but I don't know very much about it. Any information about a good workflow for hardsurface modelling would be much appreciated.
Hi @KungFuCactus The easiest way to get those Grid details on your Geometry would be just using Normal / Height Details in your texturing program. If for some reason this isn't sufficient enough I'd create a plane with the general outline of the diamond details and project / wrap this plane on top of your existing geometry so you basically have a floater with just those diamond grids.
Yes subsurface modeling is the standard practice for creating hard surface models. What you can do is try and use multiple workflows in one piece they don't have to be exclusive. I often use the boolean workflow in conjunction with just normal subsurface modeling and you can do a damage pass in your sculpting packet of choice. Remember if you bake down your details from a high poly model it doesn't matter what the wireframe looks like as long as you have a clean low poly
If you want to know more information about good hardsurface modelling workflows check out the polycount wiki as there are tons of articles explaining more about the different workflows. Also this thread is a gold mine of information
I am a Max user and am currently at work, so can't show any images.
What I would do to create those diamond shapes on the cock;
Is to create more loops, and from the quads > extrude all the faces that you want to become diamonds outwards > scale everything down a little bit > create meshflow or crease sets to make the diamond shapes sharp for the turbosmoothing.
And then you can bake that detail onto a low poly mesh.
@KungFuCactus Edit: I thought you used max. Oh well, this is how I would do it in max.. For ease of modificatioin you can do displacement with a heightmap, or even bake the heightmap into the normals, but if you're like me you want to model it in because you want to model it in.
In that case, you can get away with some pretty awful geometry if you land it on a 45° edge. The more you plan out the amount of sides of the hammer vs how many jaggies you put in, the less graphical artifacts you'll end up with. IMO the small artifacts make it look more realistic, as nothing comes out perfect from a factory. How you establish the curve is up to you. You can do it later with FFD or you can do what I did, make a curved 2x4 plane, subdivide it a couple of times, then use this or any other method to get your diamonds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoHmNuP_NNk The downside of doing the curve first is that the 45° edge also needs to be curved. The tradeoff is that for me the 45° edge will be consistent. Oh well, here I go manipulating verts again. Notice how both the top and bottom of the diamonds reside within the 45° edge.
Give the diamonds depth. We'll be cutting them into the shapeyshape now.
Boolean that shiz, and end up with a triangulated mess. Quadify the top and collapse those verteces at the edges, add some supporting geometry on the sides and connect any vertexes you need to make all polygons on the 45° angle convex, and you'll end up with the result to the right. Pay more attention than I did, and you'll get fewer flaws. *DOUBLESMOOTH THAT BOI
*Doublesmooth means putting the whole thing in SG19, then selecting the diamonds only, and autosmoothing to 35° so all the diamondy edges are hard. Then apply a turbosmooth modifier that separates by smoothing groups. Ontop of that, toss another turbosmooth modifier that doesn't. If you want a sharper result, turn up iterations on that first turbosmooth mod.
Notes: If I had spent a bit longer on this, I would've properly set the amount of sides on the cylindrical shape to match the amount of segments i'd get with the diamonds. About double would've done it. That would've created less artifacts on the 45° edge. I'm also a moron who didn't realize you're not a max user. I'm sure your app has the same features, but the workflow will be a tad different.
My point stands, boolean into 45° angle is heckin' nice, and any toxic geometry is confined to that 45° angle.
@KungFuCactus in addition to the above advice offered thus far, another technique that'll achieve the Knurling pattern non-destructively on the hammer is by utilising Blender's modifier stack using the addon Speedflow.
...also in answer too your subd hard surface query, the same applies. Non-destructive workflows are really the cornerstone enabling both efficient and effective asset generation, either pre-rendered or realtime for that matter. As a point of interest I'll link this BlenderArtists thread:
An extremely insightful discussion, well practically a dev forum, in all intents and purposes : P
NITROX3D Manifesto
An Introduction to Non-Destructive Techniques in Blender for Industrial Designers
by Chipp Walters
WHAT IS NITROX3D ?
NITROX3D is the short name I will use to refer to a collection of non-destructive techniques and strategies for creating HD (Hard Surface) models in Blender. The acronym stands for:
N on-destructive I terative T echniques for R apid O bject e X ploration in 3D .
It’s basically a Non-Destructive Hard Surface Modeling. workflow which helps create product and concept designs quickly. The techniques work with the Open Source 3D software Blender and uses Blender’s non-destructive modifiers, which in CAD terms is often referred to as parametric tools.
The point of parametric CAD software is to allow designers and engineers to go back and change parts of an object’s design, including wall thicknesses, fillets, and boolean operations. These industry CAD systems are expensive, difficult to learn, and have many drawbacks including very high pricing, lack of realtime photoreal renders along with an inherent inability to quickly and easily adjust for proportion. It also focuses on the complete documentation of an object, including draft angles, bosses, rib structures and molding requirements, which are typically not necessary for concept design models.
All of this complexity makes CAD systems poor choices for designers when they want to quickly ideate on a few concept or product designs for review.
NITROX3D combines the power of CAD based parametric modeling with the ease of editing found in polygon based modeling. It excels at providing many of the above features but focuses on quick iterative changes for proportion and detail studies. Because NITROX3D works with Blender’s EEVEE rendering subsystem, it provides instantaneos photoreal feedback-- which is most helpful for designers in both reviewing their work and presenting it to others.
The NITROX3D workflow creates simple polygon geometry which when combined with the power of Blender’s modifier stack, provides fast and iterative parametric modeling-- and has the added advantage of being able to easily change the level of detail (number of polygons) for any object created. This is especially helpful if you’re looking to create Virtual or Augmented Reality experiences for design reviews. Because EEVEE is so fast, 5 minute animations of a product design can be rendered over a lunch break at HD resolutions.
While not required, NITROX3D can use a Blender only kit bashing system called KIT OPS to drag and drop onto models familiar components such as connectors, displays, screws and bolts, vents and other details with just a few clicks of the mouse. This again expedites the overall concept to finished product design as these objects are already modeled and part of different libraries called KPACKS. More info on KIT OPS can be found at kit-ops.com 42.
WHAT IS IT NOT?
NITROX3D is not a set of Blender addons. In fact it uses ZERO addons and instead focuses on the breadth and depth of the native Blender modifiers.
NITROX3D is not CAD (solid modeling) and it is not meant to take the place of CAD for final design drawings. While NITROX3D can be very accurate, polygon modelers are not typically used in industry to create documentation files. Because Blender and other modelers like 3D Max, Modo, Maya, Cinema 4D, and SketchUp are polygon based, they are called surface modelers. Surface modelers can be used to create manifold or “watertight” models for 3D printing, but not with the ease and accuracy of CAD based solid modeling software used in production environments.
While basic subdivision surface modeling can be used, it’s important to stress NITROX3D is not a workflow for creating organic objects, like cars. characters, vegetation and the like. It is more tuned to working with geometric hard surface forms.
While there are certainly some objects which may struggle within the confines of the NITROX3D workflow, it is truly surprising the number of complex objects which do work and can in fact be simplified to only a handful of polygons.
WHO IS IT FOR? This introduction video series targets Industrial and Concept Designers. Designers understand a good part of the time creating a design is the continued refining of scale and proportions after the first pass. NITROX3D allows for multiple iterations of tweaking a design, with the added benefit of being able to use libraries of existing components, including decals and materials, to add the finishing touch to a concept design. Being able to actually work in a realtime photoreal environment, allows the designer to visualize exactly how light and reflections will affect surfaces. This critical design phase is called CMF (Color, Material, Finish) and can actually take as much design time as form creation.
WHO IS IT NOT FOR? This first video series is not a comprehensive “HOW TO” for NITROX3D. It is also not a beginner modeling course for new Blender users. It’s goal is to explain the NITROX3D workflow and theory, and show many examples. It does not use any of the non-destructive workflow addons (of which there are many), and instead tries to provide a basic foundation and understanding of how the modifiers work with simple geometry to create complex forms.
WHY THIS VIDEO SERIES?
I’m a big believer in the 80/20 rule which states “get 80% there with 20% the time and effort.” My hope is many designers think similarly. This new workflow does exactly that, and cuts down on time spent doing customer tweaks.
Professional designers know iteration is the key to a successful design. Years ago in graduate design school we would create 50 different sketches for a simple radial symmetric 12 ounce shampoo bottle, then choose two favorites and create 50 refinements for them as well. Somewhere between 40-50 you actually find the one that “works.” As designers gather more experience, much of this iterative workflow becomes second nature, but it’s still important to be able to adjust and quickly review new refinements to an existing design.
Scale and proportion are two of the hallmarks of a great design-- and NITROX3D workflow simplifies both in a huge way. I’ve personally used this workflow on a number of client based projects in the past year, and wanted to continue to pursue it and share my findings by trying to model some existing designs to see just how well it works and how far it can go.
So, let’s push a few polys around, add some modifiers, and see what we end up with!
Thank you Mahaweilo, Zoddo, Thanez, Zoddo, sacboi. Ultimately, I used a heightmap to displace the geometry and constrained the axis to z. This way it wouldn't distort. The object was flat, but I bent it with a Lattice modifier, equivalent to FFD in Max.
Hi. The cylinder of this revolver is giving me trouble.
The method I was using to make it was to create my details on a plane (the concaves, and locks), use an array to duplicate 6 times and make it circular by curving with a circle curve. The main problem I'm having is that the supporting geometry for the details is causing pinching.
To fix this I made the geometry conform to a high poly cylinder.
However this is causing other issues.
Long story short there are too many problems being caused by this fix which was necessitated by the pinching. Please help me find another way to model it, preferably one that still enables me to modify it a bit when I need to.
Your topology is too dense. Go back a couple of pages, there's solutions modeling indented cylinders flat then using Blender's modifier stack to bend (deform) back into shape. Also for those small indents causing artefacts I'd use floaters instead.
The uneven line segments around the notches are the problem. Keep the cylinder's edge segments parallel and use them as support loops. Inset and cutout geometry should fall between edge segments and not on edge segments. This can be done in the round or in a flat strip bent into a circle.
Rough sketch of the basics.
You may need more geometry to support details.
Modeled flat and bent round with a 2X subdivision modifier.
Hello, I have been having a lot of trouble with this piece, it has taken me several hours with multiple attempts but i still cannot get it right. when i add thickness and apply the smooth modifier its really hard for me to maintain those edges on the cut in squares, and it just looks awful. I know that i could use booleans but i am being stubborn and i want to learn how to do this in maya.
Hi, I'm trying to model this track, but im not sure how im gonna unwrap and texture it. Here's what i have done so far I just want to know if im doing it right or is there any better way to do it.
Grid topology with even spacing and straight edge loops will fix a lot of those problems. Figure out how much geometry is needed to hold the sharpness in the corners and build off of that. This could be modeled flat and deformed or it could be done in the round. Either way you'll have to match the segments of the curved face plate to the geometry of the diamond cut outs.
The smallest cut outs are a little ratchet but if it shades correctly then it's fine.
It all depends on the acceptable level of sharpness and detail.
Scaling down the inner verts will sharpen the corners but past a certain point you'll need to add more geometry to support the tighter loop.
Replies
I am trying to wrap my head around modeling this shape around this cylinder shape. A boole method is the easiest but of course results in terrible geo. Any tips or ideas on how to model this? The fact it wraps around I find more difficult, if it were flat I would have an easier time.
I'm trying to make this form which is part of a drill press. I'm having issues with one of the areas during smoothing after bevelling. The problem area is actually hidden in the final model, but if I know it's there then I won't be able to move on from it. Apologies for the number of images.
The form before any bevels.
The edges to be bevelled.
Post bevelling.
The problem area before smoothing.
The smoothing problem. The circle is no longer circular on this side as the form smooths to the bevel. It also pinches where the bevel meets the circle.
No problem, I'll run a holding edge on the inside of the circle to contain the problem.
The circle is good now, but now I've got a really big pinch. This is the problem.
More holding edges to contain the pinch, but obviously...
This also stops the circle from forming correctly on that point of the circle. Everything else looks fine though!
I'm sure I've been looking at this for too long now, and the solution is right there! Any help is much appreciated!
This is what I'd do:
Model the 'internal' ring (the bit with the cut-outs) flat. Don't forget to use symmetry. Then use a bend modifier to turn it into a cylinder and extrude the top/bottom edges to make the chamfered edge.
Hope that makes sense.
How would one subD model a hexagon into a curve? My brain can't do it. I've tried a few different ways straight modeling. My thought is maybe subd the curve surface. Then Boolean/cut in the hex hole on the high poly handle. I would like to do it low poly and let the subD do the work if possible. The actual application is a hex bolt in a sloping organic knife grip casing.
Application Model: Link
All but the hole near the pommel are supposed to be hexagonal.
Test File: .txt --> .blend
Image of test file:
I've posted my test files if anyone else wants to mess with the issue.
Attached Blend Test File & FBX:
IronSight_SubD-Copy.txt --> .blend
IronSight_SubD.txt --> .fbx
It's been a while since I posted, should I be linking my files externally instead of dropping them in? Feel like the answer is yes.
@Chryseus without context, I'm unsure what you're trying to accomplish. Is this modelled from a reference, if so can you post a screencap please?
Chryseus said:
I took a closer look at the references images I have and there is a visible line running along the body so my problem no longer exists, still I would be interested in knowing how you would model it so there is no visible line along the body, for clarification this is the line I'm talking about coming from the two edge loops:
With Crease and Opensubdiv applied -> Result
The weird lines wont go away
The ngons will be removed though, the center one is an LCD screen which I will detach.
I was going for a midpoly+floater workflow earlier.
In maya it's much more easier than in max. Is max you need to use Edit Normals modifier or go for custom scripts
http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/scripts/improved-face-weighted-normals
http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/scripts/custom-normals-tool
So for not working out your high poly and toorbosmoothing it you can just manage custom normals and bake it to your low poly.
Good luck!
@Thanez
btw, you can weld the boolean vertices very easily in 3DS Max w/ the Vertex Cleaner script by Shiva
http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/scripts/vertex-cleaner
This is my first post on forum, so hi!
I`m working with 3D software for a lot of years now, but I only did some packaging related stuff. But for some time I want to learn new things and start creating more creative artworks.
I know that I will be never professional modeller, I`m not even trying to be, as I work in different industry which I like and where are my money:)
I want to create science fiction related artworks, so I thought that I should expand my knowledge of subdivions modelling, especially in hard surface topic. I`m still struggling between learning the hard way (SUBD modelling) and going for some shortcuts (for example Zbrush or 3D coat).
I`m trying to be ambitious so I bought Elementza course on Hard Surface Modelling, but unfortunately it doesnt give me all anwsers.
My biggest question is how to make all the little details using subdivions modelling. At first I would like to create spaceships similar to those from Elite Dangerous, but I`m completely intimidated by all the little details. I know that at this point all this details are baked, but at the begining someone had to model them. How, I ask?
Images from google. I know that those are low poly models, But I`m reffering to design of the ships, which I would recreate using SUBd modelling.
From what I read after I establish some general shape, I should dens my mesh. But to make all those little details, I should make it a really, really dense. I'm starting to think that there is some other approach to such modelling, and I wonder can you give me some hints about it:)
Or maybe, I should give up on learning this and jump into only creative process using zbrush?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFQbqSkgsNg&t=6911s
https://www.twitch.tv/andrewhodgson3d/videos?filter=archives&sort=time
attempt:
So I think I'm close, take a look !
When I find myself not knowing how to reach a certain topology, I start with as low poly as I can, and then build up step a time.
I'm trying to model a recessed dual microphone input on an akai gx-646 reel-to-reel machine. The unit itself is flat, so I would be cool with tris and ngons. My question would be: Is this considered a "good" mesh or is this trash? I need these support cuts close to the middel so the shape holds up. The mesh itself does look strange though and I'd like it more minimalistic and clean.
Thing I'm trying to model:
My attempt (before subsurf):
How it renders:
/Edit: I've just tested a more minimal approach and the shape seems to be holding up relatively well:
If you're baking this down to a normal map, you could keep it separate from the body of the main model, just use it as a floater. http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Normal_Map_Modeling#Floating_Geometry
"As long as the sub divided mesh achieves your intended goals without throwing shading errors/artefacts despite it's aesthetics, then all good"
Figure 1 - Diamond Spikes on Revolver Hammer
At present, I have tried projecting a grid of squares onto my geometry and remaking this part of the hammer with the correct kind of geometry and bending it to shape. So far I've been going for a couple hours and I can't think of anything else. I would be grateful of any help (see Figure 2 for current state). If you happen to use other software I am well versed enough to translate some techniques into Blender.
Figure 2 - Current State
In addition, I would like to ask if using subsurf modelling is the best way to go about creating hard surface models. This revolver project has been going on for a while, and I spend most of my time struggling to fix all the issues so that the subsurf algorithm won't mess up the smoothing rather than actually creating the shapes. The boolean workflow sounds promising, but I know it has difficulty making smooth curves easily. Sculpting is very versatile, but I don't know very much about it. Any information about a good workflow for hardsurface modelling would be much appreciated.
The easiest way to get those Grid details on your Geometry would be just using Normal / Height Details in your texturing program. If for some reason this isn't sufficient enough I'd create a plane with the general outline of the diamond details and project / wrap this plane on top of your existing geometry so you basically have a floater with just those diamond grids.
Yes subsurface modeling is the standard practice for creating hard surface models. What you can do is try and use multiple workflows in one piece they don't have to be exclusive. I often use the boolean workflow in conjunction with just normal subsurface modeling and you can do a damage pass in your sculpting packet of choice. Remember if you bake down your details from a high poly model it doesn't matter what the wireframe looks like as long as you have a clean low poly
If you want to know more information about good hardsurface modelling workflows check out the polycount wiki as there are tons of articles explaining more about the different workflows. Also this thread is a gold mine of information
Edit: I thought you used max. Oh well, this is how I would do it in max..
For ease of modificatioin you can do displacement with a heightmap, or even bake the heightmap into the normals, but if you're like me you want to model it in because you want to model it in.
In that case, you can get away with some pretty awful geometry if you land it on a 45° edge. The more you plan out the amount of sides of the hammer vs how many jaggies you put in, the less graphical artifacts you'll end up with. IMO the small artifacts make it look more realistic, as nothing comes out perfect from a factory.
How you establish the curve is up to you. You can do it later with FFD or you can do what I did, make a curved 2x4 plane, subdivide it a couple of times, then use this or any other method to get your diamonds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoHmNuP_NNk
The downside of doing the curve first is that the 45° edge also needs to be curved. The tradeoff is that for me the 45° edge will be consistent. Oh well, here I go manipulating verts again. Notice how both the top and bottom of the diamonds reside within the 45° edge.
Give the diamonds depth. We'll be cutting them into the shapeyshape now.
Boolean that shiz, and end up with a triangulated mess. Quadify the top and collapse those verteces at the edges, add some supporting geometry on the sides and connect any vertexes you need to make all polygons on the 45° angle convex, and you'll end up with the result to the right. Pay more attention than I did, and you'll get fewer flaws.
*DOUBLESMOOTH THAT BOI
*Doublesmooth means putting the whole thing in SG19, then selecting the diamonds only, and autosmoothing to 35° so all the diamondy edges are hard. Then apply a turbosmooth modifier that separates by smoothing groups. Ontop of that, toss another turbosmooth modifier that doesn't. If you want a sharper result, turn up iterations on that first turbosmooth mod.
Notes: If I had spent a bit longer on this, I would've properly set the amount of sides on the cylindrical shape to match the amount of segments i'd get with the diamonds. About double would've done it. That would've created less artifacts on the 45° edge. I'm also a moron who didn't realize you're not a max user. I'm sure your app has the same features, but the workflow will be a tad different.
My point stands, boolean into 45° angle is heckin' nice, and any toxic geometry is confined to that 45° angle.
@KungFuCactus in addition to the above advice offered thus far, another technique that'll achieve the Knurling pattern non-destructively on the hammer is by utilising Blender's modifier stack using the addon Speedflow.
https://twitter.com/pitiwazou
...also in answer too your subd hard surface query, the same applies. Non-destructive workflows are really the cornerstone enabling both efficient and effective asset generation, either pre-rendered or realtime for that matter. As a point of interest I'll link this BlenderArtists thread:
NITROX3D: A new hard surface workflow for designers
An extremely insightful discussion, well practically a dev forum, in all intents and purposes : P
NITROX3D Manifesto
An Introduction to Non-Destructive Techniques in Blender for Industrial Designers
by Chipp Walters
WHAT IS NITROX3D ?
NITROX3D is the short name I will use to refer to a collection of non-destructive techniques and strategies for creating HD (Hard Surface) models in Blender. The acronym stands for:
N on-destructive I terative T echniques for R apid O bject e X ploration in 3D .
It’s basically a Non-Destructive Hard Surface Modeling. workflow which helps create product and concept designs quickly. The techniques work with the Open Source 3D software Blender and uses Blender’s non-destructive modifiers, which in CAD terms is often referred to as parametric tools.
The point of parametric CAD software is to allow designers and engineers to go back and change parts of an object’s design, including wall thicknesses, fillets, and boolean operations. These industry CAD systems are expensive, difficult to learn, and have many drawbacks including very high pricing, lack of realtime photoreal renders along with an inherent inability to quickly and easily adjust for proportion. It also focuses on the complete documentation of an object, including draft angles, bosses, rib structures and molding requirements, which are typically not necessary for concept design models.
All of this complexity makes CAD systems poor choices for designers when they want to quickly ideate on a few concept or product designs for review.
NITROX3D combines the power of CAD based parametric modeling with the ease of editing found in polygon based modeling. It excels at providing many of the above features but focuses on quick iterative changes for proportion and detail studies. Because NITROX3D works with Blender’s EEVEE rendering subsystem, it provides instantaneos photoreal feedback-- which is most helpful for designers in both reviewing their work and presenting it to others.
The NITROX3D workflow creates simple polygon geometry which when combined with the power of Blender’s modifier stack, provides fast and iterative parametric modeling-- and has the added advantage of being able to easily change the level of detail (number of polygons) for any object created. This is especially helpful if you’re looking to create Virtual or Augmented Reality experiences for design reviews. Because EEVEE is so fast, 5 minute animations of a product design can be rendered over a lunch break at HD resolutions.
While not required, NITROX3D can use a Blender only kit bashing system called KIT OPS to drag and drop onto models familiar components such as connectors, displays, screws and bolts, vents and other details with just a few clicks of the mouse. This again expedites the overall concept to finished product design as these objects are already modeled and part of different libraries called KPACKS. More info on KIT OPS can be found at kit-ops.com 42.
WHAT IS IT NOT?
NITROX3D is not a set of Blender addons. In fact it uses ZERO addons and instead focuses on the breadth and depth of the native Blender modifiers.
NITROX3D is not CAD (solid modeling) and it is not meant to take the place of CAD for final design drawings. While NITROX3D can be very accurate, polygon modelers are not typically used in industry to create documentation files. Because Blender and other modelers like 3D Max, Modo, Maya, Cinema 4D, and SketchUp are polygon based, they are called surface modelers. Surface modelers can be used to create manifold or “watertight” models for 3D printing, but not with the ease and accuracy of CAD based solid modeling software used in production environments.
While basic subdivision surface modeling can be used, it’s important to stress NITROX3D is not a workflow for creating organic objects, like cars. characters, vegetation and the like. It is more tuned to working with geometric hard surface forms.
While there are certainly some objects which may struggle within the confines of the NITROX3D workflow, it is truly surprising the number of complex objects which do work and can in fact be simplified to only a handful of polygons.
WHO IS IT FOR?This introduction video series targets Industrial and Concept Designers. Designers understand a good part of the time creating a design is the continued refining of scale and proportions after the first pass. NITROX3D allows for multiple iterations of tweaking a design, with the added benefit of being able to use libraries of existing components, including decals and materials, to add the finishing touch to a concept design.
Being able to actually work in a realtime photoreal environment, allows the designer to visualize exactly how light and reflections will affect surfaces. This critical design phase is called CMF (Color, Material, Finish) and can actually take as much design time as form creation.
WHO IS IT NOT FOR?
This first video series is not a comprehensive “HOW TO” for NITROX3D. It is also not a beginner modeling course for new Blender users.
It’s goal is to explain the NITROX3D workflow and theory, and show many examples. It does not use any of the non-destructive workflow addons (of which there are many), and instead tries to provide a basic foundation and understanding of how the modifiers work with simple geometry to create complex forms.
WHY THIS VIDEO SERIES?
I’m a big believer in the 80/20 rule which states “get 80% there with 20% the time and effort.” My hope is many designers think similarly. This new workflow does exactly that, and cuts down on time spent doing customer tweaks.
Professional designers know iteration is the key to a successful design. Years ago in graduate design school we would create 50 different sketches for a simple radial symmetric 12 ounce shampoo bottle, then choose two favorites and create 50 refinements for them as well. Somewhere between 40-50 you actually find the one that “works.” As designers gather more experience, much of this iterative workflow becomes second nature, but it’s still important to be able to adjust and quickly review new refinements to an existing design.
Scale and proportion are two of the hallmarks of a great design-- and NITROX3D workflow simplifies both in a huge way. I’ve personally used this workflow on a number of client based projects in the past year, and wanted to continue to pursue it and share my findings by trying to model some existing designs to see just how well it works and how far it can go.
So, let’s push a few polys around, add some modifiers, and see what we end up with!
I used this pattern for the heightmap.
The method I was using to make it was to create my details on a plane (the concaves, and locks), use an array to duplicate 6 times and make it circular by curving with a circle curve. The main problem I'm having is that the supporting geometry for the details is causing pinching.
To fix this I made the geometry conform to a high poly cylinder.
However this is causing other issues.
Long story short there are too many problems being caused by this fix which was necessitated by the pinching. Please help me find another way to model it, preferably one that still enables me to modify it a bit when I need to.
I have been having a lot of trouble with this piece, it has taken me several hours with multiple attempts but i still cannot get it right.
when i add thickness and apply the smooth modifier its really hard for me to maintain those edges on the cut in squares, and it just looks awful. I know that i could use booleans but i am being stubborn and i want to learn how to do this in maya.
Here's what i have done so far
I just want to know if im doing it right or is there any better way to do it.