@kuronekoshiii It's generally considered best practice to have enough geometry in the cylinder to be able to use it as support for the intersecting geometry. A few pages back there's a discussion about different topology strategies for that particular shape and how much geometry is enough to minimize smoothing artifacts.
Hi all to the master here, I'm pretty new to 3D and I was trying to model a halo battle rifle called BR85HB, and I faced some problem which I don't really know how the topology work at this section because there are like hole etc, wonder if anyone here know how it work for the topology?
So sometimes when i think something is to advanced, I usually tend to break it up to smaller parts right, Concentrate on on one and slowly work myself on the next piece. When I am done, I try to Merge them together. Try it that way?
Also, try to show your example before posting.
So I will use photoshop once again.
Two ways to go at least for me. If something is hard I can also use the technique to draw how the edgeflow would go.
In this case, this piece is rather flat, so should be easy to use ngons and tris everywhere without having issues.
You could either split this up in three pieces and work them out (without adding support loops). Then merge and add the supporting loops.
You can go with the bigger shape to smaller shape workflow.
Primary = Build the shape without adding the bevels, around the shape. KISS (Keep it simple stupid).
Secondary = Now I would add the bevels bigger cut-ins that I know would not work well with floats (or I need a denser shape before adding them). I could also add Support loops in this shape. So it holds when Subdividing once (turbo smoothing).
Tertiary or floaters = With a denser cage, I can now either add my smaller details and merge them to the mesh Or use floaters.
I have something to ask, but in the case of the shape of the image below, where should I put the support edge?
I plan to apply a subdivision surface to this mesh.
I feel that the area marked with a red circle is particularly difficult.
So The easiest way to test this (because your mesh is fairly simple) Is by doubling the density. So 8 sides, 16 sides and 32 sides. And see what happens with the mesh.
Now lets use the Mesh itself to automatically use it as a supporting edge. So I start with a 24 sided mesh this time around, and make sure that my box mesh that intersect with it, Simply is between to edges so I automatically have support edges.
If you can, always try to use your existing geometry to support the mesh that will intersect.
PS! the higher the cylinders density is, the tighter the edge can be.
Hello guys,I'm trying to find a better and faster way to weld multiple vertices at once.It seems to be too time consuming, if they will be welded one by one(software using 3ds Max)
You can weld all those verts together with one hotkey press .
But I assume you want a weld tool that would know what vert you wanted to weld each one to, and looking at the images, you want it to be a target weld and not an averaged weld between the 2 points. In which case, afaik no there is no such tool that would be able to know how to do that.
You could just target weld all those in like 35secs, but maybe you could just bridge that gap instead and delete the extra loop might be faster if there are 30-40 pairs to weld.
You can weld all those verts together with one hotkey press .
But I assume you want a weld tool that would know what vert you wanted to weld each one to, and looking at the images, you want it to be a target weld and not an averaged weld between the 2 points. In which case, afaik no there is no such tool that would be able to know how to do that.
You could just target weld all those in like 35secs, but maybe you could just bridge that gap instead and delete the extra loop might be faster if there are 30-40 pairs to weld.
try bridging them and then deleting the extra loop
Thank you guys, good suggestion.Actually I know how the bridge tool works (and will try it later) , but I just wanted any tool or specific method which could be able to target weld multiple vertices at once.
You can weld all those verts together with one hotkey press .
But I assume you want a weld tool that would know what vert you wanted to weld each one to, and looking at the images, you want it to be a target weld and not an averaged weld between the 2 points. In which case, afaik no there is no such tool that would be able to know how to do that.
You could just target weld all those in like 35secs, but maybe you could just bridge that gap instead and delete the extra loop might be faster if there are 30-40 pairs to weld.
try bridging them and then deleting the extra loop
Thank you guys, good suggestion.Actually I know how the bridge tool works (and will try it later) , but I just wanted any tool or specific method which could be able to target weld multiple vertices at once.
And selecting all the verts you want to weld and weld by distance does not work?
You can weld all those verts together with one hotkey press .
But I assume you want a weld tool that would know what vert you wanted to weld each one to, and looking at the images, you want it to be a target weld and not an averaged weld between the 2 points. In which case, afaik no there is no such tool that would be able to know how to do that.
You could just target weld all those in like 35secs, but maybe you could just bridge that gap instead and delete the extra loop might be faster if there are 30-40 pairs to weld.
try bridging them and then deleting the extra loop
Thank you guys, good suggestion.Actually I know how the bridge tool works (and will try it later) , but I just wanted any tool or specific method which could be able to target weld multiple vertices at once.
And selecting all the verts you want to weld and weld by distance does not work?
he probably wants to maintain the position of one of the rows of vertices - a global weld value will average their distances and put em in the middle. Target welding is time consuming, but bridging + deleting the loop as mentioned is the way to go here.
Hey guys, here is another piece. I dont want to use smooth modifier afterwards, so this should be final piece. I ma just not quite sure about topology of object and if this is okay.
Hey guys, here is another piece. I dont want to use smooth modifier afterwards, so this should be final piece. I ma just not quite sure about topology of object and if this is okay.
in general if it smooths good, and you have no visible artifacts, then go ahead, use whatever topology you want.
This was probably asked before, but I couldn't find it. How would you model this in one piece? The grip points or whatever they are called are giving me a hard time.
Often the easiest solution for simple shapes but small details, use a ton of geometry for the basic shapes. Enough so that those grips can just be extruded out.
Hi all to the master here, I'm pretty new to 3D and I was trying to model a halo battle rifle called BR85HB, and I faced some problem which I don't really know how the topology work at this section because there are like hole etc, wonder if anyone here know how it work for the topology?
So sometimes when i think something is to advanced, I usually tend to break it up to smaller parts right, Concentrate on on one and slowly work myself on the next piece. When I am done, I try to Merge them together. Try it that way?
Also, try to show your example before posting.
So I will use photoshop once again.
Two ways to go at least for me. If something is hard I can also use the technique to draw how the edgeflow would go.
In this case, this piece is rather flat, so should be easy to use ngons and tris everywhere without having issues.
You could either split this up in three pieces and work them out (without adding support loops). Then merge and add the supporting loops.
You can go with the bigger shape to smaller shape workflow.
Primary = Build the shape without adding the bevels, around the shape. KISS (Keep it simple stupid).
Secondary = Now I would add the bevels bigger cut-ins that I know would not work well with floats (or I need a denser shape before adding them). I could also add Support loops in this shape. So it holds when Subdividing once (turbo smoothing).
Tertiary or floaters = With a denser cage, I can now either add my smaller details and merge them to the mesh Or use floaters.
Hi sorry for a late reply was busy about assignment but truly thank you so much for the explanation!
With 3dsMax I drew a line that turns (I used the Line tool). The only problem is that the final shape is not straight anymore. How can I do it?
The angle of the shape is turned. How to solve this problem? Thank you.
I would like to do this shape.
Let me be honest, atleast from my point of view. The shape you are showing and the shape on the picture under, does not make sense for me. any better picture? Cause from the references picture, it seems like a flat face. nothing else.
With 3dsMax I drew a line that turns (I used the Line tool). The only problem is that the final shape is not straight anymore. How can I do it?
The angle of the shape is turned. How to solve this problem? Thank you.
Let me be honest, atleast from my point of view. The shape you are showing and the shape on the picture under, does not make sense for me. any better picture? Cause from the references picture, it seems like a flat face. nothing else.
phew, i thought i was going stupid
this is what your shape looks like from the photo, maybe the bottom part has a slight curve to it which i didnt model in
Thanks for the help. The problem is only the extrusion of the Line tool. As soon as you make a change of direction the extrusion is not straight. Example in video :
Thanks for the help. The problem is only the extrusion of the Line tool. As soon as you make a change of direction the extrusion is not straight. Example in video :
bezier curves could probably rotate that area, haven't used line tool for this sorta situation. Most control/predictability is to just get a flat polygon and apply a shell modifier. Edit the bottom of the stack with preview on to ensure you're getting your result. Shift drag the edge to get more geometry and move it into place. For the problematic part you're highlighting, you could simply just grab the corner vertice of the polygon and adjust it on the z-axis to get that rotation.
I did your technique by doing a Shell, an alignment of some parts and several chamfer. I was curious to see if there was another technique. Because it's not very practical anyway. I would have liked more customization in the Line tool. It's a pity. Thank you so much !
Basically, you will need to fiddle around with the link shape and Empty object offset and rotation. If after watching this video you will have questions feel free to ask.
For jewelry see if you can figure out the name of the type of chain, and then find a youtube video of it being made or repaired. That way you can see what one link looks like and how it's twisted. Personally for this chain, I'd probably bake it to a double helix looking shape with 2 cylinders, make it tile, and then I'd have a simple piece of geo I could then work with.
Trying to model a simple folding box as a single piece
My current result is more or less adequate with regards to the shape I want, but it does have some apparent issues.
The process for modeling this was a bit odd in that I created an SVG in Illustrator in order to better control proportions, but I adhered pretty strictly with the geometry that came out of converting from SVG to a workable mesh.
I am looking to try and do a leather strap around my object, however, I'm having some real trouble with it. This is the best I've got so far and it's by doing it manually with a plane with a solidify & sub-d modifier on it.
I have no clue how to fix it, I'm completely stuck on how to do this at this point and get it to look good. Would love to be pointed in the right direction! Thank you! P.S I'm using blender.
Hi everyone I'm trying to model something from this reference art in maya. And I have some topology problem where I suppose it goes somewhere wrong and can be simplified also not sure about how do get those sharp edge with subdiv as well. Smooth preview in maya (2 times subdiv) Anyone here know how do I can make it with better topology and better result? Thanks in advance
Is there a nice way to have two circular bevels of different sizes meet and intersect in such a way that circularity is preserved? As in this CAD image below:
Using the bevel tool with different bevel weights doesn't work - the tool forces the bevels to use the same end vertices, so the different bevel weight seems to force non-circularity on the bevels:
Doing one bevel first results in the second bevel being way off:
The only solution I've found is to use a boolean cut, but it seems like a lot of work:
Is this a situation where the answer is 'why are you even doing that'?
The background is that I thought I'd try to do a simple base mesh of an old DMG-01 Gameboy as a learner project but the different sized bevels are key to the form.
Replies
Two ways to go at least for me. If something is hard I can also use the technique to draw how the edgeflow would go.
Is by doubling the density.
So 8 sides, 16 sides and 32 sides. And see what happens with the mesh.
Now lets use the Mesh itself to automatically use it as a supporting edge.
So I start with a 24 sided mesh this time around, and make sure that my box mesh that intersect with it, Simply is between to edges so I automatically have support edges.
If you can, always try to use your existing geometry to support the mesh that will intersect.
But I assume you want a weld tool that would know what vert you wanted to weld each one to, and looking at the images, you want it to be a target weld and not an averaged weld between the 2 points. In which case, afaik no there is no such tool that would be able to know how to do that.
he probably wants to maintain the position of one of the rows of vertices - a global weld value will average their distances and put em in the middle. Target welding is time consuming, but bridging + deleting the loop as mentioned is the way to go here.
in general if it smooths good, and you have no visible artifacts, then go ahead, use whatever topology you want.
helps to show your topology without subdivisions/isoline display
make use of radial symmetry, so you only have to model 1/16th of the thing
While on the photo the small wall does not change direction.
Sorry, if this is not understandable.
bezier curves could probably rotate that area, haven't used line tool for this sorta situation. Most control/predictability is to just get a flat polygon and apply a shell modifier. Edit the bottom of the stack with preview on to ensure you're getting your result. Shift drag the edge to get more geometry and move it into place. For the problematic part you're highlighting, you could simply just grab the corner vertice of the polygon and adjust it on the z-axis to get that rotation.
Basically, you will need to fiddle around with the link shape and Empty object offset and rotation.
If after watching this video you will have questions feel free to ask.
Trying to model a simple folding box as a single piece
My current result is more or less adequate with regards to the shape I want, but it does have some apparent issues.
The process for modeling this was a bit odd in that I created an SVG in Illustrator in order to better control proportions, but I adhered pretty strictly with the geometry that came out of converting from SVG to a workable mesh.
looks like double vertices in the corner
check your geo and merge vertices by distance
I am looking to try and do a leather strap around my object, however, I'm having some real trouble with it. This is the best I've got so far and it's by doing it manually with a plane with a solidify & sub-d modifier on it.
The second one is what I'm trying to do, I've tried doing a shrink-wrap on the plane however it comes out looking like this
I have no clue how to fix it, I'm completely stuck on how to do this at this point and get it to look good. Would love to be pointed in the right direction! Thank you! P.S I'm using blender.
this upper image, this is what i got as a base
when I apply crease on the hard edges I got a pinching and I don't know how to overcome those (see below):
I would be happy if anyone can give me an advice, thank you
This kind of topology layout might help you:
When doing the cut, try to land your boolean shape between the edges, this way you won't disturb the edges that define the shape.
This will work with creases too:
I better not use imgur next time...
oh that is awesome thanks a lot Yusuf
Take a look at this, maybe it will help:
From this point, you will need to add another strap that goes spiral in opposite direction.
Also, you will have to apply some of the strap's modifiers to wrap the strap around axe's head.
Hope that will help.
@KebabEmperor
Correct! not only how but more importantly the WHY particularly when modeling curved surfaces, once a subd algorithm is applied
And I have some topology problem where I suppose it goes somewhere wrong and can be simplified also not sure about how do get those sharp edge with subdiv as well.
Smooth preview in maya (2 times subdiv)
Anyone here know how do I can make it with better topology and better result? Thanks in advance
Hi all, CAD guy here learning some Blender.
Is there a nice way to have two circular bevels of different sizes meet and intersect in such a way that circularity is preserved? As in this CAD image below:
Using the bevel tool with different bevel weights doesn't work - the tool forces the bevels to use the same end vertices, so the different bevel weight seems to force non-circularity on the bevels:
Doing one bevel first results in the second bevel being way off:
The only solution I've found is to use a boolean cut, but it seems like a lot of work:
Is this a situation where the answer is 'why are you even doing that'?
The background is that I thought I'd try to do a simple base mesh of an old DMG-01 Gameboy as a learner project but the different sized bevels are key to the form.