Hey, I've got a little problem with this shell model. I edit it in flat mode then add shell modifier for thickness, but it happens appear uneven thickness. If I check straighten corners the thickness is even, but it change angle between edges (around pole where vertex share 5 edges), a little corrupt the overall smooth in area nearby... From distance, shell uneven thickness is unnoticeable & can leave it without fixing, but I just want ask if you've got better way to make it, thanks.
Looks like you're doing the 'outer shell'?
-Try an inner shell with straighten corners?
-If you are unable to do the inner shell(mesh is too close and intersects with inside mesh), delete the extruded area, scale the whole thing from the center, then extrude that part again, then do the 'inner shell' with straighten corners.
yeah I agree
I always try to do a shell going the way that the model is not viewed from. But in most cases you will have to fix something usually, and it usually just a hand adjustment of two verts.
This looks like a simple thickness to apply manually as well if needed. Like what drew says
The idea itself isn´t that bad, but the geometry isn´t good enough to hold the form of the holes.Therefore you get these weird lumpy holes. Like said many times before ADD MORE GEO :P
If not, this is the obj:http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1114083/barrel.obj
Just add a shell modifier(if you want thickness, set it segments to about 3-4)
Then add a Turbo Smooth modifier on top.
thank you very much, yeah mine was just a quick one to see if it would sort of work or not, figured id find out what everyone else would do before i went to much into it. thanks again this looks like it will work well
Hi everyone. I've just been modeling random objects around my room lately. I'm working on modeling my Intous4 tablet at the moment. Was hoping someone could help me figure out how to add some certain details. I attached a pic of what I have so far.
the square indents for the buttons aren't too much of a hassle for me, but the circle bit is. Have never been good with these sorts of details.
A few posts up Specter has an image showing how to get a round shape from a grid. On the side of your intuos model you have a planar area that could be turned into such a grid by adding 2 more loops.
A few posts up Specter has an image showing how to get a round shape from a grid. On the side of your intuos model you have a planar area that could be turned into such a grid by adding 2 more loops.
Ah I didn't even see that post. Thanks. I went ahead yesterday and tried some of the approaches I knew. I think I did something similar to what Specter did in those images.
Here's how it looks now.
I know it looks a bit messy, but I couldn't see a way to keep it super clean. around the circle indent. I'm guessing its okay like this. It looks fine smoothed:
I was also wondering something else about this thread. It say's sub-d at the top, but I haven't seen much actual use of using sub-d geo in this thread (I haven't read through it all though). It seems like most of the stuff I've seen is normal modeling techniques for getting good looking models when smoothed or when using a smooth preview option in whatever 3d App people are using.
Is that what people call sub-d modeling? I'm a maya user and there's the whole convert to Sub-d option, and afterwards the whole approach to getting detail kind of changes. I always thought that was what sub-d modeling was.
Sub-D Modelling = subdivision modelling so it is indeed sub-d modelling what we do.
You could say working in zbrush is sub-d modelling(sculpting to be precise) too.
Actually by smoothing our models we mean that we subdivide them hence the sub-d.
You apply normal modelling techniques plus some additional tweaks like control edges and stuff to maintain the desired shape, because the subdividing algorithm(Catmull-Clark for most programs) would distort it in a way we don´t want.
Sub-D Modelling = subdivision modelling so it is indeed sub-d modelling what we do.
You could say working in zbrush is sub-d modelling(sculpting to be precise) too.
Actually by smoothing our models we mean that we subdivide them hence the sub-d.
You apply normal modelling techniques plus some additional tweaks like control edges and stuff to maintain the desired shape, because the subdividing algorithm(Catmull-Clark for most programs) would distort it in a way we don´t want.
Oh, right I see. I've been sub-d modeling all along then. I just always thought it was only Sub-D modeling when you went and converted your mesh into one of the more advanced Sub-D surfaces like you can in maya, and then use the extra tools that provides.
Geez i feel like an idiot' I probably should have thought more about the words 'Sub-divide', heh.
I was also wondering something else about this thread. It say's sub-d at the top, but I haven't seen much actual use of using sub-d geo in this thread (I haven't read through it all though). It seems like most of the stuff I've seen is normal modeling techniques for getting good looking models when smoothed or when using a smooth preview option in whatever 3d App people are using.
Is that what people call sub-d modeling? I'm a maya user and there's the whole convert to Sub-d option, and afterwards the whole approach to getting detail kind of changes. I always thought that was what sub-d modeling was.
Yes, maya refers to some funky patch based workflow as sub-d modeling, which I think is correct in that it is a form of sub-d modeling, but it is not exclusively so. Here are a variety of terms from various apps that refer to sub-division modeling in some form:
Metanurbs(lightwave)
Nurms(max)
Turbosmooth(max)
Meshsmooth(max)
Smooth Preview(maya)
Smooth Mesh(maya)
It seems like most apps have a different term for it, but its all sub-d.
I am trying to model the shape on the left. Modeled the detail on a plane then duplicated 5 times, stitched and bent into cylinder form. It makes a nice cylinder, but part of the detail is protruding. I tried subdividing a couple times before bending, but that does not help either. I guess the problem lies in the diagonal shape of the cutout- is it possible to model this at all?
1. MOAR GEO(overall and above the indent shape where the pole is)
2. try to get rid of the pole(if you don´t know how, i will give you a quick example)
3. dunno, the first suggestions should be enough
thanks, that's actually far, far better from what i did. there is still a minimal offset, but I think that can only be decreased any further if I throw more geo at it.
I guess what happens is:
1. Bend modifier is being used on unsubdivided geometry
2. After bending edges are properly (round) distributed
3. BUT, when entering sub-d mode, the edges are being offset a bit, thus causing the "distortion"
SOLUTION: would be to further subdivide the mesh before bending, because then the bending modifier would work on geomtry that more closely resembles the subdivided mesh.
Is that about correct?
Also, how did you create that shape in the plane? I can rebuild that poly by poly, but what would be the first two or three steps to manipulate the inner polygons of a plane to get this?
Yes it´s more or less correct, but even with the now given geometry you should be fine enough i guess.
Here is some kind of step by step:
1.Starting plane :P
2.Inset desired faces
3.deleted 2 polygons and adjusted it(i hope that part is clear enough)
4.Adjust shape(deleted 2 edges which came from the inset) and made new cuts
5.Chamfered the edges+ cleanup
6.added more edges to hold the shape
7.2 cuts to close the loop
Edit2:
You can actually skip 1-3 and start with a plane with 8x8 segments and adjust it to the desired shape
Im trying to model that wooden part, but I wasnt able to create it without having still a nice and smooth rounded shape at the end. Especially the part where the barrel is, I cant get that 90° edge there.
I'd generally advice against the "model flat, then bend" approach. Just model it bent in the first place, it'll be faster. The danger here is that if you're not good at modeling curves shapes and intersections your skills aren't going to approve if you use that approach. The more you model things as they should be in the first place, the faster and better you'll get.
Yes I am going to agree here. Generally speaking its best to just sort of do the math, figure out how many sides you need to hold the shape and... Model it! For some really advanced stuff it can be nice to do the bend workflow, but doing the bend is weird in that you've gotta scale it correctly to get the proper diameter and other technical problems like that.
In modo I dont have a way to do a bend after sub-d(without freezing the mesh) so I dont really use it much ever. One of the few features I pine after in max
Yes it´s more or less correct, but even with the now given geometry you should be fine enough i guess.
Here is some kind of step by step:
1.Starting plane :P
2.Inset desired faces
3.deleted 2 polygons and adjusted it(i hope that part is clear enough)
4.Adjust shape(deleted 2 edges which came from the inset) and made new cuts
5.Chamfered the edges+ cleanup
6.added more edges to hold the shape
7.2 cuts to close the loop
Edit2:
You can actually skip 1-3 and start with a plane with 8x8 segments and adjust it to the desired shape
8. Split the two poly rings on the right with an extra edge here as well so you've got even distribution.
well you have the shape right there... I would imagine add some support edges do some insets on those curves and done... but thats just a guess can't tell without seeing the wire on that object
ok I got one, it isnt so much a how to model it, more along the lines of a good way to APPROACH modeling this area.. Should it be part of the same unit or should this area be its own chunk? I have the plane right now in chunks but the whole middle area is non existant from pictures I found it looks like its one smooth chunk but for modeling reasons I Cant figure out a good way to approach this..
suggestions anyone? (Yes I need to make landing gear as well)
Okay. That quote is like 3 human years (and thus 759 yak-sandwich years) old. But I'm reading through the thread from the beginning SO THERE.
As a gamer and non-3D guy, I wish more game assets failed to attain proper geometric proportions. THe most interesting thing to me about this photograph is the red text.
I'm sure My Opinion <= .00001% of the gaming public, but as an end-user, my heart hurts to retain this scribbled question. I mean, okay, you're supposedto make accurate models. But I want a smooth-bottomed plane with a terrified horse strapped to the bottom with glitter twine, and some cookies and LPs glued on for wheels.
Oh, and a diagram on the bottom of the plane, red text, with arrows: "pony", "wheels", etc. And question marks. "Pony ??"
And a proud declaration, "that's how I would solve your problem."
Yeah, okay, the player'll have to think pretty carefully about mode of transportation. Who supplies the pony?
I simply can't think of a genre that, at this point, wouldn't benefit from a madly squealing horse, glitter, and cookies falling off planes, during flight. And a gruesome series of sound effects and splatter on impact. Okay, you crash every time. So did the Dukes. Cut. New car. Roll camera.
Poor horse. Happy modeler. For starters, think of how big the plane is... nobody's ever going to have to model or animate the body rending. That's now the sound designer's job.
+Happy sound designer.
Can I file this under "shortcuts = however you get the job done"?
EDIT: saving you the trouble. All my posts got lumped together, cause I'm new, and I think most of it wasn't worth reading. There was so much to absorb in this thread, I just kind of turned into a brain puddle.
Great tips everyone. can i have some help with this. i need to do a shell. i found this pic, and cant figure out how to model this without doing it all by hand methods? thx for the help.
More old posts. But so far no one has answered the following, so I thought I'd throw it out there:
This is a parametric equation. Don't know it off the top of my head, but it's one of those that shows up in graphing software as an example. OSX's "grapher" might have it.
Can you load equations in 3D apps? Talking out my butt here, but I mean, type it once and arbitrarily high number of quads thereafter, no additional work. Right?
I tend to think in math, so maybe this isn't much use if you don't, but shapes like this seem like they'd be complicated to mimic manually.
Im just helplessly watching -maybe the best- intro. material on this subject at the link above... come on man, spannish? :poly127:
And it has also introduction to nurbs.
There are pictures but ... ok, i stop crying.
Dude, seriously:
"
Tal como explica la Wikipedia, una superficie de subdivisi
Replies
Hey, I've got a little problem with this shell model. I edit it in flat mode then add shell modifier for thickness, but it happens appear uneven thickness. If I check straighten corners the thickness is even, but it change angle between edges (around pole where vertex share 5 edges), a little corrupt the overall smooth in area nearby... From distance, shell uneven thickness is unnoticeable & can leave it without fixing, but I just want ask if you've got better way to make it, thanks.
Can you guys tell how can i make this shape in red circle ?
another look
http://legion-afv.narod.ru/USSR/Heavy_USSR/KV-1_Kirovsk_2/KV-1_Kirovsk_2_119.JPG
http://legion-afv.narod.ru/USSR/Heavy_USSR/KV-1_Kirovsk_2/KV-1_Kirovsk_2_118.JPG
I would be gratefull
-Try an inner shell with straighten corners?
-If you are unable to do the inner shell(mesh is too close and intersects with inside mesh), delete the extruded area, scale the whole thing from the center, then extrude that part again, then do the 'inner shell' with straighten corners.
Something like this anyways...
I always try to do a shell going the way that the model is not viewed from. But in most cases you will have to fix something usually, and it usually just a hand adjustment of two verts.
This looks like a simple thickness to apply manually as well if needed. Like what drew says
How about this?
OBJ
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/93793/thing.obj
Ref:
i was thinking of a plane thats got the holes in and is subdivided and then use the bend modifier
sorry for the bad img
I made an example which does it´s job:
If you have max 2010(or higher) you can take a look at it directly:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1114083/barrel.max
If not, this is the obj:http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1114083/barrel.obj
Just add a shell modifier(if you want thickness, set it segments to about 3-4)
Then add a Turbo Smooth modifier on top.
shoot sorry for the double post should have edited my other one
Pedro Amorim thank you for reply and .obj. It helped me a lot but its not correctly in 100%
look..
I just made one plane with a hole in it used the array tool to duplicate it, attached them together and then weld.
thanks speCter, i was trying to do it buy chamfering the center vert, it wasnt working very well lol
I need to get these indents for the button and the round indent for the wheel thingy. You can see them on this page, towards the bottom: http://skarh.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/wacom-intuos-4-medium/
the square indents for the buttons aren't too much of a hassle for me, but the circle bit is. Have never been good with these sorts of details.
thanks!
A few posts up Specter has an image showing how to get a round shape from a grid. On the side of your intuos model you have a planar area that could be turned into such a grid by adding 2 more loops.
Ah I didn't even see that post. Thanks. I went ahead yesterday and tried some of the approaches I knew. I think I did something similar to what Specter did in those images.
Here's how it looks now.
I know it looks a bit messy, but I couldn't see a way to keep it super clean. around the circle indent. I'm guessing its okay like this. It looks fine smoothed:
Is that what people call sub-d modeling? I'm a maya user and there's the whole convert to Sub-d option, and afterwards the whole approach to getting detail kind of changes. I always thought that was what sub-d modeling was.
You could say working in zbrush is sub-d modelling(sculpting to be precise) too.
Actually by smoothing our models we mean that we subdivide them hence the sub-d.
You apply normal modelling techniques plus some additional tweaks like control edges and stuff to maintain the desired shape, because the subdividing algorithm(Catmull-Clark for most programs) would distort it in a way we don´t want.
Oh, right I see. I've been sub-d modeling all along then. I just always thought it was only Sub-D modeling when you went and converted your mesh into one of the more advanced Sub-D surfaces like you can in maya, and then use the extra tools that provides.
Geez i feel like an idiot' I probably should have thought more about the words 'Sub-divide', heh.
Yes, maya refers to some funky patch based workflow as sub-d modeling, which I think is correct in that it is a form of sub-d modeling, but it is not exclusively so. Here are a variety of terms from various apps that refer to sub-division modeling in some form:
Metanurbs(lightwave)
Nurms(max)
Turbosmooth(max)
Meshsmooth(max)
Smooth Preview(maya)
Smooth Mesh(maya)
It seems like most apps have a different term for it, but its all sub-d.
Ah yeah, thanks for the info.
Now it sounds like a more geometry solution.
2. try to get rid of the pole(if you don´t know how, i will give you a quick example)
3. dunno, the first suggestions should be enough
oops- it exported some hidden geo also
I did a new example: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1114083/bend.obj
Just bend it and smooth it and look if it´s better
I know that there are now 2 poles, but they are in places where they don´t hurt as much.
I guess what happens is:
1. Bend modifier is being used on unsubdivided geometry
2. After bending edges are properly (round) distributed
3. BUT, when entering sub-d mode, the edges are being offset a bit, thus causing the "distortion"
SOLUTION: would be to further subdivide the mesh before bending, because then the bending modifier would work on geomtry that more closely resembles the subdivided mesh.
Is that about correct?
Also, how did you create that shape in the plane? I can rebuild that poly by poly, but what would be the first two or three steps to manipulate the inner polygons of a plane to get this?
Here is some kind of step by step:
1.Starting plane :P
2.Inset desired faces
3.deleted 2 polygons and adjusted it(i hope that part is clear enough)
4.Adjust shape(deleted 2 edges which came from the inset) and made new cuts
5.Chamfered the edges+ cleanup
6.added more edges to hold the shape
7.2 cuts to close the loop
Edit2:
You can actually skip 1-3 and start with a plane with 8x8 segments and adjust it to the desired shape
Also thank you for spending so much of your time to help me out and provide the step by step picture, I really appreciate that!
viele Grüße aus Hamburg-
Im trying to model that wooden part, but I wasnt able to create it without having still a nice and smooth rounded shape at the end. Especially the part where the barrel is, I cant get that 90° edge there.
Yes I am going to agree here. Generally speaking its best to just sort of do the math, figure out how many sides you need to hold the shape and... Model it! For some really advanced stuff it can be nice to do the bend workflow, but doing the bend is weird in that you've gotta scale it correctly to get the proper diameter and other technical problems like that.
In modo I dont have a way to do a bend after sub-d(without freezing the mesh) so I dont really use it much ever. One of the few features I pine after in max
8. Split the two poly rings on the right with an extra edge here as well so you've got even distribution.
And i split the top poly row too.
And if you skip part 1-3 like i said in my edit you won´t need that either, because it´s already done :P
Okay. That quote is like 3 human years (and thus 759 yak-sandwich years) old. But I'm reading through the thread from the beginning SO THERE.
As a gamer and non-3D guy, I wish more game assets failed to attain proper geometric proportions. THe most interesting thing to me about this photograph is the red text.
I'm sure My Opinion <= .00001% of the gaming public, but as an end-user, my heart hurts to retain this scribbled question. I mean, okay, you're supposedto make accurate models. But I want a smooth-bottomed plane with a terrified horse strapped to the bottom with glitter twine, and some cookies and LPs glued on for wheels.
Oh, and a diagram on the bottom of the plane, red text, with arrows: "pony", "wheels", etc. And question marks. "Pony ??"
And a proud declaration, "that's how I would solve your problem."
Yeah, okay, the player'll have to think pretty carefully about mode of transportation. Who supplies the pony?
I simply can't think of a genre that, at this point, wouldn't benefit from a madly squealing horse, glitter, and cookies falling off planes, during flight. And a gruesome series of sound effects and splatter on impact. Okay, you crash every time. So did the Dukes. Cut. New car. Roll camera.
Poor horse. Happy modeler. For starters, think of how big the plane is... nobody's ever going to have to model or animate the body rending. That's now the sound designer's job.
+Happy sound designer.
Can I file this under "shortcuts = however you get the job done"?
I mean, I would PLAY that game.
More old posts. But so far no one has answered the following, so I thought I'd throw it out there:
This is a parametric equation. Don't know it off the top of my head, but it's one of those that shows up in graphing software as an example. OSX's "grapher" might have it.
Can you load equations in 3D apps? Talking out my butt here, but I mean, type it once and arbitrarily high number of quads thereafter, no additional work. Right?
I tend to think in math, so maybe this isn't much use if you don't, but shapes like this seem like they'd be complicated to mimic manually.
Dude, seriously:
"
Tal como explica la Wikipedia, una superficie de subdivisi
Haha yeah. Wacom Intuos 4. Here's how it came out in the end for the final render: