T Intersection placement on Face mesh.

Hazardous

Hey Dudes, over the years ive built up various head base meshes, and i did a bit of an experiment by breaking them all down and working out various loop / flow techniques that ive ended up with and more or less, I've ended up with the head on the left style.

What I wanted to ask - especially the animator / or facial riggers amongst you is about the placement of the 'T intersections' or 'stars' that ive circled in red and which would be better for facial animation ( not based on the polycount )

What say you ?

nfrrtycmplx

probably a better question to post in "Technical Discussion" You may get more helpful feedback.

Hazardous

Whoops, sorry can some mods move pls? Cheers!

Piflik

Left: The one on the cheek is bad, the one at the mouth is acceptable, but better shifted, the rest is ok.

Right: the one under the eye and the one on the front of the neck, that you didn't circle, are bad, the rest is ok.

There might be other opinions though..

meshiah

you may find this useful,,a very in depth explination of poles,smoothing, and ramifiactions of the differences in pole types, and where they lay. good luck

http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8000

i would say for the jaw, your ex on the right is better, but for the eye your ex on the left.

Hazardous

Thanks guys, the goal on the right was to attempt to achieve a face with no poles on it whatsoever but I couldnt get it. I'm going to strip down the right face and reposition those poles at least so that they are out of the way.

Meshiah: I found that article a great read, though many of the 'good' meshes still contain poles - I guess it really is all in the positioning. I always wondered about the poles above the eyebrows, i mean thats in a key wrinkling / moving position yet those good meshes contain them...

Piflik

There are some really simple meshes, that have no poles (Torus and Torus-derivatives), but any complex mesh has poles.

meshiah

heres more info, on e vs x topology and so on. like piflik said there will allways be poles, just get them to the least "stretchy places"

http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/showthread.php?t=907



about your eye brows, niether of these meshes contain enough geometry for legit realistic wrinkles, if were talking game art, it would be better to blend a normal map, or create some special geometry for wrinkle areas if needed, but both of these meshes are by far clean enough for games, and way cleaner than alot of teh mashes ive provided for faces. just rig it up and drag it around and youll see the results.
r

Hazardous

Piflik: Yeah, It was a fools hope i guess haha! I was trying to see how far around the face I could push the pole under the eye, I think I might be able to move it a couple more rows away but it will start mucking up the flow in that area.

Meshiah: Thanks man! huge help so far and making alot more sense after reading through - both are bookmarked, some really good stuff in there, I will rig up and take a crack just to see whats going on.

Cheers!

CheeseOnToast

Bay Rait (of Gollum fame, now at Valve) models without poles. He uses a lot of n-side polies to achieve it. Check out some of his meshes, if only for curiosity.

Piflik

CheeseOnToast wrote: »

Bay Rait (of Gollum fame, now at Valve) models without poles. He uses a lot of n-side polies to achieve it. Check out some of his meshes, if only for curiosity.

Just for the Concept/Volume/Form stages...

You cannot create a animateable model without proper edgeloops and the base for that are quads.

Here's a tutorial by Raitt, with his Edgeloop-scheme.