Guys I'm a beginner and have no idea how I could make this peace of colth (vest) work in animations.
I tried using the Skin Wrap modifier, but during some animations, the parts that should be loose end up being attatched to the character's body and it makes the animation look a bit strange.
Ex: In the run animation, the vest keeps completely on the character's body, when some parts should be flapping. I tried dividing the mesh and adding bones to take control of this movement, but it didn't work.
How do you create a shape like this? The triangular indentation in a bath tub? Do you model the entire tub first and then boolean it with a triangular extrusion? I can't approach the object without it becoming high poly. It almost seems as if you want to define the tub's outer curvature first, and then cut in with Cut tool to define the loops for the triangular indentation, but by that point you need way more polys for how organic the curve of the tub blends into the triangular indentation. Or you just boolean your tub with a triangular indentation and do some repairing?
I tried plane extruding by one plane each time, and I quickly lost the shape. It would seem doing Cuts or a boolean on a piece of high resolution geometry, like a tub entirely modeled first, would be easier. But I can't get my head around how high resolution the geometry would be by that point. Then, you can define the cuts and proper edge flow to make the chamfered corners, the indentation, and so on?
Drawing out the shape borders and topology flow over the reference images can be a great way to start the block out process but it may also be helpful to gather additional reference images with cleaner lighting. Single piece tubs and shower surrounds can be difficult to model because they tend to be designed with a lot of pattern draft and soft shapes that make it easier to pull the fiberglass shells from the molds and helps keep the water moving towards the drain.
Since there's few flat surfaces it's often helpful to use modeling operations that preserve the angle of the surface and keep everything co-planar. This will help prevent the cage mesh from becoming lumpy. Try to resolve the topology flow issues at the lowest possible level, before adding all the support loops, this will make the whole process a lot easier. Remember to let the subdivision smoothing do most of the work.
The amount of geometry required to do this will depend on how sharp the shapes need to be but there are diminishing returns. Subdividing too soon or over subdividing the mesh adds a lot of unnecessary complexity that can make it difficult to cleanly join certain types of compound curves. Start by blocking out the major forms then add the necessary geometry to support the smaller details. Keep things simple by focusing on creating accurate shapes first.
Below is an example of what the modeling process could look like. Create the basic shape of the tub then adjust the width of the flat surround. Add a chamfer around the rim and continue adding support loops to control the smoothing and provide support for the smaller shapes. Cut in the loops for the accent ribs and add the shelves then create transitional shapes that define the triangular hand holds. Support loops can be added around the highlighted edges using a bevel / chamfer operation. Edge dissolve operations can be used to clean up any overlapping loop geometry.
Recap:
Plan the block out and establish the major forms.
Try to keep the mesh simple and resolve the topology issues before adding details.
Work through the block out in stages and use the geometry in the larger shapes to support the smaller shapes.
A more detailed write-up on how to approach these sort of soft hard surface shapes can be found here:
Thanks for the response Frank! Had no idea I could block it out from such a simple cage instead of trying to isolate a complex detail with a higher resolution. I did try the cage idea at first but I didn't know that I could dissolve the edges for the curves on the side of the tub into a triangle, and really keep the form super simple and low resolution before subdivision. Subdividing too soon or over subdividing the mesh adds a lot of unnecessary complexity that can make it difficult to cleanly join certain types of compound curves. Great images, too, that show you modelling that part of the tub sequentially! And yes, it is an image I took of my tub, so I could get more ref for the remaining sides as well and how more transitional the back curves of the tub are, too, of course.
Hi all to the master here, I'm pretty new to 3D and I was trying to model a halo battle rif 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?
have this in mind, you can easily use ngons, tris on a flat surface, dont be afraid of it! This could save you ton of time on the weapon! =) This means that you can modell more freely on that weapon if you dont have segments going all the way through the weapon. =)
I am generting an asset, a Hero bad ass Asset for VR for Occulus Quest 2 (No Dedicated €1000 GPU!).
To start below is a just door:
Grey Shape = I have it covered with a normal map, looks great!
My problem ist the Blue part, a HUGE amount of objects for this machine, have nice smooth beveled rounded edges. After many tests between 3ds Max and Substance Painter I have the following options (with issues).
1/ Simple elongated box (4 Polys) + Normal Map
2/Chamfered elongated box (8 Polys) + smoothing groups (nearly the same as #1 and without seams!).
#1 in Substance Painter with Normal: Map
I have tried every setting under the sun, with different smoothing groups and different options in Substance Painter. The seam is not overly visible, once a texture is applied to it even a little less, but as this machine consists of A LOT of these shapes, I wish to get it spot on but, without killing the vertex count.
I even tested #2 with normal map and I still had seams (two seams) again I have tried lots of different settings.
Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated.
On a side note, using option two, is definately easier to generate and would also save a lot of time going through the normal map process.
Quick question: You have some margins in the UVs so that the normal map doesn't interfere with the neighbour faces ? The grey part seems to have no visible 90 degree edges (assuming 135) so its more visible on 90 degree on the blue.
Yes 😅 it was.. in this type of forum (vanilla?) the direct reply seems to be the (full) quote , sorry. And yes again i meant additional space at the UV borders (in blender this UV-unwrap option is just called margin) .. thanks now i see (in the polycount wiki it's also called padding).. so sad that sometimes technical terms also separate more than making the conversation more precise 😪 .. thinking about this i actually know this 🤔 maybe because i'm no native english speaker i forgot.. Thanks again 😉 so i'm also enhancing my english.
Anyway: as you said.. barely visible.. (if you hadn't put "Seam" on the image i almost didn't noticed).. i assume the final texture will be not pure blue??
Currently looks like the highpoly uses support loops plus subd which will round off the edges. Adding an actual bevel might help here. One could also map UVs to trims. Here is a test to illustrate what I mean.
@okidoki yes when working with other people on different programs it can be very confusing with the different terminology. Partially, this part will have a galvanised texture, some parts will be coated with a smooth slightly reflective colour.
@Fabi_G Thanks for the example, that's pretty cool! By Trim UV's do you mean manipulate the UV island, that the bottom edge is near the top edge taking less UV space, but the whole mesh will still have the Normal gradient applied?
@ColMatrix Oh, I meant to suggest the usage of a trim sheet for repeating elements. Tiling trims can also be combined with uniquely baked parts of course.
There's a few different topology layouts that would work for this kind of shape but the answer really depends on how "beautiful and correct" is defined... Quad grid topology can be nice to look at but it isn't always practical or necessary. This may be a bit overly pragmatic but it's unlikely that the average player will care about or even see the high poly wire-frames. For most game art workflows, as long as the high poly model is easy to edit, subdivides without any major artifacts, and provides a clean set of bakes then the topology is usually going to be considered passable.
It's generally considered best practice to:
Block out the major forms then resolve the topology flow issues at the lowest level of complexity.
Use the geometry of the existing shapes as support loops around shape intersections.
Match the segments of the intersecting shapes whenever possible.
Intersecting support loops, which often occur around shape transitions, can be resolved by topology flow that either terminates, reduces or carries one of the adjacent loop sets. Constraining topology changes to the areas between the remaining support loop will help reduce the visibility of any minor smoothing artifacts generated by terminating or reducing the intersecting support loops.
N-gons or triangles, when supported properly, can be used to terminate support loops in shape transitions.
Triangular quads [four pointed triangles] can be used to reduce support loops and join them to the edge segments in adjacent shapes.
Segment matching can be used to carry existing support loops across the intersecting shape without deforming it.
Loop termination and reduction strategies can often be used to join existing shapes but may produce minor smoothing artifacts on curved surfaces. The visibility of these artifacts can often be reduced by constraining the topology change to a small transitional area between shapes or averaging out the error over a large, preferably flat, area where it's less likely to be noticed.
Segment matching tends to require adjusting the amount of geometry in one or more shapes. Which tends to increase the overall accuracy of the shapes but can also lead to a lot of unnecessary re-work or added mesh complexity if the topology flow isn't established early on during the block out phase.
Once the shape intersections are fully supported, coplanar [flat] surfaces are largely unaffected by changes in topology flow. This means flat areas can be a great place to organize the mesh and reduce unnecessary complexity by removing extraneous support loops from the adjacent shapes.
Arbitrarily increasing the amount of geometry in all of the curved surfaces is another strategy for solving topology issues but after a certain point there's very little visual improvement in the quality of the surface and the editability of the base mesh drops off rapidly. The effective use of subdivision really comes down to making tradeoffs between shape accuracy and modeling efficiency, while balancing the overall mesh complexity with the final model's intended use.
Which topology layout and modeling strategy is right for a given project often comes down to answering the question of "How good is good enough?" Time spent polishing something that players won't ever see probably isn't the best use of time. Especially when it comes to manually placing and organizing every single support loop. It's much more important to focus on getting the shapes right and resolving the topology flow before moving past the block out stage.
Having a simple block out with good topology flow means that most of the major support loops can be placed with a couple of bevel / chamfer operations and little to no manual clean up work is required. Modifier based workflows take this to another level and can generate support loops based on edge weight, face angle, group, etc. Which makes the majority of manual loop cleanup operations redundant.
The example below shows how a relatively simple base mesh and modifiers can be used to generate a subdivision high poly. Both the basic shapes and the edge width can be adjusted as necessary, without having to manually re-route the topology. It's not the be all end all for subdivision modeling but it gets to MVP a lot faster than manually slicing and dicing the mesh to route support loops around unplanned shapes.
Recap:
Try to resolve the topology flow issues during the block out. Add all of the major forms and adjust the shapes so most of the segments line up with the edges that need support loops. Use flat areas and the shape transitions between support loops to remove unnecessary loops.
Additional resources:
Many artists have contributed to this thread over the years and there's lots of great examples of how to model other shapes. Definitely recommend skimming through the discussion here and taking a look at some of the other write-ups.
Hey guys I am trying to model pipes I was wondering as to how I could connect these two geometries without ruining their topology and having a clean mesh at the end.
I have had this problem a few times, so I am guessing it is missing knowledge on mybehalf rather than max. I first notice these problems after smoothing an optimised low-poly model. I have removed the optimisaion and the issue remains.
I have tried 'Edit Normals', XView and a few whacky test I found in the internet...nothing.
The model is not an import.
3ds Max 2022.3.3
Any help/guidance/lessons/suggestions are welcome - Thanks
Hello ! Pretty basic question I believe but I have that detail pîece on the left that I modeled separately and the vert count doesn't match with the part on the right, which creates massive artifacts using subd. How can I please fix it ? Thanks in advance
Easiest option would be to use more geometry on the other half and match the number of loops. It'll save you a lot more time not trying to reduce geometry that doesn't need to be reduced.
You can also merge the miss matched edges on that flat shelf between the 2 parts using an edge loop going around in the middle.
Hey guys I am trying to model a cylinder with holes in it and I can't seem to figure out how to, what should I do in order to get a shape like this that has proper topo? Thank you
Start the block out using shapes with a relatively uniform segment length then line up the intersecting edges by adjusting the number of segments in both shapes. Since the radial features are evenly spaced, it's also important that the number of segments in the larger cylinder be divisible by the number of smaller holes. Dividing the object into mirrored, tileable sections will also help make the whole modeling process more efficient.
The segment matching should be reasonably close but doesn't need to be perfect. A boolean operation can be used to create the smaller hole then any stray vertices can be merged down to clean up the mesh. Additional loop cuts, that run perpendicular to the cylinder wall segments, can be added to resolve any n-gons or triangles back into quads.
Support loops around the major shape transitions can be added with a single bevel / chamfer operation. Subdivide and check for visible smoothing artifacts, before splitting the mesh and copying the tileable section. Filling in the rest of geometry on the flat part of the cylinder cap is fairly straightforward and has been omitted for clarity.
The quantity, size and spacing of the holes will all affect the segment matching. Using too many segments can make the mesh difficult to edit and too few segments can cause undesired deformation. It's also possible to merge some of the support loops into the existing geometry on the larger cylinder but this can produce noticeable smoothing artifacts when it disrupts the accuracy or consistency of the shapes. The key is to balance accuracy and efficiency.
This thread is full of visual examples and written documentation that covers most common modeling challenges. Though it isn't always possible to find an example of a particular object, there's often very good examples of similar shapes and a lot of the modeling fundamentals are the same. Breaking a complex problem down into individual parts and looking for similar examples then testing those solutions is a significant part of the learning process. Even a quick skim over this thread is usually worth the time.
Recap:
Use segment matching to line up the topology around complex shape intersections.
Split repetitive surface features into tileable sections.
Look for similar problems and test those solutions.
Addendum:
Alternate topology layouts, that route the loop flow around the shape intersection, can be used to get around matching the segments on both shapes but this can introduce subtle smoothing artifacts. These smoothing artifacts tend to be especially noticeable in areas where the topology changes alter the shape of the underlying surface or where poles are are left unconstrained in the middle of a curve.
This is generally workable on matte surfaces or when using normal overlays with lots of high frequency noise but these subtle smoothing errors will be noticeable under certain lighting conditions and when using materials with high gloss or reflectance values. The less geometry used to support the shapes, the more pronounced this type of artifact will tend to be. When modeling certain types of high quality surfaces, it's generally a good idea to run a flow check to ensure that the topology isn't going to causes issues with reflective materials.
In the first example below: The highlighted quad is an area where the change in topology deforms the curvature of the underlying shape and pushes the adjacent pole out into the middle of a curved surface. These two issues generate both a minor smoothing artifact below the corner of the shape intersection and a rippled distortion in the surface flow around the hole.
In the second example below: matching the segments of both the large and small shapes will help keep the poles close to the support loops on the shape intersection. Which allows the existing geometry in the basic shapes to constrain any potential smoothing artifacts to a smaller area and also helps preserve uninterrupted surface flow.
Limiting the amount of deformation caused by the modeling operations, used to make abrupt changes in the topology and constraining poles near or between well supported areas will also help minimize the appearance of most smoothing artifacts.
Below is a brief example of how the topology flow on the previous example can be simplified without deforming the underlying surfaces. Locate an alternate set of edges in the larger shape then select and dissolve the extraneous support loops. Join the loop flow around the intersecting shape to the loop flow and base geometry of the larger shape. The final mesh is a bit cleaner and free of any major smoothing artifacts. Though the sharpness of the edges around the corner of the shape intersection does vary slightly.
Because there are three holes i would suggest making life easier and choosing an outer cylinder with edges divisible/divadable by three.. for example 15.. i also took 15 for the inner cylinders because the angle fits better.. (here centered on the top border).
@kuronekoshiii The support loops running parallel to the cylinder wall segments are disrupting the curvature when subdivision is applied. Adjusting the number of segments in the larger curve, so the existing edges can be used as support loops for the cut out, should resolve the issue.
@FrankPolygon Thanks for the links! I'm having a hard time since the model is from the client-premade 3D, so I decided not to remodel it, but I think I have to. Anyways, thanks!
I'm having trouble with a shape here, not sure if i'm on the right path or not.
The shape described here in these images, essentially it's a cylinder with a perpendicular circular extrusion that seamlessly moulds into the shape of the rest of the main cylinder it's joined to.
This was my most recent attempt. I effectively created a circle perpendicular to the main cylinder with roughly the same number of divisions for the cylinder that would join to it and quadded the area up.
It looks ok at some angles, but others it doesn't, either presenting as a little too flat or with some hard edges appearing in the shading where the cylinder starts changing shape:
Am I on the right track ad just need to do a few tweaks? or is there a better way to accomplish this shape? ( I should add the lines that are in blue are bevel edges providing control loops on each side of the highlighted mesh in a proper quadded topology (arc mitre for the middle bit).
Replies
This is how I would do it to keep all quads.
And sometimes this produces better shading, but of course it depends.
Hello, everyone!
Guys I'm a beginner and have no idea how I could make this peace of colth (vest) work in animations.
I tried using the Skin Wrap modifier, but during some animations, the parts that should be loose end up being attatched to the character's body and it makes the animation look a bit strange.
Ex: In the run animation, the vest keeps completely on the character's body, when some parts should be flapping. I tried dividing the mesh and adding bones to take control of this movement, but it didn't work.
Could someone help me with that?
Thanks in advance!
Cheers!
How do you create a shape like this? The triangular indentation in a bath tub? Do you model the entire tub first and then boolean it with a triangular extrusion? I can't approach the object without it becoming high poly. It almost seems as if you want to define the tub's outer curvature first, and then cut in with Cut tool to define the loops for the triangular indentation, but by that point you need way more polys for how organic the curve of the tub blends into the triangular indentation. Or you just boolean your tub with a triangular indentation and do some repairing?
I tried plane extruding by one plane each time, and I quickly lost the shape. It would seem doing Cuts or a boolean on a piece of high resolution geometry, like a tub entirely modeled first, would be easier. But I can't get my head around how high resolution the geometry would be by that point. Then, you can define the cuts and proper edge flow to make the chamfered corners, the indentation, and so on?
i am having trouble modeling this part, how can i get a smooth transition? i attached the model i case some can check it
IDK what do you think:
There is a slighly quirk right to selected vertex.
@Deqa You have the right idea.
Drawing out the shape borders and topology flow over the reference images can be a great way to start the block out process but it may also be helpful to gather additional reference images with cleaner lighting. Single piece tubs and shower surrounds can be difficult to model because they tend to be designed with a lot of pattern draft and soft shapes that make it easier to pull the fiberglass shells from the molds and helps keep the water moving towards the drain.
Since there's few flat surfaces it's often helpful to use modeling operations that preserve the angle of the surface and keep everything co-planar. This will help prevent the cage mesh from becoming lumpy. Try to resolve the topology flow issues at the lowest possible level, before adding all the support loops, this will make the whole process a lot easier. Remember to let the subdivision smoothing do most of the work.
The amount of geometry required to do this will depend on how sharp the shapes need to be but there are diminishing returns. Subdividing too soon or over subdividing the mesh adds a lot of unnecessary complexity that can make it difficult to cleanly join certain types of compound curves. Start by blocking out the major forms then add the necessary geometry to support the smaller details. Keep things simple by focusing on creating accurate shapes first.
Below is an example of what the modeling process could look like. Create the basic shape of the tub then adjust the width of the flat surround. Add a chamfer around the rim and continue adding support loops to control the smoothing and provide support for the smaller shapes. Cut in the loops for the accent ribs and add the shelves then create transitional shapes that define the triangular hand holds. Support loops can be added around the highlighted edges using a bevel / chamfer operation. Edge dissolve operations can be used to clean up any overlapping loop geometry.
Recap:
A more detailed write-up on how to approach these sort of soft hard surface shapes can be found here:
https://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2751340/#Comment_2751340
That doesn't look like a topology change, as much as a change in the materials roughness. At least to me that's how I see it. ;P
Thanks for the response Frank! Had no idea I could block it out from such a simple cage instead of trying to isolate a complex detail with a higher resolution. I did try the cage idea at first but I didn't know that I could dissolve the edges for the curves on the side of the tub into a triangle, and really keep the form super simple and low resolution before subdivision. Subdividing too soon or over subdividing the mesh adds a lot of unnecessary complexity that can make it difficult to cleanly join certain types of compound curves. Great images, too, that show you modelling that part of the tub sequentially! And yes, it is an image I took of my tub, so I could get more ref for the remaining sides as well and how more transitional the back curves of the tub are, too, of course.
Yeah it's diffficult to see in the reference but if you search for Glock 17 Gen 5 you can see: it is.
Hi all to the master here, I'm pretty new to 3D and I was trying to model a halo battle rif 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?
have this in mind, you can easily use ngons, tris on a flat surface, dont be afraid of it! This could save you ton of time on the weapon! =) This means that you can modell more freely on that weapon if you dont have segments going all the way through the weapon. =)
Hello all,
I am generting an asset, a Hero bad ass Asset for VR for Occulus Quest 2 (No Dedicated €1000 GPU!).
To start below is a just door:
Grey Shape = I have it covered with a normal map, looks great!
My problem ist the Blue part, a HUGE amount of objects for this machine, have nice smooth beveled rounded edges. After many tests between 3ds Max and Substance Painter I have the following options (with issues).
1/ Simple elongated box (4 Polys) + Normal Map
2/Chamfered elongated box (8 Polys) + smoothing groups (nearly the same as #1 and without seams!).
#1 in Substance Painter with Normal: Map
I have tried every setting under the sun, with different smoothing groups and different options in Substance Painter. The seam is not overly visible, once a texture is applied to it even a little less, but as this machine consists of A LOT of these shapes, I wish to get it spot on but, without killing the vertex count.
I even tested #2 with normal map and I still had seams (two seams) again I have tried lots of different settings.
Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated.
On a side note, using option two, is definately easier to generate and would also save a lot of time going through the normal map process.
Thank you 😁🙏
Quick question: You have some margins in the UVs so that the normal map doesn't interfere with the neighbour faces ? The grey part seems to have no visible 90 degree edges (assuming 135) so its more visible on 90 degree on the blue.
@okidoki Was the question directed at me? If so, thanks, I hope I understand your question.
I have enough padding, I think...0.01 at 2048x2048 px. I also tested the padding at 0,04.
Normal map back in 3ds Max with UV's:
Cheers
Yes 😅 it was.. in this type of forum (vanilla?) the direct reply seems to be the (full) quote , sorry. And yes again i meant additional space at the UV borders (in blender this UV-unwrap option is just called margin) .. thanks now i see (in the polycount wiki it's also called padding).. so sad that sometimes technical terms also separate more than making the conversation more precise 😪 .. thinking about this i actually know this 🤔 maybe because i'm no native english speaker i forgot.. Thanks again 😉 so i'm also enhancing my english.
Anyway: as you said.. barely visible.. (if you hadn't put "Seam" on the image i almost didn't noticed).. i assume the final texture will be not pure blue??
Currently looks like the highpoly uses support loops plus subd which will round off the edges. Adding an actual bevel might help here. One could also map UVs to trims. Here is a test to illustrate what I mean.
@okidoki yes when working with other people on different programs it can be very confusing with the different terminology. Partially, this part will have a galvanised texture, some parts will be coated with a smooth slightly reflective colour.
@Fabi_G Thanks for the example, that's pretty cool! By Trim UV's do you mean manipulate the UV island, that the bottom edge is near the top edge taking less UV space, but the whole mesh will still have the Normal gradient applied?
@ColMatrix Oh, I meant to suggest the usage of a trim sheet for repeating elements. Tiling trims can also be combined with uniquely baked parts of course.
@Fabi_G ahh yes a Trim Sheet, I will be using an Atlas for the texture. :)
Hello!!!How to make it beautiful and correct in terms of topology? Help😶
@macaron10 Welcome to Polycount. Consider checking out the forum information and introduction thread.
There's a few different topology layouts that would work for this kind of shape but the answer really depends on how "beautiful and correct" is defined... Quad grid topology can be nice to look at but it isn't always practical or necessary. This may be a bit overly pragmatic but it's unlikely that the average player will care about or even see the high poly wire-frames. For most game art workflows, as long as the high poly model is easy to edit, subdivides without any major artifacts, and provides a clean set of bakes then the topology is usually going to be considered passable.
It's generally considered best practice to:
Intersecting support loops, which often occur around shape transitions, can be resolved by topology flow that either terminates, reduces or carries one of the adjacent loop sets. Constraining topology changes to the areas between the remaining support loop will help reduce the visibility of any minor smoothing artifacts generated by terminating or reducing the intersecting support loops.
N-gons or triangles, when supported properly, can be used to terminate support loops in shape transitions.
Triangular quads [four pointed triangles] can be used to reduce support loops and join them to the edge segments in adjacent shapes.
Segment matching can be used to carry existing support loops across the intersecting shape without deforming it.
Loop termination and reduction strategies can often be used to join existing shapes but may produce minor smoothing artifacts on curved surfaces. The visibility of these artifacts can often be reduced by constraining the topology change to a small transitional area between shapes or averaging out the error over a large, preferably flat, area where it's less likely to be noticed.
Segment matching tends to require adjusting the amount of geometry in one or more shapes. Which tends to increase the overall accuracy of the shapes but can also lead to a lot of unnecessary re-work or added mesh complexity if the topology flow isn't established early on during the block out phase.
Once the shape intersections are fully supported, coplanar [flat] surfaces are largely unaffected by changes in topology flow. This means flat areas can be a great place to organize the mesh and reduce unnecessary complexity by removing extraneous support loops from the adjacent shapes.
Arbitrarily increasing the amount of geometry in all of the curved surfaces is another strategy for solving topology issues but after a certain point there's very little visual improvement in the quality of the surface and the editability of the base mesh drops off rapidly. The effective use of subdivision really comes down to making tradeoffs between shape accuracy and modeling efficiency, while balancing the overall mesh complexity with the final model's intended use.
Which topology layout and modeling strategy is right for a given project often comes down to answering the question of "How good is good enough?" Time spent polishing something that players won't ever see probably isn't the best use of time. Especially when it comes to manually placing and organizing every single support loop. It's much more important to focus on getting the shapes right and resolving the topology flow before moving past the block out stage.
Having a simple block out with good topology flow means that most of the major support loops can be placed with a couple of bevel / chamfer operations and little to no manual clean up work is required. Modifier based workflows take this to another level and can generate support loops based on edge weight, face angle, group, etc. Which makes the majority of manual loop cleanup operations redundant.
The example below shows how a relatively simple base mesh and modifiers can be used to generate a subdivision high poly. Both the basic shapes and the edge width can be adjusted as necessary, without having to manually re-route the topology. It's not the be all end all for subdivision modeling but it gets to MVP a lot faster than manually slicing and dicing the mesh to route support loops around unplanned shapes.
Recap:
Try to resolve the topology flow issues during the block out. Add all of the major forms and adjust the shapes so most of the segments line up with the edges that need support loops. Use flat areas and the shape transitions between support loops to remove unnecessary loops.
Additional resources:
Many artists have contributed to this thread over the years and there's lots of great examples of how to model other shapes. Definitely recommend skimming through the discussion here and taking a look at some of the other write-ups.
Hey guys I am trying to model pipes I was wondering as to how I could connect these two geometries without ruining their topology and having a clean mesh at the end.
Thank you
The answer is quite literally above you.
line up the segments of the two cylinders.
Hi everyone!
I'm trying to model an extruded cross
And I really don't understand how to make that...
Maybe you know how to correctly model it?
contain this detail like so
Maybe this will be helpful:
Thank you so much!
lazy way from me, did one extrusion, mirror it twice, work on one side, then just connect them
Thanks!
Hi all, all doing well?
I have had this problem a few times, so I am guessing it is missing knowledge on mybehalf rather than max. I first notice these problems after smoothing an optimised low-poly model. I have removed the optimisaion and the issue remains.
I have tried 'Edit Normals', XView and a few whacky test I found in the internet...nothing.
The model is not an import.
3ds Max 2022.3.3
Any help/guidance/lessons/suggestions are welcome - Thanks
Hello ! Pretty basic question I believe but I have that detail pîece on the left that I modeled separately and the vert count doesn't match with the part on the right, which creates massive artifacts using subd. How can I please fix it ? Thanks in advance
Quick thought: maybe something like this (quick thought while overpainting; upper part slihjt complex or simpler lower part) ?
Then i tried smomething like this with wire view (additional edge smooth), smooth shading and subdiv (since you also have one in the modifier stack):
Easiest option would be to use more geometry on the other half and match the number of loops. It'll save you a lot more time not trying to reduce geometry that doesn't need to be reduced.
You can also merge the miss matched edges on that flat shelf between the 2 parts using an edge loop going around in the middle.
Hey guys I am trying to model a cylinder with holes in it and I can't seem to figure out how to, what should I do in order to get a shape like this that has proper topo? Thank you
@Laon A few posts up, there's a couple of relevant examples that cover how to use segment matching to connect a cylinder to a curved surface and how to route the topology around the base of a cylinder that connects to an angled surface. The basic principles of these fundamental modeling strategies can be combined to resolve most of the potential issues when creating objects with similar shapes.
Start the block out using shapes with a relatively uniform segment length then line up the intersecting edges by adjusting the number of segments in both shapes. Since the radial features are evenly spaced, it's also important that the number of segments in the larger cylinder be divisible by the number of smaller holes. Dividing the object into mirrored, tileable sections will also help make the whole modeling process more efficient.
The segment matching should be reasonably close but doesn't need to be perfect. A boolean operation can be used to create the smaller hole then any stray vertices can be merged down to clean up the mesh. Additional loop cuts, that run perpendicular to the cylinder wall segments, can be added to resolve any n-gons or triangles back into quads.
Support loops around the major shape transitions can be added with a single bevel / chamfer operation. Subdivide and check for visible smoothing artifacts, before splitting the mesh and copying the tileable section. Filling in the rest of geometry on the flat part of the cylinder cap is fairly straightforward and has been omitted for clarity.
The quantity, size and spacing of the holes will all affect the segment matching. Using too many segments can make the mesh difficult to edit and too few segments can cause undesired deformation. It's also possible to merge some of the support loops into the existing geometry on the larger cylinder but this can produce noticeable smoothing artifacts when it disrupts the accuracy or consistency of the shapes. The key is to balance accuracy and efficiency.
This thread is full of visual examples and written documentation that covers most common modeling challenges. Though it isn't always possible to find an example of a particular object, there's often very good examples of similar shapes and a lot of the modeling fundamentals are the same. Breaking a complex problem down into individual parts and looking for similar examples then testing those solutions is a significant part of the learning process. Even a quick skim over this thread is usually worth the time.
Recap:
Addendum:
Alternate topology layouts, that route the loop flow around the shape intersection, can be used to get around matching the segments on both shapes but this can introduce subtle smoothing artifacts. These smoothing artifacts tend to be especially noticeable in areas where the topology changes alter the shape of the underlying surface or where poles are are left unconstrained in the middle of a curve.
This is generally workable on matte surfaces or when using normal overlays with lots of high frequency noise but these subtle smoothing errors will be noticeable under certain lighting conditions and when using materials with high gloss or reflectance values. The less geometry used to support the shapes, the more pronounced this type of artifact will tend to be. When modeling certain types of high quality surfaces, it's generally a good idea to run a flow check to ensure that the topology isn't going to causes issues with reflective materials.
In the first example below: The highlighted quad is an area where the change in topology deforms the curvature of the underlying shape and pushes the adjacent pole out into the middle of a curved surface. These two issues generate both a minor smoothing artifact below the corner of the shape intersection and a rippled distortion in the surface flow around the hole.
In the second example below: matching the segments of both the large and small shapes will help keep the poles close to the support loops on the shape intersection. Which allows the existing geometry in the basic shapes to constrain any potential smoothing artifacts to a smaller area and also helps preserve uninterrupted surface flow.
Limiting the amount of deformation caused by the modeling operations, used to make abrupt changes in the topology and constraining poles near or between well supported areas will also help minimize the appearance of most smoothing artifacts.
Below is a brief example of how the topology flow on the previous example can be simplified without deforming the underlying surfaces. Locate an alternate set of edges in the larger shape then select and dissolve the extraneous support loops. Join the loop flow around the intersecting shape to the loop flow and base geometry of the larger shape. The final mesh is a bit cleaner and free of any major smoothing artifacts. Though the sharpness of the edges around the corner of the shape intersection does vary slightly.
Here's how I did it:
Hope it is helpful:
Thank you guys so much, I have been trying to do this for days now, thank you so much!!!!
Because there are three holes i would suggest making life easier and choosing an outer cylinder with edges divisible/divadable by three.. for example 15.. i also took 15 for the inner cylinders because the angle fits better.. (here centered on the top border).
Sorry for busting in, but I really wanted to know how to subdiv model this one without Sharp edges.
@kuronekoshiii The support loops running parallel to the cylinder wall segments are disrupting the curvature when subdivision is applied. Adjusting the number of segments in the larger curve, so the existing edges can be used as support loops for the cut out, should resolve the issue.
wirrex recently posted a great example of how this can be done. Link to that post: https://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2769388/#Comment_2769388
There's also a couple alternate topology layouts that can be used. Link to that discussion here: https://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2757713/#Comment_2757713
@FrankPolygon Thanks for the links! I'm having a hard time since the model is from the client-premade 3D, so I decided not to remodel it, but I think I have to. Anyways, thanks!
Client stuff always get remodelled otherwise there be no client :D
Hello, dear, I ran into a topological problem, if you can call it that.
Please who can help?
I will be very grateful.
Hi folks,
I'm having trouble with a shape here, not sure if i'm on the right path or not.
The shape described here in these images, essentially it's a cylinder with a perpendicular circular extrusion that seamlessly moulds into the shape of the rest of the main cylinder it's joined to.
This was my most recent attempt. I effectively created a circle perpendicular to the main cylinder with roughly the same number of divisions for the cylinder that would join to it and quadded the area up.
It looks ok at some angles, but others it doesn't, either presenting as a little too flat or with some hard edges appearing in the shading where the cylinder starts changing shape:
Am I on the right track ad just need to do a few tweaks? or is there a better way to accomplish this shape? ( I should add the lines that are in blue are bevel edges providing control loops on each side of the highlighted mesh in a proper quadded topology (arc mitre for the middle bit).