Search
-
Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
I'm building this surface in Blender and want the face division here to be more natural and reasonable. Could you tell me if my current topology is correct? Are there any better ways to split the faces? I can't share the full model since the product is still in progress. I’ve tried many solutions on my own but haven’t… -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
Frankpolygon's perspective is what I'd think about plus the principles discussed relate too other shapes/subd processes as well e.g. Hemispherical intersections "Segment matching is a fundamental element of most subdivision modeling workflows." It's not the topology "A significant problem with trying to formulate a fixed… -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
@zylan Determining if a high poly mesh is acceptable really boils down to how closely the shapes in the model match the shapes in the references and whether or not the topology subdivides cleanly, without generating any noticeable smoothing artifacts or other surface quality issues. If the shapes and surface quality checks… -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
Thank you for your guidance. I think I’ve got the general idea. When poles appear at corners, the corresponding arcs will be larger. Conversely, adding supporting geometry shifts the poles to other positions to achieve tighter arcs. The exact location of the poles is not critical. What matters most is whether the light and… -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
Check how it looks when materials are applied, and it’s put in a scene with lighting and camera angle. Many of these tiny issues become essentially invisible, in situ. But yes, triangles and ngons are ok, as long as they don’t adversely affect the shading. Usually fine on flatter areas. -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
There are a few triangular faces here. I’d like to preserve this large curved surface as much as possible and keep smooth transitions at the corners. How should I retopologize this? -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
Is it a necessary compromise that multiple lines converge on the arc at these two positions? -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
sacboi said: Thanks for your guidance. Does the five-sided intersection point affect the curved surface? I guess this is unavoidable, right? -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
I'd highly recommend that you read those linked resources I had posted then likewise test iterations of your particular object, therefore putting into practice the 'How and Why' behind the fundamental reasoning described by @FrankPolygon Now for the highlighted areas above, they're intersecting control or support loops and… -
Re: Does having five edges meet here work for this product? What’s a better alternative?
Your 'Npole' (a vertex where 5 edges converge) in question is located on the transition boundary which will certainly throw shading artifacts once subd is applied so I would suggest a re-routing solution: For example: Hence your 5 vertex polygon is converted to a 4 vertices face that will enable smooth shading and…
10 results