Bevel/Chamfer/Fillet in Blender 2.5 Is it a joke?

Hi community.

I love blender, but is it really not possible to easily chamfer the edges of an object?
All I want is a fairly simple object to have rounded edges. I used 3ds max in the past and I miss the chamfer button. Modo is good at this too.
On the left is 3ds max (with a topology bug) and on the right is modo, which gives a very clean topology.

What I tried:
- Bevel modifier
Gives me one face. I need about 10-30. I tried adding more than one bevel modifier, but that just destroys the object.
- Beveling single edges
Not even possible in 2.5x. There seems to be an addon which gives a little control over it, but even then it’s not possible to get a result like 3ds max or modo?!
- Subdivision modifier (with loop cut)
Not practical at all. There is little control on how many faces the rounded edges have and how far they spread across the surface. You have to adjust the loop cuts and increase the subdivisions. In the end I almost got what I wanted…with 40k faces…on a single cube :confused:
- Subdivision modifier (with crease edges)
It is some kind of control, but the result looks bad. Somehow even with a subdivision of 6 the cube looks like it has too few faces.
- Bevel and subdivision modifier together
To me it sounded like a good idea. Two bevel modifier and then a subdivision modifier. Looked great…until I took a closer look. Seems to work until you delete faces. Then edges (lines) on flat surface become visible. It gets really ugly.
- Subdivision modifier and deleting unused edges
Probably the most desperate try ever. I added a subdivision modifier and just deleted the unnecessary edge loops.

I don’t think anyone wants to do that on a complex model with high subdivisions.

So what is the right solution? I used google to look for a solution and found a thread where people talked about blender and bmesh. What excactly is bmesh? Is it another mesh system that allows/supports more complex shapes of faces, etc? I read something about n-gons. I even downloaded a bmesh build from graphicall but didn’t know what to test beside the knife tool.

Thanks in advance.

I don’t really see what the problem with Bevel and Subsurf is? Can you post a screenshot?
I think bevel and subsurf works great for chamfered/beveled edges.

My main problems are:

  • I have only few controls on how big the chamfered edge is in the end and of how many faces it consists
  • The object loses its shape. The cube starts bending for the rounded corners too early
    (added red line, the shape of the original cube)
  • The end result has way to many faces. Often up to 60k faces for only a few extrudes on a cube
  • Weird behavior on some settings (too much bevel modifier, etc.)

Some screenshots:
One bevel modifier with a subdivision of 2:

(corners too round and topology is sometimes weird)

2 bevel and 4 subdivision:

(edges on flat surfaces become visible)
With “angle” instead of “none” on the bevel modifier:

(faces get stretched?! And of course wayyy too much faces^^)
An object without holes:

(again edges on flat surfaces become visible and it seems like there is something missing from the edge)

3 bevel modifier: (already overkill?)

(visible edges again but less faces and more like the original shape)

All results are far away from what I had expected. I would like to only add faces where they are needed, not everywhere. And a little control over the edges would be good too :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Sorry for the bad links, I’m not allowed to link and can only include 3 attachments -.-

Thanks so far, hope there will be more comments, because in my opinion this is one of the core basics any 3D program should be able to do.


To answer your question, no blender doesn’t have a
Chamfer, Fillet or any other tool that splits edges up
more then 2 like that. The Bevel Modifier is Blender just
it splits the edge into 2 edges and produces triangles where
ever there was 1 vertex and 3 edges to begin with.

If you want rounded edges either add a quarter circle and use
Spin and Extrude or use Subdivision Surface with blocking or
tightening loops and then clean up the extra loops after the
Modifier is applied.

been thinking about the same since i started to use blender
also used 3dsmax before and used chamfer pretty much, i really miss a function like this in blender
need to try the options mentioned here soon

I honestly don’t know what to do without such a feature.

Blender is such an awesome program, people even compare it directly to the 3d applications that made the best hollywood movies possible. But every time things get serious, Blender fails to deliever. I tested it many times and you have to be blind to see it’s potential, but in the end Blender is just something to play with, not something to work with.
But I don’t want to rant about Blender, it definetly has its use, I just wish the people behind it would focus on more important stuff like chamfering edges…

It feels silly but I can’t use Blender on this project now because of this tiny problem. There is no way I can delete all loop cuts by hand, or handing over a fairly simple box with 40k+ faces without some control or flexibility.

And I would really love to because the 3ds max user interface comes straight from hell!!! :-/

I'm still open to any ideas. Thought about splines and extrusion too, but it's not practical at all. What if I need to extrude some faces again, etc.

If possable, model your object using curves. You can set the chamfer and /or radius sizes easilly with much cleaner results. You also have the taper and bevel object options. Then convert to mesh for further modeling. Its very easy to select a radioused edge say, as these are seperate vert groups on convertion, mirror them to form a fillet, and then extrude away again.

DiLer, it would be useful to know what object you want to model, maybe someone could come up with a good idea.

it is possible to TAG single edges for the bevel-modifier.

set TAG mode in tool-shelf in “set edge select mode” to BEVEL tag

set this TAG in EDGE-select mode to a edge with Ctrl-RightMouseClick

change the bevel-modifier to Wheight

There is only one “backdraw”, if one want to set different bevel levels to
different parts of the mesh, then one has to apply the bevel-modifier.

It is not possible to set different taged bevel edges for different bevel-modifiers.

But it is possible to select a view edges for one bevel modifier (with size)
and a generic second bevel-modifier (maybe to NONE or ANGLE method).

Last there are 2 different ways for subsurf: simple may be usefull for non-organic meshes and dont forget you can use Shift-E to set the sharpness of edges for subsurf-mod.

DiLer bmesh will bring everything.chamfer.

until then some blender users will give you 100 reasons why you dont need chamger. they will try to explain to you that you need 5 times more faces with a subsurf modifier. dont listen to them.

blender is free and open source. they tryed their hardest to bring bmesh faster but it didnt work. now this year it will be finished.

Basically there are tools missing from 2.5x that were in 2.49. These tools are planned to be brought back in the near future, but were, for the most part, put on hold until bmesh is compete, since it will evaluate the mesh differently, and tools implemented now have a good chance of being broken later. Older versions of blender had the edge bevel option for individual edges so you will see that come back, it’s just not there now. As far as adding divisions like the resolution option in the text and curves options, this will probably come about after bmesh, or it has been overlooked. There are ways to go about making what you want, it just takes a little extra effort and forethought at this time. Kind of like going back several years and doing this stuff like when I started.

In the end, all I can really say is that these things are planned, it’s just a matter of time before it gets here.

at rebogey
Maybe I don’t really understand what you are saying, but I tried converting a 2D circle into a 3D mesh, without much success.
I made a simple mesh and tried to make the same on with the curve method.

Made a circle, grabbed the handles, made it more like a square and extruded it. But to get something like the extruded faces on the original mesh, I have to convert to a mesh and then? I can simple extrude the faces like on the first mesh, but how can curves help me here to get chamfered edges?
Can you explain your idea a little more?

at Carrozza
What I want to model: most likely furniture, e.g. tables, cupboards, something like a modern kitchen, with granite countertops, etc. I just googled for “kitchen”…wow…that’s the stuff I had in mind.

at test-dr
Thanks for the info. I found and tested it. Good to know that there at least is a way to bevel only single edges. It’s a pity it doesn’t really help much. But I found a way to get different amounts of bevel. Like with the subdivision modifier, you can add loop cuts to “set a border” to how large the bevel is.

I already tried shift+e to crease the edges, but thanks anyway :wink:

at blend_B
Thanks for the info. Problem is, that patience is often the answer to all the Blender related questions. About 10 month ago it was somehow my job to evaluate Blender 2.5. All I could say was, that it has a lot of potential, but needs a little more time. And that’s all I can say right now, too. We have to wait at least until Google summer of code is over and then probably some more month…
(but don’t want to complain about a free tool too much ;-))

at ajm
That sums up what Blender is quite good :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
One big problem is the fact, that they changed/updated the API of Blender several times to the point where some of the people who write plugins had enough and put down their work until Blender is finally stable.

Dev since 2007
2.50, 2.51, 2.52 alpha 2009
first stable version 2.57 april 2011
Chamfering edges november 2013
(sry, had to do it ;D)

seriously! Blenderartists. Spam protection and stuff is nice, but every post I made so far had some problems…apparently there is a “bad word” somewhere here…already changed the URLs…apparently I can’t use the "at"symbol…jesus!
At least give some clues or something…

Chamfer Fillet Example.blend (188 KB)

Here is a small blend with a few examples. You will see how from a curve, by altering the bevel options you can create any radious, fillet or chamfer. After you convert it to a mesh, you can then reposition these. In one example I have simply spun one vert to use as template, and then extruded vert lopes, and alligned them to the template.
Blender used to fill curves, but I think that option hasent been reintroduced yet, so for quickness I filled in the flats with alt f.

Rebogey, how did you place both Tools and View panels on the left hand of the workplace?
Really nice bevels there, a bit more step-by-step would have been better, but we can fill the gaps!

urgent! If you really want to get a hint about what is possible
you have to supply a sample-blend-file with an object you
want to tweak the edges(chamfer).
You speak about chair-like, table-like, … furniture with NOT organic things.
If you want this, i dont get the point why you are (or try) to use a subsurf-modifier.

(only one tip) If you want to use the subsurf-modifier, you can with Shift-E change for a selected edge (in edge-mode) how “sharp” it should be. Thats a way to make things only partly “subsurfed” and can produce nice objects.

one sample screenshot of a Cube - that is really only the default cube!
You know if setting an object to SMOOTH some thing like the edge-split-modifier
is necessary to keep things a bit more FLAT (if wanted).

If you go for furniture like things, there is a big difference what level of details you want. At some point you cannot use modifiers any more, you can only use them to get a base-mesh - then apply the modifier and work on with the “high-poly mesh”.
Next, alway try to use parts - dont block yourself by trying to build all from one single all vertices connected mesh. Normal furniture is made from simple objects, like flat planks, shelves and beams.


Just mouse over the panel, and “F5”

at test-dr
I tried subsurf modifier, because I need rounded/beveled edges, but the bevel modifier doesn’t really work (I need more than one new face). With a subsurf modifier you get more faces for the edges, but also too many faces in total.

As I said, I tested the shift+e method before, but you can’t use it to bevel objects. The object should look like a normal cube with sharp edges from far away, but if you look closely you should see that the edges are actually round. Like in the real world.
Look at the screenshot from my first post, where I used subsurf modifier and deleted unused loops. That’s what I want. A very subtle effect.

at rebogey
Thanks a lot for the file. I really appreciate that you took the time :slight_smile:
Have to agree with carrozza, maybe you could explain a little more? :wink:
I understand the part where you use the curve to get the basic object, with bevel and extrude, etc. What excactly is the reason to convert it to a mesh? To close the holes, or to use the faces to extrude? Does the object in the end consists of multiple objects/curves?
The object I examined closer had some double vertices and others weren’t connected. That will probably destroy my rendering, so is there another way?

I hope it’s okay to include the objects I’m talking about in my comparison file down below.

Comparison Blend file
I attached a blend file with a simple object from modo, 3ds max and blender. Please note that the Blender object is modeled by rebogey and only copied from his file above.

There are two 3ds max objects. The one named “alternative” is hidden. The difference is, that on the alternative object only the edges that need to be beveled are actually beveled, while on the visible object all edges are beveled.
The alternative 3ds max object also had some import issues, because Blender changed the n-gons to quads I believe.

If anyone has an idea how to recreate this object in Blender, so it looks like the 3ds max, or even better the modo object, please share your knowledge :slight_smile:

PS: I’m currently at work and just installed Blender on my laptop to create this file. The user interface and settings in the .blend file are probably weird g


chamfer comparison.blend (1.71 MB)

a sample with only 24 vertices for this in/extruded cube-like object.
But - your object is really huge - and using a lot of loop-cuts, like
in this object one can tweak those regions for wanted sharper edges.

I think for only 24 vertices, even a close render is very lookalike …

ps. and for blend-file uploads try to use the blender-built-in-compression-option
for saving blend-files and use those to upload


chamfer2.blend (375 KB)

The blend file was compressed (you are talking of the chekbox when saving the file, right?)

24 vertices without the modifier applied. Which doesn’t really count when it comes down to rendering the scene. :wink:
With modifier applied your object has 5248 faces (some of them tringular), which is even more than the modo object has (4274 all quads).
But ~5000 faces is ok with me, in the end this is only a small increase in render time that doesn’t matter. 10.000+ is what bugs me. At least for such simple objects. (made this object with more than 2 million faces today…Blender can’t handle it :-/ )

Is there some loading bug? Because there is some weird topology going on and I don’t know where it comes from. Looks like a twirl. (attached a screenshot)

But I don’t think it’s your fault, I had similar problems. The bevel modifier doesn’t really seems to work together with the subsurf modifier. Especially if you use one of them twice or more.

I think with this method your object is as close as it can get (don’t know if the topology could be better or not).

I tried something different at work today. I used several loop cuts, extruded one face and used a lattice to deform the edge. It kind of worked for one edge. Not really a solution, but maybe someone has a better use for it. If you set U,V and W to 2, set it in place and deform it, you can increase the number of U,V and W segments and they automatically position themself to fit to the overall form…like chamfer would do…

So close! :smiley:


the problem with my only 24-vertices solution for your (DiLer) sample
I wanted not to use loop-cuts like the modo-sample does.
I hope what rebogey did is clear, there is always a different approach,
some may look very like the same, but this depends on the object-geometry-goal.

For the cuboid object in low-res, the simple 24-vertice-solution might good enough
and its possible to use simple modifier.
For higher resolution the mode-example with more loop-cuts is necessary. Could be done in blender too - even with multiple loop-cuts, just Crtl-R and with mouse-wheel scroll up the wanted number of loop-cuts and if its a cuboid object it is easy to scale those cuts together along one axis (get the loop-cuts close together for shape of a corner, edge…)
For highest resolution one would go for a bezier-curve to get the rounded corners, because it is easy to tweak the shape of the corners, edges the best - and if all are placed right, then maybe convert into mesh …

The ?hardest decision is for what resolution you want to go - thats the point where i dont understand why your sample-object is so huge -
and i have to admit, i still have problems about when to use “SMOOTH” or “FLAT” for simple objects according to their usage…