Building planar geometry quickly

Hello everyone!
Does anyone know if I can get the result on the right side quickly when I only have the vertices (on the left side)?
I did this manually but it’s rather time consuming.


Many thanks in advance,
Greetings,
Shu

Subdivide a plane
select faces as needed
inset.
Using proportional editing . grab, deform as you like.

Thank you for your reply, michalis!
There is probably some misunderstanding. Either I didn’t understand you correctly or you didn’t understand my problem correctly.
I already have the vertices on the left side. I don’t want to create something like the pattern on the right side,
but I want to use the vertices I already have and let blender create the faces.

I already tried this for completing this task quickly:

  • select the small islands in the middle

  • separate them

  • make a 3d-mesh out of them

  • select the small lines

  • make a 3d-mesh out of them that is thinner than the other 3d-mesh

  • use the boolean modifier (difference)

But it didn’t work nicely. The boolean function creates a whole bunch of wrong faces.

The F2 addon is going to be useful here.

  1. Blender does not allow faces with holes.
  2. Alt-clicking on an edge will select the loop.
  3. Hitting F with a closed loop will make a face.
  4. With F2 installed if you have a single edge selected the addon will make a face if there is only one possibility.

So you can select one by one all the islands and use Fto make them faces. Then you need to bridge the areas in between using the F2 addon or - more tediously - the builtin bridge edge loops command.

Thank you for your answer, DruBan!
I have to say I didn’t know the F2 addon and it seems quite useful.
But in this case, it won’t actually help too much unless I am missing something.
The islands can be created as n-gons using the F key after selecting the edge loop without the addon, too.
And when it comes to the other faces, I find it easier to just select and ctrl-select two edge loops and bridge them just press F for an n-gon if there is no intersection.
This seems quicker than pressing F about 20 times. Also, I will get more n-gons which makes assigning materials quicker later on.
So I guess there is no way of creating those faces really quick, is there?
It would be nice if Blender could autocomplete the whole mesh (preferably with n-gons).


  • Starting point. Rings have many vertices and outer edge has been subdivided too. The amount doesn’t matter, just that it would be hard to fill this cleanly with quads
  • Selected all, alft+F to fill, alt+J to turn tris to quads to clean it up a bit
  • Edge select mode, select all, ctrl+E -> select boundary loop. Deselected outer edges
  • Alt+F and alt+J again.

Edit: except that I didn’t press Alt+J but remembered to tell about it.

Thank you very much for your answer, JA12!
Alt-F does work wonders here! I did not know about this function!
This saves a lot of time!
There is only one downside: There will be many faces and no n-gons.
Can I combine multiple faces to n-gons, too?
Because then it would be easier to apply different materials.

Sure. You could use select linked (L with mouse cursor over, or ctrl+L to extend already selected) when you’ve done the second step. Select the outside of the circle and then X -> limited dissolve and perhaps use low angle setting. Then ctrl+i to invert selection and X -> dissolve faces to make the inside circles as n-gons.

If you already have something past the 2. step, could hide the edges between the inside circles and the big plate. Edge select mode, select one short edge and then shift+G -> length to select the rest. H to hide.

Hi Shu, there’s always a tradeoff in Blender and all other 3Dapps that I know of between quick triangles and slower methods (lots of keypresses) to get all quad geometry. If you are okay with the triangles alt F is the way to go…

Multiple faces(triangles) are combined to NGons with the F key, with the restriction that you can’t have a face with a hole in it, so any interior loop has to be connected to the exterior with at least two segments.


Thank you, JA12 and DruBan!
Your answers helped a lot!
I was able to build this



quicker than what I mentioned in my original post
and it even has fewer ngons!

Although Blender allows concave Ngons I try to avoid them for some subconscious reason. So I would go ahead and make the extra joins to get rid of at least the long ones with the multiple concavities, those are just creeping me out - I probably won’t be able to sleep now… :eek: I wonder if this phobia is based on anything real or just superstition…

It’s not at all a superstition!
Sometimes, if not always, concave ngons will make appear bad overlapping triangulations in rendering, not my own direct experience since I avoid ngons as much as possible, but I have seen many of such cases in this forum.

paolo

Most of the time, I do avoid concave ngons, too.
In this case, I am only trying to create a texture.
So I won’t be working on it for very long and if there are going to be problems,
I will encounter them soon.
I just created a test-render, though.
You can take a look at it:



EDIT:
Oh and just to make sure, here is a test-render using brighter colors:



It seems to be fine.

Also, I have never had any problems with ngons that I didn’t already see in the 3D-viewport while using solid shading.
As long as the angle is not too wide, concave ngons will be fine. At least that’s what I experienced.

Just a case from the thread rendered model present aspect not present in model.

paolo

Alright, this isn’t good indeed.
While you can’t already see the problem in the 3D-view, the angle is very wide.
So I guess one could have expected problems.

I just made a test series using 45° steps to see at which angle there will be problems.
Up to 315° the n-gons (blue ones on top) seem to be fine:




Interesting, though that’s not the worst situation, there can be some acute angles along the boundary loop, and an irregular disposition of the vertices around.
But usually just one or two cuts in the proper places can solve.

paolo

You’re right. The testing I did was using planar ngons. I’m pretty sure 3d-ngons will have problems way sooner.