Apologies for creating yet another “how’s my topology” thread - you can stop here if you’re tired of them.
I’ve been fiddling with this for a while, and I feel like I’m at the stage where I could use some input. I’d ultimately like to texture and probably animate it, but for the time being I’m primarily interested in people’s thoughts on the mesh topology. Are the poles in spots that will get me in trouble when I do my RVKs? Is the mouth too heavy, loop-wise? Does the transition between the ear and the rest of the head look strange?
Any insights that will help make the model more suitable for texturing/animating would be welcome. Thanks!
dude, that looks amazing! Tho i’ve never modelled a head before, the mesh looks very good to me. Can’t think of anything to crit tbh. Except for the ears maybe. The outside rim is too thick I think.
I made a few adjustments on the ear (no major geometry changes yet, just vertex pushing) to try to get it looking a little bit better. I’m still not entirely happy with it, but I’ll wait for more comments before I make any really drastic changes. Here’s the new ear, and the old one for comparison.
Some advice, there are almost no straight lines on the face. The nose is too boxy because of this. The topology looks extremely clean otherwise. What’s the person in your avatar eating btw?
I’ve done a bit of adjustment on all of the facial features since I last posted. If the nose still looks boxy to you, let me know where - I realize that the loops run parallel in spots, but I’m not sure that the subsurfed version is outside the range of normal variation for a human nose. Here’s what I’m working with currently:
Vanilla wafers. Here’s a larger version of the image.
Looks pretty reasonable to me and I think the poles around the cheeks are acceptable. I would like to see the forehead protrude just a fraction more to take away the smooth/flat transition from the nose.
Hard to tell from the latest angled view but the nose looks okay. In the early version, I think it was the parallel edges making it look a little fat. The base of the nose, where it blends inot the face, should “normally” be thinner at the top than where it meets the nostrils.
As you say, there are acceptable bounds of variation and your model fits well within them.
For interesting shape deformations, you’ll probably need to add some crease edges in critical places. Creases on the brow are almost essential for good expression.
as far as i can see, your topology looks pretty much flawless.
however, your anatomy sucks
j/k, it merely looks like you’re suffering from modelled-in-orthographic-syndrome, shouldn’t be too hard to fix, just check against your references in perspective mode.
These are my crit for you.
“This arc in bottom of nose is almost same arc in top lip but bigger and wider scale. I see lots of models where bottom of nose is flat and looking bit wierd and unnatural.” this is from post where i did reply to joeedh: https://blenderartists.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=64998
From topology: You have nice clean mesh there but I would fix loop just above where nose tip starts, to go right down under the jaw, preffer than going on jaw.
Of cource, assuming that you are trying to make realistic face rather than comic face.
Thanks for the input guys! I’m still working on a number of changes based on the feedback I’m getting here, but here’s a quick response to the most recent posts.
I’ll keep that in mind. I tried out a few different options for adding creases, and I think I’ve found a reasonable solution, but I’d like to work with it a bit more before I finalize the geometry in that area.
The model is essentially freehand. I abandoned my reference early on and haven’t really used one since, at least as far as having images in the file itself to line up my vertices precisely. I’ve used various external references for the most part, and I’ve kept track of the model in both perspective and ortho views throughout the process. That said, perspective mode seems to distort the view to some extent as well (relative to how the human eye would perceive the same geometry). Can that be adjusted?
I would be interested to see more discussion of cameras, views, and distortion though - the only really in-depth discussion that I’ve run into was in BgDM’s Crow thread (which you also took part in), and the conclusion there seemed to be that camera settings had a lot to do with making portrait-type shots look “correct.” I may just need to work with the camera, or maybe render a flyaround of the head so that people can see it from a variety of angles.
Having looked at a number of references, I’d say that the average is probably somewhere between the two images that you’ve got (though it varies tremendously). I left the lip more or less as it was, but I did make a few minor changes to the nostrils themselves that I noticed while I was poking around down there. There may still be work that needs to be done on the area as a whole, but here’s what I’ve got so far:
However, what you do miss is a bit more defined upper-lip thingie. You know, that “path” (I can’t for the life of mine remember what it is called, not even in norwegian) on the upper lip, going up to the bottom of the nose.
ont know if you already know this but about the camera:
When you model something in blnder you never keep size in mind. As long as everything else is to proportion? right?
And because of this you tend to model something that would in real life (considering the lens settings of the camera) be WAY too big.
And you cant just scale the object down. Because then youll need to move the camera closer, and that means youve just scaled everything down, so it would seem just as big.
To fix this you need to select the camera, and open the editing panel (F9) and make the camera lens bigger. This will fix it by making the back of the object seem closer to the front (less perspective effect). Youll find that you will then need to move te camera away (thats just how cameras are :D) and once youve done it looks normal
You can change the camera focal length by selecting it and going into Editing (F9). The default is 35 which is pretty wide angle. Change it to 50-70 and move it away from the model. I can’t recall if the figure truly represents lens focal lengths but if it does, this should reduce the sort of fisheye distortion that often occurs.
Here’s a brief update for anyone who’s interested in seeing the object from a few different angles. I’ve rendered a short flyaround (XviD, 928KB) and changed the material a bit in the hope that the added specularity will serve to highlight anything that’s weird about the geometry. The camera’s set at 55.
Um, okay, while it looks like a head, the topology doesn’t really follow face’s bone structure. Especially the cheeks, but the forehead and the sides of the head as well. Not to mention the head is rarely very smooth and round like you have presented there.
The ears are wrong, it doesn’t connect to the head properly. Also, the jaw is really undefined. I think those eyes are a bit too deep and at a wrong angle, pull up the innermost corners a bit forward? And the nostrils are a bit odd too, but I’d need to see the head from the side to say for sure.
The head in general suffers from a block shape, which I presume is remnants from the square beatified and split in half technique.
Can you be more specific? I assume you’re referring to the overall shape rather than the flow of the loops (which should conform to the muscle structure rather than the bones), but what specifically strikes you as being outside the acceptable bounds for a human face?
This is obviously a fairly low poly model, so most of the “roughness” and variation that you’d expect from a real face will be added (hopefully) when I get to the point of texturing the model - the various materials that I’m using now are just placeholders.
I agree with you here. I’ve done a fair bit of work on the ears, but I’m still not quite happy with how they connect to the head, both along the front edge and in the back. Part of it, I think, is the result of the jump in the level of detail between the ear and the surrounding head area, but I may be able to refine it further. Thanks for pointing it out.
Again, can you be more specific? Is the jaw objectively wrong from an anatomical standpoint, or just aesthetically weak? Are you concerned with the shape of the jaw, or the way it transitions into the rest of the head?
You’re right, the eyes are set pretty deep. I’ve adjusted the angle slightly since my original post, but maybe it needs to change a bit more. I’ll take a closer look at it.
I linked to a video in my previous post for precisely this reason. I recommend letting it loop in your player of choice to get a solid feel for how the head looks at different angles.
You’re half right. I didn’t use the box method, but the transition between the sides and the top of the head probably is more angular than it ought to be - it’s even more apparent in the video. I was initially having trouble keeping the forehead the way I wanted it, and the sharper angles that continue back along the head are the result of that (still not totally resolved) struggle. I’ll see what I can do to tone them down a bit.
You have to remember that human faces have sharp bones in them as well, some of them which go beyond muscles in the ways of defining faces. The one underneath the eyes is a good example, but fat faces lack that, or it’s more round, but most of the time you can spot it and say “Hey, here’s that funky bone in your face!” I think your model lacks that factor. I’m not sure if it’s planned or not, but it sticks in my mind. It’s on the side, sure, but it sort of points. to my mind, anyway, could be wrong. wouldn’t be the first time.
I didn’t just mean texture, I meant headwise. Feel your head, feel it around with your finger tips, and tell me if it’s that smooth. I really think you’d oughta find yourself a skull to look at, along with the muscles. Any skull illustrates my point. Front of the face lacks detail, especially that little crevice that emerges from behind your nostrils and goes to the side of the nose. From what I can see. Remember, human face = uneven = complex != smooth, unless it’s a baby.
This time I suggest you take a book of bald people and just stare at how the ear goes. In fact, just draw the head. Draw the ears. Draw tons of them. You have clear issues with getting the earflap right and making it connect with the head correctly (it’s like sticking out, man), so drawing ears from all around should work. Feel your own ears again, should work. Human anatomy is complex affair, needs lots of study.
I notice the lines emerging from the mouth are going wrong when you enter the chin area. Mainly because there is no chin, which is a feature that some people have. The jaw is also very nonexistent and badly defined when nearing the ears. It looks like a kid, but I can tell that you nearly all adults have a slightly more defined chin. It protrudes a bit. You can clearly ‘see’ the bone. Maybe not with everyone, but most of the time yes.
Whee! … do I get a cookie now?
I shall take a look at it later when Queen isn’t raping the tv and the speaker setup in the other room.
I suppose that shows, it looks like rest of the head has been ignored pretty muchly. You have to fix those angles, honest. Also, there is some sort of depression next to the eyebrows, on the side of the head. LOOK AT A SKULL!
No, thank you for actually listening and responding. (and to give me something to type about, har.) The head’s going in a great pace, don’t take me wrong.
