I’ve been Blending off and on for quite a while, but still haven’t gone much beyond basics. I’ve been searching old threads, looking at guides, reading more about topology and watching videos, but I still don’t have an intuitive grasp of how to approach certain situations, so I get myself in trouble.
Here’s the most simplified example of geometry that I have trouble with. If I want the orange selected area to have a smooth Subsurf, controllable shape like this (sort of a smooth scoop out of the corner of the shape), how do I prevent 5/3 point poles and triangles or where is the best place to move them to minimize distortion. As I start adding more loop cuts and try to shift things around, it just gets worse (more triangles and poles).
In another look at the problem I started with an even more simple shape, but I wanted to be able have more detail and control around the selected area.
Thanks, Ricky. I’m looking for a “bevel-like” cut topology that works with the Subsurf modifier. I’m trying to learn good practices to prevent avoidable 3/5 point poles and triangles.
Here is an exaggerated example of a basic bevel with Subsurf and the problems I want to avoid.
Ok, thanks again. I will try more tests with that approach. I thought there might be other ways to do it, but maybe I’ve overthinking something that should be simple.
I also wanted to vary the smoothing. You see I have an extra set of faces in the middle (vertically), so I could have a smooth, larger radius rounding in the center cut area and then have tighter rounded edges on the outer edges of the whole shape.
Rightly or wrongly I’d do it like his if I understand the question then you can just add as much or as little sub surf as you want and just slide the loops to soften or sharpen the edges add more in if there are areas to define.
Rightly or wrongly I’d do it like his if I understand the question then you can just add as much or as little sub surf as you want and just slide the loops to soften or sharpen the edges add more in if there are areas to define.
[/quote]
Thanks, Umii! That looks like it should work well. I’ll try to see if I can add the details starting from your shape.
Meanwhile, I was working on one more try from Ricky’s bevel suggestion. I was able to get much closer to what I was looking for, but I found that I had to add all the loops and extra manual cut sections before the bevel to hold the right shape. So, I’d add the bevel to see the problem areas, then undo and make cuts before trying the bevel again. I still see a couple pinching areas where the bevel made triangles on boths sides. I also felt like maybe there were too many loops and manual cuts, but I wasn’t sure.
About modeling if there something i would like to add is: When i m modeling or retopoying i pay attention to my faces loop flow so that if i want to add an edge sometime later in the process i don’t have to deal with spiral loop. With your model it is a bit difficult to give any good advice since i don’t where you are heading to. I may go Umii’s approach so if i want to tighten up top faces then i just add an edge loop and bring it up or for the flat surface in the middle i can just extrude those faces. Just my 2cents
Well, with Umii’s model, I was able to get close to what I did with the other method. Compared to the bevel method, I didn’t have to do the extra manual knife cuts and all the areas remain available for more loop cuts. As you can see, I pushed the points around to get different edges and curves on different sides, so the loops are no longer evenly spaced. Some loops zigzag a bit trying to transition from smoother to tighter edge sections. It doesn’t look pretty, but I’m not sure if there’s another way to get the same mix of different types of edges.
Thanks, erick. It’s more of a theoretical question now, for future use. I was working on a simplified brake caliper and ran into trouble with a section like that because of the way I started extruding the model, then had to cut out that section. I rebuilt the area a few times, but it was a mess of many loop and non-loop cuts. I wanted to ask here to have a better idea of how to do something like that next time.
When I’ve done those types of odd curved hard surface pieces, for me I found that it ended up being quicker if use a combination of sculpting and boolean cutting and union etc. to create the initial shape with out worrying about the topology then just retopologise it with shrink wrap and snapping putting my edge loops in first then just filling in the gaps and add any supporting topology where I know I’ll need detail.
Makes it far less stressful and I end up with really nice topology as I just concentrate on making a nice shape then nice topology not both at once, not advising this is the best way to do it! just how I would approach it currently, it’s ever evolving
I’m really confused with this? What look are you going for? Are you wanting to create a filleted look when the object is smoothed or are you wanting to create flat geometry with filleted corners?
If you want to smooth this shape then why in gods name are you beveling the edges with so much geometry? No, no, no and nope!
Use edge-loops, try again and come back with a pic. I want to see…
That sounds like a good idea too. I’ve been meaning to practice more retopology. I tried shrinkwrap for part of another object I was working on and I couldn’t get it to work well for the two shapes I was trying to get together, so i just ended up manually snapping all the points to the second surface. With shrinkwrap, I could only get a fraction of my shape to adhere to the surface. Anyway, that’s another discussion.
Thanks, but that was a past project and I’m working on other things now. That’s why I asked as a more basic and general question with the most simplified example possible. The beveling approach was one of the suggested approaches above, so I tried to see what kind I results I could get from going down that path.
There are differing degrees of smoothness and tightness on different edges and in the cut out. I was making an extremely simplified version based on references rather than a precise, detailed model. In the end, it turns out that the part is barely visible in the final use.
That scene is done, but all the suggestions have been very helpful getting me to look at the problem in different ways. I have a much better idea of where to start and a variety of approaches to try next time.
I’ll be honest I think you need some more training in the edge loop department. The model above is horrid in terms of your edge flow. What’s with that hugely unnecessary bunch of edge loops at the front? When you have a good understanding then you won’t get topology looking like that.
That’s why I’m here asking basic questions like this. I have done some reading and watching videos, but when working on my own I still don’t have an intuitive grasp of basic do’s and don’ts. Specifically, in this case, where to simplify and where to do cuts all the way around the entire object. If I have detail, do I carry it all the way around or terminate it with edges that have points only connected on one side? Where and how do I do that without causing more artifacts and avoiding unneccessary complexity? I’m still learning to grasp these issues.
Thank you for the links. I already bookmarked and have been looking through some of them when you posted in Agash’s car thread.
One of the things that’s simple enough (if mesh isn’t subject to deformation, mostly applies to mechanical models), is if you need to terminate an edge loop, try to do it in the middle of a planar surface. If you do it near a surface transition (edge or fairly tight curve), it’s going to add tension to the smoothing and not look so good. Sometimes it’s just easier to let edges flow around though, depends on whether or not you’re worried about your poly count. (But good practice still says to keep it down if you can.)
Also another way to look at stuff is that each major surface transition is defined by at least one edge loop. So if you had an wing sticking out of the side of something, there’s a loop going around that wing. Not always the case, but more than often it is.
And of course if you don’t need something as one contiguous piece (I’ve been guilty of this at times), do part it out. It’s easier to model by just poking things through each other.
