PDA

View Full Version : Subdivision Modeling Workshop



Pages : [1] 2

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 08:07 AM
Let's make a workshop. You want to learn about subpatch modeling, you want to share tips? Have specific questions? Have a request for a tutorial? Want to share a tutorial? Post a model for examination? Anything.

We'll start here.

Take this model. It has about 100 layers or so of all the steps it took to create it.

If you have any questions ask away. :)

Maybe you have better ideas about how to do it. Maybe you can share those, with examples. Pretty much anything goes.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=57625&d=1208098458

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=57704&d=1208252181

"final" is with surfaces in case you want to play with textures or renders.

JeffrySG
05-08-2008, 01:14 PM
You rock, Richard! Great idea!

Glendalough
05-08-2008, 04:31 PM
Hi Richard,

Yes this is a great idea.

I would like to model something on the very simple end of things using Sub-ds. That is, to try and capture the essence of this car in as simple a mesh as possible -just a bit noddy, without getting too cartoonish. Basically stick to the minimum.

Maybe though this is just too unexciting. To me it represents the Ford consumer dream (stripped down) in the 1960's, having all the characteristics (chopped) of their bigger models. A deflated dream with a sour bonnet. Don't mean to be negative, just thought there is something slightly alarming about this model which also makes it endearing. Am attracted to the idea of minimalist but still representational form.

Have some more references, can post.

Hopper
05-08-2008, 04:56 PM
Actually yes. There is something that's just been burning a hole in my head for the past few weeks.

Using SubD - putting holes in irregular surfaces (after the fact). Like anything from convex to concave surfaces. Irregular bends like the fender of a car, or uneven "wavy" surfaces. And not just round holes. Holes that may have a mix of both sharp and rounded corners.

Obviously you can stencil/boolean etc, but that's just the start. The trick that gets me is how to accomplish these things without disturbing the geometry already around it.

And yes, I know... the trick is that you should have planned ahead before, but sometimes it just strikes me to add random detail.

I'm sure this won't make sense after I post it and read it again.

Hopper
05-08-2008, 04:58 PM
Have some more references, can post.
Wow .. I think that's the closest a car has ever become to being a cartoon without actually being one! :D

Matt
05-08-2008, 06:06 PM
First tip that comes to mind:

Plan your model. Even draw on paper where you plan to place cuts / edges etc. It can save a lot of time in the long run!

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 09:25 PM
Hi Richard,
Maybe though this is just too unexciting. To me it represents the Ford consumer dream (stripped down) in the 1960's, having all the characteristics (chopped) of their bigger models. A deflated dream with a sour bonnet. Don't mean to be negative, just thought there is something slightly alarming about this model which also makes it endearing. Am attracted to the idea of minimalist but still representational form.

Have some more references, can post.

I love that car! It think it would be a gas to model. Please post any more references you have of it. Do you have a plan to get started with it? Do you need any help figuring out where to begin? Let us know. I think it is a great project and I love your take on it.

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 09:26 PM
First tip that comes to mind:

Plan your model. Even draw on paper where you plan to place cuts / edges etc. It can save a lot of time in the long run!

Good one. :)

Hopper
05-08-2008, 09:49 PM
Plan your model. Even draw on paper where you plan to place cuts / edges etc. It can save a lot of time in the long run!
Now that wouldn't be very Taron like now would it... :D You're assuming you have a plan. Since I do this for fun, lately I've been opening up modeler and simply "starting". Just anything... grab some shapes and see what comes out. It's very therapeutic. For me, reproducing something can be frustrating at times. It's still something everyone should learn, but lately..... it's been extend, stretch, rotate, collapse and spin! :)

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 09:51 PM
Actually yes. There is something that's just been burning a hole in my head for the past few weeks.

Using SubD - putting holes in irregular surfaces (after the fact). Like anything from convex to concave surfaces. Irregular bends like the fender of a car, or uneven "wavy" surfaces. And not just round holes. Holes that may have a mix of both sharp and rounded corners.

Obviously you can stencil/boolean etc, but that's just the start. The trick that gets me is how to accomplish these things without disturbing the geometry already around it.

And yes, I know... the trick is that you should have planned ahead before, but sometimes it just strikes me to add random detail.

I'm sure this won't make sense after I post it and read it again.

Well that is a very good question. And a very practical problem. It is going to depend of course on the situation. But this is where the more tools you have at your disposal the better. Not to mention a willingness to tweak by hand. And I would emphasize the latter the most.

One tool that comes to mind is the point normal tool. If you add a bandsaw to the side of a disk, it is going to flatten it out on that spot. If you notice after you run the tool it leaves the points selected. Run point normal move on it to bring that back to the curve.

But that might not be enough. Because you have disturbed the overall flow. I talk about the theory of this here. (http://www.lightwiki.com/Fundamentals_of_Subpatch_Modeling_Part_Two)

So now you have different distances affecting the way SubD will create the curves. So many times you have to compensate by moving things away around the area you edited, not even on it. Don't get too focused on the area you added detail. Remember that that detail effects the curves of the edges near it. You can adjust those curves even my adjusting points around those.

Think of it like pulling the wrinkles out of a piece of fabric where you tug on the outside edges to smooth it out.

Hope that makes sense.

And remember sometimes a tool won't do it. I think it was da Vinci who said something to the effect of if an artist can draw a circle, he can draw anything. Well that means a lot more of course. A circle is the basis for all geometric forms, but that is another topic. Another way you can apply that is to be willing to look at something and tweak it by hand until you can see that the natural curve is back. Being able to make a perfect circle by hand on paper is a great exercise for this. Sometimes you can put a reference curve or sphere in the BG - which is a great technique by the way - but you don't always have that option.

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 10:06 PM
You rock, Richard! Great idea!


Thanks Jeff! And now we have a link to your tutorials which I wanted to put here. :thumbsup:

3D Kiwi
05-08-2008, 11:19 PM
Some referance for your angle box

http://www.the-blueprints.com/index.php?search/

Surrealist.
05-08-2008, 11:31 PM
Cool.

On that site I also found this tutorial (http://www.the-blueprints.com/index.php?tutorials/lightwave/) for setting up your Backdrop.

This is handy as it is a question that comes up from time to time and there are some good tips in the tutorial too.

JeffrySG
05-09-2008, 09:46 AM
^cool... and it's even a LW tutorial! :)

Glendalough
05-09-2008, 05:52 PM
Wow .. I think that's the closest a car has ever become to being a cartoon without actually being one! :D

Yeah, when I first saw these wasn't really sure what was going on!

Glendalough
05-09-2008, 05:59 PM
I love that car! It think it would be a gas to model. Please post any more references you have of it. Do you have a plan to get started with it? Do you need any help figuring out where to begin? Let us know. I think it is a great project and I love your take on it.

Hi Richard,

Yes, I really need help on where to begin!

Spent a lot of time about a year ago trying to model this car in sub-Ds and it just kept going up in polys but always falling short on getting the job done, the basic form of the car laid in. At the end of the day, quite a few days, confronted with a horrible mess (mesh) felt this was a case for simplification if there ever was one.

A reoccurring problem was maintaining the overall shape while trying to model individual parts. The hardest part was the front. Here the 60's curve on bonnet is held at the sides by the casings for the headlights but going towards the front, the bonnet flows out around beneath the headlights (where the grill is) and below a bit. Just couldn't get this to look right, accurate.

Have had a bit more experience since then but still pretty scared, daunted by the task. Exactly how to plan this is the first problem. Square box or extrude cab up? Or is it something completely different?

Hopper
05-09-2008, 07:09 PM
Yeah, when I first saw these wasn't really sure what was going on!
I have to admit though. It does have some nice clean lines. You can see the T-Bird pokin out a bit.

Surrealist.
05-09-2008, 07:57 PM
Hi Richard,

Yes, I really need help on where to begin!

First of all we need to start with the proper reference images. The ones you have are good for piecing together details and if it was all we had that would be OK but it is better to start off with ortho views.

Here are some from that link provided above:

http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/cars/ford/ford-e-anglia-105e-1966.gif

http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/cars/ford/ford-e-anglia-105e-1961.gif

http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/cars/ford/ford-e-anglia-105e-sport-1967.gif

I Like the last one best even though it is the sport. The image is larger and it has more views.

So what you need to first do is chop up the image you want to work with into 2 or three views to get started. These should match so they line up in each view. Looks like this has been done pretty well. Just make sure and preserve that when you cut them up.

Then load them up as Backdrop in modeler.

Then I would not start with trying to model the whole car from a box.

Rather I would trace out a large part such as the top of the car in one view using a polygon create tool.

I would extrude this, taper and drag to have it line up, then start adding edges with various methods to add the polyflow to keep the shape solid.

I would work in a similar fashion around the car.

That is a very very basic overview. I can provide more details if you want later when I get more time.

Glendalough
05-10-2008, 06:00 AM
First of all we need to start with the proper reference images....better to start off with ortho views.
...

Wow...gosh...wasn't thinking of using reference backdrops, but then how could you know what I was thinking!

It's not so much the proportions (tho' know these can be critical on curves) but the flow of the mesh or rather where it modulates/changes (whatever is the word?) from one form to another, such as at the headlights, in a sort of cylinder, and meets 2 different flows or aspects of the bonnet at side and front.

I'll post something later today to try and explain this better, but suppose I have in mind a very low poly mesh, that is, unless imagining something not possible!

PS -I looked at that reference site above but just typed in 'Ford Anglia' and it said 'no results', should have gone to 'Ford' and worked from there.

Surrealist.
05-10-2008, 09:47 AM
Same for me. Anglia was the ticket. :)

Regarding the orthos and your question. I do understand what you mean. However you go about it, take one part at a time. The headlights area is very interesting indeed. But I would go big and work small in this case. And think about saving the harder parts for last.

It is bedtime for me here, but I'll take a look at what you have going on my tomorrow.

Good luck.

Glendalough
05-11-2008, 01:46 PM
...You can see the T-Bird pokin out a bit.

I like that!

The first car that really created an impression on me were those scowling Buicks from the 1950s. From the low perspective of a child they really were frightening. More recently I have come to admire them, at least the qualities that came out of that "Y" car that Harley Earl designed.

Glendalough
05-11-2008, 01:48 PM
Same for me. Anglia was the ticket. :)

Regarding the orthos and your question. I do understand what you mean. However you go about it, take one part at a time. The headlights area is very interesting indeed. But I would go big and work small in this case. And think about saving the harder parts for last.

It is bedtime for me here, but I'll take a look at what you have going on my tomorrow.

Good luck.

Did a bit of work on this but not sure exactly what it proves. Hope I don't just have a theory like the famous Anne Elk:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cAYDiPizDIs

But being more serious, think I imagined doing this car the way you did that hammer or more simply the joining of various shapes (Combining Solids):

http://www.lightwiki.com/Fundamentals_of_Subpatch_Modeling_Part_Four

But exactly what the shapes are needs to be determined...after doing this can see already that it should maybe be broken down differently with the outer wings running the full length and the top a separate entity.

Anyway the backdrops proved very useful (thanks 3D Kiwi). Will post a sub-d version of this "theory" soon to see what people think. Enclosed is lwo with present setup. The sport version seems to be stretched(?) maybe the later models got bigger.

Surrealist.
05-11-2008, 10:25 PM
Yeah I think you are right. The fin should run the length and I was thinking that the top would be a good piece to work on separate too.

Interesting approach to do a block out first. Look forward to the subd version of your theory. :)

NAS
05-12-2008, 04:35 PM
Hahahahah no way you crazy buggers are doing an anglia DOH
I have written a hero flick script and the hero has an Anglia that transforms hahahahah
Cool stuff

NAS

Glendalough
05-13-2008, 11:42 AM
Hahahahah no way you crazy buggers are doing an anglia DOH
I have written a hero flick script and the hero has an Anglia that transforms hahahahah
Cool stuff

NAS

Good to hear! Every hero may need an Anglia soon.

Glendalough
05-13-2008, 11:44 AM
Yeah I think you are right. The fin should run the length and I was thinking that the top would be a good piece to work on separate too.

Interesting approach to do a block out first. Look forward to the subd version of your theory. :)

Traced out the top and wing with the Create/Polygons/Pen tool. Cross cut these using Detail/Edges/Add Edges and then extruded.

Not sure if this is the right way to go at all (you mention "Rather I would trace out a large part such as the top of the car in one view using a polygon create tool." ) or should I just do one layer of polys say from the top and smooth shift/ extrude etc. down keeping to contours of car outline?

A few tris in the wing which can be redone if going this way, kept the original outline done with pen tool.

StudioBOZON
05-13-2008, 11:51 AM
Actually yes. There is something that's just been burning a hole in my head for the past few weeks.

Using SubD - putting holes in irregular surfaces (after the fact). Like anything from convex to concave surfaces. Irregular bends like the fender of a car, or uneven "wavy" surfaces. And not just round holes. Holes that may have a mix of both sharp and rounded corners.

Obviously you can stencil/boolean etc, but that's just the start. The trick that gets me is how to accomplish these things without disturbing the geometry already around it.

And yes, I know... the trick is that you should have planned ahead before, but sometimes it just strikes me to add random detail.

I'm sure this won't make sense after I post it and read it again.


Had the same problem with my models. Well I thought that there should be a way to do it easy and fast, but all the time i spend searching for a tool or anything else made me do it from scratch, point by point, poly by poly, moving it around by 0,0001 m. I discovered that this was the fastest and the most acurate way to do it. I had to jump from modeler to layout and around, made a render, and went back to move some points by milimiters or less, then made the next render, and around. If U want to do it photoreal like, try to work on more details (I mean modyfying some parts derasticly close).

I made some pictures showing the flow of my model (U're modeling a car so, this will probobly be usefull for You).

First of all - for modeling I'm using some tools, that are very important:

BandSawPro - this one doesn't have a default shourt cut, but will need it
Cut - this one is for the places the BandSawPro wont work (shortcut +U)
Unify - if You'll have to simple some polygons to get them straighter ( +Z )
Add Point - this is for forming some curves sharper without choping every thing around (like band saw would do)

These are my favorite tools, but keep in mind to keep the object as simple as possible. Too much of polygons makes a mess, and it is hard to controll them. If u have an area that is made of - lets say 10 polys, but it still looks the same (or the difference is nearly seeable) when U unify the polys and u get 4 - 5 polys, then do it. take some time to simplify U're model. try some othere edge combinations to get the right curves (when having a 5-point poly U can cut it in three difrent ways - it's worth to try all of them)

I made this head light sprinkler - thers a hole and a cap:

http://www.theshape.internetdsl.pl/forums/endless2.jpg

good luck with modeling!

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 12:12 PM
Wonderful model. Great tips. Thanks for the contribution!

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 01:17 PM
Traced out the top and wing with the Create/Polygons/Pen tool. Cross cut these using Detail/Edges/Add Edges and then extruded.

Not sure if this is the right way to go at all (you mention "Rather I would trace out a large part such as the top of the car in one view using a polygon create tool." ) or should I just do one layer of polys say from the top and smooth shift/ extrude etc. down keeping to contours of car outline?

A few tris in the wing which can be redone if going this way, kept the original outline done with pen tool.

I know I said extrude. That was bad advice, sorry. I have been busy. The idea is to trace out a panel and then then create the polyflow. Or you can do it step by step. I have also worked with splines but I prefer the method of working your polyflow initially and then shaping it and smoothing it then refining the flow as you go.

I think no matter how cartoonish or simple you want to go, think of your polyflow. This may or may not be the best way. But it is relatively quick to think polyflow first and then work volume. Then once you have enough of both it starts to come together.

Pay particular attention to the loops around the fender and the window. These are created automatically with the bevel tool while the panel is still flat. You have to fix the sharp ends but it saves a lot of time overall.

The object has detailed steps labeled in the F7 panel.

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 01:35 PM
By the way, I never really got around to taking my tutorial on Creating Contour (http://www.lightwiki.com/Creating_Contour)to a more advanced level. But the initial theory and simple example of the car hood in that tutorial illustrates my point very well. You can really break any model down to Shape and Volume. What I did with the model above was first trace out the shape and then add volume. With that concept you could get the car to an advanced stage quite rapidly with good polyfow intact from the start. Just take each part separately and decide your plan off attack; which view to trace it from. Then build off those parts or connect them or make seams between them just as they are made at the factory.

Glendalough
05-13-2008, 01:52 PM
Wow, Thanks Richard!

That's really beautiful work. There is a lot to look at here.

P.S. Never saw all that piece you did on Contour either.

StudioBOZON
05-13-2008, 02:11 PM
Surrealist - i'm happy to help... what's an art when You keep it in your closet just for your self...

I think, that the type of modeling should be considered in the way of using Your model. There are two major ways - Spline modeling and poly by poly extruding (don't know how it's called). I've always used the poly by poly expanding (extruding), but this time I spend some time with splines. Spline modeling will help to keep the model in its frames. By making some splines, U'll get a frame to start with, and to make some geometry to work with later. I used it especialy when modeling the hood of my car. i made a hood, that later apeared to have to much geometry - in real world it was more flat, had a simple shape, the geometry didn't have many smooth curves, but one - sharp. So I deleted the hood i made, made some Poly Patch on my splines, to make a new geometry, BandSaw it twice in the place it should be sharp and moving a little bit the points in front to give it a distance to the other parts. So this way I made a new part from scratch in few minutes. The poly by poly is best to model with if u don't have to keep the shape of object - sculpture like objects - human body, face, an animal... ie. Use it for modeling a geometry that doesn't have a certain diameters, but when it comes to great detail I would use splines.

here's how the splines of my car look like:
- the splines are black and they are biger for 1% just that the splines wouldn't overlap the object - it's just for this picture

http://www.theshape.internetdsl.pl/forums/spline.jpg

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 08:09 PM
Wow, Thanks Richard!

That's really beautiful work. There is a lot to look at here.

P.S. Never saw all that piece you did on Contour either.

No prob and thank you.

Yes, the tutorial is right there at the bottom of the page. Maybe I will add it to my sig. Hope you can take some of these ideas and use them.

StudioBOZON, again, thanks for sharing. And yes, not much good kept to oneself.

Working with spines is a very good way to map out the volume and contour of the object. In the end I think regardless of how you do it, you have to think about polyflow. Clean and simple.

That is quite an amazing car object. Thanks for posting the wires and splines.

Hopper
05-13-2008, 10:36 PM
As a test, I started modeling the Anglina three different ways.

1. Box modeling - ala Taron style (I just finished his head modeling tutorial so I could hear him talking in my head the whole time - very weird)
2. Spline modeling - from some random tut I found some months ago.
3. Poly Patch modeling - ala 305z car tutorial from the old NewTek tuts

As a beginner I found this:

1. Box modeling = no. Just don't. You'll wind up with a tennis shoe instead of that cool Ferrari. If you don't have a complete grasp of your toolset, you will find it very frustrating.

2. Spline modeling = Fairly easy when you use backdrops, but you still have to plan out your points or you find yourself constantly adding and removing points, thus having to reshape many many times

3. Poly patch modeling (extruding) = Also very easy as you are controlling where each piece will be as you model. It's a little more difficult if you prefer to treat each "piece" of the car seperately (i.e. panel for panel).

This is just from a beginners perspective, so take it as just that. I'm sure as you get better at it and become more comfortable with investigating new tools, you will find your own preference.

-Hopper

StudioBOZON
05-13-2008, 11:12 PM
Surrealist. - :agree: agreed that the most important thing is the polyflow - clean, clean and once again clean.

Just been looking at some of my realy old stuff. You would laught if U saw the mess i was making with my first models... hehehe there was like 500 000 polys just for the body, and the dors were cut out, not with the polyflow, but trough all polygons acros, don't have the mesh to show You, but trust me, You would fall of your chair... :bangwall: hehehe

Been surfing trough Your tutorials... great work man! I'm realy impressed. I'd never used the Add Edges tool... just never thought about it. I'll try it on the interior... :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Is there a way of controling the location of the new created edge in the "add edges" tool, or is set to be in the middle of the lenght of side of the polygon ?

Spread the word !

P.s. If I could be any of use, I would be glad to help. :)
I think that the Lightwave community is a bit forgotten, 3d max, or maya or some other programs seem to be a bit favorized on the web. Have to change this situation. In my opinion its the best and the simplest package U can get. even though in Poland we have to pay a double price - it's still cheap.

I'm missing some fluid simulator though...

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 11:37 PM
As a test, I started modeling the Anglina three different ways.

Cool. Thanks for doing those tests and posting your feedback. That is actually valuable information to have from a beginner's perspective.

I actually don't even use box modeling anymore for anything.

I have dropped spline modeling also because I think it is an old technology. I used it and box modeling in the past to make space vehicles and cars. In my opinion with current SDS technology there is simply no need for splines.

I have been modeling in LW (a poly based modeler) off and on for 15 years since the very first versions about 2 or 3.

This is how I watched the technology in LW Modeler develop.

1) Polygon Modeling.

In the very beginning you had some basic tools and you could do anything you wanted with these tools. I was fairly easy to create inorganic shapes in LW with a reasonable amount of ingenuity. I created many different objects this way. Inorganic shapes were still a bit of a challenge.

If you had non-planar polys you tripled. And if you did manage to create something more organic you could subdivide and tripled.

2) Then along came spline cadge modeling.

This created lots of polys in quads but now you could begin to create more organic shapes with some ingenuity by connecting parts of the cage together or in the case of a car make it in panels. That it created many polys was OK because you needed this to have a smooth transition. And since the next step was to subdivide and triple before you render this was OK. You needed lots of those little tris to make a smooth organic shape with detail.

3) Then along came Metaform subdivision. This is where the concept of box modeling came into use. This was the precursor to SDS modeling we have today. The concept was very similar. You can even take one of your SDS models, turn off Subpatch and run Metaform subdivision and see the similar results if you then also triple. Now the door was opened much wider in LW modeler for organic modeling. And again pretty much your ingenuity the only barrier. The draw back of course many many polygons. So then you could load up a low poly version and replace it with the high poly version at render time. if you had to have many objects in a scene.

You could also use spline modeling in conjunction with this and there were some other plugins available that are now replaced by rail extrude and multiple rail extrude.

4)The introduction of Subdivision Surfaces.

Now you could immediately see the smooth results from your quad mesh in real time in modeler as you worked your box model. Many tools made box modeling easier such as smooth shift and spinquads.

But this was also a complete shift in technology. Now layout did all the subdivision and tripling at render time. So we had two advantages. Real time feedback in modeler and a low res and dynamic high res object in one for layout.

But it also had another advantage. Now you are basically editing curves on your solid mesh in 3D! This really and effectively eliminates the need to spline patching. You can do just as much with the edge of a quad mesh as you can with the points on a spline. So if in the past you would drag points around on a curve. Well you can also drag the points around on one edge of your base mesh just the same in SDS.

But there is another advantage. In the time it takes you to draw out a spline, you can draw out an Ngon. You can then have this Ngon cover and area that will latter be bent into shape. You can also make a custom polyflow to fit the shape you are making in advance knowing exactly how it will come out. this is a huge time saver and your model comes out much more efficient. The key here is knowing your polyflow in advance.

So to me using spine patching and SDS modeling in conjunction is counter intuitive.

That is just me. That's my opinion after years of doing all of the above.

But I never discourage people from doing what works for them. And I think modeling as much as you can with as many different techniques is a very good thing. That I have come to this from my own experience is just that, my experience.

Take it for what you think it is worth. :)

And StudioBOZON, I just saw your post... reading it now.:)

Surrealist.
05-13-2008, 11:42 PM
Surrealist. - :agree: agreed that the most important thing is the polyflow - clean, clean and once again clean.

Just been looking at some of my realy old stuff. You would laught if U saw the mess i was making with my first models... hehehe there was like 500 000 polys just for the body, and the dors were cut out, not with the polyflow, but trough all polygons acros, don't have the mesh to show You, but trust me, You would fall of your chair... :bangwall: hehehe

Been surfing trough Your tutorials... great work man! I'm realy impressed. I'd never used the Add Edges tool... just never thought about it. I'll try it on the interior... :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Is there a way of controling the location of the new created edge in the "add edges" tool, or is set to be in the middle of the lenght of side of the polygon ?

Spread the word !

P.s. If I could be any of use, I would be glad to help. :)
I think that the Lightwave community is a bit forgotten, 3d max, or maya or some other programs seem to be a bit favorized on the web. Have to change this situation. In my opinion its the best and the simplest package U can get. even though in Poland we have to pay a double price - it's still cheap.

I'm missing some fluid simulator though...

Cool man yes, anything you can do to help. Your input is very valid and appreciated! You are a great artist! I agree about LightWave.

Regarding Add Edges tool you can put the edge anywhere and you can also use the stopper by percentage or distance to create clean edge lines that are consistent.

Surrealist.
05-14-2008, 12:49 PM
Anyone wanting to look at some very clean wires and great modeling, check this thread out (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83473).

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/elinewton/Kerrys-Bike_-_006-wire.gif

colkai
05-14-2008, 01:02 PM
Very tidy, I'm jealous! :p

Hopper
05-14-2008, 06:08 PM
Well, I get my new system Friday, so I will definately join in the fun for the Anglina project. I don't know how long it's going to put together and get everything loaded and tested but one thing is for sure - I'm going to render the hell out of everything!!! (twice!).

Surrealist.
05-14-2008, 10:24 PM
Well that's good news. Hope it all comes together with a minimum of hitches. :)

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 05:29 AM
No prob and thank you.

Yes, the tutorial is right there at the bottom of the page. Maybe I will add it to my sig. Hope you can take some of these ideas and use them...

This way of modeling has been just such an eye opener!

But I've run into a road block... just can't get the Add Edges tool to work properly, get this warning "Failed to build the solid structure. Please unify or hide duplicate polygons."

Have used this tool many times and occasionally get this warning but usually just try again or reselect etc and it works. But have never used it on a flat poly structure like this (?). Tried it in 8 and 2 version of 9, so no bug, just doing something WRONG!

You're history of poly and subD modeling in Lightwave is really interesting. I started with LW 6.5, always wished I had started with 5, think things would have been much easier to understand. It must have been great to see it all develop since those very early versions.

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 05:33 AM
Well, I get my new system Friday, so I will definately join in the fun for the Anglina project. I don't know how long it's going to put together and get everything loaded and tested but one thing is for sure - I'm going to render the hell out of everything!!! (twice!).

Yes, looking forward to see what you are cooking up! Hope your new system comes together fine. I have to agree with your idea of box modeling a car and the way it ends up like a tennis shoe.

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 05:35 AM
...
I'm missing some fluid simulator though...

Super Work with that car!

You can use Blender and import to LW for fluids.

Surrealist.
05-16-2008, 07:40 AM
This way of modeling has been just such an eye opener!

But I've run into a road block... just can't get the Add Edges tool to work properly, get this warning "Failed to build the solid structure. Please unify or hide duplicate polygons."

Have used this tool many times and occasionally get this warning but usually just try again or reselect etc and it works. But have never used it on a flat poly structure like this (?). Tried it in 8 and 2 version of 9, so no bug, just doing something WRONG!

You're history of poly and subD modeling in Lightwave is really interesting. I started with LW 6.5, always wished I had started with 5, think things would have been much easier to understand. It must have been great to see it all develop since those very early versions.

Glad you are finding this stuff useful. Yes it has been interesting. LW started out as a pure necessity to finish a project. I was director and producer and had to finish. So I became the post production facility in my living room with a couple of Toasters running LW on two Amigas. I was no LW wiz but I managed to learn enough to get it done. Being a LW artist was the furthest thing from my mind. That came later. I fell in love with the whole process.

About add edges make sure when you try to use the tool you have a complete;y split polygon. When you drill a hole the result is a polygon that has only an edge half way.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/3/3d/CircleSquare5.gif

The solution is to use the split tool or connect tool to finish the split.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/e/e3/CircleSquare6.gif

StudioBOZON
05-16-2008, 08:26 AM
Super Work with that car!

You can use Blender and import to LW for fluids.

Thanx! Now the hardest part... The details...

I've downloaded the newest Blender, but the only thing I'm able to do is a box... hahaha. Just as 3D studio, the interface is a nightmare... I don't have the patients, maby some day. I'm still dreaming about the fluid simulator in LW and I hope to wakeup pretty soon... ;)

Surrealist.
05-16-2008, 11:10 AM
LOL! I got as far as learning a little of the interface. I imported a LW object and diddled about.

I have to say the online tutorials on the Blender Wiki are the most informative straight forward docs I have seen in a long time.

Even though the interface sucks, they make up for it in a great community of tutorials. It is pretty amazing.

My only reason for dropping it was really just a time factor. I have so much time invested in LW and I don't think I can stop and start all over at this point. But I gotta say it is an impressive package. And I do plan to spend more time with it in the future.

StudioBOZON
05-16-2008, 01:20 PM
Richard,

I would be very thankfull if U'd want to link mi some fresh-starter blender tuts. I tried to play with some collada format in blender, for flash usage, couse there's no collada exporter for LW - Newtek, should implement it for web masters, this would be realy usefull (that's just by the way). So i did try to texture something in blender, on a box... didn't have the patience to finish it though...8/

Surrealist.
05-16-2008, 10:46 PM
You can start here (http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Manual) and see if you can get going. Otherwise try a search for blender and wiki. There should be plenty.

Surrealist.
05-19-2008, 04:41 AM
Hi, I wanted to bring this over here and with MacGregg's permission here we are.



I have tried to remove polygons from my head model, seems like it might be better to start over then try to reduce the polycount down to the levels you're getting.

What's the best way to add a row of polygons to the mesh, the only way I have found is to select the points hit Extender Plus then Drag which is very bad and no control. There just doesn't seem to be an efficient mesh growing tool. The obvious ones don't work on edges or points like Extrude, Smooth Shift or MultiShift or even Create Row.

Thanks,
MacGregg

If you want to start over on the head model that is entirely up to you. But I would say you can easily reduce the polys on that head in very short order starting with the bandglue tool.

I would leave the face as it is for now.

Then starting with the sides of the head, reduce about 30 bands on each side until you have bands - scaled to the head - that are about an inch and a half wide.

Then redirect the flow so you get them going like they are on this head example.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/6/68/PolyFlowExample.gif

Notice how hey band around with a center at the ear. As if you took a sphere and turned it sideways so that the caps are where the ears are. That is a decent starting place for the scalp polyflow. Not something you would do for every single head perhaps but for a good portion of "normal" heads this should be fine.

The head model in question:

Then on the face part, you can look at the concept of redirecting the flow based on the idea of stepping down your mesh up to the scalp.

This is the basic stepping down concept here:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/f/fb/StepDown2.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/91/StepDown3.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/c/c1/StepDown4.gif

A great place to use this is at the point where the bridge of the nose merges with the brow. It is a good idea to redirect the flow there.

What I would do to accomplish this is maybe a little spin quads but lately I am in favor of using the add edges tool along with the merge poly tool to just simply draw the flow where I want it.

Like in this example here:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/94/Fender2.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/2/2d/Fender3.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/e/ed/Fender5.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/9e/Fender6.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/d/d2/Fender8.gif

More of this concept and sequence is on the LightWiki (http://www.lightwiki.com/Creating_Contour).

As to using tools to add polys, The extender plus tool works on edges and then of course I use multishift and other tools too. But mostly I just get real specific about what I want where and I draw it on directly.

Or I will start with a profile sketch and draw the polyfow over that first like I did with the car above.

Here is the head in question.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=58944&d=1211036743

Surrealist.
05-21-2008, 11:53 PM
On another thread I saw Jeffry give a link to a page with some examples for polyfow on a head. Rather good.

http://www.pixelandpoly.com/graphics/referenceimages/poly_regions.jpg

Take a look here, middle of the page for more info (http://www.pixelandpoly.com/reference.html).

MacGregg
05-22-2008, 03:20 AM
Ahhh... found it... This is all great thanks very much Surrealist, I have been trying to work on rearranging the flow and reducing the polycount. Some of my flows are really messed up and take some work to get them more "symmetrical". The way you're doing it you keep each area of complexity independent and isolated, each eye, nose, mouth, chin and each ear. Whereas this last design you showed groups both eyes and part of the nose and the mouth and rest of nose together. The later would probably have an overall lower polycount, but less independent control over each facial feature.

How much of the "Look" of the character is the result of the Math of SubD when you have limited polycounts? Seems like you must increase polycount to resist the "natural curves" of SubD. Like I don't think it is possible to keep the same look of my character and reduce the polycount below some point, in fact every reduction gradually changes the "look" as it trends to a generic face... wouldn't that be true?

Thanks,
MacGregg

(I got sidetracked the last few days, my TV died and I decided to go HDTV and it took some research. Oh, and of course I needed a 26" monitor for my computer too... :) )

Surrealist.
05-22-2008, 05:34 AM
Well I am guessing you saved a copy of the object. What I would go is forget about the way the model is looking. Just get a logical polyflow. Then with the original in the background reshape it to match.

If the polyfow is good, it should look better. Try not to get attached. :)

And yes, if you reduce the polys to a certain point you have less control over the look of it. But you you want a polyfow that gives you loops where you need them, and how you need them to get the shape. No more and no less. It is that simple.

And the head example that I posted above Jeffs is incomplete. It is just a simple example of where the basic loop regions would be and generally how they would be laid out. And it is more polys than is needed. It is just an image I had available.

MacGregg
05-22-2008, 03:37 PM
Oh, it isn't that I think my head is so great...lol, I was just thinking about the process of poly reduction and how many polys are necessary to create a particular character design and you would not be able to go below some soft threshold of polygons for its shape. It occurs to me that you must have less control over the shape of a character as the polycount is reduced and on the other hand it is much harder to change the shape of a character or object the more polygons it has.

((ZBrush has a special "polygon" that contains all its "subdivisions" so you can edit the low polygon mesh independent from the high polygon mesh. This makes it much easier to alter an object even after it has been detailed.))

Just thinking out loud,
MacGregg

MacGregg
05-22-2008, 05:03 PM
Do I understand you right, is there some way to make another object appear in the background or are you just talking about a jpg of the object in the background? Oh, I guess you mean in a layer... duh.

MacGregg

Surrealist.
05-22-2008, 06:37 PM
It occurs to me that you must have less control over the shape of a character as the polycount is reduced and on the other hand it is much harder to change the shape of a character or object the more polygons it has.
Just thinking out loud,
MacGregg

Yeah, I am tracking with you. And someplace in the middle there is the sweet spot.

But what I am trying to drive home is it is not the # of polys it is where they are and how the edge loops flow that is important. Because if you have the edgeloops set properly for what you need, then there is simply no need for extra polys and you have control exactly where you need it.

There are never too many polys if the polys are efficiently giving you the control you need where you need it for the complexity of that model.

This will all come with practice. Doing many many heads, 15 or 20 should get you to the point that you have a good idea of it.

Glendalough
05-24-2008, 05:56 AM
...About add edges make sure when you try to use the tool you have a complete;y split polygon. When you drill a hole the result is a polygon that has only an edge half way

Should have worked that out, don't know why I didn't see it. Have gone on and done a bit more...

The mesh could have a better flow, will go back eventually and do again with better understanding but would like to get through a complete trial run first.

The Splineguide is a great tool, have seen the video on it, but this is a practical application of its use. Went on to the extenderplus, but not completely sure of this. You just select the points, then the tool and click once (that's it) and then move them out with the move tool I gather?

Somehow got 2 vertice polys last before sub-patch, not sure how this happened, maybe did extenderplus by mistake (before using it with the points) in poly mode(?)

Anyway, getting around the front corner, first just block it out and then later concentrate on changing to the curved volumes where needed?

Surrealist.
05-24-2008, 09:32 AM
That is looking real good. Nice simple polyfow. I have not downloaded the object but just looking at it you are way in the ballpark. Well done! :thumbsup:

OK so first a workflow note:

Before moving on and even adding any more volume or even shape to this first panel you have created, I would go back and remove the door and rather build around the door. (Make it like the real thing.) Then go in and biuld the door in the same way tracing around the shape. Then get in there and line up those points so that they hug the door frame with a nice even gap all the way around. again just like the real thing. You could of course build the door panel in another layer off the existing points(copied) but that would take just as long I think.

Then go ahead and add volume to this panel only(including the door). Check it in the other two views so that it matches up with the backdrop.

Then you could use extender plus if you want to bring thins over across the front. You could even do the same thing in the top view as you did in the side view and draw out panel polygons that match the number of points that need to be connected. I would definitely think about this for the bonnet. Do the same as you did with the door.

That would be one way to have simple control again over the polys.

Well I've given you much to think about. Sorry I short on time and pictures this go around. Let me know if you have any questions or ideas.

Spiderman6
05-28-2008, 12:55 PM
Quick shout out to Surrealist, I just finished your subpatch modeling tutorial and wanted to say it was really informative and helpful. I'm an archviz guy so I wasn't as familiar with subpatch modeling and it helped connect a lot of dots....or should I say points? Thanks.

Surrealist.
05-28-2008, 06:13 PM
Cool man, thanks for the report. Glad it helped you Connect the points.:)

Matt
05-29-2008, 03:43 PM
I have a question ...

When I'm modelling anything, I always feel like I'm a 'better' modeler if I use all subd's, for me it's like the holy grail of modelling - trying to get the mesh as minimal as possible to do the job visually (something I'm still trying to achieve).

However, a lot of things I model are sometimes best left as straight polys, but I feel like I'm letting myself down! I know it sounds daft, but when you model 'hard' objects, adding radiusses to holes can on one hand be easier than subd's, especially on curved surfaces, yet on the other hand it can also be a pain, especially when Rounder fails on the geometry.

Whereas subd's can be much more flexible but require more thought when thinking about where to place cuts.

How does everyone else feel about pain polys vs subd's?

Or is it simply a case of mixing and matching where they offer advantages over the other?

Attached is an image of a typical project for me (train interior) where I feel straight polys are quicker to model than if I tried to do it using subd's, am I just being lazy? Or is this a case where subd's aren't needed?

Cheers
Matt

JeffrySG
05-29-2008, 04:14 PM
How does everyone else feel about pain polys vs subd's?

Matt

I totally agree with you. :) Many times if I'm working on a personal project I'll force myself to go all subd because I know it will push me to learn more. But I would definitely say that there are times where poly modeling something will be much quicker and more efficient, and more than 'enough' to get the job done. And I would say that when modeling for actual production - knowing when to do either method is really important. And the 'when' might be different for each person out there depending on their skill set.

Hopper
05-29-2008, 07:29 PM
How does everyone else feel about pain polys vs subd's?
Well, one advantage is that if you are using hard models, you know what you're getting into when you export them.

evolross
05-29-2008, 09:52 PM
Is there a sub-d tutorial anywhere that shows how to model something small, but complex from beginning to end? I'm desperately looking for something like this. For me, that's the best way to learn. It seems like there's an abundance of sub-d tutorials on techniques and tricks and a lot of really great sub-d model examples, but none that link the two together. I would love something that details the application of the techniques, step by step from the very start. Something small that wouldn't take too long... like the web cam or something.

Point me in the right direction if you've seen something like this.

Surrealist.
05-30-2008, 01:42 AM
At the end of my tutorial there is a tutorial on making hammer. This covers a lot of techniques you can apply to other things. After you do that, then download my webcam object, take a look at the layers and they should be easy to understand what I am doing. If not you can ask and I will gladly explain.

Surrealist.
05-30-2008, 01:59 AM
I have a question ...
How does everyone else feel about pain polys vs subd's?

Or is it simply a case of mixing and matching where they offer advantages over the other?

Attached is an image of a typical project for me (train interior) where I feel straight polys are quicker to model than if I tried to do it using subd's, am I just being lazy? Or is this a case where subd's aren't needed?

Cheers
Matt


Well you also do suffer a pretty big hit on the poly side during the render for something like your train interior with sub d. There is a lot of relatively flat area.

For me it would not be a time factor so much, because I do so many inorganic things in sub d. I don't really have to think about it and the techniques I use are fairly simple and quick. One of the reasons is because you either spend time adding round edges or you spend time filling in the quads.

So for me, I use bandsaw and multishift. To tighten up the corners. Those tools are real fast. So I am not concerned with adding round edges only then filling in the quads on the flat area. And rounder is quick when it works and then you still have to fill in places where there are slight curves like the walls in your example. Then you have to worry about smoothing issues and use a micro bevel in some places. In Subd it is all trippled at the render. No smoothing errors.

So for me it is 50/50 in terms of work.

But I think the biggest hit is in rendered polys. And this concept is something I am trying to decide on now. How much of a hit can I take there?

Then on the other side is I have so much more flexibility with Sub. I never have to worry about non planars and I can create any kind of shape I want.

Another bad thing about sub d is the movement of edges. When you want to make a surface on an edge change to another that can be tricky if it moves off that corner and there is no real definitive line. Not to mention this has to be all quad points along that edge or it will not be a straight line between the surfaces.

Those are my thoughts. :)

Matt
05-30-2008, 03:01 AM
... There is a lot of relatively flat area.

... And rounder is quick when it works and then you still have to fill in places where there are slight curves like the walls in your example. Then you have to worry about smoothing issues and use a micro bevel in some places ...

Tell me about it, that's one downside to straight polys, which you can get away with if you're doing stills, but on anims you definitely want to add a micro bevel 'helper' poly, or you get surface popping.

Worth noting that I think.

Surrealist.
05-30-2008, 04:21 AM
Yeah, good point.

JeffrySG
05-30-2008, 07:42 AM
^the non-planar polys are the biggest issue for me when just poly modeling. When I want to create a shape, I just simply want to do it, I don't want to have to worry about how slightly off-planar this one big poly is... or then worry about trippling it or smoothing errors at render time. That stuff really drives me crazy!

I know a lot of people will also freeze a subd mesh and then go in and optimize it before rendering. There was a nice discussion about this over at foundation3d. There was some good input from people from the vfx industry that have real time/render concerns, etc.

Surrealist.
05-30-2008, 09:58 AM
Yes and the other thing that I have struggled with is architectural obtuse angles. Trying to get flat polygons at odd angles. I don't mean a simple bay window, I mean like parts that have no real normal rhyme or reason, Like a ceiling with several odd angles that converge.

Like this:

Obviously it does not have to be all one piece. This is something I am currently working through now to see what I can get a way with and I am kind of learning about it as I go. But it illustrates the issue of odd angles. I was having a real tough time designing stuff like this using poly modeling.

JeffrySG
05-30-2008, 02:38 PM
Now on something like that model, Richard, would you ever (when you're completely done modeling it) freeze the model and then go in with bandglue, etc. and start to clean out flatter areas to lessen the poly count on it? Just curious...

Surrealist.
05-31-2008, 08:40 AM
Yeah, that is an interesting thought. I wonder if I could get it down to a manageable level in layout? I think I will experiment with that idea.

Another thing I thought of was creating a weight map to drive the subdivision level.

What I was actually hoping to do was use APS and have only the things close to camera render at high res. I have not seemed to find a setting for that that has worked yet. So it may be weightmaps or freezing.

Nangleator
05-31-2008, 08:46 AM
Pixels per polygon works pretty well for me. Set it to 100 or so for tests, and down to 30 or 20 for high quality. Step it down and watch the poly count each time, though, or you'll lock up on millions of polys.

Surrealist.
05-31-2008, 10:28 AM
Yes. I have done quite a bit of testing with Pix per Poly. I am sure to revisit that too as well. Thanks. :)

Andyjaggy
05-31-2008, 03:36 PM
I always use a combination of straight polys and subD surfaces in my models. I just feel like some things are not worth the time Sub D'ing when you can do it with straight polys about 10X as fast.

A good example is arches cut into walls. I just do a drill, and then clean it up a little bit. Especially if you are then going to add some sort of a beveled geometric object to the edges so all you see is the flat face then I really don't see any reason to SubD it.

Surrealist.
06-01-2008, 09:27 AM
Thanks for the input on that. Very good to know your work flow. :lwicon:

JeffrySG
06-01-2008, 04:57 PM
I also think what you are rendering would effect how you build your models. If you're doing arch-vis stills, high poly counts may not matter as much as if you're rendering 3,000 frames for a feature film.

I always heard that in Renderman it didn't matter what level you set your subd models to render, as it wouldn't affect render times. So a level 30 would render as fast as a level 5, etc. Not sure if that's true but that would be really nice.

Nangleator
06-01-2008, 07:26 PM
I'm working on techniques for problem areas.

Sometimes I'll start box modeling, other times I'll start with primitives or an N-gon or splines, but sooner or later, I'll end up with a flow that doesn't match what I want, and my clumsy attempts at redirecting flow only cause more problems. Spinquads and Taron's Collapse Polygons trick are great tools, but sometimes I feel like I need to start from scratch in a particular area.

I've been trying to delete the problem areas and rebuild them via splines around the bordering area, and spline(s) following the contours I want. I'm not always successful, but I think it's a good workaround.

Is this a good way? The best way? Or should I know how to redirect flow well enough that I can use the geometry I have?

Surrealist.
06-02-2008, 03:34 AM
Well, I stopped using spin quads and box modeling for that very reason. There is nothing at all wrong with that technique. It is one way to go about it. And it is a technique that almost works best in SubD mode rather than polymode when you are working. And it is more of a molding, sculpting kind of approach where you are trying to work it and work it until all the things line up right. And after a while you get real handy with those tools spin quads, multishift etc.

But that technique got old for me when I started being able to see the polyflow I wanted. Then I was thinking, "why can't I just draw this line here and that one there.?" So that's what I started doing. Turn of subpaches and just go with the add edges tool. Then use merge polys to rejoin areas and so on.

Then I started getting more into the pollyflow and trying to understand how it all works and started just drawing on flat polygons. Then I got the idea that I could just work from that.

Then along about the same time over on Spin Quads somebody started a thread on a similar technique of creating the polyfow first and then making it into a volume.

So I thought I must be onto something because I was having the same thoughts and doing the same thing basically.

So now with a head for example I will draw out enough to get started then pull out some volume and then continue drawing on it until I am finished, kind of tweaking as I go. I don't think there is a right way here. It is just to me I can see things this way better is all.

So if you have an area that you need to work on. Go head and just merge some polys on that spot and try drawing what you see in your head and see if that works. Then you can use tools to drag and massage the area back into the volume you want. Just another way to look at it is all.

Matt
06-02-2008, 07:31 AM
I find myself starting out thinking I'm going to be all Taron-like and model my stuff effortlessly, spinning quads intuitively etc.

Then when things get complicated I realise I'm no Taron! I can't see what I should spin, collapse etc. I guess it comes with time.

Often I'll rough out a shape which might have bad poly flow, but I use it as a guide to extract splines off for patching much neater later on.

Works for me when it all goes tits up!

:D

JeffrySG
06-02-2008, 07:34 AM
I find myself starting out thinking I'm going to be all Taron-like and model my stuff effortlessly, spinning quads intuitively etc.
Then when things get complicated I realise I'm no Taron! I can't see what I should spin, collapse etc. I guess it comes with time.
I hear you brother!

Sometimes I think the organic subd modeling is more talent than skill... I don't do a lot of it but I think some people can really just 'see' the flow and how it should be. It's great to watch people like that work!

Glendalough
06-14-2008, 06:40 PM
That is looking real good. Nice simple polyfow. I have not downloaded the object but just looking at it you are way in the ballpark. Well done! :thumbsup:

OK so first a workflow note:

Before moving on and even adding any more volume or even shape to this first panel you have created, I would go back and remove the door and rather build around the door. (Make it like the real thing.) Then go in and biuld the door in the same way tracing around the shape. Then get in there and line up those points so that they hug the door frame with a nice even gap all the way around. again just like the real thing. You could of course build the door panel in another layer off the existing points(copied) but that would take just as long I think.

Then go ahead and add volume to this panel only(including the door). Check it in the other two views so that it matches up with the backdrop.

Then you could use extender plus if you want to bring thins over across the front. You could even do the same thing in the top view as you did in the side view and draw out panel polygons that match the number of points that need to be connected. I would definitely think about this for the bonnet. Do the same as you did with the door.

That would be one way to have simple control again over the polys.

Well I've given you much to think about. Sorry I short on time and pictures this go around. Let me know if you have any questions or ideas.

Thanks for the compliments!

Got terribly busy and preoccupied with other things so have just been able to get back to this now, yesterday.

Well I like this idea a lot, that is making the car in various parts and fitting them together. So going on with the door first , then rest of side, and bonnet from the top view.

Hoping to maybe cut out, delete the mesh of the side where the door would fit but for the moment am having trouble making the door keep it's shape (square shape) at the corners. Have a second door in this file where i added extra loop on front and side but though this sharpens the edges it doesn't stop the corners rounding. Obviously more geometry has to be added to the door panel, but would like to keep it to a minimum.

Surrealist.
06-14-2008, 11:26 PM
Thanks for coming back to it!

Again. Great work on the door. Looking nice and clean.

The way to make those sharp corners is to make it a cross hatch. Pretty simple to do. When you bevel the shape, it saves time for all of the rounded parts. What you then have to do - and this is much quicker than trying to put the edge along the rounded parts - is simply change the poly configuration of the corners using add edges and merge ploys. Simple quick, economic and effective.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/0/0a/CrossHatch.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/d/d0/EdgeLoop2.gif

In the "S" example you can see that it is simple to use the bevel tool.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/e/e7/ExS6.gif

Then simply terminate the ends in a cross hatch.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/d/dc/ExS7.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/9b/ExS5.gif

Subpatched gives you the sharp corners for your doors.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/5/5f/ExS11.gif

Using the bevel tool in this way allows you to make a very quick edge loop, you don't have to draw by hand.

Glendalough
06-17-2008, 12:44 PM
Well that solution certainly was easy, really don't think I could have worked it out that fast, would have first started putting extra cross cuts rather than just changing the configuration of what was there. Pretty good the way it holds it shape perfectly toggling between polys and sub-ds.

Now am having exact similar problems with other soft corners on both door ( just the window frame) and the whole car side panel, at the door aperture corners. Do I just put a loop around the aperture and cross cut the corners? The inner window corners are obviously some inverse solution of what you just illustrated but I really can not just see it at present!

Andyjaggy
06-17-2008, 01:19 PM
I also think what you are rendering would effect how you build your models. If you're doing arch-vis stills, high poly counts may not matter as much as if you're rendering 3,000 frames for a feature film.

I always heard that in Renderman it didn't matter what level you set your subd models to render, as it wouldn't affect render times. So a level 30 would render as fast as a level 5, etc. Not sure if that's true but that would be really nice.

From what I've seen in renderman that is pretty much true. I watched a guy doing some displacement maps in it and the rendertime difference between the base object and then massive displacement was negligible.

Surrealist.
06-20-2008, 07:40 AM
Well that solution certainly was easy, really don't think I could have worked it out that fast, would have first started putting extra cross cuts rather than just changing the configuration of what was there. Pretty good the way it holds it shape perfectly toggling between polys and sub-ds.

Now am having exact similar problems with other soft corners on both door ( just the window frame) and the whole car side panel, at the door aperture corners. Do I just put a loop around the aperture and cross cut the corners? The inner window corners are obviously some inverse solution of what you just illustrated but I really can not just see it at present!

Sorry for the delay, I have been traveling.

OK actually the answer to the last question and this one is in the second part of my tutorial.

I will copy images again.

For the inside corners use the edge loop not the cross hatch.

The cross hatch is not totally ideal here. It is the opposite for the inside of corner than the outside.

The cross hatch makes a 5 poly point:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/9b/LetterA.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/a/ad/LetterA2.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/92/LetterA4.gif

And you get pinching and otherwise hard to control mesh.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/1/10/LetterA5.gif

The edge loop makes a nice sharp corner for the inside. It can be as sharp as you need it. But realistic corners are rarely ever totally sharp. But you can get that if you need it too.

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/5/52/LetterA6.gif

Good luck with it. Seems to be progressing well.

cresshead
06-22-2008, 01:18 PM
interesting read ...some good info there.

i bought a modo modeling vid the other day and i like his approch of modeling the volume without thought about poly flow then drawing the polyflow ontop of the volume mesh..

this is what i'd do in zbrush too...sculpt the model out of a zsphere base mesh or ball base mesh then retopologise afterward...maybe keep some of the origional mesh as well...

3dsmax also can do this with the plugin called polyboost and so can silo as well...

maybe lightwave could get something like retopologise tools...actually there probably is a plugin already..i just havn't found it yet!

JeffrySG
06-23-2008, 07:42 AM
Silo is good for re-topo work, and at only $150 you can think of it like a plugin for LW. ;)

Andyjaggy
06-23-2008, 09:21 AM
so what tools do you guys need when you refer to re-topo work. I would think you would just need the add edges tool to draw in your new poly flow, but maybe I don't understand how the process works.

Surrealist.
06-23-2008, 09:39 AM
You know come to think of it I am a little unclear on the re-topo term myself. I assumed you meant tools like add edges or any other tools you could add mesh with. So yes, does it have any other special use and what other tools are we talking about here?

Andyjaggy
06-23-2008, 09:51 AM
Yeah I always hear the term but have never really been sure what is meant by it.

JeffrySG
06-23-2008, 10:14 AM
Well, I know in Silo, it offers tool to help in these type of cases:

You have a model that you have sculpted using displacement painting or a model that you are just not happy with the overall topology.

Then you lock that model and start to create a new model on top of it but as you do all the points that you create 'stick' to the surface of the model that you are 'tracing' in the background.

This thread shows it in use if you're curious to see.
http://www.silo3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6917

This is really more for organic work, I would think, though.

JeffrySG
06-23-2008, 11:21 AM
and here's a video of it in use:
http://www.silo3d.com/users/danmarell/surfacesnapping.avi

Glendalough
06-23-2008, 01:40 PM
...

For the inside corners use the edge loop not the cross hatch.

The cross hatch is not totally ideal here. It is the opposite for the inside of corner than the outside.....

The edge loop makes a nice sharp corner for the inside. It can be as sharp as you need it. But realistic corners are rarely ever totally sharp. But you can get that if you need it too......

Hi Richard,
Thanks again for all the help and advice!

At the moment a bit stuck, not sure weather I am just not getting it or things are going as to be expected.

Put the edge loop in as you suggested (I believe this is done correctly, but maybe I have missed something) but am not getting as sharp corners as your letter illustrations.

Was amazed with the cross hatch (solution) on the door, the way it holds it's shape between tabbing (straight polys and sub-ds). The edge loop on the door aperture doesn't seem to be holding the shape as tightly but maybe this is to be expected? But why does your letter example do it? (Could it be the internal angles are tighter?)

Surrealist.
06-23-2008, 09:30 PM
Here you go. Study what I did against what you have and you'll get the idea. Basically keep the 5 poly points off the edges and especially the corners. The edges will cause a problem when you add thickness. And in the corner they create a week joint making a soft corner. In order to do that you can add a buffer edge to route the edges away from the corners. This creates a "perfect" edge loop. One with only 4 poly points.

Surrealist.
06-23-2008, 09:38 PM
Also as a further note. This is why it is a good idea to do all of this before you ad curves to the volume of the shape as you have now. This makes it more of a hassle to smooth things out. You can smooth it with the smooth tool and tweaking by hand but it makes it so much faster if you know ahead of time what polyflow will work. In time you will memorize these configurations and just do it second nature.

A trip through my tutorial again now would probably give you a better grasp too.

Surrealist.
06-23-2008, 09:44 PM
Oh and I also forgot to mention. I am not sure if it was the zip file, but I had to remove some duplicate polygons in the front of the car because Add Edges was failing.

Glendalough
06-24-2008, 11:55 AM
Here you go. Study what I did against what you have and you'll get the idea. Basically keep the 5 poly points off the edges and especially the corners. The edges will cause a problem when you add thickness. And in the corner they create a week joint making a soft corner. In order to do that you can add a buffer edge to route the edges away from the corners. This creates a "perfect" edge loop. One with only 4 poly points.

Never been so lost....for the life of me I just can't see the difference in the configurations! This really must be the darkest hour ever....

Have gone over your "Fundamentals_of_Subpatch_Modeling" and will go over it again this afternoon but really it's just a sort of Rosetta Stone to me, absolutely fascinating, a reference of configurations, but I obviously have some Subpatch Deficiency when it comes to understanding the principles.

But to go to the above first post, I believe i can understand what you are saying, but didn't think I had any 5 poly points (five edge 'stars') on the edges or the corners. Maybe just confusion over terminology and you speak of the theory not what I had done.

In the image posted here it appears the configurations are (fairly -closely) identical and just shifting 2 edges towards the corner plus adding a continuation of one of the bounding loops makes the corner strong, hard, sharp (it would be better without the tri and the extra loop and polys) Sorry for being so awkward.




Oh and I also forgot to mention. I am not sure if it was the zip file, but I had to remove some duplicate polygons in the front of the car because Add Edges was failing.

How does one check for this? Can see from the second image that something is wrong in the mesh, usually delete bits like this and and just pick the points clockwise, make poly. But don't know how to check for duplicate polys, if they are tris, 2 point polys you can check in statistics (w), but for a duplicate quad don't know what to do.

Again, Thanks for the help and hoping the Subpatch side of the brain improves.

Surrealist.
06-24-2008, 10:42 PM
Sorry, my bad. You have it now. I should have said you will have 5 poly points when you thicken. What you had was two lines merging with the edge making a 4 poly point (or actually 4 edge point in this case) like this V. What you want on the edges is 3 poly points like a T. Then when you add thickness you have 4 poly points. But if you start out with a V you wind up with 5. But in the corner this V also makes it unstable.

So very sorry to have given you a bad steer. That must have sent your head into a spin for sure. But you do have it and you really are making progress with this.

To find the duplicate polygons, what I do is simply methodically select areas of the model and try Add Edges. I do this until I can narrow down the area of the model that is causing the fail. Then I simply go in and investigate. I will try and narrow it down in this same way to one or two polygons. Once I have done that, then I can see what the problem is exactly. And if I delete a polygon in one of the shading modes and there is one left underneath, I have my problem.

Then if that does not fix it then I run "unify polys" in the detail tab, Polygons/More.

After that I merge points and then look for 2 point polys in the stats window.

If none of these things work, I simply rebuild the polygon(s).

Regarding the problem in your model it is most likely two points where there should be one. The angle of the artifact usually points to the culprit. Merge or weld to correct the problem. It happens a lot.

Surrealist.
06-25-2008, 08:22 AM
Well, I know in Silo, it offers tool to help in these type of cases:

You have a model that you have sculpted using displacement painting or a model that you are just not happy with the overall topology.

Then you lock that model and start to create a new model on top of it but as you do all the points that you create 'stick' to the surface of the model that you are 'tracing' in the background.

This thread shows it in use if you're curious to see.
http://www.silo3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6917

This is really more for organic work, I would think, though.

Thanks for the explanation Jeff. That was something I was completely unaware of. Nice to learn something totally new every now and then. :)

Glendalough
06-25-2008, 02:43 PM
Sorry, my bad. You have it now. I should have said you will have 5 poly points when you thicken. What you had was two lines merging with the edge making a 4 poly point (or actually 4 edge point in this case) like this V. What you want on the edges is 3 poly points like a T. Then when you add thickness you have 4 poly points. But if you start out with a V you wind up with 5. But in the corner this V also makes it unstable.

So very sorry to have given you a bad steer. That must have sent your head into a spin for sure. But you do have it and you really are making progress with this.

To find the duplicate polygons, what I do is simply methodically select areas of the model and try Add Edges. I do this until I can narrow down the area of the model that is causing the fail. Then I simply go in and investigate. I will try and narrow it down in this same way to one or two polygons. Once I have done that, then I can see what the problem is exactly. And if I delete a polygon in one of the shading modes and there is one left underneath, I have my problem.

Then if that does not fix it then I run "unify polys" in the detail tab, Polygons/More.

After that I merge points and then look for 2 point polys in the stats window.

If none of these things work, I simply rebuild the polygon(s).

Regarding the problem in your model it is most likely two points where there should be one. The angle of the artifact usually points to the culprit. Merge or weld to correct the problem. It happens a lot.

Thanks Richard. Everything is making sense now. Should be well on the way with things more under control.

Surrealist.
06-25-2008, 05:26 PM
Good. :thumbsup:

JeffrySG
06-25-2008, 08:53 PM
I still love seeing how everyone solves topology issues! While I have a tendency to box model still, I think Richard's technique is probably something I should start to try more often. I still think that one day I'll just be able to 'see' the correct topology and everything will click. But I have a feeling that I'll be waiting for a long time... lol

sammael
06-26-2008, 01:51 AM
Some very handy tips here guys, thanks!

cresshead
06-26-2008, 11:21 AM
retopology can be many things>>

1.use existing topology and with spin quad and add edges/delete edges you can re route topology lines...this is shown by taron in the gnomon lightwave training video.

2.use only the base mesh to "draw on top of" with brand new topology...the base mesh is there for the volume and form of the model but may itself be many thousands of polys if say you make it in zbrush by sculpting> this method is shown in the blur studio training videos from gnomonworkshop with zbrush and max/polyboost

such tools found in polyboost, modo, zbrush and silo allow you to constrain what new polys you create to the base mesh below/behind.

i love option 2 as you can model a detailed head in zbrush from a ball then recreate it with edgeloops ontop .

Surrealist.
06-26-2008, 10:20 PM
Thanks for the further explanation and info. :)

Surrealist.
06-27-2008, 07:14 PM
I still think that one day I'll just be able to 'see' the correct topology and everything will click. But I have a feeling that I'll be waiting for a long time... lol

Really? You want to expound on this? Do you mean it is hard to see the basic configurations where they should be placed? Or do you mean it is still an art and you kind of find your way as you go? You are an accomplished modeler so this has piqued my interest.

For me I can see where the polyflow should go. It is a continuous artistic struggle to find the quickest and easiest way to get there. Sometimes I have to start a model two maybe three times before I find myself on the right tack.

In the Webcam example I first tried to create a profile from the front view and extrude it. That presented some other problems so I scrapped that. So what I did was created a lathe profile and made a solid disc volume object from which I then began to break apart and stencil and so on.

And with each model it seems I have to start a different way and also use many tools along the way to add volume to parts of it or combine volumes and so on.

Seems to me that seeing the polyflow is the easiest part. There is really not much to it. Edge loop, cross hatch, grid. There are only three and they each do something specific. I can never seem to find a shape on any object that does not use these and only these no matter how complex it is. Am I alone in this? Or is it that modelers are looking for something more complex? I am not sure. (I have found one other tricky little area of hard surface models that can require a special treatment if you so choose. Maybe I can take the time to show that at some point but this is kind of rare)

The next hardest part is connecting the dots you could say. Once I know what the shape is I know where and how the polyflow should go, it then becomes a chore to connect these areas smoothly and efficiently into the grid mesh. That is getting easier as I go but still one of the things I struggle with.

So for me it is:

1) Figuring out the work flow

2) Connecting the control flow portions efficiently with the rest of the mesh.

Matt
06-30-2008, 10:23 AM
Is it just me, or do some of you have brain melt-down days when modelling and just can't see the best way of doing something?

Today is one of those days!

I need to put this window in the side of this carriage, and I just can't get it done without a horrible mesh.

How would you guys go about doing this?

Nangleator
06-30-2008, 10:30 AM
Two methods come to mind.

1) In poly mode, merge all the polys that will be affected. Solid drill "slice" to create a poly for the window. Use bevel or multishift to create a couple of edge loops around the window frame. Split that gawdawful n-gon on the outside into quads and tris. (Yes, that will become ugly.)

2) Move and shape existing polys and points into the shape of the window, using the background layer as reference. This will be extremely tricky, as you'll need to maintain the outer shape of your curved model, but will end in a prettier mesh.

cresshead
06-30-2008, 11:00 AM
2 ways...both will annoy you!:D

1. spline patch the whole thing as you would with a car in lw
2.make a box...throw it into z brush...have loads of fun sculpting with the lazy brush..then re-topologise and export the low poly retop as a obj back into lw.


told ya!...you annoyed now yeh?:hey:

Surrealist.
06-30-2008, 10:01 PM
My Crack at it - irresistible of course. :)

There are some layer progressions. The final is on the 13th layer I think.

Essentially reducing the polyflow with band glue, then stenciling the window. Lots of add edges and merge polys, points etc. to get the flow I wanted.

For the window, I simply created another simple poly with the one generated with curves in the bg as a ref. I used CC subpatches to adjust the points - same as editing curves - to match the original curve.

I reduced polys to simplify in the end to get what I wanted. Again using merge polys band glue etc.

Matt if you have to be adding more detail maybe you need more polys but I was just taking this shape at face value. You can do what you need with the information of course. I am not sure where you need to go with it. Hope this helps. :)

Surrealist.
07-01-2008, 04:01 AM
Now looking back at how that was written. I want to make sure I am clear. I did not use the Reduce Polygon tool or any other reduce tool. Only merging and Bandglue.

So I could not resist playing with it more. I reduced even more polys gave a little bulge to the windows. tweaked a few things. Here are a couple of screen grabs.

JeffrySG
07-01-2008, 08:31 AM
Really? You want to expound on this? Do you mean it is hard to see the basic configurations where they should be placed? Or do you mean it is still an art and you kind of find your way as you go? You are an accomplished modeler so this has piqued my interest.
I think I meant that it's still an art. Especially so with organic stuff but even with the hard surface work. I can usually get what I want in the end but there are many times where I will really struggle trying to get the right topology on a specific area. Some other times it just gets made without much effort. On the parts that I struggle with, I usually end up building it two or three times, and each time I say, boy why didn't I do it that way in the beginning. ;)

I suppose the object I have the hardest time with are the ones that I don't usually have good reference to work from. It's hard to see the flow when you can't really see the object I guess... lol

I still pretty much always box model my objects, though. Things have been crazy here for me lately, but as soon as I get some down time I'm going to try some of your techniques of building it flat with all the flow and adding volume next.

JeffrySG
07-01-2008, 08:32 AM
My Crack at it - irresistible of course. :)

looks great, richard!

Surrealist.
07-01-2008, 09:57 AM
Thanks for the compliment on my crack at it. :)

So I also understand now better about what you meant. Makes perfect sense. It is indeed an art, learn as you go. Like what proton had in his signature for a while. "I already know how to do the things I've already done" Or something like that.

Looking forward to what having you post some samples of your attempts at flat modeling here when you can. I would love to have your feedback on it and see if it helps you at all or not. Or maybe you'll have some ideas to add as well. :hey:

sean hargreaves
07-12-2008, 02:44 PM
Hi Surrealist,

Can you please describe the three different ways of making a cutline.

Thanks,

Sean

Surrealist.
07-12-2008, 08:09 PM
Three of the ways I know how to do it are:

1) Make separate pieces of geometry. Look at my webcam example. Also look at the car example above for modeling something in parts.

2) Make a thin grove that follows the flow of the polys along an edge. look at the webcam example.

3) Use image mapping to map an image onto the object that has lines (blurred in a paint program) to give a look of a seam. This is best if the seams are complex and seem to go against the flow of the object.

If I get some time I will go into more detail. But if any one wants to fill in the gaps or add another solution feel free.

Matt
07-12-2008, 08:47 PM
Wow, thanks Surrealist, not checked this thread for a while and forgot I posted the question! Doh!

Thanks for showing the steps, it's sort of what I was doing, but my eye for where to place cuts / quads / and where triangles might be okay needs some serious improvement, I guess it comes with practice.

Still, it's always great to see how someone better does it!

Surrealist.
07-12-2008, 11:46 PM
Hey, I have had those days. But I was only trying to help so I hope it gave you some ideas.

Keep posting, asking questions and giving your valuable tips!

It is appreciated.

Surrealist.
07-14-2008, 01:40 AM
OK so I wanted to put this here because of the fact that I want this info here in one place. It originated from this thread here (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86118&page=2).

Larry was kind enough to show how splines can be used to create the basic shape of this head here.

http://www.3dtrainingonline.com/personal/ogre.jpg

If you want to learn some great tips for subpatch modeling and other techniques you owe yourself a trip to his website at www.splinegod.com

I learned tons of stuff from Larry over the years and one thing was the concept of drawing polyflow on a flat or nearly flat poly. He is not the only ione doing that. Others have pioneered this as well and I sort of picked it up independently and then was inspired to keep with it and have worked to perfect it over the years. Now I work primarily in profile for a head. But you can do what you want.

I did my example of this to show my approach to modeling heads without spline patches or box modeling.

Looking at these images I have drawn arrows on the first two. If I am going from reference I can clearly see the parts of the model I want to have poly flow and how. In the first picture I show this. I can see in my mind where the flow needs to go. There is no mystery.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60666&d=1216019575

I don't have to have the mass of the head to know that there will be a jaw line a cheek line, an edge loop around the eyes, a flow of polys around the head etc. I can see this.

So with add edges merge polys and the drag tool primarily I very quickly - say in about 15 to 30 minutes sketch out the poly flow.

You don't have go as far as this, you can just put some simple control lines in and then pull out some mass if you want, then add more edges to get the poly flow. With a full developed nose you need to do this anyway.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60667&d=1216019625

In the next picture you can see a glimpse of the technique of pulling out the mass.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60668&d=1216019643


Usually I will select everything but the center points and use the dragnet tool. Then I mirror it and use Symmetry. From here it is a matter of continuing to sculpt the head and use the pictures as reference.

The last two pictures I intentionally pulled out the mesh more drastically to make a smile and a long chin.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60669&d=1216019659
http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60670&d=1216019672

This was to illustrate how the mesh can be edited in real time with fall off using the drag net tool. In this way you can have the poly flow intact and edit it in large sections or small sections. Make broad strokes or pull one point at a time. I usually work in poly mode when doing this.

sean hargreaves
07-16-2008, 08:55 PM
Hi Richard,

I am working on a car fender. How do I cut a wheel well into the fender without mangling my sub'd?

Thanks!

s

Surrealist.
07-17-2008, 06:28 AM
Turn off subpatches and draw it on.

The geometry should look something like this:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/5/5b/ContourFender.gif

I have a short tutorial on it here (http://www.lightwiki.com/Creating_Contour).

I show one way you can draw onto an object with add edges like so:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/94/Fender2.gif

And come up with something like this (depending on your particular case):

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/3/34/Fender9.gif

And extend it like so:

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/9/9d/Fender15.gif

More details in the tutorial.

sean hargreaves
07-18-2008, 10:59 AM
Richard,

Heres my first go at sub'd modelling. All started from boxes. I'm pretty happy with it.

Sean

JeffrySG
07-18-2008, 11:44 AM
looks great, Sean!

sean hargreaves
07-18-2008, 02:25 PM
Thanks Jeffrysg! :thumbsup:

Surrealist.
07-19-2008, 07:53 AM
Great Work! Really, amazing actually! First go? Wow!

Show us more!

And in spirit of the thread, some wires please?

Sean, as I have said before, I think you are a great artist!

Keep it coming.

sean hargreaves
07-19-2008, 09:58 AM
Wow! Thanks so much Richard. I'm working hard at trying to figure sub'd out, but this has given me confidence.

In terms of showing my wires, I'm actually still rendering the robots, FPrime(I grabbed a frame to show the render). But, I can't figure out how to show the wires like you have here in the opening of this thread when you showed your webcam. Its grey with a black wire.

Any help?

Surrealist.
07-19-2008, 10:50 AM
Solution 1:

Simply make a screen capture of the model in Modeler. (note that you can change the wires color in the detail tab under "Sketch Color"

Solution 2:

Get Art's Polygon Coloring (http://www.artssphere.com/plugins/polygoncoloring.php) plugin.

Be forewarned that to make this plugin work, you have to basically run the tool and it overwrites all of the surfaces in the model in a sort of checkerboard fashion. Then in Layout, you can use the Edges tab of the object properties panel and check the "Surface Borders" option and it will render with wires. (You can adjust the color of the edges as well there)

So for the wires version of your object make that a copy so you don't loose your surfaces on the original.

And for the wires render. Make those renders specifically to show the wires of one of the models rather than the scene so we can get a good look.

sean hargreaves
07-19-2008, 11:15 AM
Good God!!!!

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 07:19 AM
LOL!

Sean I never did find out what you meant by that. :D

JeffrySG
07-23-2008, 09:46 AM
^lol

I usually just do a screen grab in modeler. And for subd work it's always nice to show the smoothed and unsmoothed wires (tab and un-tabed) versions... :)

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 11:08 AM
Someone asked me to show how I did that 09 so I'll start by uploading the pictures.

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 11:09 AM
And five more then we'll get to a small tut on it.

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 11:30 AM
OK so this is pretty simple. You may find your own workflow to get here but this is the basic steps. I used a picture of the 09 from the LightWave 09 logo as a reference.

First I start out with two polygons. Many ways you can do this. But the first one here is going to be the center cut hole. Notice the points placed near each other to hold the shape and make a nice sharp but not abrupt transition from the straight to the curve.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60983&d=1216832877

And if you use CC subpatches you can test it just as you would a curve to see if it is following the shape.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60984&d=1216832883

Here is the outside. Notice the same points. (Again how you create this is up to you. I simply traced the image used mirror on the X and Y etc.)

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60985&d=1216832890

Now we will cut it out with the Drill tool.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60986&d=1216832899

And here is what it looks like with the points highlighted.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60987&d=1216832907

The next step is to use the bevel tool.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60988&d=1216832951

Then connect the inner points and make quads. (Add edges tool connect, split. Choice is yours.) Note that you can make half and mirror it. That is likely what I did.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60989&d=1216832958

The nine has a similar workflow. Start with a single poly to make the shape first, cut your hole, and then bevel.

Notice the placement of the edges to make a sharp inside corner. I started with an 8 sided disc then simply traced the leg out and merged the two polygons. Again many ways you could do that I wont go into detail here. It often does take tweaking and adjustment with the drag tool however.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60990&d=1216832965

But do pay particular attention to the corners. After you do the bevel step you need to correct these. You can use add edges and the merge polys command.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60991&d=1216832977

Then when you extrude and use bandsaw pro on the edges to create sharp corners you get this.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60992&d=1216832987

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 11:37 AM
Rule of thumb: Most circle shapes can be made with an economical 8 sided disc. That is a good thing to keep in mind. :)

Kuzey
07-23-2008, 02:52 PM
Hi Richard,

Why not just bevel the disc and then delete it, you don't need to drill... unless I'm missing something :D

Kuzey

Surrealist.
07-23-2008, 10:11 PM
Hi Richard,

Why not just bevel the disc and then delete it, you don't need to drill... unless I'm missing something :D

Kuzey

Well, honestely, I had not even thought of that. I was more interested in illustrating a certain workflow that goes beyond just an 0 where I start out with the basic shape - with control points in place - and then bevel. For more complex shapes this is a real time saver.

With that approach bevel does not work on the O since I already have the control points in place. So you could certainly come up with an alternate sequence to use bevel for that using the knife tool and that would probably be faster for just the 0.

However if you are tracing a background as I was you would then have to go in and adjust all of those control points after the fact. I kind of like having the control points in place first on the two shapes and know it is ready by checking it in CC mode. Then it is just a matter of bevel and connect the dots.

For any odd shape with a hole in it of any shape such as the 9 or in the second screen grab below, I find it best to use the approach I outlined for the 0 because it saves many steps.

The last example: Obviously certainly could be done with an image map and displacement. That is up to your own situation and use. I did it all with subpatches. But posting here to illustrate a more advanced use of this technique.

PS: Thanks for the input. :)

blindsided
07-24-2008, 02:54 AM
Thanks Richard,
and thank you for pointing me toward your sub patch tutorials, I am in for a busy few weeks!!!

Surrealist.
07-24-2008, 03:20 AM
You're welcome. And if you have any questions, feel free to post here for answers.

Happy Modeling. :)

JeffrySG
07-24-2008, 01:18 PM
The last example: Obviously certainly could be done with an image map and displacement. That is up to your own situation and use. I did it all with subpatches. But posting here to illustrate a more advanced use of this technique.

show off... ;)


:lol:

Surrealist.
07-25-2008, 07:27 AM
LOL!

OK I admit it. :D

That was a bit gratuitous. :)

But............. point being make I think. :hey:

JeffrySG
07-25-2008, 08:02 AM
^yep... just made me chuckle! ;)

...amazing work! :)

Surrealist.
07-25-2008, 08:29 AM
Cool. Thanks Jeff. :)

I would like to see some more modeling problems/solutions here. We have had kind of a dry spell for a while.

Anyone?

Nangleator
07-25-2008, 12:12 PM
I'd love to see more detail on how you sketch out a head with only a profile, set up the poly flow, then pull it out into the right 3D shape.

For instance, what tool do you use to cut poly flow into a big n-gon?

sean hargreaves
07-25-2008, 07:16 PM
Hi Surrealist,
Here are the wires you wanted to see from my robots I posted earlier on this thread.


Sean

Surrealist.
07-25-2008, 09:57 PM
Sean, thanks for the wires.

You did an exceptional job on the model. It really is a work of art.

As for the wires it does reveal something that I think we all must go through in the beginning stages of Subpatch modeling especially if you have done lots of polygon modeling before. And that is a reliance too much on a dense mesh. There are quite a few too many polygons and edge loops than you need to hold those shapes.

But frankly I think in your case that is a lesson for another day. When you get ready to do another project, please stop in here if you would and I'd like to work with you to get a workflow going that does not require as many polygons.

Again,

Great work.

Thanks for posting. :)

Surrealist.
07-25-2008, 09:59 PM
I'd love to see more detail on how you sketch out a head with only a profile, set up the poly flow, then pull it out into the right 3D shape.

For instance, what tool do you use to cut poly flow into a big n-gon?

OK. I will work something up and do a short tut here.

Surrealist.
07-26-2008, 07:39 AM
OK, as promised. But first some picture uploads.

Surrealist.
07-26-2008, 07:46 AM
And a few more...

Surrealist.
07-26-2008, 08:04 AM
Here's the sketch I started with.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61117&d=1217079428

OK. The first thing I do is trace out the flat shape in one view. Then using the add edges tool and merge polys I gradually get a basic flow so that I cam have enough to grab onto to pull it out.

Make note of the fact that for the eye I simply started the edge loop knowing that I would come back with more detail once I got some volume.

Then the other thing to note is the direction of the polyflow along the back of the head. And I have everything converge into a hole where I will later attach an ear.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61118&d=1217079443

Then I pull it out and start adding more detail to the mass.

Here is the side view with more detail:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61120&d=1217079485

And the perspective:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61121&d=1217079508

Then more detail:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61122&d=1217079936

And the perspective:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61123&d=1217079950

Then the ear in another layer:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61124&d=1217079964

Then the final:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61125&d=1217079978

Now of course if you have not noticed I did this with CC's which I don't recommend. I will go back and change this model to all quads at a later date. But always work in CC mode while I am setting up the polylow.

This is not a full-out tutorial. But basically the tools used are Add Edges, Merge Polys and Bandsaw Pro. Then the Drag Net tool as the main edit tool.

It is pretty much an artistic process I am improving on with each go at it.

Hope these illustrations are a help. I can fill in more detail if yo have more questions.

One thing I omitted was the fact that I put the eyeball in another layer as a reference for the eye socket and the fact that I work on one half of the model at a time.

Nangleator
07-26-2008, 09:22 AM
Okay, I guess you just lay out the major loops and the connecting geometry between them and don't increase the detail until you've roughed out the 3D shape. I was thinking you somehow knew all the geometry you needed while it was still flat.

And that creeped me out.

But I understand enough to get started with a few tries of my own. I already tried a test wherein I created a subdivided plane and dragged the outer edges around to conform to my profile's outer shape, but that didn't give me a nice edge loop around the outside.

Next I think I'll try drawing out my inner loops first. I'll draw a 2-point poly, then in edge selection mode, Extend and drag, rotating as I go, and do loops around the important stuff. Then a loop around the outside. Then I'll just lay a grid over the whole mess and delete the stuff I don't need from it, and connect the stuff I do.

Thanks, Richard!

Surrealist.
07-26-2008, 10:03 AM
Okay, I guess you just lay out the major loops and the connecting geometry between them and don't increase the detail until you've roughed out the 3D shape. I was thinking you somehow knew all the geometry you needed while it was still flat.

And that creeped me out.

But I understand enough to get started with a few tries of my own. I already tried a test wherein I created a subdivided plane and dragged the outer edges around to conform to my profile's outer shape, but that didn't give me a nice edge loop around the outside.

Next I think I'll try drawing out my inner loops first. I'll draw a 2-point poly, then in edge selection mode, Extend and drag, rotating as I go, and do loops around the important stuff. Then a loop around the outside. Then I'll just lay a grid over the whole mess and delete the stuff I don't need from it, and connect the stuff I do.

Thanks, Richard!


Yeah You would work it that way if you wanted. I personally would not use a 2 point poly. But whatever gets you rolling.

And the reason I don't do all the poly flow first is because, yeah, for the post part you can't see the parts under the nose and the eyes are usually facing the other way etc. So it makes more sense to pull out a shape first.

In Larry's example I did do all the polyflow because I could see it all. That won't be the case with most heads.

And just remember the more you do it the more you will get used to the idea of 3D form. If you have not done so I do recommend doing other methods of modeling such as box modeling and even spline modeling to get the idea of form. If you can jump right into my method great, but if you are having trouble you can always try other methods that will help you get a general idea.

Good luck and post some samples of your progress.

sean hargreaves
07-26-2008, 10:45 AM
Thanks a lot Richard for the compliments. I do rely on too many polygons, I know, something I need to work on.

Once I get something going again I'll post the wires first and we can work it out.

Thanks as always,

Sean

Nangleator
07-26-2008, 11:54 AM
Okay, here's my one-pass, unedited tutorial. Laugh with me, not at me.

Step 1
Good luck finding good profiles sketches or photos with Google, but I found this one. I put a 2-point poly perpendicular to her neck line in the lower right. Selected the edge, hit extend, moved and dragged points. I went all the way around, while wondering if this was the right way to do the mouth and eye area. I obviously want loops around the mouth and each eye, so if this first stuff doesn't work, I can always delete polys and redraw them the right way. Here, you see my attempt at creating a loop for the eye which works with the loop around the profile.

Richard, is there a reason you don't do this from a front picture? It seems like the loops would be easier to visualize.
http://home.comcast.net/~david.nangle/pic/Step1.jpg
Step 2
Edge loops where I think they should go. Time to fill in the gaps.
http://home.comcast.net/~david.nangle/pic/Step2.jpg
Step 3
Ye gods! I think I'm going to puke! This is where my quick and dirty extending gets me. Tris and awkward quads and just plain ugly flow.

Time to start over. There has to be a way to fill in the spaces with a more organic flow. Spline patching using the border points? Let's see.
http://home.comcast.net/~david.nangle/pic/Step3.jpg
Step 4
Ugly, but way better. It's tricky figuring out how exactly to draw the splines, and how to patch so you end up with more or less the same number of verts, which you can Weld Average together. I ended up with a few tris, some of which I could combine away.

Too much geometry over the ear. I'll work on that and general flow.
http://home.comcast.net/~david.nangle/pic/Step4.jpg
Step 5
Progress? You be the judge. Ready to pull out into 3D? You be the judge.

(I've left holes for ears, eyes and mouth, of course.)
http://home.comcast.net/~david.nangle/pic/Step5.jpg

Surrealist.
07-26-2008, 04:13 PM
First of all, yes. It is much easier to understand and execute the loops of most of the face from the front.

And the only reason I don't do that now is because I did it enough times as well as with enough various techniques to understand them. I find that especially for more strange characters the profile speaks more to me than a straight on shot.

That however is far from an absolute.

And finally this technique that I use is not a substitute for understanding form and how the loops flow.

Take a look at this example that Jeffry found:

http://www.pixelandpoly.com/graphics/referenceimages/poly_regions.jpg

Understand that I don't know how many heads I tried. But it was a lot. And I tried every kind of method to give each a fair shake. I actually do recommend doing heads many ways. It can't hurt.

I also took each part of the head and studied how the poly flow should work for each.

This profile method then became sort of a shorthand way for me to cut enough corners to get to where I wanted quickly for character work.

When I get more time I can post some more examples of polyflow and the form of the head.

As far as the two point polychain start. That is one approach. But it sort of restricts you. I just use one flat poly and I can draw the polyflow any way I want.

I'll try and post some better examples of that work flow too.

Surrealist.
07-27-2008, 12:01 AM
OK. Two more images.

Surrealist.
07-27-2008, 12:21 AM
A few more images:

Surrealist.
07-27-2008, 12:48 AM
OK so this first one is just the head. Here is the basic basic polyfow for the form of the head.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61142&d=1217138452

As I said in earlier places it is important to understand form. This is why things like spline modeling and box modeling are a good thing to learn. Now of course I have taken the stance that once you do that enough times, that's enough times.

So the question is how many times is enough?

I think the answer is until you understand two things

1) What the form should be in its basics and
2) What is a good polyflow to achieve that form.

So maybe I can help speed that process up a bit by breaking down this head in terms of what polyfow was put where and why.

For the basic form of the skull you can see that is is like a sphere turned on its side with the caps deleted. This is a good configuration because the ear has so much detail this allows you to converge these edges all in one place.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61146&d=1217139639

The face and jaw are like a tapered rectangle. This tapered rectangle is attached to the skull at the jaw bone.

Notice the basic poly flow from the side and bottom view along the jaw bone and under the chin. This simple polyflow is all that is needed to hold the form.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61147&d=1217139651

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61145&d=1217139627

These then hold the form of a sort of tapered box that falls from the brow and then attached at the skull where the jaw bone is.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61144&d=1217139611

So now for details:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61143&d=1217138463

We'll take up the jaw bone first in purple. It is a basic basic edge loop.

A simple configuration that holds the shape of the jaw bone in place.

Then the brow ridge in green flows around the eye sockets and into the cheek bone.

Then of course the eyes are a simple oval edge loop that sits in the eye socket and connects to the brow ridge.

The nose is simply a smaller tapered rectangle.

The mouth again is simply another oval loop that sets under the nose and above the chin.

The laugh line in blue goes from the nose down along the cheek to the side of the jaw. It should border the edges of the mouth.

And finally the skull bone loop. In yellow, basically allows you to define the ridge in the skull above the temple.

I have uploaded this skull for study. The way I would suggest doing it is to put it into the background and try and recreate it with whatever method you choose and I would do this enough times until you understand the 2 points above:

1) What the form should be in its basics and
2) What is a good polyflow to achieve that form.

Then if anyone is interested I will do the same with the details of the mouth eyes and ear.

Surrealist.
07-27-2008, 03:16 AM
And I think it should be understood that this is just a basic example. The more strange character traits your model has the more you will have to play with the polyfow. And also a good understanding of anatomy is key to keeping proportions correct. Then again once you learn those you can apply it to wilder characters and then break some rules but a good character always seems to have some resemblance to basic anatomy rules.

KurtF
07-31-2008, 07:29 PM
Excellent write up Richard, thanks for the illustrations.

Surrealist.
07-31-2008, 10:46 PM
You're welcome. Do you have any questions? Anything that needs more explaining?

Glendalough
08-08-2008, 10:32 AM
Hi Richard,

Haven't managed to get to this thread for awhile. The tutorial on the Character Profiles on page 10 is very interesting. Must try this sort of thing if the Anglia ever gets finished.

Really got out of touch with this and now would like to get it finished in some form. At the moment it seems to be in strong harmony with 60's workmanship, the doors hardly fitting.

I put a rather ugly line down the mesh (which should probably go all the way) at the front to hold the middle corner of the door frame from moving in on the door. I copied exactly what you did on the other 4 corners after a few pathetic attempts to do it differently, realized there were enough problems without trying to be original. Set out the bonnet or rather the top front minus the light casings and some of the radiator grill.

At this point wondering if it should be started all over again (though was hoping to get something basic finished before a 2nd go). Don't seem to have a proper strategy for framing up the door aperture and door itself. Started a tentative run in putting glass in the window of the door on layer 6 (of the file).....Also maybe the polygon lines should (have been planned) run evenly through the whole model across the door? This would help with curvature and make things easier.

Just a note on the theory level, noticed that you were using CC on the profile character. Just the use of ngons on flat and some other areas would be so much easier (don't know about rendering implications on some renderers). The mesh does always look so much better in quads, but you wonder (I do) that by the time this is all mastered, we will finally have the green light on ngons.

MacGregg
08-08-2008, 12:06 PM
You might try turning off Grid Snapping, I think it could be interfering with precision point placement.

Surrealist.
08-08-2008, 07:57 PM
Yes. That is a good point. Something to check. I almost always leave it off for that reason. Unless I need something to snap.

Don't have time to look at the model just now. But welcome back! When I get a chance I'll take a look at it. :)

Glendalough
08-09-2008, 03:31 PM
No hurry. Thanks for all the help!

MacGregg: I must look into this grid snapping and see how its set. Not too clear on the whole snapping thing across multiple programs.

JeffrySG
08-20-2008, 09:39 PM
Just wanted to let people know that Iain, has been hosting some speed modeling sessions here on the forums. We just finished the first one and we onto the 2nd one already. These are 1hr. sessions so they are perfect way to work on your subd work. And it won't eat up much of your time.

Head on over and have a look and work on a model...

http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87687

Surrealist.
08-20-2008, 10:38 PM
Thanks Jeffry. :thumbsup:

Hopper
08-29-2008, 10:08 PM
Hi guys,

I was attempting to model a kitchen mixer the other day for the speed modeling challenge, but got stuck when it came down to creating the handle. It has quite an irregular curve with a seam between it and the rest of the uniform curve. I'm sure I could have gotten the curve part, but what troubled me most was preparing the geometry for creating the seam then combining it to the rest of the irregular curve. Here is a picture I found of the mixer in question...

http://wolfhard.com/images/forsale/K...un%20Mixer.jpg

If you open the Modeling Challenge #2 link, you'll see what I have done so far.

http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87687&page=10#144

You can see the direction I was heading was obviously wrong, but after trying to figure it out for a while I ran out of time. I would still like to finish this model simply because I hate leaving projects in this state. If you guys could throw a few hints or ideas my way, I would greatly appreciate it. I'm sure it would help me in my next project (which also has wierd shaped seams and curves.

-Thanks.

Hopper
08-29-2008, 10:11 PM
Crap. I just noticed the pic is no longer available... I'll see if I can find another.

Ahhh .. snagged a cached version out of my browser folder...

Surrealist.
08-30-2008, 01:07 PM
One thing you can try is finish the curved volume of the handle and then stencil in the seam shape. Then go in and create an edge loop around the seam by hand and clean up the polyflow just like you would for any shape so you have a clean edge to then bandsaw pro and point normal move or something to create indent of the seam. Or you can also do a similar thing but create two pieces that butt up against each other. Either way would work I think.

JeffrySG
08-31-2008, 11:21 AM
^yeah, and for that type of work, I've grown to love the 'add edges' tool, that I know Richard has talked about using as well many times! Great for adding in those new edge loops that you need to create after cutting out a section of your geometry.

Hopper
08-31-2008, 11:56 AM
Well ... I'm slowly getting there. I'm really hating my poly flow at the moment. After such a great time with the bottom half (I was pleased how that turned out), this just makes me cringe... Looks great in smooth shade, until you look under the covers... yuk! Someone please help these poor polys find their way. I had done horrible things to them last night.

Nangleator
08-31-2008, 05:26 PM
...I've grown to love the 'add edges' tool... Great for adding in those new edge loops that you need to create after cutting out a section of your geometry.
Yes, the Boolean tool is useful once again!

Surrealist.
08-31-2008, 11:03 PM
^yeah, and for that type of work, I've grown to love the 'add edges' tool, that I know Richard has talked about using as well many times! Great for adding in those new edge loops that you need to create after cutting out a section of your geometry.

Absolutely. Thanks for filling in the blanks there. Sorry guys I am a little busy with a project and for some time ahead I won't have time to get into specifics, or detailed examples. So don't think I am ignoring this thread. I will try to put my 2c in when I can but it will be brief.

There is my tutorial for those getting a hang of it. And yes the add edges tool and the merge polys tool are the two common tools I use to redirect and create flow.

Surrealist.
08-31-2008, 11:06 PM
Well ... I'm slowly getting there. I'm really hating my poly flow at the moment. After such a great time with the bottom half (I was pleased how that turned out), this just makes me cringe... Looks great in smooth shade, until you look under the covers... yuk! Someone please help these poor polys find their way. I had done horrible things to them last night.

Not too bad actually.The only crit I would have is you could reduce some of the polyflow by about half, and you could get rid of the tri in the corner with a little redirection but it would add one loop. But if you reduce the others you are doing well I think.

Lewis
09-02-2008, 01:02 AM
Is it just me, or do some of you have brain melt-down days when modelling and just can't see the best way of doing something?

Today is one of those days!

I need to put this window in the side of this carriage, and I just can't get it done without a horrible mesh.

How would you guys go about doing this?

Hmm, I might try to tackle this one for you so we can see/compare what to do with it ;) ;) :D.

Surrealist.
09-02-2008, 02:33 AM
Looking forward to that. :)

We can use more input here for sure. :thumbsup:

Lewis
09-02-2008, 03:05 AM
Heheeh Richard now we just need to wait for Matt to appear here and say/show something ;) ;).

Surrealist.
09-02-2008, 10:56 AM
lol! .... Matt? Oh.. Matt? :D

Lewis
09-02-2008, 11:15 AM
Yeah it will be more clear when (if?) you see him post ;) ;).

Surrealist.
09-20-2008, 02:26 PM
Hi Richard,

Haven't managed to get to this thread for awhile. The tutorial on the Character Profiles on page 10 is very interesting. Must try this sort of thing if the Anglia ever gets finished.

Really got out of touch with this and now would like to get it finished in some form. At the moment it seems to be in strong harmony with 60's workmanship, the doors hardly fitting.

I put a rather ugly line down the mesh (which should probably go all the way) at the front to hold the middle corner of the door frame from moving in on the door. I copied exactly what you did on the other 4 corners after a few pathetic attempts to do it differently, realized there were enough problems without trying to be original. Set out the bonnet or rather the top front minus the light casings and some of the radiator grill.

At this point wondering if it should be started all over again (though was hoping to get something basic finished before a 2nd go). Don't seem to have a proper strategy for framing up the door aperture and door itself. Started a tentative run in putting glass in the window of the door on layer 6 (of the file).....Also maybe the polygon lines should (have been planned) run evenly through the whole model across the door? This would help with curvature and make things easier.

Just a note on the theory level, noticed that you were using CC on the profile character. Just the use of ngons on flat and some other areas would be so much easier (don't know about rendering implications on some renderers). The mesh does always look so much better in quads, but you wonder (I do) that by the time this is all mastered, we will finally have the green light on ngons.

Well I finally got a chance to look at your model.

Basically there is a problem with just putting too many edges and letting things get more complex than they need to be.

Generally, what I would do is first get a basic shape of the model all though. Just flat no thickness. Don't stop to do window glass. Anything, just get the shell done all though. Get that finished as a basic form and then start adding more detail.

Notes on what I did with the model:

First, looks like you were trying to model the bumper as a part of the body. Better to model each part as it is made, separately. So I removed that and it simplifies the body.

Then I simply took many edges out and I made the corners cross hatch in the front.

Then a little trick I showed you in layers to see the basic sequence. I first remove the horizontal lines from the fender and it left me with just simple straight lines to connect to the headlamp guide - an 8 sided disk I used snap drag tool to snap to. This makes it easy to get this simple contour to the circle of the light socket. (I would later remove the disc. It is just a guide) Then I go in and put the horizontal lines back in. Believe it or not this kind of approach (I use in many ways) saves time in the long run trying to tweak the inbetween edges.

Many little things I did but if you look. I am only restoring the polyflow back to simple lines. The simple cross hatch and edge loops I show in my tutorial. I left it unfinished. Just trying to give you an idea.

Wish I had more time to teach this stuff. It's fun.

Hope this helps you get back on track. :)

Surrealist.
09-20-2008, 02:35 PM
Here's an image.

And regarding CC's they are great for completing a model. A great tool and for a while yeah I did many heads in CCs with ngons and started to come up with some very workable patterns that did not stray too far from basics but in the end had to drop CC's for practical layout purposes. Now I only use them so I can see supatches with ngons while I work. In my opinion the most powerful and useful thing about them in LW now.

Glendalough
09-21-2008, 04:18 PM
Thanks Richard for getting back to this.

Have gone over what you have said here and can see I was getting things too complicated and intense. Mustn't forget, like you say, simplicity usually wins out. Starting from this new perspective, hope I will post something worthy soon -getting there inch by inch.

Surrealist.
09-21-2008, 09:33 PM
Cool. Looking forward to it. And correction: "Through" I meant to say twice not "though". "All through" :)

Glendalough
09-25-2008, 06:49 AM
Hi Richard, hoping this is the final major hurtle in getting this car finished. Thanks for all the patience and help.

I've got stuck on this front bit where the headlights and bonnet meet. In particular it's the way the bonnet curves down in front and flows around the headlights.

Can't see the exact basic configuration of this poly flow. Attached is the file in stages on 5 layers. At the last stage it devolves into a lot of tris looking for some sort of flow, solution (?)

Nangleator
09-25-2008, 07:07 AM
I sometimes face a problem like that with an old school solution. Select a portion of the worst area, roughly square, if you can swing it, and delete the polys. Then go along the borders and use the points to make curves. End up with four curves along the border and patch it. Try to patch with the appropriate number of polys so that it's easy to weld average the new geometry to the border.

Works a charm. Sometimes.

Surrealist.
09-25-2008, 09:04 AM
Hi Richard, hoping this is the final major hurtle in getting this car finished. Thanks for all the patience and help.

I've got stuck on this front bit where the headlights and bonnet meet. In particular it's the way the bonnet curves down in front and flows around the headlights.

Can't see the exact basic configuration of this poly flow. Attached is the file in stages on 5 layers. At the last stage it devolves into a lot of tris looking for some sort of flow, solution (?)

Nangleator - Good idea. Can work wonders in the right situation. By the way what happened to your head modeling attempts?

Glendalough - explained in the file on the layer headings.

Remember there are two things you can do to work your flow. 1) add polys 2) remove polys. :hey:

Surrealist.
09-25-2008, 09:09 AM
Also is that not supposed to be two separate pieces? Was my first thought but you'll still need that polyflow around the light.

Hope this gets you going with this. Remember keep it simple. :)

Nangleator
09-25-2008, 09:17 AM
By the way what happened to your head modeling attempts?
Life gets in the way. I'm happy to have work, and my free time gets split between the wife, chores, TV, Silent Hunter III, and speed modeling sessions (I did a whole, crappy Leela in one of them!)

I noodle around during my lunches at work, but rarely save anything. I think the thing for me is to create about a thousand horrible heads before I start to make good ones.

Surrealist.
09-25-2008, 01:29 PM
Yeah. That is the ticket. Seems to be the way you have to do it. Just keep modeling them. It is the way it is for me anyway and I am still working on it. :hey:

Glendalough
09-25-2008, 03:58 PM
Wow! What do I say?

A bit dumbfounded, thought you would come up with something easy and straightforward, but not this simple. I'll go on and finish the rest now but doubtlessly you will show me something better, superior, like the whole car in 20 or 30 polygons.



Also is that not supposed to be two separate pieces? Was my first thought but you'll still need that polyflow around the light.

Hope this gets you going with this. Remember keep it simple. :)

About separate pieces, (the bonnet should be separate?) think for the moment to just concentrate on getting it together and see if I can get the door to fit properly first. Also, wondering about the trim, a very minimal amount. Would this be stuck on top or extruded out in some manner (?) mostly thinking about the round bit over the headlights which goes to the back along the side.

Surrealist.
09-25-2008, 11:26 PM
LOL! Well I am learning too, remember. Part of why I do this. I was surprised I could get the polys that simple too. But it worked beautiful. This is why I like to help other people because it forces me to work on something I would not otherwise do. Cars, I've done a few. But I am no Lewis or other people who have mastered this. I simply understand the basics and work to apply those to whatever I do. And it seems to work well in every situation - so far. And I have yet to be stumped but looking forward to that if it happens because it should be a good way to learn more. I tried to show my thought process with the layers too. Show you that it is a creative process of trying to find the right polyflow. The more you do it the faster that comes.

SEPARATE PIECES:

Do the body first and then do all of the trim, bumpers etc as separate pieces including the light rims. This will help you to keep the polyflow simple around the body.

As far as the bonnet goes if it opens it is separate. But don't worry now. First finish the model as a solid - except the for the doors of course. Then if you want I'll show you how to make the bonnet a separate piece from what you have there.

JeffrySG
10-02-2008, 01:19 PM
I posted this in another thread but figured I'd post it here too.

I made this step-down guide, mostly for my own reference. But I thought it might come in handy for other people doing subd work. Just a little useful for adding or removing geometry and keeping all quads. I use these reduction techniques a lot in my hard surface work.

The files is also on my reference page (http://www.pixelandpoly.com/reference.html) on my site if you need to find it again.

64138

Surrealist.
10-02-2008, 03:17 PM
As already stated in the other thread. Brilliant!

Thanks again for the resource. I wanted to post it here but you beat me to it. :)

Also there was a recent thread where you had some decent modeling resources for characters, I think the one about the head. Do you mind digging some of those up and put them here? That would be cool.

Hopper
10-02-2008, 04:21 PM
What a super handy reference. I'm constantly staring at subD models for 30 minutes trying to figure out "step-down" geometry. Thanks Jeffry.

I suppose you don't have a generic poly-flow spin quad guide huh? Or maybe a collapse polygon to quads "tips" guide? :D

JeffrySG
10-02-2008, 06:31 PM
What a super handy reference. I'm constantly staring at subD models for 30 minutes trying to figure out "step-down" geometry. Thanks Jeffry.

I suppose you don't have a generic poly-flow spin quad guide huh? Or maybe a collapse polygon to quads "tips" guide? :D

That sounds like a great idea but I think that it would probably be more up Richard's alley to make one of them. Personally I'd love to see one too!

I'll post a few of the other images that I have also, Richard.

JeffrySG
10-03-2008, 08:13 AM
Some other reference images....
(can't take credit for these, as they are not mine. just found them online and thought they were worth keeping)

64182

64183

64184

64185

64186

JeffrySG
10-03-2008, 08:15 AM
64187

64188

64189

JeffrySG
10-03-2008, 11:23 AM
Just found this video by SplineGod on Vfx Cast (http://www.vfxcast.com/media/1258/Basic_Edgeloops/). It's free but you might have to register not sure. But it's a really good basic demo of spin quads and edge loops...

Surrealist.
10-03-2008, 01:31 PM
Cool. glad you found that one. I was going to mention it. I think he has that one on his site too. And thanks for the pictures too! :)

JeffrySG
10-07-2008, 10:02 AM
Just found these great video tutorials.... They are in Maya but will work with LW as well.

The Ear - 85MB (ear reference photo)
The Head - 50MB
The Hand - 87MB (hand reference photos: front, side, top)
The Torso - 36MB (http://www.erraticimagery.com/extras/tuts.html)

Surrealist.
10-07-2008, 01:55 PM
That sounds like a great idea but I think that it would probably be more up Richard's alley to make one of them. Personally I'd love to see one too!

I'll post a few of the other images that I have also, Richard.

Thanks for those last links by the way.

And regarding the spin quad bit, I think I picked up some tips from tutorials and figured out some stuff myself and then basically doing it a lot I did find some patterns but I don't think it is my province to try and compile any kind of chart on them really. I think I only found the one main pattern that when you spin that L shape it allows you to merge two polys. Other than that is was just a lot of experimentation. I got far enough with it that I could make heads like the one here. (Images from my tutorial)

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/4/4a/LowPolyHead.gif

http://www.lightwiki.com/images/7/7f/PolyPoints.gif

And then I realized that I did not really like the spin quad approach and stopped doing it in favor of other methods.

So you could make a chart I guess- or somebody could.

You know what would be a good chart would be a polyflow chart. Something that is easy to understand and help you visualize where you are trying to go and use to evaluate an object or images for modeling.

I sort of did that in a way in my tutorial but it would be cool to do something more concise.

Glendalough
10-15-2008, 05:10 PM
... I tried to show my thought process with the layers too. Show you that it is a creative process of trying to find the right polyflow. The more you do it the faster that comes...

Well I am seeing that it is a creative process which I often forget and then experience again when things go smoothly. I've done a bit more but not sure if it is going in the right direction. Found the 'step-down guide' of JeffrySG's useful.

Also Thanks Nangleator for the tip about patching curves; just got to do more to become fluent in all this.

Surrealist.
10-15-2008, 10:53 PM
Well that is a great improvement over the other attempts! :thumbsup:

The main thing I would look at is the 3 poly point on the inside of the fin (just above blue edges). Seems like you could make that a loop somehow rather than a weak joint. It will likely cause a little bump there in that tight spot. See if you can redirect that and if you have any problems, let me know.

Then see if you can not reduce some of the redundant loops on the top where is is mostly flat and any other places where you can get rid of a loop or two.

Again. Nice improvement. :thumbsup:

Glendalough
10-17-2008, 05:45 AM
...The main thing I would look at is the 3 poly point on the inside of the fin (just above blue edges). Seems like you could make that a loop somehow rather than a weak joint. It will likely cause a little bump there in that tight spot. See if you can redirect that and if you have any problems, let me know....

Hi Richard,

Not sure if i understand you about the loop so have posted this to check. Quickly went forward in 4 steps. Just trying to feel out the back window and shape of the boot or trunk.

Scaled the car transversely after it was mirrored as it seemed too wide, this is just temporary, can think about this (scale problem maybe, maybe not) later. Also realize the curvature on the sides is not really accurate (bit exaggerated -but maybe this actually looks better with this simple low ploy model -?) & can worry about this later, I hope, when fitting the door.

Don't know if the trunk lip is just a dirty fix and should be done a better way(?) But better not do any more until I get the OK on the loop around the fin.

And Thanks again for all this guidance and help!

Surrealist.
10-17-2008, 11:19 PM
Yeah, you got the loop on fin right. The lip for the trunk will take a little more finesse than that. But I would not worry about that until you are ready to separate parts or go in and create grooves. For now I'd leave it smooth and just get the contour good all around which is looking real good now. :)

Surrealist.
03-19-2009, 12:06 AM
A great little tutorial by Kuzey:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=71164&d=1237293091

Found it here (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95999&page=2).

THREEL
03-19-2009, 07:01 AM
I call this the octagon method. I've used it before, but not as much with the Multishift and bridge method, especially to bring the holes together. One thing to remember is you can have only 2 vertically aligned octagons selected at a time to finish the hole off, at least that's the way it is in v8.5. If you do have more than 2 selected the bridge command does strange things.

tHANX for sharing Kuzey's great little tutorial with us Richard!

Kuzey
03-19-2009, 07:57 AM
I call this the octagon method. I've used it before, but not as much with the Multishift and bridge method, especially to bring the holes together. One thing to remember is you can have only 2 vertically aligned octagons selected at a time to finish the hole off, at least that's the way it is in v8.5. If you do have more than 2 selected the bridge command does strange things.

tHANX for sharing Kuzey's great little tutorial with us Richard!

Ahhhh...the octagon method....sounds cool :hey:

Yes, I was half expecting funny things to happen with the bridge tool, kinda thinking I should do it with two octagons at a time but was pleasantly surprised.

However Multishift can be buggy...see original post.

Kuzey

THREEL
03-19-2009, 08:02 AM
However Multishift can be buggy...see original post.

Kuzey

That's for sure! :agree:

Surrealist.
03-19-2009, 05:48 PM
tHANX for sharing Kuzey's great little tutorial with us Richard!

I always wanted to make this thread one of contribution, so I could learn things too.

And then also to have this here as a good resource all in one place not just mine but others also.

It would be great to have all of the subd questions referenced in one place. That would be a great thing to have. But since we don't have that at least we can start building a good repository here. So the more stuff we can bring here the better. So if any of you see any good help tips on the forum feel free to post a link to them here. Also if you have any other tips to share, please do.

Oedo 808
03-19-2009, 06:39 PM
Ahh, so many tutorials, so little time!

Kuzey, I just had to try that mini-tut Surrealist posted there, I love the idea of using the bridge tool as a pseudo boolean, great!

After using ExtenderPlus, have you tried using MovePlus (right-click), Surrealist might remember I like that one, I use these two in combination all the time, especially as SmoothShift likes to give me so much grief!

I just wanted to ask Surrealist if he caught my post about the Deselect All tool? Allows you to drop your selection without having to drop the current tool, I love it! Saves having to flick layers which is what I had been doing after you suggested it as a work around, still it was a great tip though. The only disadvantage I've found with Deselect All is that you cannot drop the selections on hidden geometry, so you might want to keep a shortcut for Drop Current Selection handy if you do switch over.

Must get on to that tutorial of yours, I really haven't got the hang of subpatch modelling yet.

Surrealist.
03-19-2009, 08:15 PM
I had not seen that post or heard of the tool, no. I am not using LightWave to model at the moment, but posting a link to that would be helpful to have here for others.

Oedo 808
03-19-2009, 08:40 PM
Sorry, I guess I should have mentioned it was already in Modeler, at least for 9.3.1, I'm not sure how far back it goes though.

So what are you using to model with at the moment? Anything in particular take you towards it?

JeffrySG
03-19-2009, 09:27 PM
So what are you using to model with at the moment? Anything in particular take you towards it?
You'll find your answer here I think: http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95674

We don't care what Richard uses as long as he shows up here every so often! :)

Surrealist.
03-20-2009, 12:23 AM
Sorry, I guess I should have mentioned it was already in Modeler, at least for 9.3.1, I'm not sure how far back it goes though.

Funny I never used the key short for that. I thought it was some other tool. But yeah the key short does allow you to keep the tool active and that would have been the correct answer to your original question.

There you have it. I learned something new. :) Thanks!


You'll find your answer here I think: http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95674

We don't care what Richard uses as long as he shows up here every so often! :)

Thanks Jeff.

BTW, modeling in Blender just came mainly because I decided to switch to Blender for the project I was working on. Mainly for CA, cloth and other features. Had I not sold my copy of LightWave I would have probably kept on with the old habit and used Modeler for a while longer. But I have been enjoying many features in Blender just the same so it turns out to be a trade off.

But regardless of the package, the techniques for subd are the same. :hey:

Kuzey
03-20-2009, 07:13 AM
Sorry, I guess I should have mentioned it was already in Modeler, at least for 9.3.1, I'm not sure how far back it goes though.

I did a search in the "edit menu layout" panel and couldn't find it in LW9.5, what's the default location. I'll have to check my Mac version of 9.6UB next time I boot up in OS X.

Any tool that eliminates the need for smooth shift is a good one :thumbsup:

Kuzey

JeffrySG
03-20-2009, 07:36 AM
But regardless of the package, the techniques for subd are the same. :hey:

This is one of the things that I really love about subd work. I started in Wings3D, then moved to SILO, and now I'm on to LW for my subd work, but the principles are all the same. This also makes it great when looking for video tutorials on subd. It usually doesn't matter what app they are done in. As long as you can move points around you're usually good to go.

THREEL
03-20-2009, 10:59 AM
We don't care what Richard uses as long as he shows up here every so often! :)

You got that right! :agree:

Surrealist.
03-20-2009, 02:31 PM
Al- thank you. :)
Jeff - yes. Interesting. It is for this reason I have been thinking about writing another simpler tutorial that is generic and only covers the basics in a non-platform way.


I did a search in the "edit menu layout" panel and couldn't find it in LW9.5, what's the default location. I'll have to check my Mac version of 9.6UB next time I boot up in OS X.

Any tool that eliminates the need for smooth shift is a good one :thumbsup:

Kuzey

Are we talking about the drop selection tool? If so, the default location I am sure you know. It is in View/Selection and as far as I know he was referring to using this tool to drop selection. If you have a tool like Move active you can not drop a selection and keep the tool active. The drop selection button will not work either. But the key short "Shift /" will.

That is at least what I was able to figure out. Not sure how it relates to smooth shift though.

Kuzey
03-20-2009, 02:48 PM
Haha...looks like I'm getting confused....it won't be the last time either :hey:

I was talking about the "MovePlus" tool that Oedo 808 mentioned. Somehow, I thought it might work like similar to the smooth shift tool but without creating new polygons. So we end up with with the same thing as the multishift or smooth shift tool after using the extender plus....but without having points shoot off all over the place.

Kuzey

Surrealist.
03-21-2009, 01:52 AM
lol! Oh I see. Or maybe I am confused. :D

Kuzey
03-21-2009, 06:22 AM
Ok....I found it and yes it's true....it's beautiful, does what I hoped it would :thumbsup:

For those that haven't used it before it's located at : Modify/Translate/More/Move Plus.

Now I can write up a new and better tutorial.

Thanks Oedo 808 :thumbsup::thumbsup:

Kuzey

ps. The reason I couldn't find it in the edit menu layout panel is because it's internal name is translate...go figure :)

Surrealist.
03-22-2009, 04:37 AM
LOL! So many tools, so much need for consolidation. CORE anyone?

Kuzey
03-22-2009, 08:05 AM
Just finished a mini tutorial with the updated version :D

Subdivision Basics part1 (http://kuzey3d.blogspot.com/2009/03/subdivision-basics-part1.html)

Kuzey

Surrealist.
03-23-2009, 01:08 PM
Nice. Thanks for the tutorial. :)

Oedo 808
03-24-2009, 08:08 AM
Great stuff Kuzey, I could really do with adding to my subdivision modelling techniques. Richard, I've been reading your tutorial (not for the first time I think) and it's apparent that I don't understand the fundamentals of subdivision, it will be a good read. I had written more, but I was too tired to finish off as I've got a stinking cold that affects my energy more than anything and obviously I forgot to save the words, luckily saving you all from a load of mindless drivel. :)

I'm going to switch to tutorial mode (my brain can't do creativity and learning in harmony) and try to take in some more info. I'm sure I've already got one or two of JefferySG's vids to go through.

Thanks for your efforts in passing on your knowledge guys! :thumbsup:

Surrealist.
03-25-2009, 02:37 PM
Cool. Just remember if and when you have any questions or need clarification on anything in my tutorial, let me know here and I am happy to enlighten if I can. :)

Kuzey
03-26-2009, 03:50 PM
Thanks guys,

I should have upped the number of sides of the disc in the precision example, it really comes into it's own when there are a lot of points to place etc.

:D

Kuzey

sampei
03-01-2010, 05:44 AM
what a kick *** thread, thanks to everybody who contributed ! :D

Deadlyforce
10-04-2010, 11:18 AM
Hi,

Here is a question about subpatch modeling. What would be the best method to match the subpatch curves on the pictures I joined ? The buttons area was a perfect match until I split it in half.
I often run into that problem...:help:

Nangleator
10-04-2010, 11:22 AM
In general, you can drag points until you like what you see. On a 3D mesh, that can get difficult and damage your smooth flow. I think there's a free plugin called EdgeSlide that's probably great for sliding control points in and out along their edges.

Kuzey
10-05-2010, 03:33 AM
Hi,

Here is a question about subpatch modeling. What would be the best method to match the subpatch curves on the pictures I joined ? The buttons area was a perfect match until I split it in half.
I often run into that problem...:help:

Probiner has done some interesting experiments on that very problem:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98754&page=4

Also...just off the top of my head...you can subdivide the base object, so you have more segments around the curve, then bandglue the parts where you don't need as much detail. Split it in half and go from there.

Kuzey

Deadlyforce
10-05-2010, 04:01 AM
Interesting, thanks for the replies ! :thumbsup:

Surrealist.
11-09-2011, 04:51 PM
Let's keep this baby alive. LightWiki is up and running gain also.

And as a note. After 3 years away I am back with LightWave 10!

probiner
11-09-2011, 05:06 PM
Welcome back!
What do you suggest? =)

JeffrySG
11-09-2011, 08:37 PM
Let's keep this baby alive. LightWiki is up and running gain also.

And as a note. After 3 years away I am back with LightWave 10!

Great to see you around more now, Richard! Just out of curiosity, are you still using Blender and LW now or have you switched totally to LW now? Was there a specific reason(s)? Whatever the reason it's nice to have you here!

JeffrySG
11-09-2011, 08:41 PM
Also if we're looking for ideas, there is a great SubD challenge thread (http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=60177&page=0) going on at the Luxology forums. Basically once a week a shape that is not overly complex gets posted as a smooth shaded picture. Everyone tries to create the same basic shape and post their smooth shaded images. When the next challenge starts the following week everyone shares their wireframes. It's a great way to practice and see how people solve the same modeling task.

Actually this type of challenge would have been great to do on subdivisionmodeling.com where it didn't matter what app people were using. Then we could really learn the strengths of all the apps as well. I always think it's a shame when people get too stuck in a forum dedicated to a specific application.

Surrealist.
11-10-2011, 01:51 AM
Yes, Jeffry, agreed on that last point. That is a shame especially for subd work.

I like the idea of that challenge. Modo does have some nice tools. And that is a great idea.

@Probliner

I think I was noticing that the same thing is still happening with threads all over. It is amazing how much these same questions come up over and over again.

I see it works kind of like this for new guys when they come to subd regardless of what modeling experience. They see that this is what you have to learn for character work or cars or whatever. And they start in, soon realizing that something is not right but they really don't quite get why. And it is always the same problems more or less over and over again.

This is why I wrote that wiki tutorial, because really it was just a culmination of all of the information I got from other people as I was learning and then turning around and passing it on. So instead of answering another thread with, :"Well your problem is, you see there are edgeloops, and ah...." "here is an example or link or whatever..." So it was better to just say, OK go here and start from the beginning and you'll get most of not all of what you'll need. I wrote it so that the new guy could be a good grounding in what exactly is happening to the mesh and why and then move on from there.

And this thread was to share these ideas further and in specific cases. So simply... bump :-) And Jeffry's idea is outstanding. I am going to have to check that out. Maybe we could do it here also. Or crash their party. lol

@Jeffry regarding your pipeline question. Well it is quite a bit of a long story which included really looking into other solutions than Blender or LightWave. Actually I was set on Softimage as my ideal choice of software for a one-stop solution and I spent quite a bit of time and money training to use it. But when I got doing some serious modeling with the trial version an issue came up with my graphics card and it was crashing all the time. So it was either build a new workstation with a graphics card (I am using a Laptop now) and shell out for Sotimage or go the other way and use what I have.

So I did get Messiah back in the challenge and I had an old license of LightWave going back to the good old Amiga days. So I just upgraded it. Now the pipeline could have been Blender/Messiah but I figured Lightwave is familiar on the rendering side and would be a shorter path to get up and rolling and with what I think is a better rendering solution over all anyways.

So my pipeline is going to be basically Blender for much of the set design stuff where I need the kind of control I get there; UV mapping/image set up;Cloth Dynamics for characters and possibly all of the Character animation. Output .obj and mdd then render in LightWave. (I won't be doing hair particles or dynamics for this project)

Messiah is an option for taking care of the CA part but it is a learning curve so we'll see. Then possibly for organic modeling of characters I'll come back to Modeler for that because of the toolset.

Surrealist.
11-10-2011, 02:12 AM
Oh also I forgot to mention. If you have not already noticed many of the internal links are broken on this forum, so if you have favorite threads, you might have to repost the links. I think there are some on this page even.

probiner
11-10-2011, 05:33 AM
Actually this type of challenge would have been great to do on subdivisionmodeling.com where it didn't matter what app people were using. Then we could really learn the strengths of all the apps as well. I always think it's a shame when people get too stuck in a forum dedicated to a specific application.

Yep. I hear you. There is CGtalk, but I feel that is too big. subdivisionmodeling.com was nice cosy corner :)

Thats a nice thread.
Another idea would be to post a photo with some peculiar object that would have both relation to something of every day life + unique beauty.

I haven't read this thread, but if there are lack of ideas, I propose one of the exercises/challanges to be Edge Weight oriented. Explore it's uses, etc.
Personally I find it great to control the wireframe where you want it more tight to the cage, than loose, like usual.
Example attached. Single mesh, just different surfaces, with Edge Weight to the control eges to stay tight to the holes they are controling, making a nice metal rim.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/Lightwave/th_rim-1.jpg (http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/Lightwave/rim-1.jpg)



This is why I wrote that wiki tutorial, because really it was just a culmination of all of the information I got from other people as I was learning and then turning around and passing it on. So instead of answering another thread with, :"Well your problem is, you see there are edgeloops, and ah...." "here is an example or link or whatever..." So it was better to just say, OK go here and start from the beginning and you'll get most of not all of what you'll need. I wrote it so that the new guy could be a good grounding in what exactly is happening to the mesh and why and then move on from there.
Same motivation here for my quirky topology tables =)

I guess one could explore here the limits of SubD, given that many stuff you might probably take it to NURBS, but with SubD, you will probably have more animatability.
There are SubDs that are meant to deform and others that don't though.

Some things that take Sub-D to stress for begginers (guessing)
- Get a grasp of control edges and edge weight
- Get a precise position of the surface for round meshes.
- Booleans and insertions (round meshes again present more problems)
- Stepping
- Good flow for deformation.
- Too much difference between cage and subdivision can lead to undesired results in animation.

I'll be around. if I think of a specific good challange I'll post it, or if someone post a good one, I'll be here to fuel it. :)

What about we start our own subdivision modeling forum?
Anyway, here is the Prime (http://www.blendernewbies.com/tools/subdivisionmodeling/subd_PRIMER/page1.html) and here is some subdivisionmodeling threads (http://madseeds.com/the_pole/)

Cheers

JeffrySG
11-10-2011, 06:01 AM
And just to be clear I was thinking that we could do the same thing that they were doing on the modo forums here, not necessarily crash their thread with LW examples. :)

I do really like the idea of picking photos as well and building those objects as well. Kind of like the reverse of the speed modeling challenges.

Thanks for those links Probiner I didn't know someone else was hosting the primer now.

@Richard, that's an interesting story of the workflow. I know you've put a lot of effort into finding out what will work for you!

probiner
11-10-2011, 06:26 AM
Thanks for those links Probiner I didn't know someone else was hosting the primer now.

As far as I know, no. No one else.

LWiki has the Richard's work. I'll talk with Glen to see if we could find a way to host both the Prime and some threads. It would bring those back in one place and give to the Wiki forums an additional push as a Modeling stop point. Need to talk with people though =)

Cheers

Surrealist.
11-10-2011, 08:52 AM
And just to be clear I was thinking that we could do the same thing that they were doing on the modo forums here, not necessarily crash their thread with LW examples. :)


Yeah. I think the shape challenge would be a good idea to put here.



@Richard, that's an interesting story of the workflow. I know you've put a lot of effort into finding out what will work for you!

The thing that has hurt me more than anything with this project has been my complete dissatisfaction with the story. I have lost count of the rewrites and the completely fresh rewrites, that is, from page one, a new story, is about half a dozen or more over these 7 years since I started.

You hear about these projects where people say "well it was 10 years in development". You know, looking for money, trying to find the right script, the right creative people involved, attaching a director, getting cast and so on.

Well for me it has been mostly the story. And in between that and producing it, life getting in the way.

For all this time spent I could have made several films if I was just willing to do about anything. And perhaps that is a flaw. But it is something I am passionate about and I just want to do it right - for me.

On the technology side, of course, that is another story entirely. I started out with the hope of returning to LightWave after so many years and had to learn 8.0 from having last used 4.0. And that was quite a leap.

Everything I have learned has been solely for the purpose to do this film. and looking up at LightWave - 7 years ago and saying. Crap, there is so much to master. I just have to start at square one. And that was modeling. So that is how I fell into that and now I make a living at it with Blender. Which is rather a strange twist.

But there are all of these other areas I have yet to completely get sorted.

Rigging, basic animation and then Cloth was a big one for me.

So now I am finally at a point where I have enough of a handle on all of the various things to proceed. And finally a script I feel good about.

So lets hope 2012 brings some good things.

Anyways looks like I am hijacking the thread.

What should the first shape challenge be?

Surrealist.
11-10-2011, 08:57 AM
I haven't read this thread, but if there are lack of ideas, I propose one of the exercises/challanges to be Edge Weight oriented. Explore it's uses, etc.
Personally I find it great to control the wireframe where you want it more tight to the cage, than loose, like usual.
Example attached. Single mesh, just different surfaces, with Edge Weight to the control eges to stay tight to the holes they are controling, making a nice metal rim.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/Lightwave/th_rim-1.jpg (http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/Lightwave/rim-1.jpg)


Same motivation here for my quirky topology tables =)

I guess one could explore here the limits of SubD, given that many stuff you might probably take it to NURBS, but with SubD, you will probably have more animatability.
There are SubDs that are meant to deform and others that don't though.

Some things that take Sub-D to stress for begginers (guessing)
- Get a grasp of control edges and edge weight
- Get a precise position of the surface for round meshes.
- Booleans and insertions (round meshes again present more problems)
- Stepping
- Good flow for deformation.
- Too much difference between cage and subdivision can lead to undesired results in animation.

I'll be around. if I think of a specific good challange I'll post it, or if someone post a good one, I'll be here to fuel it. :)

What about we start our own subdivision modeling forum?
Anyway, here is the Prime (http://www.blendernewbies.com/tools/subdivisionmodeling/subd_PRIMER/page1.html) and here is some subdivisionmodeling threads (http://madseeds.com/the_pole/)

Cheers

Great little set of tips. And I have not been a big fan of edge weighing but it has its place and it is definitely another technique that would need to be explored as its own thing apart from SubD polyflow. But I think it belongs here just the same because it is using Subd and is a valid technique for some things.

probiner
11-10-2011, 10:30 AM
Richard, I would like to hear your beefs with edges weight why it must go parallel with polyflow concerns. One of the big downsides for me, is that it's not animatable.

Two things EW is good to me so far:

- Prototyping.
EW shaping is not the same and need more divisions than control edges, but it's sure faster, so when you are experimenting shapes it will be easier to add than control edges.
Unless of course there comes the day something like (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znjO6NltRaI&t=44s) this comes to LW.

- Tighten Wireframes without the need of adding extra control edges. This will result in less geometry for same result and it's the main strenght for me of EW.



Two things really bad about EW right now (besides bad LW implementation for editing and UV):

- If by deformation the polygons separated by the weighted edges have different direction, then the egde shape will become visible, so they are not ver animation friendly.

- If a point has at least 3 edges with Weight, it will be snapped to it's cage position. This makes sense many times, but many other times it's not what you wanted.


On another topic. I would really like to see an interpolation scheme as alternative to the approximation scheme we have.
This way the cage would be on the resulting mesh! And retoplogy would make more sense! I'm sure it has it's issues though.
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20000411/sharp_01.gif image's site (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3177/subdivision_surface_theory.php)

About it on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subdivision_surface#Interpolating_schemes

Cheers

JeffrySG
11-10-2011, 10:36 AM
The thing that has hurt me more than anything with this project has been my complete dissatisfaction with the story. I have lost count of the rewrites and the completely fresh rewrites, that is, from page one, a new story, is about half a dozen or more over these 7 years since I started.

So lets hope 2012 brings some good things.

Anyways looks like I am hijacking the thread.

What should the first shape challenge be?

It's amazing how the perfect story/script can be so allusive. And I think that's why so many movies fail today. I'm sure 2012 will bring good things and it's great to hear that your story is in a place that you like now!


In LW I'm not a fan of weighting either because of the issues with UV maps and I don't think they smooth very well in LW. This is one thing that I really do like in modo. The pixar subd is really amazing when it comes to weighting. I do think that LW weighting can be used as a starting point though and then you can freeze at a level 1 or 2 to continue to model without the weights.

Let's start with a more simple shape/model and hopefully we can get other people to join in on the challenges here. I'd be curious to hear if there are other people interested at all here though.

Surrealist.
11-10-2011, 11:00 AM
Regarding the edge weights, pretty much on the same page with both of you guys.

I think it is not a bad idea to have here just because it uses SubD and people do like to use them.

For me the biggest drawback is poly count in the render. (Because you have to subdivide so much just to get the edges smooth.) There was a thread a while back where somebody was talking about edge weights and I brought up the point about poly count and he countered with a method to use weight maps to control the subdivision in Layout. I never tried it but I figure if you feel you must used them that is an option.

But for me, I have not found a good use. For one, I have not had any clients asking me for objects that use it. Second, if weight maps is the answer, at that point I'd just rather model the loops.

But you might find situations in a complex model that would be a good solution.

By the way edge weighing works very well in Blender which uses CC by default and it is a very good implementation all around of Subdivision surfaces. Something I will miss having to go back to regular subD's to render in LightWave because CC looks so much better. There are still some major issues with CC in LightWave apparently. So not much changed there since I left.

@Jeffry, yeah the all elusive script.

The Challenge.

Should we make it a separate thread to attract attention?

I do have a shape idea to perhaps kick it off. A very simple shape but I think maybe I have an idea to throw a wrench into doing it the many easy ways you might think of first and put the challenge to stick to certain guides when doing it.

What do you think?

probiner
11-10-2011, 12:10 PM
Regarding the edge weights, pretty much on the same page with both of you guys.

I think it is not a bad idea to have here just because it uses SubD and people do like to use them.

For me the biggest drawback is poly count in the render. (Because you have to subdivide so much just to get the edges smooth.) There was a thread a while back where somebody was talking about edge weights and I brought up the point about poly count and he countered with a method to use weight maps to control the subdivision in Layout. I never tried it but I figure if you feel you must used them that is an option.


To use Edge Weight to sharpen corners by itself it's a wrong use of edge weight in my opinion, not just because of very high poly count, but beacause for non proportional corners you get a biased shape.
Zoom in on these examples (http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s202/animatics/Lightwave/Rounding-a-Box.png)
Column 1 is what I think is a bad use of EW. Column 5 is what I consider the best use for EW, where you actually lower polycount, when compared to adding more geometry for the same effect (Column 4). Basicly you Edge Weight the control edges to make them fixed, instead of adding, yet another extra set of control edges. Without this you: 1 - Will not have the Control Edges to say where you modeled them;2 - Will not have an Even corner without adding more geometry.
(another example (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=117211))
Of course one could say... "That's not practical" or "The differences are too narrow". And most times that it's case, not all.

On another topic SubdNURBS, it's All-In :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5XMNefDBv8
Nurbs > SubD also would be the ultimate win =)

Anyway... I think I went far with the nerd talk, bring that challange, you can count me in :thumbsup:
Personally I think a separate thread might be good for the "new thing" feeling. Although I don't see much of of a purpose of a thread per challenge, just for this next serie of challange/workshop, whatever.
Personally I don't even know if NT foruns are the right place for it. How many begginers here? How many ppl looking for learning Sub-D here?

Cheers

JeffrySG
11-10-2011, 01:05 PM
Well maybe we should start the subd challenge over at CGSociety? Maybe call it something else besides a 'challenge' too. I like the idea of one thread. Not sure if you can edit posts there indefinitely but it helps to update the first post with new info.

Or maybe there is another place to start it. Not sure.