PDA

View Full Version : Whats so bad about triangles?


chaostest
07-12-2005, 08:41 PM
I been working on my first character and its coming along, with the only 30min. i get a day ,but i roughed out a head and torso, and well i got trianglels all over ...if they are that bad is there a way to turn them into polygons before i screw things up tio badd.

Zarathustra
07-12-2005, 09:02 PM
Better to just do it manually, but there is a plug out there somewhere called M_TrigonsX

toonafish
07-12-2005, 09:14 PM
There's nothing wrong with triangles, but when you're using SubPatches Lightwave sometimes does not smoothen them as nicely as quads. Besides that, it's also easyer to spot edgeloops when you're using quads. But if you don't see any weird creases when you render the object or freeze the SubPatches in modeler there's no reason to worry about them.

But if you need to remove some you can merge 2 triangles into a quad by moving the edgeloop towards eachother. In Lightwave you can do this by tripling the quad ( Shift+t ) next to a triangle and merging the the old triangle with one of the new ones you created by tripling the quad. If you do this several times, you can move the tri to wherever you want.

So if you move it towards another tri this way, you can merge the two as soon as they meet and you're left with a quad.

rickycox
07-13-2005, 02:27 AM
I've noticed that other people sometimes use tris in normal poly modeling. If you check some of the wireframes on this site http://www.etereaestudios.com/ you'll notice the use of tris even on things like table tops. I'm not exactly sure why. Not Lightwave btw.

Here's an example http://www.etereaestudios.com/docs_html/geographica_04.htm
Wires look good.

tibes
07-13-2005, 02:56 AM
What's so bad about triangles?? If you get one stuck in your eye, they REALLY hurt!

There's nothing wrong with triangles as long as they look okay in the model. It's more for animation. Areas that deform a lot during animation (e.g. knees, hips, shoulders, face) will be easier to rig without issues if they are quad-based, since quads fold and collapse more predictably than tris or ngons. You also want to avoid extreme quad shapes, i.e. long skinny quads. As close to squares as you can get (and also assuming your edges are in the right places) in areas that will deform a lot, then the less weird stuff will happen when you come to animate.

xiao_x
07-13-2005, 03:11 AM
There's nothing wrong with triangles, but when you're using SubPatches Lightwave sometimes does not smoothen them as nicely as quads. Besides that, it's also easyer to spot edgeloops when you're using quads. But if you don't see any weird creases when you render the object or freeze the SubPatches in modeler there's no reason to worry about them.

But if you need to remove some you can merge 2 triangles into a quad by moving the edgeloop towards eachother. In Lightwave you can do this by tripling the quad ( Shift+t ) next to a triangle and merging the the old triangle with one of the new ones you created by tripling the quad. If you do this several times, you can move the tri to wherever you want.

So if you move it towards another tri this way, you can merge the two as soon as they meet and you're left with a quad.



i like your point,100% agree that.

chaostest
07-14-2005, 02:44 AM
thanks for the advice ...let me see if i get this..does it depend on edgeloops..you have to start out with as less geometry.. and good edgeloops..so your details will flow..i can sorta picture it but i think i need to get some kind of system..WHAT R EDGELOOPS???

blaqDeaph
07-14-2005, 09:28 AM
Yea, tibes basically summed it up, a deform map doesnt deform nearly as nicely if it were left in quads as compared to when it is triangled.

toonafish
07-14-2005, 11:06 AM
..WHAT R EDGELOOPS???

edgeloops is just a fancy name for letting your edges flow with the anatomy of your object. So if you want to define a muslce or crease, make sure your edges fallow those shapes. If the edges are not there, it's very hard to model those details.

In most cases you'd do that automaticly, like with an eye. If you make sure that the edges are following the round shape of the eyesocket it easyer to define that shape.

I always try to breakdown the anatomy in parts that could form a nice "round" shape and then stitch those together. For a face that would be an edgeloop for the eye, one for the nose and one for the mouth. If you're planning to animate a character, especialy the mouth area will give you a lot of headaches if you don't have clean edgeloops.

CGTalk Moderation
07-14-2005, 11:06 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.