Topology research

[LoTekK]

Ack, sorry, just got the PM. Umm, I can't actually find the images, nor the models that the shots were from. From what I recall, though, they weren't remotely fantastic. 'Bout two years old now, I think. Sorry. :hmm:

[FantaBurky]

Thanks siquier, and no problem LoTekk, I'm just sry I havnt been paying attention to the modelling section of cgtalk earlier :'(.

[chudofsinister]

updated the image I had posted MANY MANY moons ago. but its still cool to see all the other posts back. I love this thread.

[FantaBurky]

Thanks Chud! Very nice model :).

[nubian]

is it a general rule to have the flow start from the sternomastoid down > towards the inner part of the chest > under the chest over the outter part of the shoulder > towards the back?

http://www.myfreeimagehost.com/uploads/d5fdae5d75.jpg (http://www.myfreeimagehost.com/view_image.php?img=uploads/d5fdae5d75.jpg)

thanks

[Stahlberg]

Sounds feasible... but as you may know I'm not one of those modelers who actively try to make logical edgeloops that are as long and continuous as possible... :)
I guess I might split the one you mentioned into 2, one that goes down the center, and then another crossing the chest horisonatlly (and then up along the deltoid as you mentioned).

[rblitz7]

Vedic Kings, if it wouldnt be a problem could you send the images to me at rblitz7@gmail.com.
Thanks a lot!!:scream:

[Inaudable]

Vedi King, if it wouldnt be a problem could you send the images to me at rblitz7@gmail.com.
Thanks a lot!!:scream:

Me too please rhoney@gmail.com , thanks :applause:

[rblitz7]

EDIT: nevermind

[DieByTheSword]

Posted by bunk:
http://www.bunk.cistron.nl/plaatjes/poly_regions.jpg

Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!! Thank you!!

Did i thank you?

[Vedic-kings]

Because there are many people asking for the 90+ images, I im just giong to up load them here:)

Enjoy!

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/1.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/2.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/6342551.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/AsianFemale.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/Ray_06.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/SuperHeroHead.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/alicia_shapes.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

2

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bay_free.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bay_free_wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bay_geisha_wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/black_grin.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/black_grin_wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/blake_progress.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

3

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/blake_shapes.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/blake_wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/blk_head_5.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bloke11facewire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bonobo_sneer.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bruce001.jp

[Vedic-kings]

4

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bruce001.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bruce002.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/bruce004.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/buildup.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/car_chaser-wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cg_post1.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cgpost_topology1.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/chani2.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

5

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/character_head.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/child2.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cmw_fat.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cmw_half00.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cmw_jaw01.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cmw_turn.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/compare.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

6

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/complexity.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/crapmesh.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/cyborg_head_wire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/develop_2.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/edge_loop.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/express.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/eye_nose_mouth.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/eyewire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/face.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

7

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/facewire01.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/femWire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/headwire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/heid.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/image118.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/image119.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/image13.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/image14.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/image20.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/inner_mouth.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

8

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/irobotwire.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/jamie7gj.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/loops.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/loops02.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/loops03.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/loopsfill.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/mantizwip0002.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/mesh.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/mesh.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

9

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/minimum_1.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/morph_test.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/muska_glava_cg.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/new_head3.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/new_head4.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/new_head6.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/new_head8.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/nose.gif
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/old_2.jpg

[rblitz7]

hehe, thanks a million vedic kings!:buttrock:

[Vedic-kings]

10

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/plate.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/test143cd.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/topology_girlie.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/tremorwire29be.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/tremorwire34al.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/troll2.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wip-1-sharon.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wip-head-sides.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wire-face.jpg

[Vedic-kings]

11

http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wirefacetri.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wires-back.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wires-front.jpg
http://mars.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/wires-front.jpg

[nubian]

holyshit! :eek:
thanks! :thumbsup:

[DieByTheSword]

thats awesome!

Hope people can study hard and all benefit from these!

[Inaudable]

Thanks Vedic :buttrock:
Much appreicated

[yann22]

no kidding, and now I even get the missing pictures, made my day, thanks a lot,

cheers

[Vedic-kings]

Your welcome guys:)

[Shonner]

http://www.shonner.com/drafts/images/hexagon_athena_10.jpg

The ears are not present. But one gets the general idea of how to start on head modeling.

[fabergambis]

Vedic kings, you're my SuperHero. It's about 3 days i'm studing, reading and staring everything you lovely people posted, and I appreciated so much you re-posted all the lost images.

Thank you very ,very ,very much.

[storyman]

I'd like to model a cartoonish character. Should i work with the topology just like i work on a realistic character?

[animalunae]

Yes you should. There might be some loops that are will become unnesessary, but these will all be shape loops, there's two kinds of loops, shape loops and deformation loops. Most of the loops are both, but there's the finer detail that generally are only shape loops, apart from wrinkles, cause these are caused by deformation. For instance, the shape of the nose might be more simplefied, so the loop that starts underneath the chin and goes all the way up, next to the mouth and around the nostrils, it won't be needed that far.
But you will have the need for the same topology. Even with characters that have like a sphere head... use correct topology.

Vedic, it's good to use wires as reference, but don't copy... think, cause believe it or not, there's very rarely a mesh that has correct topology. I didn't see one correct topology amongst the wires you posted, but I'm going to take another look to make sure I didnt miss any. I'm not saying these are terrible wires... as long as the deformation you need is possible, you're safe...

*Edit* In my opinion, the hobbit guy from David Komorowski is about the only topology I really like, and even that is simplified...

[Lukas]

Hi there ... am a total noob, i`v never (till 3 days ago) modeled any organic models. I`v decided to change it and started to read this thread. I bow down :bowdown:for all you talented artists i admire your work. Ok lets get to the point... i`v analised meshes of Mr. Steven Stahlberg (those a couple of posts above) and started to model a simple face (using photo references - two photos). Everything i`v done in those three days i learned from scratch (am a architectural visualisator for 2dimes.com), how to paint a texture, how to add hairFX and stuff. Maybe its not something spectacular but it can show what can you learn in three days just when you get to learn for such a talented people like on this forum. Basicaly... everything i`v learned about 3d is from this forum, therfore i would like to thank you all for been here and sharing your wisdom with all of us! :beer:

heres the piece :

http://www.counter-strike.net.pl/images/bolson/head_04.jpg

Merry Christmas!

[ares623]

hey all. someone at cgtalk, //(i cant remember who, nor the thread where he posted this.but i think it hasnt been posted in this thread yet.)// saved the metagon site and uploaded it.. metagon file (www.rawbot.net/crap/metagons.zip) thanks to whoever did this. :) very useful resource. :applause:
EDIT: just unzip and open Index.html

[javierdl]

Thank you so much ares623, this file is great! :)

DPC

[animalunae]

Hey everybody, I started modeling on a horse a few days back, perhaps this may come in handy for anyone, thought I'd share the wires;

I'm now fixing some topology errors, trying deformations, making sure I got what I need...

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=303210

[Mikademius]

Thanks a lot Vedic kings :applause:
Really nice study there.

[mentalman]

Hi!

This is my first post here. I just got a member at CGTalk. What an incredible thread! I was lurking around at CGTalk for years but now I decided to become active here aswell, since I'm just starting to build my first full-fledged female character. This single thread here was so helpful in my research! Thank you guys for all your material! And Mr. Stahlberg being around here makes it even cooler. I admire your work and learned so much from you!

When I have first results to show I'll post it here and ask you guys for opinions about my topology.

Alex

[cecofuli]

Hello,

I'm not a Modeling man, i'm engineer and i buildin scyscrapers, but for fun i try to modeling an organic subject. This is my first organic model.

http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_Project_Image.jpg


. 3ds max 8 + Vray

. 170.000 Poly, " ALL QUAD "


. Turn ON THE SPEACKER !


http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_Project.jpg

DOWNLOAD 1280x1024 (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_1280x1024_With_Sound.exe) - 70 MB AutoEXE Player
DOWNLOAD 640x480 (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_640x48_With_Sound.exe) - 56 MB AutoEXE Player


Ths is the some file, but in Avi compression
AVI - HIGH QUALITY (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_Project_Cecofuli_HIGH.avi) - 56 Mb

AVI - LOW QUALITY (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/Human_Project_Cecofuli_LOW.avi) - 28 Mb

And this is a "funny" MOV

MOV FILE - HIGH QUALITY (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/800x600_HIGH.mov) - 30 Mb
MOV FILE - LOW QUALITY (http://www.treddi.com/upload/cecofuli/Upload/LAVORI/Animazioni/Human_Project/Modeling/800x600_LOW.mov) - 12 Mb




Ciao!

[dfaris]

Been reading up on this thread, some really good stuff in here. I thought I would post a model I have been working on trying to come up with good topology. Any advice or tips anyone has is welcome. There are a few polys that I would like to fix but I'm not sure the best place to put them so the model will animate well.

Thanks

[Squirmy]

Dfaris, Its looking good. I suggest pulling the front of the earloobs(the part at the bottom thats hanging down) in toward the face. Take a look in the mirror at your ears and you will see what I mean. Also there is a five sided poly on the outside of the mouth edge loop, level with the nose. If it deforms ok then who cares. I guess the only way to find out is an animation test.

[dfaris]

Dfaris, Its looking good. I suggest pulling the front of the earloobs(the part at the bottom thats hanging down) in toward the face. Take a look in the mirror at your ears and you will see what I mean. Also there is a five sided poly on the outside of the mouth edge loop, level with the nose. If it deforms ok then who cares. I guess the only way to find out is an animation test.

Still have some tweaking to do and I will move the ear loob a bit. Yeah the 5 sides polys are what my problem is I'm trying to find a good place to kill them off. I guess I could do some animation tests to see how it works.

Thanks

[aprentice23]

I am having trouble with the Knees and Feet areas. I feel as though my topology is good to help me achieve a level of realism but I am still not satisified with the look.
All C&C are welcome on any area that could use improvement.
Also if anyone can suggest edgeloop topology flow for the back, this would be great.

You can view the images http://www.geocities.com/mig_e_c


Thanks

[aprentice23]

Since I didn't recieve any comments I am assuming that my model looks good.
jk

Ok, I posted more images of the rendered model maybe now I can get some C&C.
http://www.geocities.com/mig_e_c

My main question is
If I am satisfied with the model can I now begin to unwrap the mesh for texturing?
My main objective is to create multiple levels for one mesh. Low, mid and HIGH.

Low -5000 poly
Mid - 20,000
HIGH - 40,000

[io,]

Sure you can begin unwrap the mesh for texturing.

About topology: in my opinion, topology issue should appear after the form is right. Of course a good topology can provide an easy to get, good shape, but, I think, a good form and knowledge of that’s happening under that skin gives you a better topology. I’m not saying that you should not care for topology, but first focus on the shape and general line.

You can find a lot of resources about correct topology or the best one, you can find some free ones, or you can buy ones (first in mind are the ones from freedom organic, gnomon or the hyper-realistic modeling series from alias). And, no, the amount of tutorials owned is not proportional with the quality of you work. It takes a lot of vertexes tweaking until you get a nice form/shape.

I also think that one of the beginner’s most common mistakes is the rush to the render. Now, you have to choose from getting the right shape of your model (this includes a lot of work sometimes) or finding the best angle to hide the mistakes in your model.


Hope this helps,
Dada

[aprentice23]

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.
I do in fact have the hyper-real series.
I am not satisified with the model but I understand when you say we "Rush". My concern with topology comes when deciding to follow muscle flow OR skin surface. I think it is possible to accomplish quality deformations when choosing between the two, but it comes to which is best for the project. In my case I would like to have topology that follows the muscles follow beneath the skin (As you suggested).
Is my topology doing that? i think so, maybe could use some tweeks.

[io,]

Hello again.

As I said before, you should concern about form in first place. Try to achieve the desired shape and minimize the importance of topology. You can get good results using less complicated topology. One of the best examples would be Steven Stahlberg. Therefore, you should check his foot modeling tutorial (http://www.3d.sk/tutorials/Modeling_a_foot_in_Maya.htm) or you can have a look at much simplest leg modeling way in tutorials section of Arild Wiro Anfinnsen homepage (http://www.secondreality.ch/).

Please note that I’m not saying that those are the best ways to model but the first decent and suitable ones that I could find. All that I had to do was to check the Post Your Best modeling tuts (http://showthread.php/?t=7228) thread on cgtalk.

So, get some decent references, use those as guidelines (no offence, you need some help with general shape and proportions of an leg- and there is no shame in doing it) get the right form, change topology to match a chosen tutorial or whatever, ask yourself first if what you see it’s good enough, then as a response to an older question, yes, you could unwrap the uv’s



Dada

[aprentice23]

I did some major sculpting on the model, there are areas that still need more tweaking. (the muscles of the leg)
http://www.geocities.com/mig_e_c

I am using different color faces to help me with the form. I do find myself concerned with topology very early, especially when I am splitting polygons the chaos of edges and verts drives me to constantly keep the mesh clean. I find this very distracting.

Question:
What do you do to combat the urge to clean the mesh when defining the form?


Hey, I take no offense to constructive criticism.
I appreciate it!

[aprentice23]

The first image is the original mesh.
All the shaded images are the derived surface with a subdivision of 1.

[aprentice23]

io,

I'll have the images posted before the weekend is over, Hopefully.
I just figured out that my host sucks for viewing these type of images.
A member suggested I use imageshack and it has worked so far. Here is an example of my model IP.

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/300/front0se.th.jpg (http://img157.imageshack.us/my.php?image=front0se.jpg)

[aprentice23]

Here are more images of the upper torso.


http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/9356/frontshaded0hm.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=frontshaded0hm.jpg)http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/4117/per3rx.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=per3rx.jpg)
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/1238/perpshaded6qz.th.jpg (http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=perpshaded6qz.jpg)

[DimaDavid]

here is mine:


http://easy2upload.net/uploads/f5c9ea30c6.jpg
http://easy2upload.net/uploads/8190598e2b.jpg

[DimaDavid]

WireWrames:


http://easy2upload.net/uploads/99fa89f5ff.jpg

[dfaris]

Small update on my head mesh.

http://www.modozine.com/images/head6.jpg

[IestynRoberts]

A serioulsy awsome thread!

Thanks a lot for all the pics Vedic, i've learned soo much today, just by reading throught the whole thread. Great stuff
-Iest

[Vedic-kings]

A serioulsy awsome thread!

Thanks a lot for all the pics Vedic, i've learned soo much today, just by reading throught the whole thread. Great stuff
-Iest

My pleasure:)

[XYZRGB]

Just another thank you Vedic Kings ! :thumbsup:
Amazing skills !

[bardur]

all the images that "Vedic kings" posted are down...:sad:
i haven´t seen them... would it be possible to reup them.. or maybe send them to me as a zip
(commandos_15@hotmail.com) or upload them as a packed zip file.. i just want to see them
from what i read.. they are great

Regards
Bardur

[Vedic-kings]

Vegan - Just so you know, I didn't create any of those models, I just uploaded them:D

bardur - The images are still there:)

They are on page 35.

Here the link http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=38469&page=35&pp=15

[gustapo]

Vegan - Just so you know, I didn't create any of those models, I just uploaded them:D

bardur - The images are still there:)

They are on page 35.

Here the link http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=38469&page=35&pp=15

looks like the images on page 35 are down aswell...

Edit: sorry my misstake, looks like some kind of filter (at work) is block your site =P

[Vedic-kings]

I get lots of emails about the topology file, which people ask me kindly to send to them, I have no problem sending the file to them, but I think i'll post a link of the file here for everyone to download.:)


Here you go guys.

http://star.walagata.com/w/vedic_kings/topology.rar

[Womball]

Some general notes on topology studies. Edgeloops follow the flow of muscles generally. This is most evident on the face (the loops follow the direction of the muscles around the nose and mouth and eyes). So to take advantage of this you can form muscles using 8 point octagons that are shaped into the overal shape of the muscle. You than extrude the hexagon inward forming a face loop. Details can be added via additional face loops! You can also form edgeloops by selecting a group of quads that roughly form a muscle shape. You than can extrude and scale down the selection so that you have an area that can be raised.

Also a tip for maya users, you can smooth without subdividing. When you polygon>smooth, it automatically subdivides the mesh. This creates really high poly counts. A way around this is to lower the subdivision level to 0. Than you change linear to exponetial in the division settings. (I will confirm this in a couple of minutes, I don't have maya on this computer.)

I find this to smooth better than smoothing normals.

[Revvels]

Hey guys!

Awesome thread, I'm slowly reading bits of it, and I'm getting a better understanding of how things work.

Modelling heads was always sort of a not-done thing for me, as I could never get it right. I could follow some tutorials along quite nicely, but I hadn't done/found any that goes into detail why polygons are placed like that, or what edge loops really are. So, taking some information I've found in this thread, I tried some more modelling!

Now, I know it's not top-knotch or anything, as I'm just a kid trying to get around a 3d program, and it's only my third try at modelling a head. I hope I achieved even a quarter-decent topology with not too many polygons :) I'd love some crits; tear me apart.

[3dzombie]

hey Vedic-kings!
Awesome models on pg 35... Can u make a modelling tut for male (muscular) body as in pg 35 similar to Joan de Arc? Everywhere I see only female tuts... no male ones... or can u direct me if there's one?

Zombie3d

[jaxxxirons]

Hi everybody am working in my girl , and what do you think about my topology,

I put this image for Critics, and I can update and be more best in my models, sorry for my english

[Laa-Yosh]

Narrow the FOV of your camera, you have an awful lot of perspective distortion there...

[jaxxxirons]

I change The vieport of Camera, This is Front Face

[Laa-Yosh]

Working in an orthographic view isn't good either. Is it that hard to change the FOV?
If I remember well, you should do this: right click on the perspective viewport's name and chose 'select camera', then adjust the FOV until it does not distort that much.

[Phrenzy84]

im with Tamas on this one. :).

I think as a beginner its ok to use ortho views for modelling but as you get better, you should only be modelling in the perspective view. This ay seem.... inaccurate but trust me modelling in the front and side the whole time, will lead you you model becoming square or flat in one plane.

If you need to be accurate model in perspective and then use something like the tweak tool in the front and side to line things up. Its faster accurate and it will stay faithful to the image.

I forgot this thread was still going, here is sometopology shots for ya.


http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/1065/screenshot0013nw.jpghttp://img118.imageshack.us/img118/9711/screenshot0025mo.jpg

I did this for another forum.

http://img345.imageshack.us/img345/5683/fourthpass2tr.jpg

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/5780/fifthpass7eg.jpg

Ive tweaked more after the last image but hopefully its clear what the topology can allow. Oh and objective was high poly modelling no zbrush (i will be in the future but not right now :))

oh and they were all done in wings3d plus i did a video for the guy with the bolts in his head, its in my sig.

[Luca_CGTALK]

Very good perfect

[hagridden]

Hey Peeps

This is my first posting in cgsociety and my first attempt at a face in Max.
Im pretty happy with it so far(i think)..any crits welcome.....thanks http://www.graphicalkiosk.com/faceAttempt.html

[jorust]

What a great thread! Lots of inspiring work on here.

Here's a head with a basic topology. The polyloops/edgeloops makes it easy to add details.
I think... :)

It's based on stuff from this thread. Thanks.

http://homepage.mac.com/janoverust/.Pictures/toolux/edgeloops_01.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/janoverust/.Pictures/toolux/ear_01.jpg

[Keith Young]

Polymess, that looks pretty good/clean. I've been bouncing around trying to find a toplogy I liked (most of them based on other's seen in this thread)...

http://www.skinprops.com/images/topo_cmpr.jpg

...I started out using #4, but wasn't crazy about the weird action in the upper head. Then I moved on to #3 for a while, but I'm not sure that the flow of the mesh will suit me. The #2 one is based on Bunk's mesh and seems to be laid out nicely, but I'm wondering if the lines that go up from the mouth, along the nose and to the eye sockets in the #1 mesh will work better for adding cheek-puffiness shaping.

[jorust]

Nice display of meshes Keith.
I like the #2, but I not shure about the two poles on the cheek...

Interesting info (http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/showthread.php?t=907)

[Ashford_Butler]

dfaris - you have some good things going with the face but the ears are too small. I checked your proportions and they are correct though your volume seems a little off. Not sure what program you are using but I would hit the mesh with a relax in certain areas to soften it up a bit. Also the lips seem a little thin. besides that keep at it.

jaxxxirons - from the front view that you have shown the ears are to small and the jaw line lacks definition. The topology looks good though.

[cryolab]

after reading this thread i startet to modell my first head, the topology i saw in a blender-head-video tutorial.
2 days of work for now using blender, the shape isn't good yet but i hope its not totally ugly :-)
greets manuel

http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp3d.jpg
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_3d_wire.jpg
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_front.jpg
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_side.jpg

[cryolab]

ive done a bit shaping the head, it should look more like a female now
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_3d2.jpg
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_front2.jpg
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_side2.jpg

[mech7]

lady looks like a dude :D

[cryolab]

hehe, im working on it.
here is the new ear..
http://cryolab.cr.funpic.de/img/cgtalk/kopp_side4.jpg

[Bayaron]

http://www.kreinin.com/gallery_10/head.jpg

[ciroman]

hello everyone, my first post. First id like to say what a great forum and great models.

so my question is: If you guys could tell me what modeling do u prefer and from where do you start.

Options: - box modeling
- poly by poly
- spline
- other: tell which


I like to start from: - the eyes
- the nose
- the mouth
- overall shaping and refining
- other: describe which please

Thanks, i hope this will help me

[Phrenzy84]

im a box modeller i guess. Create a box and cut away.

Here is something i worked on for a little bit.


http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/8320/screenshotrehd8.jpg

[Autarkis]

Here's my current study of a male face. THere's a few things that are bugging me so far, i need more tweaking time and all.

If anyone sees glaring problems with it, please feel free to give me a healthy critique :)

[jtaddei]

actually that site is called hippydrome.com and yes it WAS one of the best explanations of "modelling theory" I've ever seen.

lucky for me I made a copy of the site while it was still up.

and yes hippydrome seems to be down, ...how long has it been down for? hope it's not gone for ever, that would be a terrible shame.

a copy you say?

[Neox]

hey guys, this is my current basemesh, the image is quite big, so i'll use a link instead of a image tag
http://polyphobia.de/nonpublic/basemesh.jpg

and these are the heads i did with it, the aim was to create a standard basemesh for every human character i do, it still has some problem areas, but i'm too lazy to fix them, maybe this will help someone :)

http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/me/morphtest2.mov
http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/me/morphtest2_wire.mov
this was just a quick test, how flexible it is, i changed some things afterwards

here are some images with the changed mesh
http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/Red/red4.jpg
http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/mudbox/girl_face_02.jpg
http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/mudbox/male_head_01a.jpg
http://polyphobia.de/public/pictures/3d/wip/paratrooper/paratrooper08_facedetails5.jpg
http://polyphobia.de/nonpublic/muddles/gambit/gambit_07.jpg

and my latest

http://nonpublic.gamereplays.de/wip/neox/boy01/06a.jpg
and a lowres version with normalmaps
http://nonpublic.gamereplays.de/wip/neox/boy01/boy_turn.gif

[Diependaal]

why has your basemesh have a smooth ? youve added a subd level, thats what i see.. from the ears etc

[Neox]

nope, that it the unsmoothed version, but i'm always using the relaxed version for creating new heads, it has so many subdivisions, because I wanted it to be very flexible to support me when creating new heads without having to model them everytime again.

[storyman]

i am building a anime style character, it's a bit cartoonish, but i want him having a correct topology so that it can do physically-right facial movement.
:)
please kindly give me some advise!
thanks!

[tin-tin]

Neox, them models are bad ass

[Kurosaki Ichigo]

Hello everyone,


You mind helping me make this look better? This is my second head model. I'm a noob also. This guy is a cyborg soldier :

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/5221/untitledop6.jpg

[Diependaal]

Your main issue is that its all to flat, a head isnt flat in the front.. only maybe above the ears at the temple, but also i see your eyesockets arent modelled around the eyes,, the eye area is shaped by the eye itself, therefore its a really round area, the fatty eyelids wrap around it.. the rest of the face ofcource wraps around a skull, so make cheekbone area's.. but basicly a less flatter hid, you dont want a karakter, that looks if it has fallen on his face.

Also be carefull with the forhead, you have a lot of edges there, coming from the nose , reduse these by making a loop at the top. and maybe around the brow area, try to isolate the facial feauteres.

[Kurosaki Ichigo]

Thanks alot, yeah this is just the front part of the face now. I'm going to tuch things up when I get home thanks alot. :)

[Kurosaki Ichigo]

Here is an updated, I'm really hesitant on the lips and nose, don't want to screw up.



http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/7016/heromn7.jpg

[storyman]

i am working on a 3d anime style character, WIP.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=105017

[Cumulo-Nimbus]

Dear friends,
After trying with my humble abilities, I have reached up to something. A basic human-head mesh, with inner-perimeter and outer perimeter of mouth area and provison for putting loops around the eyes and lips. My idea is to put detail after roughing out such a basic "outline mesh", or a prototype mesh. So the one I have tried to develop, attaching herein. Is that ok to go further?

If you kindly guide me with your prudent suggestions, I will feel grateful.

Best regards

Darkclouds10

[Diependaal]

Darkclouds, your doing nice, some issues here and there, the loop around the mouth, you brake it with the straight lines going up from the corners of the mouth, also adding a look, so you get the roundness above the top lip would be good, to pronounce the looping and the shape of the mouth area.

but i would not use this, to go for higher poly models, you should alter some things first, the chin for example, its somewhat to straight forward, all the lines go straight down, you could do with less, or at least get more if you spread them out, and let it all follow the face's structure, do not try to do everything with a very low amount of polys, its nice to controll, but when going detailing, it will be a lot more shape correcting, caus every line added is also a major update on its global shape, caus there are not a lot of polygons in it, so every change will be a big one..

look at some wite frames, pitty i dont have any time to draw some stuff over your image, but your going in the right direction.

[Cumulo-Nimbus]

Dear Diependaal, thank you very much for your encouraging touch. Right after I read your post, I started some detailing works feeling charged. I did these detailings within 1 and half hour or so...

According to your suggestion, I made some changes in the chin region and put loops round the mouth region and eye regions. Provisions for forehead folds and eyebrow knit are done. Tried my best to keep it as low numbers of polygons as possible. But still it reached 620 polygons, so hold back myself to supply more edges. Made an edgespin in the upper corner of the lips, and upper corner of brows, and changed the edgeflow. Still there is lot and lots to do with the artistic shaping and tweaking, sculpting in other word may be. But hence it's an approach to experiment with a prototype mesh evoluting to a detailed form, I left it here in it's average state. It's an unsmoothed model, 620 polys are all kept in single smoothing group.

I don't know what to ask, but most kindly seeking your invaluable opinions.

Thanking you all in advance,

Best regards

Darkclouds10

[Sho Takahashi]

May the power of the intraweb be with the user who will upload back vedic king pics on page 35...

:)

[bardur]

Yes.. could someone re-upload the images/references on page 35 by "Vedic-kings"
I havent seen them, but i would LOVE to...

Regards

[Cumulo-Nimbus]

Hello friends,

I have re-uploaded the compilation of Vedic-King to this link "as is" that I got:

http://rapidshare.com/files/17425445/metagons.rar.html

Not quite sure how long it would stay there, but hopefully long enough for you guys to have it from there. :)

Regards

Darkclouds10

[EvoInSec]

Hey hi Everybody

Heres my work !! its take me about a week and its one of my classes homework ! We have to try to model a realistic head model ! So here it is !
Every critic or comment about anything are welcome


http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/3373/cgtalk002ca0.jpg
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/13/cgtalk003zq2.jpg
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/7148/cgtalk004ww1.jpg
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/8162/cgtalk001or1.jpg




ps. The ear is not attach its just for reference

[durianseed]

Hello friends,

I have re-uploaded the compilation of Vedic-King to this link "as is" that I got:

http://rapidshare.com/files/17425445/metagons.rar.html

Not quite sure how long it would stay there, but hopefully long enough for you guys to have it from there. :)

Regards

Darkclouds10

I can't seem to download from rapidshare. Anyone kind soul to email me the file? Thanks in advance.

[Diependaal]

Evolnsec:

First of, you did a nice job for your school assignment, you got the global shape and distances of a human head basicly naild right.

But you used way to much poly's for the face you build, because they dont ad detail, there are a lot of loops that dont have a pupose at all,
its a pretty common thing,

Its basicly when you start with a x amount of polys from your starting point, than its hard to get back to a lower amount,
The over usage of polys is especially visible in the cheek and neckare, and are giving you some very messy problems in the smoothness of your model
and the definition of the form.

The form is really important, because the head is basicly build out of the underlying shapes, the skull+ muscles + tissue/fat define a head.
Because of that fact, your geometry must follow those shapes, just as you make the basic head shape, you need every poly to follow its underlying structure.

But this is a thing you are doing in some cases, but you forget to do it in your side view, all the lines go straight on the side, there is no following the cheek bone or the jaw muscles.
Now dont get frightend, caus you dont actually really have to know every muscle, following the shape you want basicly works most of the time.
So follow the cheekbone, and around the ear , caus the skull has a dent in the side above the ear for example, its slight but its there.

Also try to isolate the brow area
, and its always good to try to reduce your polycount when going to the top of the head, and the neck, so you dont get stuck with 999 polys
when you want to go on doing the body modeling, caus you can always ad them, but removing them get trickier the further you go.


First things first,

Tip: keep a mirror beside you, and feel your face a lot, feel how areas flow,
caus pictures desive you, and also your eyes do a lot of the time.



- if you have the time: Reduce the polycount where you can, lesser amount of loops.
- make the edge of the upperlip softer
- edge of the lowerlip, in the corners let it flow over in the face, there is most of the time no edge
only in the center you get a sort of edge, mostly there is a dent under the lower lip, going to the chin from there.

-give the edge of the ear some more variati, and make the ear a little thicket, looks at some good reference.
-let the ear flow over to the head smoothly, now its sticked on the head, give its manneqieun look.
- eyelids, give the top eyelid some volume, at the outer side of the eye, where the upper and lower eyelid meet,
let there be a seperation line, there is a sort of crease, but maybe giving the top eyelid volume will automaticly fix this.


- corner of the mouth, let the corner of the mouth go into the face a little, and seperate your edges there a little, because your edges are
very close in the corners and the mouth sticks out the face there, those are the things that make it look so sharp., its hard to explain without going into
drawing it all out, but i dont have a wacom, so just have a go and youll get there.

- from the nose to the forhead, make sure the forhead is basicly a nice rounded area at first, dont have the polys from your nose defing the forhead.
- a lot of time the brow area also hang over the top eyelids slightly instead of being above it. This is what give him the staring eyes wide open look.

- nose wing, because of your overusage of polys you can see in your wire, that above the nose wing there are edge lines very clow to each other, what also causes for the nosewing to look very sharp, if its softer there it will look more natural like human skin, now you get a sort of statue feeling.

This are things i can see now that would imrpove alot with a bit of tweaking and editing.

good luck




http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/2006/cgtalk003zq2pm6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
[img=http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/2006/cgtalk003zq2pm6.jpg] (http://imageshack.us)

[elveatles]

This thread has some great examples of facial topology, but I noticed this it's lacking in body topology. Does anyone have any good examples?

[vb]

hi.

Here is my head. Topology not perfect, there are several triangles, but most of them in the not-animating areas (except one in cheeks area). Anyway, in my next model I will try to use only quads.http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/7763/w01xu4.jpg


here is perspective view: wire and smooth model (base mesh + tesselate + turbosmooth)
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4415/w02zn9.jpg

[jaxxxirons]

this is my last work , am making a face with one target, have a most perfect topology, so critics welcome, what do you thing a bout my work ?

[jaxxxirons]

this is another image

[Star-Scream]

What's up with his ear, it looks weird so pulled in to his head.

[afxwinter]

I've been working on a low-poly character for a game and have been trying to use all quads for flexibility in the event of sub-dividing it for a high-rez render and to try to keep myself disciplined with my modeling. It's been an immense challenge and I've been stuck numerous times with an n-gon that i just can't seem to solve. Do any of you have a tried and tested solution for getting rid of 5-sided and 3-sided polys easily without adding an edge-loop around the whole model? Here's how the character looks so far, you'll notice it's got a couple problem areas that I'm trying to work out but I'm finding it quite intimidating so far.

http://home.cogeco.ca/%7Emblack4/cg/alita-head1.jpg

[Diependaal]

this is my last work , am making a face with one target, have a most perfect topology, so critics welcome, what do you thing a bout my work ?


Your topology is good, but if this was your main goal, than its a shame you use twice the amount of polys that where nessecery.
The amount of polys dont ad detail in your model, and are therefore they more of a waste, and will make it harder for you to animate , because that where good topology is for to be animated, but if you have so many polys that dont ad something it is just a pain.

Your topology is good, no big problems there, but your the shaping of the model could be better, and can be made a lot better with some tweaking.


few things:

Ears: are to thin, and lack detail , could also be little bigger.

Nose: your nose is a little pointy, and the nosewings , openings are really sharp and thin, should be thicker.

Jawline: could be little sharper at the ear, its very round.

Chin: the chins toplogy for the dent is a problem, its visible in the mesh, it deforms the chin a little, i would make another solution for what you want to get there.



Next time when modelling try to use just enough polys for what you want, not to much, not to little.

Adding polys later is a lot easyer than deleting them in a later stage, caus everything is than connected and in another balance caus of its global density.

[Diependaal]

I've been working on a low-poly character for a game and have been trying to use all quads for flexibility in the event of sub-dividing it for a high-rez render and to try to keep myself disciplined with my modeling. It's been an immense challenge and I've been stuck numerous times with an n-gon that i just can't seem to solve. Do any of you have a tried and tested solution for getting rid of 5-sided and 3-sided polys easily without adding an edge-loop around the whole model? Here's how the character looks so far, you'll notice it's got a couple problem areas that I'm trying to work out but I'm finding it quite intimidating so far.

http://home.cogeco.ca/%7Emblack4/cg/alita-head1.jpg


Well you started with x amount of polys, now you are at a point that you couldnt finish the level of detail with you probable poly limit.

So you started of with to many i assume, now you could make your model lower res, or just follow through ad the needed loops break them with a quad, fold principle topology or some other way.

or just finish it, use the amount you need, and use lesser polys in the body to compensate.

[waltsimonson]

hi this is a good thread, if its still active.
i'm trying to get better with the edge loops, so i can
control the animations better and up the polys a little to
prevent the displacement smoothing.
i did a study on care michauds face last night,
(i'm not going to post it because it was just a study,
which turned out nicely i'd say except for the single tri in each eyesocket.
i had to delete the ears though, because i developed another tri. and then i saw stahlbergs method of "tris are ok" and regretted deleteing the ear)
i like it because its simple, cares method, but also has
enough geo to do things with it. plus it looks classy his approach.
it looks like it should be on a nickel, his approach. :)
plus now i'm into stahlbergs work, especially the
disregard for tris and 5 sided approach that has been killing me for years.
usually i stayed away from edgeloops because i thought
they always rendered weird, but i was using to small dis maps.
are there any tried and true edgeloop layouts? some of them look pretty good
( the bill cosby one barely would need displacements.)



now i'm trying to wrap my head around how bay raitt does
this stuff starting with a cube...his giffs are nuts that crazy bastard.
i found this reptile animation he created here below,
which is cool as hell.
http://maxrovat.sns.hu/subdiv/bay_turtle.gif

[elfenomeno]

edge loop is a very critical part of any character modeling and is cause me great problem,here is a face i'am working on and i have bog problem with my topo and my poly flow,maybe you can help me some.
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/7140/facerh3.jpg
i have another question too,it seem to have a lot of topology and i don't know what is the difference between and what prototype to choose.
i'am very annoyed cause organic modeling cause me lot of hurt in my 3d learning process!thx

[waltsimonson]

I've noticed that as well, that there are a lot of different choices
on how to wire up the model. I've seen posts also, that said certain
ways were wrong.
( a lot of those were stressing learning the planes of the face,
but the models were pretty much the standard edgeloop layout
that everyone uses. so i'm not sure if they're critiquing the
modeling or the edgeloop layout. )
and now i guess ngons and tris are ok.
plus also there is the extremely low poly approach
which doesn't translate very well to subdivision,
or expressive animation. i guess as long as it looks ok in
the demo then it'll be fine as i'm not going to send the
actual obj. files along with my submmissions.
is there an animation director or something that could explain what
they're looking for with modellng submissions?
would it be better to have some closeup shots of the wireframe
to show the ear is all quads for example?
i like bay raitt...
http://mag.awn.com/issue8.10/8.10images/gollum04_gollum_newFaceMode.jpg

[elfenomeno]

here is a topo i have draw from a photohttp://img243.imageshack.us/img243/1272/topocopyyr9.jpg

[elfenomeno]

any advice or contribution?

[elfenomeno]

http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/6470/topolv8.jpgher another

[Diependaal]

A lot of topology layouts are basivly identical, and that has a pretty easy answer to it also.
every human has the same muscles, so the muscles under the skin are all at the same place,

the only difference is the bone structure, is it thicker, wider thinner, more cheeks and so on + the important role of fat, that is between and on top of it all.

there are basicly 2 loops, the eye and mouth/nose loop, and why not mouth loop and nose loop?


well youll notice when someone opens his mouth wide, that a big circle/ apears of a fold line, and shaping from under the mouth to the nose, if you would isolate the nose and mouth completely in seperate loops, then they would get a little cut of from each other , and break the flow.



here is a quick speed model girl head i did , basicly eye and mouth nose loop there.

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/1045/sculpt2wireyj3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Now other loops can be ad, at the side of the head, to give the side of the skull its shape, at the temple lobe(probably wrong spelling) and loops for the forehead to reduse polycount, or make fold lines etc.


sometimes extra loops can be made at the chin also, if it has a very distinctive shape and it needs to be really isolated etc.. well it explains itself i guess

[waltsimonson]

I think the main things everyone tops differently are the ears.
i'm trying to do it with all quads, where it doesn't mess up my model with
a damned tri. i've been putting it off though for a few days because
of this damned bitter canadian breeze. i don't want to wind up with a stroke
when i'm 50 because i was modelling an ear in 2007.
already i have a corn on the heel of my palm. if any
animation director comes around, i'd like to ask him if thats normal too.
like say if bay raitt saw this, is your palm all leathery?
maybe i should get that checked out?
in spiraloids tradition here's a good silo link (http://www.silo3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2951)



(http://www.silo3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2951)

[Diependaal]

i also think al quads is the best thing, aldo dont feel like it is a hard thing to do, to build and ear with all quads must not be a big opstical, just visualise your goal in quads, its a puzzle.

sometimes tri's are welcome, aldo its nothing more than cheating yourself and beeing quick about it, because with a few min xtra time, you could make it all quads,

now im refering to the ear thing you menstioning Waltsimonson, caus the ears mostly are done with quads but the attaching of ear to the head isnt alwaus done propperly, aldo im not saying i always do, but its very important to try and do it well,

especially the 2 problem areas to attachment of the ear and the attachment area under .

[waltsimonson]

yeah see i already modelled the ear attached
to the model, so thats probably where i messed up.
because now i have a ring of 4 quads in the middle
of the ear, and its like "good luck edgelooping that!"
thats where bay raitt is good because he could just size
up those 4 polygons and edge loop it perfectly.
my loop is probably going to have an extra loop thats
not really needed,and maybe even a triangle,
and would wind up slowing down the
entire production pipeline, with a flabby model.

[Diependaal]

In the end its not important that you can make and ear straight out of the head looking good with nice loops and all, box modelled up nicely, ..

It's about making a good looking model, and if you model the ear seperatly, with out the restriction of the polys you get from the head as start, but just start and ear from scratch,
that will allways be better than making it straight out of the head.

Mostly an ear modeled seperatly will look much better, just attach it neatly later on , spend some extra time for that, but in the end, it gives you maximum freedom, and the ability to give it all you got on that part.


Personally that is also why i like poly modelling better than box modelling, its all about what you like the best and what works for you, but if you can lose the strings that hold you back, than just lose them, and fix the rest later.

[waltsimonson]

i agree on the poly modelling bit,
with box modelling it ussualy turns out looking like a ztool.
the only hassle is merging ponts, but that gets kind of fun.
so do you have tris in your ears when you attach it to the head?
this is one i'm working on, it needs more geo around the cheeck
and the top forehead, for better subd. i'm trying to find a
middleground between a light model and being expressive.
definately another edgeloop around the eye because right now
when its subdivided it looks like a waxman alien with pudding ears.
i'm still extruding the mouth... bay raitt still has no worries
though about me stealing his job :)
http://aycu38.webshots.com/image/13877/2001129722688831883_rs.jpg

[Diependaal]

I just make it so, that it fits, tweak the ear itself and the surrounding part of the head.
And than you have all quads.

here is a example

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/6635/earwireys1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


in your model one of the biggest problems is the last loop around the mouth/nose, you should lose that, and make a loop around the eyes there, so it will give you edges for the cheekbone, because now it is making it so, that its an open spot there.

be sure to place your loops at the same distances, or let it differ slightly allong the way, now around the yes they are close, and than there is a big gap, this will give you a choppy look when smoothed, be sure to have a even distribution of polys,

look at some wireframes of other people, see how they are placed.
maybe even do a poly modelling try on a head, it will make you more aware of every poly and loop you make,

than you start from the eyesocket, top of the nose, forhead, nose, lips, cheeks, chin, filling gaps, neck, done :)

[waltsimonson]

thanks for the ear diependaal, that looks really good.
with all the rings i have around my ear i get a seam
when its subdivided.
i'm going to try this to add more structure to it,
i think its almost xt topology, but i think its supposed
to have a radial flow around the ear. more like EZ topology this one is.
i'm going to try a couple more to see which approach i like best, but i don't
want to get too crazy with it. i just want that sweet spot
where the model doesn't get all skinny when rendered.
plus i want to practice breaking the flow of edgeloops,
so its not so homer simpson-ish.
is there a non smoothing displacement?
that should be the next big invention.
instead of smoothing it could calculated the difference
between the high poly and the low and compensate for the
massive smoothing without needing to have a caged model.
i think taron worked on this, but i can't remember.
maybe it was just displacement morphs.
i guess when the processors get better since its all
smoothing algorythms.
well i better get back to work :)
http://aycu20.webshots.com/image/16179/2002058720801643959_rs.jpg

[waltsimonson]

i don't want to dilute the forums with irrelevant and unnecessary fluff,
but i thought one last update would be ok. i'm pretty proud i got it to be all quads,
even though it looks like michael berryman smoothed. mainly i'm concentrating on
the flows for now, i still hate the ear, it looks a mess.
http://aycu22.webshots.com/image/14141/2003030510196649735_rs.jpg
i worked on it for a coule of minutes, so i guess it'll work...
http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/15002/2001267479606791186_rs.jpg
i modelled it a little more and textured it to resemble a burned victim.
to cover up its crappy-ness i've turned it into a
head bobble flash. so hopefully weta digital will be getting a
hold of me if they need a substandard disfigured head,
now that i've mastered edgeloops.
edit
removed bobleheads for not having anything to do with topology.
I'm a stickler for that stuff. I have OCD.

[mogglin]

Hi,

Not sure if this is the right place for this post but I was just wondering if anyone could help me. I am in the process of modelling my first human character. The character is an old over-weight biker. I have started to block out the figure following an organic, human anatomy dvd. The problem is that my character is much fatter than the character whose topology i am referencing and I am starting to see that adding in some skin folds might be difficult to add in.

Anyway, here is the mesh as it stands so far:

http://i12.tinypic.com/6gwnhja.jpg

http://i15.tinypic.com/4lz81l5.jpg

Any advice on this or any other part of the mesh would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

[RichSuchy]

I would look at the way the shoulder and chest muscles align and follow that flow. I'm thinking you need more divisions there to define that area when the arms are raised. I would also follow your red lines on the back, fat or no fat, thats the more natural way to go! Good instinct.

I'd like to watch you progress this model. I'll keep an eye opened.

Rich

Hi,

Not sure if this is the right place for this post but I was just wondering if anyone could help me. I am in the process of modelling my first human character. The character is an old over-weight biker. I have started to block out the figure following an organic, human anatomy dvd. The problem is that my character is much fatter than the character whose topology i am referencing and I am starting to see that adding in some skin folds might be difficult to add in.

Anyway, here is the mesh as it stands so far:





Any advice on this or any other part of the mesh would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

[Effedebe]

Hi All,

This thread is very cool thx. ( since 20-05-2003 !! )

I'm looking for a workflow with very defined steps, with not much manipulation of polygons for creation for a structure of face.

An good sample is published in character modeling 2 of ballistic ( p 90 -> 95 ), who Taron Baysal bulid a face over a subsurface subdivided. This workflow is used a few polygones.

What do you think about this tutorial ?

I've test it, it's a good start to build some face.

( It 's not explain how mouth, noze and some dark method to build ears.)

Maybe someones have some samples like this method ?? :)

Many many Thx All !

[mogglin]

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback from the last question I posted. I have moved alonf quite a lit with the model and I was wondering if anyone could tell me when is a good time to sub-divide my mesh. I was wanting to model in a lot of the detail rather that use zbrush to add in it later. Here is an image showing the current stage of the model:http://i7.tinypic.com/61otjbb.jpg

Any assistance, comments and critisism would be much appreciated.

Cheers!

[cdx]

hi every body im doing this for my college class, i like you see the topology and everything you can see for give a critic, thanks a lot
http://shared.zanqdo.com/i_body003.jpghttp://shared.zanqdo.com/i_body002.jpghttp://shared.zanqdo.com/i_body001.jpg

[RichSuchy]

Here's the topology of my universal character. I'm building I library of Morph modifiers to build any kind of body out of this topology by mixing and matching blend shapes. This resolution is intended to carry normal maps or Displacement mapping, depending on the application.

Link below V
http://features.cgsociety.org/gallerycrits/16589/16589_1188519541_submedium.jpg (http://features.cgsociety.org/gallerycrits/16589/16589_1188519541_large.jpg)

The discussion of the rendered version (including cloth) is linked below.
http://features.cgsociety.org//gallerycrits/16589/16589_1188427138_small.jpg (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=534470)

[scrawford]

this is a good resource i defer to a lot

http://www.deadicated.net/subDModelling_ThePole/

[NiyOo]

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/9353/56558184mm4.jpghere is the my workshttp://img210.imageshack.us/img210/2753/69057950ug3.jpg...
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/513/77721053fi6.jpghttp://features-temp.cgsociety.org/gallerycrits/66831/66831_1191939710_large.jpg

[Shellfish]

Hi Guys! Is there a way to understand topology? Not just for humans but also creatures/animals. What are the basic rules in building the topology for all subjects.

[scrawford]

create edgeflows that follow the underlying structures ie muscles and bones of your character. also make sure to allow enough detail for proper deformation

[Shellfish]

Are there any practice or exercise I could do to improve topology. I mean for a human heard we can find reference almost anywhere but what about creatures that are non human like. How do we build these topology for the made up creatures? What are the key points to getting it right?

[pelos]

I have seen so many good models, and i decide to post something.
i am trying to do a anime girl but i am having a little problem with proportions.
i did the model with 8 head tall.
any sugestion?

thanks guys

[3dzombie]

Hi RichSuchy,

Nice models. I've been following many of your works and thread! Wow! You're amazing. Can you make a tutorial similar to the Joan de Arc one? I find it really difficult to model a male. Especially the chest and the place where the chest joins biceps and all that.... I would really appreciate if skilled guys like you help us dumbos.

Thank you,

Mouli

[RichSuchy]

Hi, First thank you for the accolades. You are too kind!

Once I made a tutorial using lightwave, that was similar to the Tutorial you mention. It may still exist somewhere. I rethought what I was doing and came up with way of thinking about teaching 3d that may be a little less popular but I believe will actually do a better job of teaching.

I really don't think it helps to teach by doing a here's how tutorial. I think that teaching how to think in more general terms does a better job.

There are many ways to approach a 3D model and as long as the results are good, that is what matters. Topology is really a simplification of form. If one follows the contours of the model in such a way as to only have enough geometry to define the form and hold deformations such as on a joint or in facial expressions, Topology becomes automatic. So one first needs to have a powerful understanding of the underlying form and structure of what one wants to model.

The above can be arrived at with an aplication of copious amounts of reference, time and a critical eye, or with a knowlege born of years of artistic study and practice, or a combination of the two.

Flat reference is dificult to work with due to distortions from the camera, and a lack of all the angles (usually) however, artistic knowlege of volumes can fill in the gaps left behind from photo-reference. If you can get sculptural reference, reproductions, you can accelerate your learning quite a bit.

The above is not aimed just at you but is generalized advice that I believe in.

Rich
Hi RichSuchy,

Nice models. I've been following many of your works and thread! Wow! You're amazing. Can you make a tutorial similar to the Joan de Arc one? I find it really difficult to model a male. Especially the chest and the place where the chest joins biceps and all that.... I would really appreciate if skilled guys like you help us dumbos.

Thank you,

Mouli

[Samran]

thanks for all this
hop fix mis link .

you whal find in this link very good stafe
http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/showthread.php?t=907

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f25/errantkid/triflow1-1.jpg

[designingpatrick]

Hey modelers, first off; I love this thread I just wish all the pictures would display, there are a bunch of pages with only text info which makes it kinda hard. anyway, I'm looking for some opinions about the pose, the forearm is lacking definition I think. it's just bending from the elbow to the wrist. I thought before I spend any more time trying to fix it, I could hear some opinions.

[CastorPT]

Here is a 4-quad, best flow as I could get for a male/female model. At the moment doing a couple of poses to test the flow. You can follow the progress of the model here http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=43&t=571100. (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=43&t=571100)

THen I'll adapt the rig to a female. Some issues have been already optimized in the mesh (some feet vertices and too many edges in some vertes) but I havent taken new screenshots.

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/1549/backfronthn8.jpg

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/268/detalisqr7.jpg

http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/9649/wipcolormalepc3.jpg

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/7647/attachment5jd8.jpg

[Shonner]

Nice! Show us some smoothed shots.

[CastorPT]

Further details on the model are more specific to the project, so I'll just post this WIP (working on the torso). For the rest please follow the specific Thread mentioned above.

http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/393/zbrushwip01lw0.jpg

[waterlilly]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for some advice on the shoulder of a model I'm working on. Details will be added with a displacement map, so the model is rather minimal. I've just put the model through a smooth bind (not done with the skin weights yet), and I'm wondering if the deformation of the armpit needs to be fixed with deformers (I'm very new to rigging) or if my topology is off. I know that there's a lot of effort to rigging to make things looks right, but I'm too much of a novice to tell if my rigging needs work or if I've made a topo error. Please have a look at my attachments and let me know what you think. Thanks in advance!

*PS- I'm working on fixing the collar bone angle, I know its not supposed to be completely horizonal :)

[thorin13]

edge loop is a very critical part of any character modeling and is cause me great problem,here is a face i'am working on and i have bog problem with my topo and my poly flow,maybe you can help me some.
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/7140/facerh3.jpg
i have another question too,it seem to have a lot of topology and i don't know what is the difference between and what prototype to choose.
i'am very annoyed cause organic modeling cause me lot of hurt in my 3d learning process!thx

Hi! Elfenomeno can u tell me where did you find these reference images pls ? Cause i like them very much and want to use them on a low poly model i'm working on...

[rybeck]

looks alike from following tutorial DVD...
http://www.trinity3d.com/product.php?productid=783&cat=0&page=1

[thorin13]

Anyway here is a low poly version for that reference i did this morning. Although there are 2 triangles and the rest are quads, i think the topology is good enough. Waiting for crits....

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m159/thorin13/_de_postat_pe_forumuri/fem_head_test_001.jpg

[Megamorph]

Megamorph's Toplogy Guide in XHTML 1.1 (http://gregory.kramida.home.comcast.net/%7Egregory.kramida/TopologyGuide/)

Megamorph's Topology Guide in HTML 4.01 Strict (http://gregory.kramida.home.comcast.net/%7Egregory.kramida/TopologyGuide/TopologyGuide.html)

-Cheers.

[McJAKe]

Bad link:


"Under Construction and Coming Soon"

Hope its good when it comes!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT - Well it is/was good - don't know what happened - Cheers

[Megamorph]

What's under construction? My Guide is up and running fine.

If you're having trouble viewing,
a) try a different browser
b) try to reinstall your browser
c) make sure .xhtml files are associated with your browser.

The Guide is up and running, and validates as XHTML 1.1 transitional, so whatever the problem is, it's not on my side.

We're used to HTML or PDF. It just works. Otherwise, you're frustrating your intended audience. I'm sure it's written well (can't view it). But this thread as many fine examples that are easy to browse.

XHTML is a new standard of HTML. I advise not to offend the rest of website community. The guide is compete and thorough, I'm sorry your browser doesn't work. Works 100% fine (tested) in IE 7 32/64 bit, Opera, and in Mozilla Firefox (latest).

I've made an HTML 4.01 version for all who found this didn't work before (see my initial post).

[Shonner]

Your code works now. Wiki has improved navigation.

[designingpatrick]

4. Critiques and responses to images are to be constructive and related to improving the quality of the artwork.

I'm sure this applies to more than images

[Factotum]

Megamorph's topology guide works for me. :D
It has so much clarity, it's like reading from non-existent CG textbook.
Thanks Megamorph (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=308253)
:buttrock:

[Lumin8]

Great thread! There's alot here. I'll most likely do alot of reading before posting any work. ;)

Chad

[rgbaguy]

Hey guys,

Here's a quick torso I knocked together, and did a quick pose with less than perfect deformers :D Had to get some modeling practice in :P

http://www.rgbandalpha.com/files/scratch/torso_shaded_and_wire.jpg
http://www.rgbandalpha.com/files/scratch/torsos_persp.jpg

Cheers!

[mustgo3D]

Good Lord, I think I am going to print this entire thread and bind it like a book.
There are tons of useful information here. I will be contributing soon. I want to
read it thru, so that I do not repeat ideas.

[shoujoboy]

I did most of the Joan of Arc tutorial and I plan on buying Ken brilliants book but I still would like more material to study does anyone know of some websites I can goto ? .....I still need to read through this thread, I'm also currently checking out the Body Topology thread.

[designingpatrick]

Yeah this thread is the shit! (Hopefully no one misunderstands this phrase) You can learn a lot here, unfortunately I don't have access to a lot of the pics that were once posted. I took a class from Stahlberg through this site about 2 weeks ago. Everything that is covered here is covered in that class but in the span of about 3 weeks, then it is applied to all of the important things like animation and rigging. I have a lot of references from that class (that I cannot share due to common courtesy), but there are are references from around the net too.

[shoujoboy]

Yeah this thread is the shit! (Hopefully no one misunderstands this phrase) You can learn a lot here, unfortunately I don't have access to a lot of the pics that were once posted. I took a class from Stahlberg through this site about 2 weeks ago. Everything that is covered here is covered in that class but in the span of about 3 weeks, then it is applied to all of the important things like animation and rigging. I have a lot of references from that class (that I cannot share due to common courtesy), but there are are references from around the net too.
Yes it is(though I'm only on like page 10).....so What Stahlberg Class did you take ?

[designingpatrick]

Cybergirl. I dont know if he'll do it again, but if he does....take it. You will get all the info you need plus direct feedback. Most of the resources presented are from references found online. Subscribe to 3d.sk for all the references you could ever need. Then start drawing the topology on the references with some 2-d app, use those as general references in your favorite 3-d app. That was a small snippet of the goodness I got from that class. I have all of his lessons on my computer....but you can't have them without paying for the class. hehehe.

[claren89]

I am new to the 3d world and currently using maya software, and my 1st try at extruding edges to make a head instead of box modelling, but i nt sure if my topology is gd enough for a realistic head

So need your guyz help and advice thank alot!!!


Both smooth and before smoothing

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j148/claren_89/highres.jpghttp://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j148/claren_89/lowresface-1.jpg

[srb1977az]

This is the base mesh I use to start all human heads, ...I found this to work well for sculpting and deformation purposes (blend shapes morph targets, and joint driven deformations), its also very easy to downres.
http://www.seanbinder.com/theLastSpartan_headRotationWireframe.jpg

[chontep]

Oh'' master piece

[mogglin]

Hi Guys,

Just wondering if anyone could give me some crits on a head meash I have been working on. The plan is to take it into ZBrush to finish off the detailing, but I wanted to try and make sure the edge loops were going to work, if it was to be animated.

Look forward to your comments.

Cheers!!http://i420.photobucket.com/albums/pp285/digitaldoughnut/head_topo_110908.jpg

[tasteyBooger]

I would suggest moving the pole located on the cheek, back towards the outside of the jaw line.

[designingpatrick]

everything looks good over all, you are missing the caruncula. I think that you can do a better job spreading the lines around to increase the spread. Areas with more fat/smoother should have less topological detail. The lines that represent wrinkles and details may be appropriate, but I think that it depends on the target audience/medium. If you are expecting deformations for animation purposes, then the elaborate topology may be necessary. Then again it may not be; if you plan on using an zbrush then detail specific topology isn't necessary. I marked some areas where the connecting angles are too extreme based on what I've seen works well. You should relax the angles unless there is a reason to make a statement, parametrization is the idea.
http://i34.tinypic.com/ipavsh.jpg

[yamobust]

I suppose it depends on your individual workflow, but a lot of people start modeling the head from around the eye. This is how I learned to start modeling the head, and I've come to realize that the amount of vertices I use to form the eye can have a very large effect on how many edges I end up running around the face (for instance if you outlined the shape of the eye with something like 20 vertices, all of those edges have to run somewhere!)

So I was just curious how many verts you guys usually use to form the shape of the eye?

[Laa-Yosh]

Nowadays, the only time I'm modeling a head in the traditional way is when I prepare something for Zbrush. It's usually lowres, and we actually prefer to have no facial features defined at all; and a compeletely quad layout too, as Zbrush has trouble when smoothing surfaces with 3 or 5 sided vertices. In these cases I still prefer to start from a box so that I can always see what's going on.

Then we use Topogun to resurface the sculpt. Faster, better, easier... I don't see any reason to waste time with the old methods.


I've gathered some experience in the past few years, if I have the time I might compile the results into something...

[chontep]

I still not excellent , get about follow this picture , enter advise criticize done to a turn , www.chontep3d.blogspot.com (http://www.chontep3d.blogspot.com/)

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/9702/005gx6.jpg

[alex51919667]

Man, i need to learn more about it. Check out my avatar...

[Shuggs]

My biggest issue with geometry is how much do you start out with? How much is too little and how much is too much?

[Shonner]

My biggest issue with geometry is how much do you start out with? How much is too little and how much is too much?

That can depend on your particular modeler. Some have vertex/edge/polygon selection and morphing tools that are more efficient than other apps.

[Laa-Yosh]

All it depends on is how much control you want to have over the deformations on the vertex level. For a movie VFX character you'll need a lot of geometry usually. For a still image you may be OK with a low res model and lots of displacement.

A little experience and good tools are all you need to handle large models. Of course it'll also take more time but that's the expected price for good results.

There are some interesting results using animated displacement maps and lowres meshes as well, but so far it seems to be far too clumsy and unpredictable to me, partially because you can't really integrate the workflow into a single app (ie. export-import from Mudbox/Zbrush all the time, no viewport feedback for the animator, huge datasets because of the displacement maps etc). I think the new Hulk relied on a complex system of skinning, corrective morphs and animated displacements, but even they only used it for muscle fiber stuff and not large shapes (so they needed lots of geometry too).

[designingpatrick]

I guess the biggest question to ask yourself when considering the depth of geometry is; "Will this model be animated?" and if it will be then ask "Will it animate in a run-time environment?"


Unless you know what you're doing, then geometry is typically most complex dense for non-animated meshes, so it can be as dense as your hardware allows.
Animated meshes should be at a middle zone, like 100,000 polys give or take whatever makes sense when rigging and rendering.
Meshes intended for games should be less then 5,000. But that is a very flexible number and is dependent on a lot of factors beyond just making the model.
With the apps out these days, the mesh density doesn't matter so much as your understanding of topology, physiology, anatomy, and all that stuff.

[Shonner]

Will it animate in a run-time environment?

And will it animate just in preview mode in real-time without bringing the computer to its knees?

[Shuggs]

Thank you all for those responses. It has cleared a lot of things up. We're always render conscience here at my university, so we tend to make the models more low-poly. Our general lack of understanding of these basic principles explains why we would get bad deformations when we went to animate our characters. The classes are set up in a way that you have to learn the majority of what you need to know outside of class. A lot of what I know about Lightwave has been self-taught, and I took it upon myself to explore modeling a lot deeper than what our classes were covering (and they aren't much). I started modeling biped characters in Computer 2, and we have now just been given a semester long assignment to model our first organic character in Computer 4. A lot of people generally do not understand what they're doing, and know nothing about topology simply because we aren't taught it.

As I continue to study and grow as a modeler I find it to be a lot more complex then what it appears. Topology seems to be one of those things you learn over a long period of time. It takes a lot of trial and error to get it right, and even at an expert level you can still find new ways of doing things. I have set aside my entire Saturday and Sunday to read a lot of the tutorials I've found in this thread so that I can become more skilled at modeling. I love it, and I want to succeed in it. So again, thank you for the responses! I'll definitely be back in here with more questions. :)

[Shuggs]

I'm having pole issues. Could somone possibly help me out on this?:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinFront.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinSide.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinBack.jpg

I'm a Lightwaver. Any suggestions/help/crit is greatly appreciated.

[Laa-Yosh]

First of all turn off that stupid subpatch/preview mode immediately. If your model does not look good without it, then you're already in trouble down the pipeline, be it UVs, rigging or displacement. Do not rely on the subdivision scheme to fix your model, do not be lazy.
:)

Second, once you have more geometry it'll be easier to reduce the number of poles and distribute them better on the mesh.

Also, avoid 6 or more sided vertices completely. Some 5 and 3 sided vertices are required for an all quads model, but anything more can not be justified.


I still suggest starting with a concept sculpt and rebuilding the mesh on top of it, this helps to concentrate on one problem at a time. If you don't have access to Zbrush then try to look for some other app or a demo... you don't need to be able to extract maps, all you need is a relatively detailed hihgres mesh.

[Shuggs]

First of all turn off that stupid subpatch/preview mode immediately. If your model does not look good without it, then you're already in trouble down the pipeline, be it UVs, rigging or displacement. Do not rely on the subdivision scheme to fix your model, do not be lazy.
:)

Woah, woah, woah. My bad. And I'm not being lazy. I just posted my model with subpatch turned on. I have no problem posting it un-subpatched.

Second, once you have more geometry it'll be easier to reduce the number of poles and distribute them better on the mesh.

Like this?:
file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/e599133w/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpgfile:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/e599133w/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/Yinpolys.jpg

Metaform Plus tool was used to add more geometry.


Also, avoid 6 or more sided vertices completely. Some 5 and 3 sided vertices are required for an all quads model, but anything more can not be justified.

The 6 sides I know of, and I seem to have a problem with getting rid of them. I'll go back in and Spin Quad the mess out of it until I get it right.


I still suggest starting with a concept sculpt and rebuilding the mesh on top of it, this helps to concentrate on one problem at a time. If you don't have access to Zbrush then try to look for some other app or a demo... you don't need to be able to extract maps, all you need is a relatively detailed hihgres mesh.

I have ZBrush. Thanks for that!

[Laa-Yosh]

What I've meant with subpatch and lazyness is that it's been a common practice with LW modelers to turn this on pretty early and try to use the least amount of geometry they could get away with, pushing and pulling points all around to sculpt the forms instead of adding enough geometry. The usual result is a very messy model with uneven poly distribution and lots of poles.

Good modelers work without any subdivision, only use it to check the model's shape in the final stages. Smoothing the mesh is there to refine curves and not to create them.

As for your model, without edge based tools it'll be pretty complicated to redirect the edge flow. I can't really help you with that.

[Shuggs]

What I've meant with subpatch and lazyness is that it's been a common practice with LW modelers to turn this on pretty early and try to use the least amount of geometry they could get away with, pushing and pulling points all around to sculpt the forms instead of adding enough geometry. The usual result is a very messy model with uneven poly distribution and lots of poles.

Good modelers work without any subdivision, only use it to check the model's shape in the final stages. Smoothing the mesh is there to refine curves and not to create them.

As for your model, without edge based tools it'll be pretty complicated to redirect the edge flow. I can't really help you with that.

I see.

I had that problem the first time I did a complete character. Modeled completely in sub-patched mode and when I turned Sub-Ds off the polygons were everywhere. It makes sense to keep Sub-D's off so you don't get non-planars and avoid messy polygons.

As far as edge-based tools we've been given 'Add Edges' and 'Spin Edge' in the last two installments of Lightwave. So should I start over on the head again? I'm really aiming to get it to where I'm satisfied with the topology and I'm not.

[spencerneal]

I am interested in the images in this thread. However, they are no longer displayed, at least not showing up on my machine. Are they still available for download?

Spencer

[CYBERNATION]

Really useful thread!!:thumbsup: It really help me.

2 spencerneal: try to download this
Hello friends,

I have re-uploaded the compilation of Vedic-King to this link "as is" that I got:

http://rapidshare.com/files/17425445/metagons.rar.html

Not quite sure how long it would stay there, but hopefully long enough for you guys to have it from there. :)

Regards

Darkclouds10

[DaGuai]

Hi, There

I have been reading everything here about topology but, I still have some confusion here. I have organized my thoughts in a true false sort of way so it should be easier to answere. However, if everyone could just throw they're thoughts out about what I have written here that would be great help! :D thanks!! :D

If you model following only muscle flow then every person on earth could be made useing just one model because, all muscles in humans are the same?

If we do not consider the Morphology of the human figure when we model then all our humans will look the same. They may look smaller or fatter but, to get the "Likness" of the person shouldn't we be thinking more about the surface as well?

I come from sculpting, painting, and drawing and we learned that just by getting the muscles in the right spot will not give you a likness of the human. Angles,shapes and plane changes are what to look for to give you a likness of what ever human is being made.

Thanks for your time all! :)

[Shonner]

makeHuman attempts to create all kinds of figures using the same topology. You can decide if the results are stellar or not.

[DaGuai]

makeHuman attempts to create all kinds of figures using the same topology. You can decide if the results are stellar or not.

Thanks, I have look into it and do feel they are bit stellar. Thanks for the Comments! :)

[designingpatrick]

That's why this is the topology thread; it is only for the shape and form. Not even the shape but the graphical representation of the mathematical equation which is most efficient in supporting a likeness of the human image. This thread doesn't address materials or shaders, texture, lighting, or surface detail or deformation. It only covers one thing; the way that the lines are organized on the surface. Actual sculpting doesn't really even need to address topology, because the topological structure of clay (or whatever) is almost infinite and malleable enough that sculptors don't need to think about it. You know?

[Laa-Yosh]

If you model following only muscle flow then every person on earth could be made useing just one model because, all muscles in humans are the same?

No. Muscle origin and insertion points are unique, as is bone structure. Amount of muscle mass and body fat also affect forms and topology.

They may look smaller or fatter but, to get the "Likness" of the person shouldn't we be thinking more about the surface as well?

You should always think about the surface first - particularly how it's deforming during animation. Muscle, bone and fat pay an important role in this, but you want to recreate the results.
This also means that you may have to model wrinkles and creases as well, especialy for facial animation where some of these are very important.

[Laa-Yosh]

This thread doesn't address texture, or lighting, or surface detail or deformation. It only covers one thing, the way that the lines are organized on the surface.

Surface deformation and topology are inherently linked, one builds upon the other...

[GrogMcGee]

It should be added I think that good topology allows for the easy addition of surface detail or it's removal.

[DaGuai]

Surface deformation and topology are inherently linked, one builds upon the other...

Thanks for your thoughts and comments! :)

[DaGuai]

Surface deformation and topology are inherently linked, one builds upon the other...

I had some thoughts:

I am thinking about the flow of the edge, loops. When I model I feel that each figure should and does have a unique edge loop flow to them.
Some times I wonder if I am wasteing my time trying to model each figures edge flow uniquely (not just where the points are I am talking more about where my poles are which, control the edge flows). Am I?

[Laa-Yosh]

It's not a waste of time IMHO. Not that you can't reuse whole models from time to time, though, and yes there are recurring cases like the cheekbones or the upper lip/nose area on faces, but usually it's better to start from scratch and develop workflows that are fast enough. Like, concept sculpt -> retopo with Topogun, for a good example.

[HippyDrome]

Take a look at Ratatouille. Every Human used the same mesh. Same with the rat'z. This can give you an idea of just how far you can take one mesh design. Two mesh designs for the whole film.

[DaGuai]

Take a look at Ratatouille. Every Human used the same mesh. Same with the rat'z. This can give you an idea of just how far you can take one mesh design. Two mesh designs for the whole film.

Thanks, I will look into that. I actual have the movie playing now.
Thanks to both of you :)

I think it is safe to say that I was right when I noticed that a lot of the characters in DOA look the same even some of the guys look like the women. (DOA Dead or Alive game seris).

[Laa-Yosh]

Take a look at Ratatouille. Every Human used the same mesh. Same with the rat'z. This can give you an idea of just how far you can take one mesh design. Two mesh designs for the whole film.

They're kinda far from realistic or detailed in my book. Simple shapes and forms everywhere, not to mention the fur on the rats.

Cartoons are in general a completely different matter - you need to have extreme deformations to do squash and stretch, but those are some pretty simple deformations, too. Also, Pixar uses very dense meshes and LOTS of controls. Without these, their topology wouldn't make sense.

And let's not forget Geri either.
http://www.nationmaster.com/wikimir/images/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Pixar-geri.jpg

[DaGuai]

They're kinda far from realistic or detailed in my book. Simple shapes and forms everywhere, not to mention the fur on the rats.

Cartoons are in general a completely different matter - you need to have extreme deformations to do squash and stretch, but those are some pretty simple deformations, too. Also, Pixar uses very dense meshes and LOTS of controls. Without these, their topology wouldn't make sense.

And let's not forget Geri either.
http://www.nationmaster.com/wikimir/images/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Pixar-geri.jpg

Thanks this helps a lot!

I am sure everyone has some kind of logic as to why they model somthing one way over another but, sometimes I can't see it. Like this example here, they got topology every where. Like you say it wouldn't make any sense if the model were not dense. So is this sort of modeling a Pixar thing? Most of my teachers at AAU are from ILM and they are very strict and make us learn to model with all quads. But, artist like Stephen Stahlberg seems to reject all that quad stuff. So I look at myself and say "Ok, what should I do because, someday I want to get a job so how should I model?".
Anyway, thanks for this! :D

[Laa-Yosh]

Like this example here, they got topology every where. Like you say it wouldn't make any sense if the model were not dense. So is this sort of modeling a Pixar thing?

No, this has been their first poly (actually subdiv...) based character model after decades of NURBS, while researching the implementation of Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces for PRMan. To put it simple, they didn't know any better and it has worked well enough for them for that shortfilm.

Incredibles has introduced a completely different art style for their human characters, they're more simple and cartoony, so their current approach is different as well. If they move to yet another style, they may have to change it again.

Most of my teachers at AAU are from ILM and they are very strict and make us learn to model with all quads.

Quads are good for all kinds of reasons, stick to them.

But, artist like Stephen Stahlberg seems to reject all that quad stuff.

Stahlberg is usually working as a lone artist, specializing in young girls with smooth faces. I suspect he developed his approach in order to speed up the modeling work, as making all quad models takes more time and effort.

His method works well enough for his purposes - but it doesn't mean that there is no better way. Remember that he used to rely on Maya's hierarchical subdivs for years before he had to drop them because of render issues (PRMan doesn't support it).

If he's started to use Zbrush extensively, he may have already decided to stick to quads as that app won't take anything 5-sided. Alternatively he can subdivide his meshes in Maya once to get an all quads model. To be honest I haven't really seen anything topology wise from him in years; AFAIK he contributed to the PS3 game Heavy Rain recently, which is obviously a different field with ingame lowpoly models.


So I look at myself and say "Ok, what should I do because, someday I want to get a job so how should I model?".

The most common approach is: all quads (1-5% triangles may be OK depending on the studio), topology follows surface details. Sticking to it is the safest way.

Also, modeling instead of conemplating is the fastest way... ;)

[GrogMcGee]

the initial poly cage is the base on which surface detail is added. As such, the cage needs adequate edge flow; edge flow that can support the details and the deformations of a much higher resolution smoothed mesh.


What Laa-Yosh is saying, I think, is that Pixar is doing something that lends it self to a particular work flow:

Catoons have a certain simplisity of form and exagreation of certain kinds of details. As such once a basic cage is built multiple high resolution smooth-meshes can be made that appear radically different. The basic cage is what allows them to do this.

In general a very good base cage can be tweaked into almost any other cage; however, that takes a very good cage. I believe that Steven Ståhlberg has (still is?) used (using) such a method in his digital women.

[Laa-Yosh]

Pixar's using 100% same geometry for most / all characters.

I guess with Incredibles they only did this for the crowds; the heroes all had individual models. For Ratatouille the humans weren't that important or characteristic, so they could treat them all like background crowd characters (I actually didn't really like most of the guys in the kitchen).


As for base cages, I don't really spend time on stuff like this. With Topogun it's usually quicker to start from scratch.

[DaGuai]

No, this has been their first poly (actually subdiv...) based character model after decades of NURBS, while researching the implementation of Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces for PRMan. To put it simple, they didn't know any better and it has worked well enough for them for that shortfilm.

Incredibles has introduced a completely different art style for their human characters, they're more simple and cartoony, so their current approach is different as well. If they move to yet another style, they may have to change it again.



Quads are good for all kinds of reasons, stick to them.



Stahlberg is usually working as a lone artist, specializing in young girls with smooth faces. I suspect he developed his approach in order to speed up the modeling work, as making all quad models takes more time and effort.

His method works well enough for his purposes - but it doesn't mean that there is no better way. Remember that he used to rely on Maya's hierarchical subdivs for years before he had to drop them because of render issues (PRMan doesn't support it).

If he's started to use Zbrush extensively, he may have already decided to stick to quads as that app won't take anything 5-sided. Alternatively he can subdivide his meshes in Maya once to get an all quads model. To be honest I haven't really seen anything topology wise from him in years; AFAIK he contributed to the PS3 game Heavy Rain recently, which is obviously a different field with ingame lowpoly models.




The most common approach is: all quads (1-5% triangles may be OK depending on the studio), topology follows surface details. Sticking to it is the safest way.

Also, modeling instead of conemplating is the fastest way... ;)

Thanks! :)
Yes doing is better than conemplating. I am doing, and have been for some time but, it was time to get some things clear as my modeling has been getting stiffled with all these wondering questions I have.
I'll dig up some of my models and explain my topology logic on some of them. maybe that would be a better way to clear some things up in my head :)
Is that cool?

Again, thanks! :)

[toontje]

I'm having pole issues. Could somone possibly help me out on this?:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinFront.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinSide.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Threshold/YinBack.jpg

I'm a Lightwaver. Any suggestions/help/crit is greatly appreciated.

Hi, forget about poles being bad for animation, unless you are modeling a model with 30 faces or something. Most models are mid or high poly, so won't see any so called pinching effect.

Some of your poles has 6 edges. Those should be eliminated, the other poles don't pose much of a problem other they direct the loops in the wrong direction. Mayba this thread can help you understand topology more:
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=93651

I tried to keep it as program agnostic as possible, and I think a LW user shouldn't have any trouble following this thread.

[Laa-Yosh]

I'm a bit scared to say, but I find your explanations pretty hard to follow... E-poles, C-loops, too much text, too much thought, too much to take in. Maybe I'm getting old but I can't even read through it all.
Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate your intentions and the incredible effort it must've taken to compile all the text and images (did stuff like that myself a few years ago so I know how much work it is).


You should put the horse in front of the cart - everyone should try to get the basics down first, form and shape and propoprtions and anatomy.
Sculpting is a much more natural, easier and faster way to model, everyone should use it as a first stage. There really is no sense in trying to model something complex from a cube any more. Learn to build a simple box man for sculpting and get it into Zbrush or Mudbox first. Worry about topology and poles and loops - about technical stuff - later.

You should be able to simplify any kind of system to a small set of fundamental rules. It's easier to explain, to understand and to put into practice.
It's interesting and challenging to try to analyze stuff to its last bits and pieces and it will produce practical results as well (I've seen a lot of stuff in your writings that I've sort of filtered down through experience on my own, too).

I'm kinda tired, so I'll stop here... I also realize that maybe it'd be better to spend time on actually writing about the topology issues instead of discussing other people's efforts and opinions, so maybe I'll end up doing that ;)

Oh and someone sent me an email through CGTalk and I can't reply to him any other way - I don't have a website, sorry ;)

[designingpatrick]

I think that you're right about too much focus on technical aspects, if this were only a modeling forum. There's more to it though, well more and less; unless I'm mistaken this forum isn't about shape or form so much as it is about arranging the topological lines to achieve efficient geometry. If you bring the modeling apps like Zbrush and Mudbox into the mix, then it seems that this forum is obsolete. It isn't, but this forum has been going for five years, and so the info was much more necessary previously. Which is probably why the posts have been only commentary and not actual modeling work. If we were to compile all of the information in this forum and create guidelines for correct topological arrangement, you could probably narrow it down to a couple pages, with a lot of examples there after.

[DaGuai]

I have been sculpting for a couple years now. My training has been at AAU, GCA Atleir in New York and BACCA Atleir in Belmont. I have stronge Traditional Classical Art skills. I think I have put the horse way way way in front of the cart.

Anyway, thanks for all your thoughts and comments all. I will leave you guys now.

Thanks

[j3st3r]

Hola Tamas,

You are getting old, as well as me. The main problem is that I think there are basic rules, but the current generation of artists tries to incorporate it into strict rules. Rules are against art. Few things to consider when modeling:
-Use quads (better deformation, less glitches when sculpting)
-Use evenly distributed polygons (many LW artist tend to use awfully distorted polygons, that may look good on screen, but animation and sculpting may be painful)
-Follow the outlines with your topology.
-Poles may be problematical (not necessary), so try to keept their number low, and put them to places, where you can deal with them.

And as our friend LY said. Sculpt first, then build the topology. Sculpting is almost pure artistic experience. You don't care about technical issues, just the shapes and forms. When you are ready you may use Topogun, ZBrush, etc. to build up your real geometry. This is mostly technical task. Think of this as it work in the large studios. A clay sculpture of the creature is created, then it is scanned, and the modeler created the model with proper topology. Here you are the sculptor, and the modeler as well.

So enough talk. I think that organizing pole types, and so are not the best way to be an industry level artist. And moreover, I have seen many pages about the e/loops, c/loops etc., but there weren't too much good models there.

[toontje]

Sculpt first than build the topology:

Not everyone has Mudbox or Zbrush. The other progs that do have sculpting are at best adequate compared to the former two. But I think that condensed remarks like, don't explain, just do it the correct way are symptomatic to the problem that most have. Yes, some can play the piano like a virtuoso after just one week because they just get it. Some others take years to get anywhere. And by saying that it serves little purpose to analyse this because it is art or whichever reason, the fact remains that there are people out there yearning to reach the level of you guys. Obviously you guys are not gods, or you most excellent models are not conceived through some kind of magic.

Topology is a complex subject, and like any other complex subject it deserves analysis.
The biggest advantage of scultping is that you are not bound by the limitation of the concept of technology (all quads, loop here and loop there) but by your own artistic limitation. Tools that are used for sculpting are not more technical than a chissel and a hammer. The biggest downside of sculpting is that you are bound by technology itself!
Until we have quantum computers in which we can model billions of polys and have them rigged and animated smoothly, I'll hang on to traditional box modeling or poly by poly modeling.

Once someone said something about sculpting Angelina Jolie, and I said why? She has a very smooth face. In other words, sculpting is not the method to model for all situations. It only makes sense for very specific situations/ needs.

My 2 cents.

[j3st3r]

You are a bit wrong. Sculpting works in every situation. Even when you are doing inorganic things. I don't say that you need not to know about the issues with modeling, but I don't see the point of the over analysis. There people talking too much of jargon, without any valuable product. Topology is important, but the form is more important. With sculpting you can easily have the proper form. You may have a kickass topology if the form is not right. And believe me, if you spent days with careful modeling of a character with excellent topology, and you need to change something...it's a nightmare. With sculpting it takes about 2-3 days to create basic character concept. When it's approved, only the topology will change, the details are in place. It's another day or two to build the topology, reproject the details, and continue detailing. The rest is to make UV, and textures, shading, whatever needed.

There are not only ZBrush and Mudbox, Silo, modo has also sculpting capabilities, even if they are far from the forementioned two.

I understand that you prefer modeling first, especially if you don't have acces to these programs. But believe me, if you are going to create a good Angelina Jolie, it's the best if you sculpt her first.

[Ruramuq]

In other words, sculpting is not the method to model for all situations. It only makes sense for very specific situations/ needs.I would separate topology(modeling) from sculpting itself:
• Basic topology for sculpting
• Complex topology for a character design

The thing is, you don't need to be an expert at all, to sculpt or to be great artist, both are not tied together, not at all. and When you see an excellent peace or Art, usually it is not about techniques, but details.

So I know for sure that a simple character requires a very simple topology, usually just the basics about subdivitions, like those webpages taking about poles.
But complex characters, requires a much more complex topology, in fact it can get so complex, that I don't think zbrush wold be usefull to redesign the topology. I other words zbrush is not for profesional modeling tool, its mainly of Artistic modeling, hard modeling, very basic topology, and as a starting point...

Someone can become very experimented with their software, and sculpting is not required unless you need many more details. but if you know the character your designing, if you know what you have to do, then you do it. but if you don't then perhaps you should try zbrush.

There is another thread about topology, I think in the Maya section, and that is a terrible situation of how people can convince themselves that something bad is good. So don't be wrong, when you consider sculpting as a tool for profesionals.. because it's first goal is as a tool for artists, as the galleries are demostrating..

[Neox]

hmm well i have to admit that i think modellig of characters these days is, unless they are pretty simple stylewise, a total timewaste, why sculpting angelina jolie? because her is face is not as smooth as you say, it's all about subtle forms and thats a pain in the ass on vertex level, not having sculptingtools these days is like doing lifesize sculptures with a toothpick, it's possible sure, but sculpting didn't just evolve because modelling was oh so great, it limits artwise way more then sculpting does and is so damn timeconsuming in comparison.
Next step would be to kill topology for the forming process (back then called modelling now called sculpting) at all or to change it on the fly where needed.

usually it is not about techniques, but details.
i would disagree, details are just blenders, basic form is what count's way more, at least to me

[j3st3r]

I do ALL of my character modeling with sculpting first. It's much easier. Even the most complex characters can be sculpted. Or use simple topology object for the sculpt. It is so easier sculpt any form, than to model. When I'm ready with sculpting, I have a good model, that lacks the CGish look, and ready to create the topology. Topogun is excellent for that, better at this point then ZBrush. But I did retopology in XSI without any problem. Look, if you sculpt first an topologize later, you can separate the two phases for a more effective workflow.
But there is no absolute truth. This workflow fits better to those who are skilled or talented users of pencils, while others with skilled vertexpushing abilities may found this bad.

[toontje]

Well, I see what you guys are getting at and I'm not debating this at all. I just want to learn through discussion.
I do have have access to modeling tools because I use Blender. Even more, the sculpting tools are very topology friendly in that it uses multi resolution. You can revert back to a previous subdivision level to make changes to the topology, go back to the high res level where the topology changes are there in place too.

I don't dispute that a sculpted Angelina Jolie won't look good. These are couple of sculpts made by Romeo in Blender with which I want to illustrate that you are right about the results:

http://blenderartists.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=50994&d=1221889449

But in my opinion I think that the first example is a bit of overkill. I think it could be easily done with traditional modeling. The base mesh of the girl is almost more than half the work. A few sub divs more and I'm sure you'll get the same result.

Now, the dog is another situation that would be hard to model with topology or bump/ displacement mapping. To model those folds in the traditional way would be hard, yet with sculpting it's easy and the results are dramatic.
Many models can be traditionaly modeled and properly uv-mapped to show high detail. The model will stay light and workable.

I heard Z-brush is fast, but in Blender you have to disable UNDO if you want to sculpt a million poly and even so you have to hide parts of the mesh from time to time to keep things running smoothly.

[j3st3r]

Great examples!

Blender is getting better and better. Anyway, just to make some conclusion, some likes blond girls, some like browns. That's the same here. I prefer sculpting first, I have a solid look, how it'll look finally, and then I sepnd few hours with topology, and ready.

That's I made as a sculpt first (it's a fast sculpt, but for laying out the character was the fastest way)
http://w3.enternet.hu/matefy/Shapeshifter.jpg

The concept artist asked me to change few things, and it was really easy, because nothing was against it. I smoothed the areas in question, and rebuilt with claytubes brush. The total work was done in 2 comfortable days (including consultation, etc). The character was then retopologized within a day, uvmapped in an hour or two, and the company I worked for busted. So that's the all I have of this unfinshed piece...:(

But to me this workflow fits better, to you the other fits better.

[Ruramuq]

i would disagree, details are just blenders, basic form is what count's way more, at least to meYes,shape is very important, but, something comes to my mind, about topology vs details:
Your character j3st3r, It has muscles, and those muscles have detail, but there is another kind of details, when you are animating, for example:
those muscles could be animated like real muscles and would require good topology or a dense mesh, or perhaps the arm itself is going to be animated as a whole, and muscle will follow.. and the end result is going to be very good.

What I mean is that each character has a purpose beforehand, and based on that people can decide what kind of details are important: static details or details related to animation.

but if animation details are required, you need to design them, and the great benefit of sculpting is shape. but still it depends on how complex the character is going to behave. I suppose a specific workflow can be good,better in different senses, like speed, but this thread is more about topology in general, than effective workflows. be it difficult or easy
all i say is that sculpting has its purpose, and topology it's own. mixing them would confuse a little the idea of finding better topology

[toontje]

Ruramuq, you have a point there. The first thing you have to consider before modeling/ sculpting is: animation or still?
The second thing you should consider: functional detail.
A fat face has a different topology than a rugged face etc.
Topology helps drive the shaping of the form better. But if you modeling for animation, the topology should make the details part of the model, and not as if it was pasted on.

[j3st3r]

You didn't understand my point. I told, that I start to work on a sculpt, as they work in films. When the shapes are OK, I can work on the proper topology. So what's the question? The topology will be good for animation and still images as well, but I don't try to focus on two tasks at once. Let's from the shape, and then let's build the proper topology.

[Laa-Yosh]

Yeah, seems like you guys don't get what Jester's saying... I'll see if I can put together something in the near future...

[j3st3r]

It's my fault Tamas, my English is rubbish.

[bunk]

And believe me, if you spent days with careful modeling of a character with excellent topology, and you need to change something...it's a nightmare.

Then why not import your excellent topology into Mudbox/Zbrush and make the changes needed. That's how I work. I import my "perfect" mesh with "wrong" forms, subdivide some, brush away till I'm happy, go back to level zero, export and voila a perfect mesh with a perfect shape.

A clay sculpture of the creature is created, then it is scanned, and the modeler created the model with proper topology. Here you are the sculptor, and the modeler as well.

That has nothing to do with work flow but all with clay modelers not being able to work with computers in those days. The model scanned by a technician (not a modeler) was the solution.

Another assumption I more or less read is that the sculpt was a concept. i think it was more an end product to visualize the 2D designs to get a final approval and to be used by 2D animators to study the character.

There is a lot of people around here (like me) that can model and sculpt but there is just a handful around here that can design a character. These people (the designers) don't even need a sculpting tool ...a simple pencil and some paper is enough. Once the designers are done with the designs there really is no need to start concept modeling nor concept sculpting. It's the task of modelers (in case the designer is not also a modeler) to translate the designs as good as possible into 3D characters. The route to take is up to the modeler.

Like described I like to plot my poly-loops as early as possible and only roughly approximate the shape so I can later fine tune the finished mesh in Mudbox.

This way of working is even possible when there is no real consensus yet about the design.


http://www.bunk.cistron.nl/plaatjes/character_devellop.jpg

Not one polygon needed to be replaced nor did it hinder while sculpting. I totally agree it's about form in the end ...but there are more ways that lead to Rome.

[DaGuai]

I understand what your saying Jester.

I have the same problem. Tyring to juggle good Topo and form at the same time. Sculpting the figure first allows the artist to focus purely on form and the character of the figure. Instead of being tied down by Topo rules.

Then when the sculpt is ready the modeler can focus on creating the topo useing what ever technique he feels is suitable for the task. For example if I wanted to have a super smooth model I would use Nurbs to begin my re topo tast than convert to polys. It's a common method used for automotive models, but, i have found it to work on figures as well if you want really smooth faces or what not.

Anyway, I am going to try your method you mentioned. I e-mailed you about this already Jester but wanted to just make a post as well.

Thanks,
Ryan

[j3st3r]

Bunk, very nice models.

Every road lead to Rome.

What I said that if you concentrate first on the form, and later on the topology you may gain time.

It takes few hours to create a perfect, detailed head by sculpting. It takes less then a half day to build the topology. Within one and a half day I have the cage of the head and the high polygonal model as well. And believe me, if you have a wrongly placed wrinkle it's much easier to sculpt it, than change the topology, and take care of the form.

But it's my, and that's your way, and that's why the world is interesting :)

[bunk]

Bunk, very nice models.

thanks ...but it's one and the same model. I tried to illustrate that this method even works when no proper design was done first ;) Starts left up ends right down.

What I said that if you concentrate first on the form, and later on the topology you may gain time.

It takes few hours to create a perfect, detailed head by sculpting.

Wow you're fast. I can use that amount of time just to create the shape of an eyelid or nose wing before I'm satisfied.

It takes less then a half day to build the topology.

Same here

Within one and a half day I have the cage of the head and the high polygonal model as well.

Me too since it's the same mesh, further more I don't have to bring the mesh back in for the creation of displacement maps as you will have to do. The shape of your topologized mesh will change because of that so you will have to export the low level as your new base mesh. Then you 'll have to relax your UV once more to accommodate the new shape (a step I can't escape from either ;).

And believe me, if you have a wrongly placed wrinkle it's much easier to sculpt it, than change the topology, and take care of the form.

Hold on. Wrinkle details come from displacement maps and if not I only add it after I'm done sculpting. So I only create the basic loops and add details (if necessary) after sculpting.

[j3st3r]

Sorry pal, you don't get my point. So this debate leads nowhere.

you said:"Me too since it's the same mesh, further more I don't have to bring the mesh back in for the creation of displacement maps as you will have to do. The shape of your topologized mesh will change because of that so you will have to export the low level as your new base mesh. Then you 'll have to relax your UV once more to accommodate the new shape (a step I can't escape from either ;)."

That shows me pretty well, that you have no clue of my workflow.

1. I sculpt, mostly from ZSpheres, rarely some basic geometry is built in XSI and used for sculpting
2. When the sculpt is approved, I spend a day or so to build up an evenly distributed, all quad topology. I don't make difference between animation and still. An edge looped model will work for both, if I follow the outlines.
3. When the control mesh is ready, I make the UV set for it. Few hours at most, within a day usually, but in extreme cases it can take two days
4. Reproject the mesh back to the new topology (ten minutes at most).
5. This mesh will follow perfectly the details I sculpted. Displacement in ZBrush within no time.

For you your workflow is better, for me mine. So there's no need to debate on it.

[DaGuai]

Sorry for being a retard.

I understand every step here except this Jester...

4. Reproject the mesh back to the new topology (ten minutes at most).

Reproject the new mesh?

I think I know how to do that but, maybe I am wrong. Would you mind going in a bit more depth about that?

[bunk]

j3st3r I'm not discussing your work flow. Since there is nothing wrong with it.
I'm discussing the general advice: "Sculpt first, then build the topology."
The claim entirely depends on what is modeled imho. If it's some obscure character then yes it's the fastest route.
If it's just another head I don't see why starting from a base mesh with the loops in place should limit the artistic freedom. If you can sculpt a blob or whatever into a character you can certainly sculpt that character from the mesh at hand.
Advantage is that the low-res mesh is auto shaped into the form of the High-res mesh. Meaning a lot of retopogizing that doesn't need to be done. I think that -in those cases- adjusting the mesh is faster then the retopo route from scratch.
http://www.bunk.cistron.nl/plaatjes/model_sculpt.jpg

[j3st3r]

The key sentence is there: if it's just a head.

Anyway, I prefer doing even heads from the scratch. I am not bound to the topology, I can work more freely. And I can retopologize it in short time. That's good for practicing, experimenting. What I said, that it's easier (to me) to sculpt hte character first, then retopo it. I'm not against using simple geometries (like basemeshes) during sculpting process. But I'm sure that sculpting is faster than edge loop modeling, and easier to correct mistakes.

[toontje]

Just another thought: Jester, have you ever thought about shrinkwrapping a base model on a sculpt instead of retopologizing? Of course you'll be left with a lowres version of your sculpt, but you can bake the normal map back on the lowres version.

[j3st3r]

Sorry for being a retard.

I understand every step here except this Jester...

4. Reproject the mesh back to the new topology (ten minutes at most).

Reproject the new mesh?

I think I know how to do that but, maybe I am wrong. Would you mind going in a bit more depth about that?

ZBrush has a feature (as well as topogun has) where you transfer your sculpted details onto your new geometry

toontje, believe me I did. Rebuilding the topology is faster. What you forget, that ZB and MB change all subdiv levels of geometry when you sculpt. A stroke on the highest level affects the lowers also, and vica versa. So your base mesh has no worth. Second, a muscular man needs a totally different topology than a smooth babe. Shrinkwrapping is not the solution here.

There were a video by Gnomon (God bless them) where the artist, Zac Petroc used that shrinkwrapping method. That method inspired ZBrush retopology tools, and Topogun as well. Retopology is one step beyond shrinkwrapping. Formerly I used your methods, I tried all of them. To me, with my attitude this one is the more effective. I don't understand why you are so strongly against it, although it's almost obvious that you hadn't try it? I suggest to all doubter to give that method a try

I am working in 3D insdustry since 1998, and I was always an explorer. Whenever I read something that was interesting, I tried it. That's not different. I gave a try to sculpting, now I cannot imagine to work other way. To me (and it's strictly to me) that method is a more creative way of working.

[Julez4001]

This thread has certainly picked up steam in the last few days :eek:

[Laa-Yosh]

Yeah... the last time there was so much discussion about modeling tech, we've been talking about how subdivs will replace NURBS ;)

[toontje]

Jester thank you for your advices. I will do the mental switch and make a couple of methods according to your workflow. I hope you don't take offense if I appear headstrong, I was just looking for that solid POV/ sales pitch. :)

[DaGuai]

Jester, I am not questioning your workflow and I never said I was against it. I was just wondering about this step bcause I wasn't sure exactly what it was.

Anyway
thanks for your comments on this.

[DaGuai]

My wife wants to know why I need to learn how to paint to do 3D modeling.

So my question is:

Do I need to know how to paint in order to be a good digital artist?

[Laa-Yosh]

Art requires the same skills and a lot of similar knowledge regardless of the tools. Anatomy, composition, color theory, a trained eye and so on.

You can develop these while practicing on a computer with 3D graphics, but it is a lot faster and easier with a pencil or even with paint (or Photoshop and a tablet, although that will require some extra effort to learn the tools).
Formal education can help a lot here, but you can learn a lot on the internet as well. But you can only develop your sight through practice.

So you do not need to know how to use oil paint and canvas, but it is absolutely required to develop artistic skills somehow. Otherwise your stuff won't look good.

There's a lot of threads here on this subject, by the way...

[Shonner]

Otherwise your stuff won't look good.

No two people have the same definition of what good is. And very few people do art the same way.

[designingpatrick]

My initial reaction to the question is, "Hell no!" because painting is such a physical form of art, and the initial skill set that is required to be of any use to cg art isn't very related.
Composition and color theory are definitely areas of overlap though. If you consider zbrush, then it makes a lot of sense that an understanding of painting will be helpful. You might relate to this analogy; 3d modeling is like practicing law, and painting is like acting. They both require that the individual adopts a role, and the characteristics of each have cross-over skills. But because 3d modeling, like the legal field, can be soooo technical, arduous, and esoteric, it doesn't make sense to trade direct education in the field for an indirect, somewhat related, education in painting. So the analogy is that a student of law would be wasting precious time if he were to take acting lessons, even though there may be overlap.
All that said; the two fields of art go hand in hand concerning the appreciation of composition and art in general. And when you find yourself in the desirable position that would require color and shape compositions in scenes or production level conceptual design, you may learn that your creative process has been fostered by your ability to paint. When considering concept design, nothing is more efficient than sketching.

Also, if you feel that you need to immerse yourself in related areas like painting or sculpting in order to fully understand concepts of modeling, then it makes sense to do so. A very specific knowledge of your toolset is the most important thing to someone who is learning the craft, that means understanding the application's limitations and possibilties, and having an imprinted map in your brain of what the programs can do and how to do it; you will be sacrificing some of this understanding when you spend time painting, but you may gain things like "appreciation", "understanding", "well-roundedness", "open creativity".

I know that my experiences with non-digital mediums of art have contributed in one way or another, but at the end of the day I think that it comes down to learning how to paint with the program (so to speak)

[j3st3r]

No problem, guys! Religious debates are always hot :)

The painting skill helps a lot. Not necessary the technique, but the theory behind it.

[kyuketsuki]

In order to keep the image loading to a minimum on this thread I have moved my various images to a single updated location further in this thread.

[Cubikat]

There is a terrific thread about facial topology and the 'pole' over at Subdivisionmodeling: http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/showthread.php?t=907

It covers just about everything, including the nose. I hope it helps you as much as it did me (note: you can download the whole thing as a pdf for reference).

http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/3893/anose3pbtb8.jpg

http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/8079/fnose8zeml1tv9.jpg

[kyuketsuki]

[/url]Cubikat: That is exactly the type of information I have been looking for. Very good reference, thank you.

Now if only there was a diagram of the primary loops for the 'ideal' structure, which is somewhat what I am trying to either find or discover. (even if there is no ideal)

I couldn't seem to get that type of input on my primary thread, so again, thank you.

Primary Thread:
[url]http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=5594410#post5594410 (http://forums.cgsociety.org/member.php?u=359950)

[Cubikat]

Phew! Modeling a nose isn't easy. This is my humble attempt to recreate that nose.

I didn't use any reference, I just wanted to get the topology right, so the shape and proportions could use some work.

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/767/nose17hn4.jpghttp://img509.imageshack.us/img509/5996/new1wr5.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8140/nose18lw1.jpghttp://img443.imageshack.us/img443/6172/nose20hc8.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8306/nosetopology10gf0.jpghttp://img509.imageshack.us/img509/4511/new3hp5.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/2789/nosetopology11xe9.jpghttp://img509.imageshack.us/img509/9792/new4il5.jpg
http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/4295/nose17wq2.jpg
I'm rather pleased with it. I think it turned out ok. It just needs a little bit of tweaking. And it's 100% quads, even the inside of the nostrils are quads :D.

Hope it helps.

[Cubikat]

Here's a shot of the edge loops and poles. I think I've got them all placed correctly.

http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/2923/new2ms4.jpg

[Cubikat]

I did a little more work on this. I made a few slight changes to the topology and tweaked the shape a bit to look more like a nose (all major loops are still there).

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5590/new5xp5.jpg

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/1484/new7lb7.jpg

I think it looks a bit better now :)

[toontje]

Cubikat: That is exactly the type of information I have been looking for. Very good reference, thank you.

Now if only there was a diagram of the primary loops for the 'ideal' structure, which is somewhat what I am trying to either find or discover. (even if there is no ideal)

I couldn't seem to get that type of input on my primary thread, so again, thank you.

Primary Thread:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=5594410#post5594410

Loops of the ideal structure?
If you mean the topology on a human body, there are a few basic topological layout but that is besides the point. What if you need to model a fantasy creature?
Loops are there to:
- Keep your model light while maintaining a high level of detail
- Aid (for a lack of better word) in deformation. This is done by mimicking the outline of the muscles
- Detailing and tweak details, especially after extrusions, insets etc.

I don't know why the nose should be a hard thing to model. I explained it purely through diagrams in this thread, http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=93651&page=4 , so you can see clearer why and what is happening to the topology.

[Cubikat]

Toontje I've been using that thread of yours for reference, it's a fantastic resource! Thanks for responding.

[Laa-Yosh]

Am I the only one with the impression that the topic is going in circles?...

[toontje]

Well this thread is called topology research.

[Mincher]

Am I the only one with the impression that the topic is going in circles?...

*cringe*

This is an excellent thread. Exactly the kind of thing i've been wanting to look at.

Thanks folks. :)