Theoretical SUB-D

[urgaffel]

I think you should keep this thread open for later additions. Maybe someone comes up with new interesting techniques, and it would be a shame if they couldn't post them here :)

Will you compile this thread into a comprehensive guide later?

[Dave Black]

I certainly will, heck, I've already started on it. :D

As for leaving the thread open, it's sounds good to me. Just did'nt want it to go too far off topic and balloon so big that it becomes impossible to read.

I'd like to encourage anyone who has not tried the techniques that have been described in the past few pages, to pick something, and try modeling it. The problem solving becomes much less abstract and easier to understand as you do it.

Thanks guys!

-3DZ

:D

[urgaffel]

Well, if you want to keep it managable (sp?), you could let this thread keep on for a while, then when you've compiled it, close this thread and start a new one with the compiled info at the start :)

But seriously, I think you should leave this open for now. If it starts to degenerate, close it, wait for a while and see if people start to moan about a new thread and start a new one then. Kind of like how it went with this one ;)

[Dave Black]

Roger that! ;)

This thread will remain open until people start complaining about the length.

Oh, and even then, I'd have to buy Equinoxx a pizza to have it closed. I hate that. You'd think I would'nt have to bribe the mods everytime I turn around. Pizza, beer, gold, hookers...It's really gotten out of control.

:D

-3DZ

:D

[jadedchron]

if you want, i can condense the 18 pages down and put it on a website [as i'm bored out of my mind]:wip: .. i can edit out anything that isn't really relevant and put up highlights.. with the images and who said it. just a thought.:buttrock:

[DP]

That sounds like a great idea!! :applause:
This thread is beginnig to be just a little bit comprehensive, so that won't hurt a bit :)

[Stepunk]

Originally posted by jadedchron
if you want, i can condense the 18 pages down and put it on a website [as i'm bored out of my mind]:wip: .. i can edit out anything that isn't really relevant and put up highlights.. with the images and who said it. just a thought.:buttrock:

Yaeh! Good idea!

I didn't started to read the thread from the begginning and now I have no time to read all the 18 pages of this thread! :):beer:

[urgaffel]

Thanks for the offers, but 3dzealot is working on it already. He'll post it up when it's done :)

[jadedchron]

i was simply condensing them by copyin only the relevant material. i think 3dz might be going in more depth

[ivo D]

well.. ive read all the pages..

and my opinion is.. for making the holes in the hard to editable shapes..

is only quickly done by power bloolean(plugin)

im going to look at it to, tomorrow or so
maybe ill come up with a practical solution.

Great thead btw!!

and it will never be to long.., i hate reading books

but this wasnt any prob to do :surprised
it just rocks:buttrock:

[cdinic]

thats because books don't have emoticons

:buttrock:

excellent thread.. I will be watching closley, as I have been for this threads long life, for the compiled version!!!

:airguitar

-Chris

[gustojunk]

Hi All,

I've been following this thread on and off, looking for a specific answer to a question I have, I have not found it so here we go.

I'm not sure how the Sub-D surfaces in Max compare to SubD in Maya. One essential feature (for me) of Maya's SubDs is that you can convert them to a Nurbs model. The output after conversion is a seamless model made of untrimmed nurb patches. Can you do the same with Max's SubD models?

I'm thinking about buying Max/Brazil for modeling and rendering. I Use Rhino for Nurbs modeling currently (I'm an industrial designer) and I'd like to be able to model using SubD also, because is extremely fast and intuitive. However I need to be able t convert to Nurbs. All my 3D models eventually need to be machined using CNC equipment into physical objects. All CNC software is Nurbs based. Same goes for exporting to engineering CAD packages.

The SubD to Nurbs conversion exists in Maya, but the reality is that Maya SubDs are very unstable. Besides it seems that nothing can beat Max for fast modeling. Add to that the option of having world class rendering plugins and Maya does not look so hot anymore. I'm really crossing my finger waiting for a good reply.

Thanks for your help,

Gustavo

[urgaffel]

Alas, max has no such capabilities. You could export it from max to maya for conversion, but that might be a little expensive if you're jsut going to use maya for converting to Nurbs :(

[gustojunk]

You are right, that sounds like a very expensive 'export plugin'. Why I don't understand is why doen't Max have such a thing built in. Are Max's SubDs true Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces or just polygons with some fancy rendering mesh?

Like when export to Maya for example, do you get a polygon or a true SubD model?

[urgaffel]

Maxs SubDs are essentially a fancy tesselation plugin. It's NOT true Catmull-Clark SubDs... As for exporting, you can export a lowpoly mesh or a highpoly mesh. The problem is that the highpoly mesh isn't a subd mesh. It's just your regular heavy duty mesh with lots and lots of polys. Exporting a lowpoly mesh and applying SubDs to it in Maya works as it should (I asume).

[proteus2002]

there is a script, which converts quad-polys into nurbs-patches. i tested it once, but it didn`t work.
But you can give it a try:

http://www.maya3d.dk/MEL/polyNURBS/

[cdinic]

gustojunk: I must sugjest you look at Vray seriously. I have spent a good deal of time with both Brazil and V-ray and V-ray has served me much better.

When it comes down to it V-ray is just faster. For me at least

good luck with which ever you choose

-Chris

[sledgeweb]

*Spent last hour and a half reading through topic*

*collapses to floor*

Utters: "I don't get it"

*dies*

[gnarlycranium]

Oh god!! Not only did our mission fail, but we've KILLED him!! Aigh!! 3DZealot, we need that condensed version-- hurry before these tragedies spread!! :scream:

[Dave Black]

Dagnammit...That's the 3rd one this week.

I'm on it, guys, I promise. Had a little side project I had to get done on top of my normal schedule, but I've been working on the condensed version during my lunch breaks.

I'm not sure how I'm going to deliver it. I guess either a new thread, or I'll just put it up on my site in html.

Preferences?

Of course, I'd have to buy Equinox another car to get it sticky again...hmmmm...worth it I think.

Keep up the good fight, and I hope that people who have not gotten this yet will actually ask some questions...That's what we are here for. Sometimes it just takes a rephrase to make sense.

-3DZ

:D

[Stepunk]

Originally posted by 3DZealot

I'm not sure how I'm going to deliver it. I guess either a new thread, or I'll just put it up on my site in html.

Preferences?


I think that it's much better if you put it up on your site...
(maybe in .pdf format so I can download and print this..)

Bye

[sux9000]

Say, I was wondering...do u guys always use a MS on top of EPoly? I've been using the Subdivision Surface rollout in EPoly and I like the results. A completely clean stack! Um am I missing something/being foolish?

I find SS great for setting the render iterations and having a bare low-poly mesh to play with in the viewports. (my pc is a dog with no means of locomotion, so the lower the polys the better!)

[gaggle]

.pdf would be nift-tastic I think. Which would be downloadable from the html version. Which itself would be available from your site. Which would be linked to from a new sticky thread.

:)

Hopefully you won't have to give away free cars or hookers again, this time I'm sure many of us will volunteer to a group-effort in bringing him around. Say.. camp up outside his house, and sing sing sing the night away? Or would that be considered a threat, hm?
If that fails, we fall back on plan B, involving ale and whores in sufficient quantities.

[gaggle]

Originally posted by sux9000
Say, I was wondering...do u guys always use a MS on top of EPoly?

I usually always end up with a MeshSmooth on top, yes, because Skin/Physique has to go in somewhere before the thing get's smoothed.

That said, I don't neccessairly model using MS. During that phase I've been known to sit there and toggle the SS checkboxes.

Actually been a while since I've modeled anything so that's all my old pre-this-thread way of doing things. Who knows what might've changed since then :)

[sux9000]

Oh yeah! Animation! I remember that! :surprised hahaha I hardly get anything to the stage where its ready to be animated!

fanx

[ivan iliev]

Awesome Thread 3DZealot!:applause:

You have to keep it alive in some way, man. Everyone can learn a lot here!..
But I have sometimes the feeling, that everything around us, cars we are driving, furniture, other stuff, even CG galleries..., begin to look very similar, just because the Catmull-Clark algorithm, I'm afraid!?:hmm: Is this the only way to work?,...Is ''Mesh Smooth''(on top) another name of God!?..What do you think, boy?...But don't take me seriousely,this was just a melancholic reflection of an old man, I don't want to underestimate the big job done here in this wonderful thread.:thumbsup: Good luck!

ivan

[gaggle]

We're all the whores of Catmull-Clark, it's what MAX uses on both the built-into-poly-objects smoothing, and the MeshSmooth modifier.

I think mostly everyone uses it.. and I don't think every object will end up looking the same. It's all in the hands of the arteest :)

[tonygib]

Originally posted by sux9000
Say, I was wondering...do u guys always use a MS on top of EPoly? I've been using the Subdivision Surface rollout in EPoly and I like the results. A completely clean stack! Um am I missing something/being foolish?

I find SS great for setting the render iterations and having a bare low-poly mesh to play with in the viewports. (my pc is a dog with no means of locomotion, so the lower the polys the better!)

Don't know about other people, but I always tend to have a MS on top. While I know the Epoly has the same effect as a NURMS check box, I just find it to be a pain.

Consider this, you are pushing and pulling vertices, edges, etc, using the "edit" options for those selection modes and maybe the soft selection. Now all of those are at the top of the modifer panel. If your screen is big enough they should fit in view. Now I'll work at base level, but may want to see an iteration of 1 in the viewport at times to see how the mesh is smoothing out. Or I may want to have a full look at how it renders at iteration 2.

So I have a MS at the top, with viewport port iteration at 1 and render iteration at 2. When I want to see how it is looking, I hit the show end result. The advantage is that I don't have to scroll down the Epoly list to turn NURMS on/off.

But hay, maybe its just me :hmm:

[gaggle]

I urge you to consider setting up shortcuts to toggling the NURMSing on and off. Or, which would be just as good, finding the tiny script that makes it possible to toggle Show End Result on and off.

Shortcuts are like tiny windows into the soul of God. Not using them makes baby Jesus cry.

[Stygian]

LOL !!! feeling a little philosophic this morning gaggle ? :applause: Shortcuts are like tiny windows into the soul of God. Not using them makes baby Jesus cry.

[Dave Black]

Wow. That was really inspired...LOL.

Let's use shortcuts, for it is the only path to righteousness...

I like that.

:D

As for MS, In my experience professionally, it's just a good idea to put MS on top. But you can do it any way you want. I really haven't been able to test the new way in production yet...

-3DZ

:D

[tonygib]

hehe, you know as soon as I posted that, I just knew someone would say the magic word: "shortcuts" :p

but seriously, I guess the reason I haven't done a shortcut, is that my left hand is always sitting over the far side CTRL/ALT, etc and all the close by one's are pretty much used. Besides, by the time I moved my hand to the shortcut, I could have moved my mouse, which is hovering in that general area anyway to the show end result.

At least thats my excuse and I'm sticking to it ;)

[dvornik]

If you like shortcuts use Lightwave. There's a reason I say that other than I hate shortcuts.

There is no way of altering the cage without changing the resulting SubD surface. In the examples that were posted (add an edge to a cylinder) I don't think there is a way to write a tool that would just add an edge without altering how the resulting surface looks. I believe that such a tool would need to rearange other edges for the surface to remain the same. I'm not a programmer and not a mathematician, but I strongly suspect that no matter where the new edge is placed the surface will not be exactly circular in cross-section. So you may as well move the edge manually until it looks right.

The reason I mention LW is cause in it's implementation of SubD you can work directly on the resulting surface, which takes much of the guesswork out of the process. It's still "looks right" rather than "is right", but you can make a much closer approximation. Now, I don't think there's a reason not to insist on discreet adding this implementation of SubD to max.

[Dave Black]

I'm not sure I understand the LW people saying that we can't operate on the smoothed version.

If you display the MS up the stack from the EP, you can tweak the lowpoly while seeing the results in the highpoly. You get a smooth mesh with a lowpoly cage to tweak.

Also, you can adjust the verts from the MS modifier.

Can you clarify a bit about what is lacking, or more precise, what is included in LW that trumps Max's tools so well?

I'm not flaming LW, as I have a great deal of respect for the prog, just trying to clear up your thoughts.

Thanks!

-3DZ

:D

[dvornik]

I'm not a big LW fan myself, it has an interface from hell (don't flame me now, just an opinion). I just think this particular feature has to be implemented in every poly modelling package.

What it does is displays the cage as nurbs-like lines on the subdivided surface. So you work directly on the surface, like a control mesh vertex is actually on the surface and you place it exactly where you want it. You work directly with the subdivided surface without any toggling or guessing. Check these videos to get better understanding:

http://www.lightwave3d.com/tutorials/modeling/head/index.html

Here's my only attempt at LW modelling:
head (http://home.earthlink.net/~dvornik/cgt/tech/LW1.jpg) (left side is what you're working on) and it's mesh (http://home.earthlink.net/~dvornik/cgt/tech/LW_mesh.png) . It's more of a display feature than a tool. Max tools are more advanced in my opinion.

[urgaffel]

LW shows a smoothed control cage instead of a lowpoly one, which is what max shows. If you look at the shuolders of Dvorniks example, the max controlcage would look like that, while in LW you get smoothed lines instead... I would very much like that...

As for adding an edgeto a curved surface, the tension settings in the tesselate rollout almost gets it right. But only almost. Which reminds me, I need to talk to Hormon about that...

[tonygib]

Originally posted by urgaffel

As for adding an edgeto a curved surface, the tension settings in the tesselate rollout almost gets it right. But only almost. Which reminds me, I need to talk to Hormon about that...

hehe, yeah we talked about that on IRC about a week ago, guess I should have reminded you about it :wavey:

[ThirdEye]

Lw displays wireframes like isoparms on the surface, it's simpler to work on the surface, it seems like sculpting clay, but the polygons are "deformed" in this particular view so it seems more difficult to detect loops imo.

[Dave Black]

So you are saying that LW displays a spline cage that can be manipulated while smoothed?

I still don't understand what the big deal is. If I have a low poly cage, and I add a MS modifier, then show it up the stack, I can manipulate the final smoothed object while tweaking the low. The only reason I'd have to turn off meshsmooth is when I want to look at the low poly cage.

I'm going to have to do some digging at NewTek to further understand this...

Hmmm...

-3DZ

:D

[dvornik]

In a moderately complex mesh seeing both the cage and the surface is very confusing. Plus, many cage vertices disappear below the surface. It's just not a realistic workflow option in max. From theoretical point of view it may be the same thing, but as far as workflow goes it's not. Plus, in LW it doesn't slow down the viewport the way meshsmooth does.

[edit] To illustrate my point here's (http://home.earthlink.net/~dvornik/cgt/tech/lw2max.gif) how the same model (next version of it actually) would look in max5 if you want to see a 2-iterations meshsmooth. Same thing, only you can't work on it.

[Dave Black]

Thanks Dvornik!

But wait a sec...

Is'nt that a catmull-clark based system? Max does'nt implement that...yet...

Which I know is your whole point...

hmmm...

Good to know. I'll fire off an email to the Discreet developers about this.

Thanks again.

-3DZ

:D

[dvornik]

To be honest I don't know what catmull-clark is. The smoothed results look the same, but LW implementation offers a workflow improvement. It would be great to have this in max.

[Dave Black]

I'm not 100% sure what catmull-clark is myself, but I know that it's a more fully realized system. It's something about the way it handles edgeloops...looks different than max's...

I gotta look it up...

Anyone have a clue? Post it!

Thanks all.

And, btw, dvornik, I could not agree more.

-3DZ

:D

[demoncage]

COLOR=crimson]I have just updated to max5 and am working with edit poly. Did majority of my modeling up to this point with editable mesh in r2.5, so Im still assimilating to the interactive sub-d features incorporated into the later max versions. On that note, I have read some of this thread but am eager to get back to modeling so If this subsequent question has been answered already, simply point me to the right page. In max5 edit poly and I think max4 as well, you can apply ms within the editpoly rollout. There is no control mesh so this rectifies problems with verts disappearing into the sub-d model. However, I haven't figured out a way to return to the lowpoly cage after applying ms within editable poly. Anyone with experience in this area please reply.[/COLOR]

[urgaffel]

When you check the "apply meshsmooth" or whatever it's called, you should get a control cage you can edit. Or you can just un-check it and you should have your lowpoly model back. If you apply a meshsmooth modifier, you can toggle "show end result" on and off as you please and all should be well. Can't say I've ever had any problems with that....

[Dave Black]

He's meshmoothing it permanently using the meshsmooth button.

The dynamic meshsmooth is on a nother rollout...Yeah, I know, really intelligent.

Hope that helps, man.

Look in the online help if you have problems finding it.

The option of using a Meshsmooth modifier is still available, and can sometimes be very handy.

-3DZ

:D

[demoncage]

So there is no way to use the ms button in editable poly and still retain the low poly model?

[urgaffel]

There's a button that says Meshsmooth and there's a rollout where you can CHECK "apply meshsmooth" or something similar. You want the check box, not the button. The button does permanent meshsmoothing, the checkbox does temporary. Temporart is like applying a meshsmooth modifier. More or less...

[gaggle]

hi class, and welcome to Interface From Hell 101.

Yegads, I've never thought about that Meshsmooth poop, but that's actually pretty lame now when focused on like that.

[gaggle]

Catmull-Clark theory found here:
http://gamasutra.com/features/20000411/sharp_01.htm

Requires a (free) login.

Thanks to.. er.. mrfandiwagon, back on page 2 (gasp!, remember back then?) for hooking us up with that link.

[Xaint]

Interesting Thing that I have found in ClothReyes 3, the Hexamesh Object.

"This primitive is a flat plane with a special pattern of subdivision which looks really nice when bending and distorting, even with a somewhat lower polygon count.

Hexameshes, unlike any standard Max primitives, intelligently add an even distribution of polygons to fill possibly oblong shapes, so you don't have to fuss with subdivision numbers to avoid long-skinny polygons. (See illustration at left, showing several Hexameshes of different shapes.) No matter what shape you pull out, the subdivisions themselves always remain evenly proportioned.

Hexameshes also permit you to randomize the way their polygons are distributed, so that eventual creases in your object will look more organic and cloth-like, and less "computerish".

Hexameshes are ideal for use as Cloth objects, but you might also find them useful for making ocean waves with animated displacement modifiers, or in any situation where a flat plane needs to be highly distorted"

Computer games could take an advantage on this.

[ivo D]

cool.. , but ow well.. i use other plugs..and they work just as good and for waves i use real flow ereal wave etc


but.. it all looks pretty neet.. only thing that i find stupid..is that they could have thought on just making it handy for just polys not tri's so you can model a face with it to.. and get better poly counts and some better detail, in less time

[Xaint]

Originally posted by gaggle
We're all the whores of Catmull-Clark, it's what MAX uses on both the built-into-poly-objects smoothing, and the MeshSmooth modifier.

I think mostly everyone uses it.. and I don't think every object will end up looking the same. It's all in the hands of the arteest :)

"Bitches of Catmull-Clark", read my post on the 8th page, 'bout a Subdivision alternative.

Sorry to quote gaggle, couldn't left this out. Here's a direct link:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40373&perpage=15&pagenumber=8

[gaggle]

Hey Xaint, I'm afraid I don't quite follow your post back on the 8th page. Nor did I back when I read it the first time I don't think. Maybe you could elaborate on what you mean by the poles/quad sacrifice thing when smoothing? I don't think I'm completly understanding you as it is.

[ivo D]

i think that he meens that the edgeloops in normal mesmooth.. /nurms what we all use.. i think ar not maintaned

it gives the same shape but in whire frame you wont see the exact loops you made.. so when deforming.. it wont quit be how you want it.. but i think that is only relavent when working reall really ,super acurat.


that to come back on LW.. max really needs that option of having your object smoothed and than the whire going over in in low res..just as a normall working surface.. over the smoother surface

no verts dissapear and everything is clear..and its faster.. and works way easyer i think, i want that to in max!!!GRRRRRRRRRRRR:hmm: :annoyed:

[Equinoxx]

Originally posted by urgaffel
There's a button that says Meshsmooth and there's a rollout where you can CHECK "apply meshsmooth" or something similar.

Wouldn't that be the 'show Nurms Subdivision' Toggle ???

it's an interactive NON-destructive way to have a 1-layer stack
while being able to toggle between lowpoly & and Nurms-meshmoothed model . . .

[Xaint]

Classic Meshsmooth gives an accurate result when modelling organic surfaces (as I learned). And depending on Meshsmooth's settings, a not so dense mesh is sufficient.
But I like it mostly for the mesh it produces, the beauty of the flowing edges revealing the form...

Btw. does anybody know the real name of this algorythm?

[ivo D]

dont know really.

but i have a question.

when making photorealistic objects..

we al know objects dont have such sharp edges as the boxprimitive for example.

so how do you make the bumpy corners..tesselation?..

if you do..it just gives tri's so it wont allways look oke right?



and when you make natural corners on your objects
you will need pretty much polys..

but with a vase..youl need messmooth.. so it will be very dens
is that needed..caus when you have lots of those objects
everything will be pretty slow.

and for wals..is meshsmooth needed for realistic edges..?

the meshsmooth only goes on the corner than right?..

im doubting my way of thinking in this part..
and would like some suggestions..and maybe lots of different ways to get those jobs done

[gaggle]

Check out this thread, back a bunch of pages, it has a lot of information on chamfering/beveling edges.

Meshsmooth generally goes on the whole model. I.. guess you could apply it only to the corners, but the ordinary way of doing this is by applying it to the whole shebang. Yes that means a flat area will get more polygons as well, but it's not bad as such.. after all, we're not using Meshsmoothing for realtime purposes.

Tessellate is not an option in this case, it's not used to bevel edges.

[Dave Black]

Well put!

That was gagglicious!

Sorry...just dug 10 people out of snow up to our waists...Endorphins...:D

BTW, I've been doing some research on Catmull-Clark for the faq, and I found out that these guys came up with this smoothing algorithm in 1978! Smart little buggers.

Here it is...sans the GUI! :D

1. The face points are positioned as the average of the positions of the face's original vertices;

2. The edge point locations are calculated as the average of the center point of the original edge and the average of the locations of the two new adjacent face points;

3. The old vertices are repositioned according to the equation:

Q/n+2*R/n+S(n-3)/n where Q is the average of the face points of the faces adjacent to the vertex point, R is the average of the midpoints of the edges adjacent to the vertex point, S is the corresponding vertex from the original mesh, and n the number of vertices of the face under consideration.


Cool, no?

Soooooo glad I don't gotta do that by hand! :D

-3DZ

:D

[Dave Black]

Also, anyone who has contributed information to this thread and wants to be acknowledged in the FAQ, can shoot me an email here:

3dzealot@3dzealot.com

I just want to use your real names, so if you could include that, it'd be great.

BTW, just a heads-up on the FAQ's progress:

I've been working on it for a bit now, and I'm many pages into it. I'm creating the images as a go, and I'd say I'm about 50% of the way done. I'm going to initially release it on my site in HTML. If anyone owns a fully licensed copy of Adobe Acrobat, please email me, as I'd also like to provide it in a .PDF format.

Thanks again to everyone for your contributions to this big 'ol hog of a thread. I look forward to releasing the FAQ as a more manageable read.

Cheers!

:beer:

-3DZ

:D

[ivo D]

zealot your great!!..putting al that effort into it.. and comming up with this great idear:D

[jadedchron]

hey zealot can you put me in there for just havin' good looks :D

[Dave Black]

Brother, you're one of the top guys on the list...sniff...sniff...I love you, man....

:blush:

Anyway......

:D

-3DZ

:D

[Stroker]

3DZ: PDF w/out Acrobat (http://faq.ozoneasylum.com/FaqWiki/shownode.php?id=814&sortby=rating)

[jadedchron]

very nice stroker. if those don't work out or something i can do it as well.

[gaggle]

Huurah! for the FAQ-making goodness. Lookin' forward to it :drool:

[jadedchron]

zealot, i'm infact working on convertin html to pdf for my workout. just gimme a heads up on the url and i can convert it and host it for you. :thumbsup:

[edaddy]

man i swear i've posted this before, even on this thread too! - http://www.chaoticdimension.com/products/moreinfo/1.html

but check out chaotic dimensions 'f-edge' for the photorealism query last page

[urgaffel]

F-Edge is cheating, but it's a damn nice cheat. I've thought of getting it a couple of times, but nah :)

[Dave Black]

Thanks for the info and offers on the .pdf stuff, guys. I really appreciate it.

Since I started this "FAQ", it's grown into something I think is even cooler.

Look at this excerpt from the article I'm working on to get an idea of what I'm up to.

After the intro, I branch the document off like this:


"1. Theory: Look here to get understand about the basic principles

2. FAQ: Here you will find a Q&A section that answers many most common questions regarding Sub-D.

3. Methodologies: In this section, you will find both written and graphical explanations of differing user's methods.

4. Math: Here is a scary section that most of you won't care much about, but it explains much of the math behind this stuff. Programmers and script-savvy gents might find this interesting."

I did this because the subjects that we have discussed in this thread have breached the bounds of a simple FAQ, and it would be a shame to lose all this great info on technique and knowledge.

So here's what I need from you guys. I need a little quality control. I need a review board.

If anyone with some smarts and a small amount of time to kill, would like to be on this panel, please drop me a line here:

3dzealot@3dzealot.com

You'll be credited for it in the document. Newbs and Pros welcome, as it's for everyone, and has to be clear and concise. I'm taking the time to write all this out, but this is really by and for the community. If noone is interested, I will still output and host this document, but I'd really like some feedback.

Thanks for the read, and I look forward to your replies.

-3DZ

:D

[jadedchron]

my email thing isn't workin' for some reason.. :[

anyway i'm not exactly sure what you need Z, but i'll be sittin' here in my chair bored as can be so lemme know what you need done. -> cpgenius@hotmail.com

[ToddD]

I haven't gone through this thread since it's infancy, I was wondering how things have gone. Have some of the common issues that spawned this thread been solved in any way? I have alot of catching up to do, was just wondering if someone could give a quick recap. What I would like to know is: Were valid solutions to the files the gracious 3DZealot posted ever found? I know I should read it all, but the thread has grown to the point where I don't think I can alot the time to read through it all, any info would be deeply appreciated. 1 of the best threads I've ever seen here wish I had time to follow it as it grew.:thumbsup:

[jadedchron]

Zealot is compiling the thread into a condensed helpful "FAQ" I guess you could say. If you check the last 2 pages you'll see what I mean. So unless you have time to read 4,504 pages I'd wait for that to come out :D

[shimra]

i have some simple questions:
1© what are sub-d's? ?
i have been using max and have not figured this out

2© what exactly are n-gons and what are they used for?

3© Are tri's the basic face in max? a triangle?

i am no noob in max but i have never really paid attention to these terms except for faces being a triangle© but then what is and editable poly in max? i knoq it reduces your polycount but how and is it better to use than an editable mesh since it does lower the polycount? thanks alot:¤

[jadedchron]

1. is what this whole thread is about 2. n stands as a variable .. octa-gons hexa-gons etc . when zealot is done with the faq i suggest reading it. also i'd suggest reading thru the max tutorials and 3dbuzz.com's VTM's. :wip:

[shimra]

well basically i just wanted a quik response to what they are© i can use max just fine but i do not see anything in the tools that say sub-d like in maya, so that is why i am asking©

[ivo D]

i know.. but well subdiv is a lot of things

im glad that max just has primitives so that you just can go one
and do with it what ever you like..

caus a plane is a plane.. but you can start with it..for modelling poly by poly(sub div)


or box sphere.. tubue etc..for box modelling..
and making a spline cage and than surfacing it and modelling is also still subdiv..

so i think its kindah crazy to but a section subdiv ina program or a button

[Dipesh (India)]

carry on ... very informative:bounce: :bounce:

[urgaffel]

Originally posted by shimra
i have some simple questions:
1: what are sub-d's? ?
i have been using max and have not figured this out

SubDs in max is basically applying either a HSDS modifier or a meshsmooth modifier to your model. What they do is what this whole thread is about. Basically it tesselates the model based on an algorithm that places a vertex at the center of each polygon and at the center of each edge surrounding said polygon and then connects them with edges. So one 4-sided polygon becomes 4 polygons. I think you can say that an n-sided polygon turns into n polygons...

2: what exactly are n-gons and what are they used for?

N-gons are a different word for polygons. N is a math term, it's an integer (I think that's the word) larger than 0. So N+1 can be 1+1, 2+1, 3+1, 4+1, 5+1 etc etc. Basically a polygon with N number of points. Again, what they are used for is part of what this wole thread is about. Some say you should only use 4-sided polygons, some say anything goes. I say anything goes as long as it looks good. On the other hand, if you have to animate, 4-sided is usually the best since they give you the most predictable results (no creases etc)

3: Are tri's the basic face in max? a triangle?

A tri is a triangle yes and a Quad has four points. After that people usually talk about n-gons since they have more than 4 points

i am no noob in max but i have never really paid attention to these terms except for faces being a triangle© but then what is and editable poly in max? i knoq it reduces your polycount but how and is it better to use than an editable mesh since it does lower the polycount? thanks alot:¤

Editable poly does not reduce the polycount. The reason it's lower is because of how max counts the polygons in the veiwport. Max doesn't count every triangle when you use Editable Poly, it only counts the polygons defined by visible edges. When you render, the polycount will show the total number of triangles. Another way to get the proper polycount is to hit 7 (to show the polycount in the viewport) and then apply an edit mesh or a mesh select modifier to the object. The polycount will most certainly increase.

Because of the structure of Editable Poly, different tools can be used compared to Editable Mesh. For example, you don't have to think about making edges visible/invisible as you have to in Editable Mesh. If you want an edge, you create it, if you want to remove it you delete it. And as I said earlier there are nicer tools in Editable Poly, for example for selecting and editing your model. Loop/Ring/Shrink/Grow/Connect are some of the nice ones you don't have in Editable Mess ;)

[ivo D]

im busy making a character..

getting the best out of mee..giving all i got..(still noob so..blaah:(


but i have this till now : http://213.51.221.74/3dhype/images_gallery/ivo-d/wip_wip2.jpg

now i have a problem.

ill have to atatch the pants to the boot.. so i can weld it on in the inside

is that the best way( have to make some extra polys i think..but it can be done ..

or is just connecting it someway good enough..
dont know if that will screw up the model later on

so oke..what im realy asking is

when your modelling something like this and have parts..like a buckle etc.. and so on.. do you have that model that and weld it all together at some way..

or just connect it in some way..?..

and if it just has to be connected how..with connect/ or boolean connect?

[sledgeweb]

OK, I need help. I was told you guys might help me, and that this applies to your discussion here. I simply want to figure out how to make a rounded negative extrusion with a ring around it in MAX 5. Here's an example done in Rhino (the two extrusion on the "chest"):

http://www.quantum2k.de/temp/r2d2-0005.jpg

How can I do this in MAX?

I tried boolean, which I can use to create the hole, but I can't get the ring around the edge. If I try selected the edges making up the hole's edge and extruding, or whatever, it goes nuts.

I tried shapemerge, which gets the shape on the cylinder, but then I can't get it to behave right when trying to extrude or whatever.

If someone could make a quick demonstration with a few screen caps, it would help me greatly. PLEASE!!! I've been trying to figure this out for weeks.

It's seems so simple. I used truespace before MAX, and I never had any problems with booleans. But MAX creates all these xtra verts and stuff. It's ridiculous. Why can't they fix this?

-Sledge

[urgaffel]

Ivo D: You can just use Attach. If you don't know what it is, there's a helpfile which tells you ;)

[ivo D]

thx urgaffel:)..yea i get it.. ofcrouce.. pff dumd mee

but is was doubting like crazy, about what to do

and **sledgeweb**

cant you just boolean the shape..vlean it up
than make a tube like form.. for the whole thing.. inser that in the model.. than merge it

attacht the polys..from the booleand surface two the
merged mesh.. and taadaaa..or not?


:shrug:

[sledgeweb]

The problem is, whenever I shapemerge or boolean, the surface of the cylinder get's screwed up. I really don't know why something as complicated as MAX can't handle such a simple problem.

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/cylinderCut4.jpg
http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/cylinderCut4b.jpg

This stinks. Can anyone help?? I've posted this problem on so many forums and no one can help. Why can Rhino do something so easily and MAX cannot?!?!?!?! ARGH!

-Sledge

[holosynthetic]

its all about making your poly's cleaner, the better the poly's are placed, the better results you get

[Dave Black]

Listen, we feel your pain, really...the artifacts that are around that area are slight enough to be considered unimportant...to some...

You will have to manually fix the verts now. You have a bunch of orphaned verts that are causing these problems. Now you just have to clean it up.

I cannot agree with you more about discreet having their heads up their butts(my words) when it comes to fixing some basic issues with the software.

Hang in there, and read through this thread. That's what it's basically about. How to get good results when trying to cut into a mesh.

-3DZ

:D

[sam]

Sledgeweb,

A couple of things

first, there is an alternative to max booleans called power booleans which I thought I'd inform you about

http://www.npowersoftware.com/index.html


Also, with regards to your particular task, a major part of the reason you are getting bad results is that you are trying to boolean a much higher detailed object onto a lower detailed object. The boolean from such an operation will almost always produce poorly shaped polys. The answer is to match the resolution of the two parts

I would make a higher resolution cylinder body (which has approximately the same resolution of polys as the part you are trying to embed) and either use that entirely in place of the low resolution cylinder body you are using . . .

or graft a section of the higher resolution cylinder body only where you need it around the embedded component and then boolean, then step down your resolution as needed to get it to blend with the lower resolution body. Basically, if you look at the way the HSDS modifier steps up and down resolution, you can get a sense of a good way to go about structuring the mesh to handle it.

I hope what I am proposing makes sense and will be of help

sam

[jadedchron]

made sense to me sam :thumbsup:

[Dave Black]

Don't encourage him, chron...Look at that barrel chest...eeeww...He may be right, but all the thumbs ups and winkings in the world are'nt going to deflate that chest...

*shudders*

All that aside...Good explination, sam!

-3DZ

:D

[jadedchron]

cough* that is one hairy chest *cough :eek:

[sledgeweb]

I had another person say the resolution on the cylinder was too low, so I'll try upping it and see what happens. Thanks for the feedback.

As for the other method... sounds good, but I'm not sure how to graft it on. Just deleted some faces and attach the more detailed ones, welding verts? Or does grafting refer to a specific method which I'm unfamiliar with?

-Sledge

[edaddy]

i think he meant there is no need to make the WHOLE cylinder heavy w/ poly's, but rather just the portion of it that will be altered w/ the boolean or whatever

[kdaug]

You're exactly right edaddy.

I'm going to go with Sam here and mention the HSDS modifier again. It's fairly decent in adding localized detail, and at minimum can offer you a strategy for adding the detail manually if you want.

-K

[sledgeweb]

I'm not too familiar with the HSDS modifier, but I know what it does.

I actually tried using it on this problem, but I couldn't figure out how to aplly it only to selected faces. Maybe because I was using edtable poly?

I tried using Mest Select, selecting a few faces and running the HSDS modifier, but it applied it to the whole cylinder which really mest up the top and bottom of the cyliner.

I'll read up on it. Any pointers though?

-Sledge

[kdaug]

You select the face (or vert, edge, element) within the HSDS modifier itelf. Just access the sub-object level within the stack or via the buttons at the top of the modifier, select the appropriate face on the model, and hit subdivide.

Also note that you can model within the HSDS modifier as well, tweaking the new verts that have been added by the subdivision.

Hope this helps.

-K

[jadedchron]

and there's also the lovely 'detach' function :P

[ivo D]

its way to much work to..alter that in hsds mode..or meshsmooth
irritation to is the most used.. than you have way many polys.

it can be modified in normal mesh a lot better is my opinion

we just havent found a quick solution for it yet
you just have to put the polys in the right place afterwords.

and maybe a angry mail to discreet will help..they'll have to learn
it sometime:annoyed:

[sledgeweb]

OK, I tried upping the detail in the cylinder using an HSDS modifier. If I kept subdividing too much, it eventually distorted the rim of the cylinder. So I ended up having to just use a subdivided section. Didn't come out too great:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/cylinderCut6.jpg
http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/cylinderCut6b.jpg

1) If this worked, how would I "graft" this section back onto a cylinder?

2) Why isn't this working???? Is there any possibility someone can try this out and show me some screen grabs of how its done?

I'm going insane in the membrane.

-Sledge

[urgaffel]

Biggest question is, do you want to meshsmooth the whole thing? If yes, then you have to use a lowpoly rounded rectangle thingy. The control points/vertices of that has to coincide with the control points/vertices on the "belly" or the main body/cylinder.

If it wasn't 12:30am and workday tomorrow I'd whip it up. Unfortunately we have deadline at work on monday, so I'll just hope someone else is up to it :)

[ivan iliev]

Dear Sledgeweb,

I don't understand from the begining, why the 'rounded rectangle thing' have to be, at all coast, part of the cylinder? It can be just another object, attached to the cylinder mesh. The most importent in this business is, that your model have to look good. The SUB-D tools are only tools, but not the gool.(It was already said: If something looks good, it surely is!):thumbsup:

ivan

[sledgeweb]

Well, it needs to extrude into the cyliner, which seems like it needs to be part of the cylinder? Is this not accurate?

-Sledge

[gaggle]

Ihhdunno, looks at all useable?

I don't have easy access to a webhosting place from where I'm at now, so sorry about the lame-ass picture quality.

[urgaffel]

You know, you could just cut a hole in the "body"/base cylinder and hide the edge with the outer rim of the other smaller cylinder...

[marcolissoni]

Great topic!

but i have to make things in lightawave then importe them in max for render until i start to do something interesting!!
:bounce:

[urgaffel]

How are things coming? Need any help 3dzealot?

[Neox]

hmmmm here are are very usefull tips for sds modlling in this thread, but what i really don't understand is, why are tris better then n-gons? ngons are mostly better smoothed then tris, just because tri's are always getting "sharp" edges in your surface, i'm modelling with Meshsmooth for a lot of years now, and i definately prefer a 5pointed n-gon then one quad and one tri, you always get a stupid hard edge on the tri, just because of the smoothing algorithm behind meshsmooth

just look at this picture

http://neox.gfx-scene.de/public/advices/Ngon-vs-Tri.jpg

the left one is the 5point-Ngon and the reght one is the Tri
I hope you see what i mean
and i dunno but how could anyone get a ngon with more then 5 corners? with 6 just connect 2 of the points and you have 2 quads with 7 do the same and you have one quad and one 5sided Ngon, so i dunno how anybody can produce ngons that are THAT ugly smoothed as shown before in this thread :shrug:

[KingofDaveness]

heres a tute image I made for the guys at polycount.

Its only out of date in regards to bay raitts address, which has changed.

http://www.planetquake.com/polycount/cottages/kingscastle/tutes/tut_brom_1.gif

:surprised

[Neox]

this mesh is definately not clean, and the anatomy is strange :D

:edit: oh man i was tired when i wrote that, forgive me :)
the design is pretty cool but it will look really strange smoothed, doesn't it? you have there a lot of unfinished loops and tris, try to get rid of them to get a clean mesh :edit:

[UberModeler]

This thread is awesome. I've learned so much. IT has taken me 2 days to read it! 8 hours strait almost, at work yesterday because i went to all the links and now im finally here at the end. maybe one day this will be the biggest thread ever :)

does anyone know the biggest thread ever? im thinking world record...jk.

[KingofDaveness]

Its anatomically correct... that is, if your looking at the BROM painting it was taken from ;)

Thanks for apologising, because your really starting to rub me up the wrong way. Im not sure thats your intention, but its early, im tired and Im just trying to help newbies. Those guys just need one spark to set them going usually... weather its perfect or not.


http://www.planetquake.com/polycount/cottages/kingscastle/gallery/3d_hi/gal_3d_helexia.jpg

[ivo D]

wel.. not anatomicly correct duuh..it aint human.. and..it wasnt supose to be anatomicly correct..everyone can see that..

its a creature..a hybrid thing..you cant look for anatomy for that..you see breasts and think..heej its a women..why are the ribs that way..and the fat at the upper belly etc..

let it just be..it is called creativity.. and proportionally..it looks acceptible..it can stand and move..it has ribs etc..so it could be..
that beats.it is capable of living..in this shape... (hard to say in english.but i trhink you all know what i mean)

beginngers need just a little thing to start..some pics.. some explanation.. etc.. thats how i started of.


question.. you see some people using tree's in a few things ..
for example.. a man thats on top of a big beast..and than the beast is in tree's cant get that.why..?

it doesnt smooth well..and its a little harder to modell with i guess..

i cant seem to get.. it..
cant be to have less polys..caus it wasnt for games.. and it wasnt that big at all(the scene)

[Dave Black]

Hey guys, long time no see!

Been really busy with work the past few weeks, so I'm sorry I have'nt been able to get back about the progress of the FAQ.

I'm going to stay at work late a few nights this week in order to get it together. I've gotta go to a discreet game developer's conference on wednesday, but after that, I'm hoping to have the FAQ ready for the review panel to begin ripping it apart. :D

Hey guys, thanks for all the support and encouragement in regards to keeping this thread interesting and useful. Glad to see some fresh faces around too. I'm also amazed at UberModeler's resolve to check it all out...that took some dedication! :D

I'll be in touch for those who are still interested.

-3DZ

:D

[ivo D]

k..great going..

take your time.. its going to be great.. and naah we wont rip it appart.. lol :)

we will just takes some bites out it.. we need to feed ourselves with all the information:)

[Neox]

@kingofdaveness this was no offense against you :)
i like your work and the model is finde, but just compare your helexa with the brom one, in brom's picture it looks totally organic, a strange but plausible anatomy. But in your picture it looks a litte bit mechanic, a lot of hard edges which are not in the picture by brom maybe you can get rid of that with the textures but currently she is not looking like a organic lifeform, more like a hybrid between organic and technic
and please look at other pictures by brom to get the shape of her abomial muscles it looks as if there where extruded, but abdomial muscles are not extruded
i hope you understand my really bad english ;)
and again its not an offense against you :)

[ToddD]

Just to steer this thread a little back on topic, can anyone explain the draw backs of the HSDS Modifier? I understand the workaround technique(detach/reattach), but I would think if the results are desireable, I would opt for the added time to go through the process. I just made a quick plane primitive, curved it (2 directions) to a basic car fender shape, and added a gas door to the mesh. To my surprise, the curves were retained very well---no bumps or pinching, and my mesh was much less dense than if I had to add density to the whole mesh. So again I'm just trying to figure out what the drawback to HSDS is, I'm sure there must be something. Thanx for any info! :beer:

[urgaffel]

Biggest drawback is that if you delete the modifier you lose all your work, and if you tesselate the mesh and collapse, you're stuck with a high(er) density mesh.

[KingofDaveness]

The main problem is when instancing errors occur. You know when sometimes a vert just.. well, it goes all bug eyed. Usually the solution is to delete the instance and collapse, create a new instance and whack a new mesh smoothing modifier on top.

Now with hsds you totally locked into your stack... much like if you use nurms to reshape and sharpen edges.

I tend to avoid hsds because it makes messy surfaces that are not easy to map.

[ToddD]

Ok, so I tried to map my very basic HSDS mesh, no distortion! I understand what you guys are saying about the higher poly count, but when I see people talking about rhino models they import into max, I see incredibly high polycounts. My next question then, is, aren't all imported nurbs models going to possess a high poly count in order to sustain such a hi level of detail? I mean a model can be imported at a lower setting, but in order to achieve the high LOD we've seen talked about here, wouldn't it be necessary to have a hi poly count on the imported nurbs object? So the HSDS still may be creating a comparable polycount?

[KingofDaveness]

I always like to keep my meshsmooth ontop of physique and rig and animate the low model. So I tend not to collapse models where I can help it.
:bounce:

[Dave Black]

Hey all.

First, I want to thank everyone from GDC East for all the great discussions we had on the future of modeling, max, and industry tech. Looks like we all have alot to look forward to, as well as alot of good stuff to implement...

Special thanks to BigSerge for the talk we had about the FAQ and sub-d stuff in general, as well as listening to my rants on the subject. And thanks again for turning me onto the polysculpt script! Wish you best of luck with your projects. :D

Ok, now that I've got that out of the way...

Just a heads up on the progress of the document:

I've got the first few sections done, and am implementing the graphics this weekend. I'll be emailing/PMing the review panel soon...Hope everyone is still onboard. Again, I appologize for the lengthy wait on this sucker, but I've been really busy with work.

And one other thing:

At the conference, I noticed a ton of people who did'nt know of the CSPolytools scripts...Anyone and everyone using EditPoly NEEDS to go over here: www.scriptspot.com , and GET THOSE SCRIPTS!!

You get tools like:

-Create poly out of selected verts <------------Coolest thing ever!!
-Chamfer, but leave original edge
-Slide selected edgeloops
-Move verts along normals
-Untangle single poly
-Spherify selected verts
-Rotate verts selection around a snap point

Anyway, until later...

Oh, and sorry for the hyper post...too little sleep, too much coffee.

-3DZ

:D

[holosynthetic]

hey man, just thought i'de drop by and say Hello, i'm that guy becoming a student you briefly talked with at the GDE event yesterday night...you know...my name is john :)

[chin]

maxfile (http://www.xynesis.com/cgweb/cgsubd.max)
text in a text file (http://www.xynesis.com/cgweb/holesinsubd.txt)



after talking with zealot at the discreet seminar i decided to add this for discussion.


how i put holes in objects that wont disrupt the curve of a surface when meshsmoothed.

the theory.

use a curved surface either custom built, or perhaps a copy of the mesh you wish to modify that has been meshsmoothed, and project the modified surface down on to it. this will force all the edges to folow the curve so that when meshsmoothed it should behave much more predicably. i use the conform compund object to do this. conform will push verts towards a "wrap to object" in many diferent ways: along vert normals or from a viewport. this allows for lots of flexability to get the look you want. its easy and gives good results, but it aint perfect.

here is a break down of what i do.. in this case im using a whole surface instead of just modifing an area. i have included a link with a max file that this next part refers to.



first model the surface in low poly without the holes in it. once satisfied with it i copy it and put holes in the copy where ever i want them (step 1 in the example file) . then i take the original unmodified mesh and meshsmooth it up a few levels (step 2) so its nice and smooth. i then align the two versions up (step3). once aligned i then put a push modifier on the holed mesh so
that it sits off of the surface of the smoothed mesh a little bit (step 4). then with the holed mesh selected i use the conform compund object pick the wrap to object as the meshsmoothed mesh and then set the vertex prjection direction to along normals and click the hide wrap to option so it is enabled (step 5). i then colapse the holed mesh to a editable mesh or poly and do some
tweaking to get the little things just right (step 6) then i end up with step 7...


this may be a bit confusing but i cant spend any more time tonight . so i hope this is clear enough, if not ill drop by tommorow and try again.


chin

[Neox]

cool techinque!
but why are you working in a the user vfiew and not the perpective?? :eek:

[gnarlycranium]

Originally posted by chin
[this may be a bit confusing but i cant spend any more time tonight . so i hope this is clear enough, if not ill drop by tommorow and try again.chin

I think it made sense... and heck, that sounds darn clever!! You need a medal for coming up with a helpful method that actually kinda works! :cool:

[Dave Black]

Good one, Chin!

Thanks for taking the time to post that...I was following what you where saying at GDC, but that really clears it up.

Again, I know you guys must be crazy-busy right now, so it means alot that you would take the time to post that. Rock-oN!

holosynthetic:

I'm so glad you could attend. I hope you had a good time. I had fun talking with you. Hope you made it back safe...that had to be a long drive. :D

If you have anything to add to what's being said here, please share!

Until later, guys, and thanks again Chin...we gotta do lunch sometime. :D

-3DZ

:D

:D

[chin]

here is an image of the model that i based the sample max file on
http://xynesis.com/cgweb/cgtudie.jpg
its in progress, so stuff is buckled in places... but thought id share.

im glad that so far people get what i was trying to explain, not that its a difficult topic to grasp but rather i didnt spend alot of time on the post.



chin

[sireel]

Hey Chin thats a neat trick thanks for shareing :)

[ToddD]

Chin, would that work just as well if the area we were creating the hole in were multiple polygons? On the example the holes are small(1poly) what if the area were larger and composed of more polys?

[Dave Black]

Hey, Tbonz816, it does work with just about anything.

-3DZ

:D

[chin]

Tbonz816, as zealot said it should work in most situations, but it does help to do alittle planning before putting your holes in. the planning should lean towards making the mesh prior to conforming as clean and uniform as possible... so if you are putting in holes across multiple faces, try and make the mesh around the holes as similar as possible. that shoud give the best results.

but in the case of modeling more complicated holes (more segmented/ smoother) its a good thing to do, as more detail would only prove to make things look better when meshsmoothed

-chin

[ivo D]

this was a big issue.. we have been talking about this for a long time.. and this is the best way.. besides power boolean i think.

*HAIR*

oke.. many people ask this all the time.. how to make good sub div hair, and what is best.. shag hair(max) or splines or sub div.

well the best way i guess is sub div in most cases.
so here i have a tutorial about..
i think this is on of, or not the best sub div hair tutorial.

it is lightwave.. but its really global, so you can use it with any ab.

im still , kindah of a beginner.. but im really gonna use this.. like forever i guess..

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/tutorials/modeling/hair/


if you have comments about it.. or extra tips on subdiv hair.

just let mee know, caus im building the hair for my char soon

check the link below

[ToddD]

Maybe, maybe not the best way. I think though, that because the topic is applicable to any project it deserves the discussion. Ivo-d While I appreciate your "Hair" info, I think at least, that it is a little specific in regards to what has been discussed.
Chin, I found that in order to maintain say a square cut out when it is composed of multiple polys, I had to give the mesh a meshsmooth with an iteration of 1, convert that to epoly, then add the detail in order to get a descent result. I haven't dedicated a whole lot of time to it, just a few on the fly tests since reading your info. Anyone have a good example of a cutout with a multi poly hole using this technique?:thumbsup:

[chin]

Tbonz816, im not sure i undertand what your saying.. if you could post or send me a file of what you mean i could try it out and see what results i can get. i guess you could set up a file as if you were gonna do a boolean, and just not boolean..


-chin

[holosynthetic]

Zealot, I did very much enjoy attending that siminar, and was very surprised to see you there, its a small world after all

after attending one big connection with modeling did help me out that may help some, but helped me understand what a mesh does when it smooths out

recently i was making a hard 45 degree corner on a mesh that had hard edges but was very rounded, after adding a mesh smooth the 45 degree corner would act really strange by adding a messed up mesh that did anything except what i wanted, i was lost and didn't know what was happening, well after seeing one of the discreet team quickly fly through the modeling part, she brought up triangulation, come to find out, the triangulartion of that poly having problems was the problem to begin with, by simply moving the triangulation of the poly the 45 degree corner then became the intended mesh, which i would say made me understand poly modeling alot more

[Chaos Maximus]

Hey looks like a lot of awesome info on here, i love the hole punching stuff, im absolutly going to play with that. i have somthing of an unrelated newbie question:

im still new to 3d and sub-d modeling ( I did the hobit guys head modeling tutorial and im working on my first organic character) and i understand why 5+ verts to a polygon is bad, but i dont understand what is wrong with 3s. I understand how to keep them out of my models but dont completly know why i dont want 3 sided faces, they seem like they should be a very accurate way to define geometry, are they just less data efficent or is there another reason why quads are perfered?

thanks for the info

[ivo D]

srry.. for the hair thing..

but to get back on track..

tri's are triangles.. and will mostly have one sharp side.. or 3 sharp sides..
in meshsmooth it can get a little chunky ,caus of the combination.. of quads with tris, quads are a lot smoother, than a tri.

thes why tesselation, in tris is very much used to make.. choppy details.. like cracks in a wall etc, it just doesnt smooth out as wel as quads, thats why game models ofther look a little choppy.. caus they are tri's. to make them , less date consuming.

especially, with an organic figure tris can result in bad smoothing.
but mostly it looks good..but thats because you put it just right ,so it looks oke.
that is why you think .. eej whats the bad thing.

but when animating..the whole mesh flexes.. around.. than the tri can easaly show its self.. in a band way that is :P

*could have made this shorter..but its early ,and my brain just doesnt come allong that fast :shrug: *

[sireel]

chin I had a question on the image you posted above (the orange .... mmm... what looks like a robots body)
Am I correct in assuming you modeled the entire object and then detached the separate pieces to add solidify and meshsmooth?

[chin]

Sir Eel,
well sorta. anytime i want to make a new piece i usually shift-drag a few eges off of an existing peice of geometry, detach the resultant geometry and use the detached faces as the start of a new piece.

-chin

[ToddD]

Chin I was refering to an object like the example Zealot gave on page 13. It was a cylinder type object with a shape cut away from it. What I was wondering is, if you would have to up the poly count in order to have your technique work in that situation?:)

[urgaffel]

I would! :)

You get better smoothing when the polys are regular, so increasing density could help with that...

[ToddD]

Thanx Urg!:thumbsup:

[Chaos Maximus]

thanks ivo D

i think i understand what is going on with the tris now. and i dont mind you answer was long.

thanks, have fun

[chin]

Tbonz816,
yup you would need to add some detail around the hole to keep the curve correct. i think that you could get away with subdividing the area around the hole one time, or you could more efficently do this by cutting the mesh by hand.

-chin

[Chaos Maximus]

hey, im kind of confused, i did the little tutorial thing and i dont think i got what i was supposed to out of it.

first i dont understand how to get from #6 to #7, 6 is a surface and 7 has actual thickness. I just extruded mine, but it still isnt closed then.

and second, more importantly i dont understand the effect of this process, because the orange surface in 1 appears to be exactly the same as the orange surface in 6. I dont undersand what this process actually does (you mentioned using a simplified surface and i think that might be part of the practical use but im not sure). I do like the result so i would like understand what i was doing.

below is what i got, i think it looks ok, i know the surface kind of sucks, but i wanted to know how to make it correctly, going from 6 to 7 the right way

http://www2.bc.edu/~conradm/mask.jpg

thanks for the advice, have fun

[Mariomx]

ok something a little different here but a little like the 'adding holes in your mesh without fvcking up the subd'.

how does one go about removing detail from a lowpoly model.
say you have a mouth, extrude some edges down to make the chin and then the neck, but then you figure... hey i don't want to have such a dense neck (for whatever reason :rolleyes: )

because the mouth part is pretty high detail, but the neck could be much less in detail.
i'll attach a picture to explain what i'm mumbling about :p
(and yes i know, the mouth looks like crap :annoyed: )

http://www.geocities.com/geitje2000/poly2.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/geitje2000/poly2.jpg

[phoenix2k]

i had exactly the same problem while i was modeling my bmw... :)... i still dunno how, so i'd also be very interested to hear a solution to this problem...

[chin]

here is a sample file of how i usually get rid of excess resolution in a mesh. its has some limitations but works well in most cases for me.

maxfile (http://www.xynesis.com/cgweb/resolution.max)

an image for those who dont need the max file


http://www.xynesis.com/cgweb/detail.jpg

-chin

[ivo D]

just delete and re-create the poly.. in the place thats suite it..

isnt that a commen..way.. i use it like all the time,to clean up afterwords.

dont much people know this than ?

[chin]

Chaos Maximus,
i use a plugin thats called solidify to make the surface have thickness, all it does is make the extrude process you did to make your surface a little easier. the plugin is free and available most places max3d.com might be one of those sites.

-chin

[Neox]

@mariomx, you can tell me what you want but this smoothing not just becaause of a 5sided ngon...
i tried every smoothing method in max but what you have there is not because of those 5sided ngons...
you have there (I'm very sure about that) vertices on the middle of those vertical edges of those ngons...
the next thing is that you didn't follow any anatomical line, ok its toon but using the human anatomy gives you a LOT of possibilities to clean those ngons...
model the lines of the sternomastoid, the larynx and so on and you'll see that you can clean your mesh without having this much ngons, or tris as in chin's example...

[Chaos Maximus]

Hey, thanks if found it. one more plugin question for anybody. i got mesh tools and cspoly tools how do i use these? do i need to make my own menu? i know how to do that but i was wondering if they are allready accesable somewhere else

thanks all

[urgaffel]

You'll need to configure them (meshtools and cspolytools) yourself. Either put them in a quad, or a menu or bind them to hotkeys. I have most commands either in a quad or bound to hotkeys, works best for me.

[Chaos Maximus]

thanks, thats what i was guessing but i didnt want to set that all up to find it has allready been done. thanks

[celticdog]

what am I missing. Holes in curved surfaces are really easy (unless I missed something along the way). Here's what i do:
1. pick a quad where you want your hole
2. cut it diagonally , corner to corner
3. cut across from midpoint to midpoint
4. collapse the center verices
5. chamfer the center vertice to desired size
6. negative extrude the center polygon and delete it
7. slightly chamfer the edge loop
8. subdivide all you want and its stays nice and round.

is this too many steps? its extremely easy. No guess work.
Heres the screenshots

[celticdog]

here's the finished hole

[celticdog]

before smoothing

[celticdog]

after 2 iterations of nurms

[celticdog]

here's the process

[Dave Black]

I changed this post to reflect my appology to celticdog. That was a great method. Sorry I jumped the gun. I hope you will continue to contribute to this thread. We all apprecieate your input!


-3DZ

:D

[celticdog]

uh..................never mind

[eek]

Hi People,

When i was building my facial rig, and every other rig/model since, poly-sub-D modelling was key. Also relying on edge loop topology was very important to give nice expressive pattern formation. One key thing is to keep polys 4 point polys, the mesh becomes so much cleaner to rig and skin. Generally i use meshtools 2.5 or wings 3d/nendo to model. Also i look for curves that can be through the mesh i.e edge loops. The other things is that the NURMS meshsmooth modifier, uses the pixar algorithm.

eek

[Dave Black]

Actually, yes, the NURMS algorithm is a copy of the "pixar" method, and is expressed as thus:

"When a polyhedron is subdivided with the Catmull-Clark method, new vertices (called "face points") are placed at the center of each original face, new "edge points" are similarly placed at the center of each original edge, and then new edges are added to connect the new edge points to the new adjacent face points. The positions of the vertices are calculated as follows:
The edge point locations are calculated as the average of the center point of the original edge and the average of the locations of the two new adjacent face points;
The old vertices are repositioned according to the equation:

Q/n+2R/n+S(n-3)/n

where:
Q is the average of the new face points surrounding the old vertex,
R is the average of the midpoints of the edges that share the old vertex,
S is the old vertex point, and
n is the number of edges that share the old vertex. "

This is essentially the Catmull-Clark method pioneered by Ed Catmull, of pixar entertainment.

Just to clear that up for anyone confused... :)

Thanks eek!

-3DZ

:D

[Tony Richardson]

Here is a way to create a hole in a sphere that works very well for me.

You will need cspolytools to create them but most everyone has that anyway!

1. you need a 4 sided polygon to create these.

2. Pick the 4 edges of the polygon and click the connect button in MAX's polytools and apply 1 edge segment. This will create a four sided polygon inside of the one you started with.

3. With the edges you just created hit the connect button again. This will create a new polygon inside the one you created before.

4. Pick the edges of the inside polygon and then hit the remove button. This will remove the edges but will leave the vertices. This is what you want! Do not use delete!

5. Choose the polygon that is created and then use the "untangle a single poly to a perfect ngon" that is the csPolyTools function. This will create an 8 sided circle.

6. With the circle still selected, inset a small amount and then delete or extrude the polygon in the center.

This is what you end up with. with and with an extruded edge

[Tony Richardson]

Here's the one with the extruded edge.

This method also gives a much smoother circle than the four sided method. This is with 2 meshsmooth iterations. It is also a very closeup render. Hope this helps.

[Tony Richardson]

Here's a wire.

[Tony Richardson]

Celticdog - I gave your method a try and it works very well for me! Even across four polygons. I did inset a little and it helped. I will use it!

[Tony Richardson]

Here's the render of celticdogs method.

[holosynthetic]

I just tryed your example and it worked perfectly for me..no extrusion around the hole...thanks for showing the wireframe man :)

[eek]

Thats its, perfect! 4 point polys!

looks like it can support edge loops too, nicely done.

eek

[sam]

Indeed, it looks like if you apply the celticdog method to a grouping of four 4-sided polys (rather than a single 4-sided poly) the method produces a nice hole that requires minimal if any cleanup. Kudos to Celticdog and TonyRichardson for finding that.


Since this is a theoretical discussion, I think we might want to look into why it is working better with a grouping of 4 polys then with a single 4-sided poly. I think the reasons for it are interesting and could lead to further discovery.

Generally speaking, using a grouping of four 4-sided polys produces a result that maintains an edgeloop topology and avoids the 5-sided polys that result from using a single 4-sided poly. But that is not the most significant reason why.

The big reason why in my opinion, is that when you use a group of four 4-sided polys, the vertex at the center of the group of 4 polys is correctly positioned in terms of the overall mesh curvature. On the other hand, when you cut up a single poly into parts the vertex that is produced at the center is not correctly positioned (it is placed "flat" and ruins the curvature). Because of that, if you start with a group of four 4-sided polys then you will be incorporating a modeling method that is more "aware" of the subsequent smoothing.

I point this out theoretically because this can lead then to other techniques based on this method, like non-circular holes. If you start with a patch of four 4-sided polys that is curved correctly then the mesh inside contains within it some curvature information that can be successfully used to construct things that incorporate the curvature successfully. If you need something other than circles you can use the "Constrain to Edge" or "Constrain to Face" to make topology adjustments that are aware of the curvature and minimize cleanup.

At any rate it looks like we might be on to something here.

sam

[ivo D]

well 4 polys around it works better..caus every line can flow on..
uhm...it has..more legs ,if its oke to say it this way..

see it as a spider that has those legs..now it has enough lines to hold onto.. can flow in the way the rest of the mesh does.

its very handy,wouldnt have thought of it this way..but now that i see it. i makes mee think that there must be many other things to do with it, than just cap holes..but what

[celticdog]

No prob zealot.

[Tony Richardson]

Sam, I think your right. It has to do with the fact that the center vertex is on the line of curvature.

When I first tried celticdogs method on a single polygon it worked well. But it seemed to make since to me to use four poygons because of the way he cut the polygon to a single vertex.

Glad this helped and I agree that this method has potential for other noncircular applications. I will give it a spin and get back to you guys.

[celticdog]

This thread is exactly what forums are "supposed" to be about; pooling thoughts and sharing knowledge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tony Richardson]

I modified my method for holes a little and here are the results. I combined my method and celticdogs method on a single polygon.

This is a very close up render with no touchup of the vertices at all. This method reduces the effect on adjoining polys guite a bit. All these holes are done on adjacent polygons.

If anyone is still interested I can detail the procedure.

wire:

[Tony Richardson]

Here is the smoothed wire version

[Tony Richardson]

Finally, the rendered version

[gaggle]

Tony, if you're up for it I for one would like a more detailed description, what you've got going seems very nice. I've been left a little behind with this latest development, maybe I didn't pay enough attention at this thread's first revival or something.. so yeah, I'd much appriciate a more detailed description of this hole-making-magic.

It'll be something 3D Zealot can likely copy into his FAQ as well, so.. hooray?
..yeah, hooray! :)

[ivo D]

there aint much explaning to it.. if i meespeak freely.. he sayd there wasnt any vertex adjustments.. so just follow hi description.. a page back.. on how to create the whole

really easy :-)

[eek]

hey...

The only problem i have, with it is that your making 5 point polys. Also your vertex mid-point isnt falling on an edge to give flow. But this has raised an issue, if you want an even amount of holes do they have to be odd i.e 1,3,5 to fall on edge lines?

The most important thing is not to go into n-gon territory, i think.

eek

[gnarlycranium]

I thought that poles with 6 or more edges leading into them were to be avoided at all costs, since they invariably cause shading errors... :curious:

[celticdog]

I havent found that the poles are an issue. I think maybe its because, if you look at Tony's or my wireframes, the polys around the poles are completely symmetrical. This is especially the case with Tony's 4-poly version (where the center vertex actually follows the curvature of the mesh). Does that make sense? I could be wrong

[eek]

I think i get you roughly,

Are shading errors due to n-gons/3point being subdivided.Because are they subdivided evenly? i.e 4 polys -> 8 ->16 or does say 5 poly's to 10 get split by 6 and 4?

Also wherever you have the center vertex isnt it gunna follow the curviture?

It looks like tony's 5 point poly version is creating 3 point polys at subdivision time, at the corners.

eek

[Mariomx]

I still don't exactly understand why 3sided poly's are not good?
I remember reading somewhere that 3 sided polygons where better than 4 sided poly's because with 3 sides the 3dprogram can calculate the surface better or something :rolleyes:

it had an example of a glass plate with 3 sides laying on a table. Whenever you lift 1 corner, the other 2 corners will remain on the table, thus the surface will not deform.

but when you have a glass plate with 4 sides and lift 1 corner, at least 1 other corner will have to move with it in order to keep the surface intact. but the 3d program will not 'simulate' the other corners, therefore the surface *will* deform.

that's only what i read, but i guess it makes sense :insane:

[Dave Black]

Gnarly:

Just to clarify:

Poles are not to avoided at all costs. They are to be avoided if possible, and used sparingly. If using a pole means not redundantly subdividing a mesh, then by all means use a pole. They are most apparent when, like you said, they have 6 or more edges.

This is good stuff, guys, keep it coming.

:buttrock:

-3DZ

:D

[Dave Black]

Mariomx:

You really have to take some time modeling organics before you see the problems with tris. First off, the "new" methods of poly modeling, e.g. nendo, meshtools, miriah, etc., utilize selection methods based on edgeloops. That feature alone requires that poles do not exist. If you use alot of tris, you will get alot of poles, and therefore, you selection methods will become tedious and time consuming. Tris are not interpolated well with the Catmull-Clark smoothing method, as the smoothing groups get messed up and leave a little shading abnormality.

Remeber as well, that Catmull-Clark(NURMS) is going to make the mesh into quads in the end anyway, and anything you lay down that is not already a quad is going to get interpolated beyond your control as the algorithm makes a "best guess" as to were to tie-off the tris.

Just like anything else, triangles can be used, and sometimes must be used, but the idea is to use them sparingly. There are some complexities going on here that are not redily apparent, and I urge you to play with the smoothing algorithm more to see what I'm talking about.

-3DZ

:D

[UberModeler]

i've been following this thread and have learned a lot...almost too much:) im kinda of overwhelmed and im not sure how to tackle what im doing. i have a somewhat complex shape and im not sure how to make it the "right way" i.e. low poly and smoothes well. i have tried many many ways and i cant get good results.


what i have tried is taking the spline and extruding it but the problem with that is there is no polys on the face of it so there is no way to smooth it.

another thing i tried is taking the spine and shape merging it to a plane and taking away the polyies i didnt need so i had the shape i wanted but the smoothing was horrible too. i did mess with each of these to get the smoothing to work but the polyies always ended up ugly and the smoothing had UBER problems.

i also tried to booleaning the extruded shape into a box and that almost worked but it left me with tris and evil geometry.

i just read all the hole on a curve tuts back 2-3 pages and that was great but i still need direction on how to even start or what methode would be better. i feel like im missing something so simple and i feel foolish.

i hope i have explianed my problem well. what i am after is nice smoothed polyies that dotn look chaotic.

any tips, suggestions, comments, yellings, would be greatful.

thanks

[urgaffel]

I would use your spline/shape as a guide and build the surface in 2d first, just a plane. If you build it poly by poly you have complete control over where each edge goes. Then use solidify and maybe chamfer or add some loops to get a rounded edge. I'd strongly suggest you model the initial 2d poly with a meshsmooth modifier so you can see where to add detail to get the sharp corners. I'll do a quickie in max and post it in a bit.

[urgaffel]

Here we go. At the far right, Shape guide. Next, unsmoothed editable poly. 3rd, smoothed with one iteration. 4th, added Solidify with A LOT of segments on the sides to get the sharp edges, and a meshsmooth with 2 iterations :)

My mesh is not the cleanest, but it shows you how you can do it. If you spend some more time on it, you can probably get nicer results without having to use meshsmooth on 2nd iteration etc...

This was just a quickie so don't take it too seriously.

*edit*

I should mention that I modeled it by shift+draging edges, moving verts and cutting/connecting. Also had meshsmooth on 1 iteration, show end result ON all the time. Easier to match up the circular holes if you see how it will smooth. You could use shape/mesh guides as discussed earlier in this thread to get perfectly circular holes, but I didn't want to spend time setting it up since it would probably be faster to eyeball it. Besides, the shape guide is perfectly cylindrical soo... ;)

[UberModeler]

urgaffel- thanks man you rock. that helps a lot.


ill see what i can come up with. ill post my outcome and see what you think i should do. thanks

[urgaffel]

Oh yeah, a thing that isn't really apparent due to the low res image is that a corner is chamfered. On the base, the top left corner is chamfered to get the sharp edge. The lower isn't chamfered since it ends in a quad.

Funny thing I just discovered:

[ARSA]

Wow !!! this is an interesting board... sure is it ! :beer:

[Dave Black]

Hey all!

I've been playing around, trying to apply everything I've been learning and talking about on this thread, and in the process, I've come across a neat little trick for cutting up your mesh. It's quick, virtually effortless, and only requires one litte freeware plugin.

The plugin is called "Solidify", and can be found here:

www.maxplugins.de

I should caution that there are 2 caviots to this technique.

1st: The geometry has to be co-planer, sort of. It must be an open entity. The solidify modifier will mess things up a bit if it's not.

2nd: The segmentation of the solidify modifier is only bumped up to give a nice crisp edge. When you're happy with the results, before you collapse the stack, set the segments to 1. Then, when it's converted to an EP, add a tight edgeloop in manually to avoid a super high-poly edge.

So, having said that, I've made a stupid little .gif animation to show what I'm talking about. To some, this is a normal, everyday task, but to others, it just might be useful. This is the technique:

http://www.3dzealot.com/DownLoads/CGtalk_SubD/Cool_Cuts.gif

Hope that made sense...

Questions? Comments?

-3DZ

:D

[urgaffel]

No questions. Got a comment though!

You suck a... I mean... Great gif anim 3dzealot ;)

Btw... I wouldn't mind helping you out with the pdf if you feel I'm worthy :) At least I could proof read it...

(Looking very good)

*edit*

I too cheated with the segments on the blade I posted earlier... :blush:

Remember kids, don't try that at home!

[ToddD]

Great trick, and presentation Zealot, thanx for sharing!:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Dave Black]

Tbonz816: Thanks! Glad it was of use to...eh hem...someone...

urgaffel: you really are my CG better, and I'd be honored to have you help.

The deeper I go with this pdf, the more work I have, so any help would be great if we want to get it done this century.

If you really want to help, I'll tell ya what I need.

I've got the graphical look all down, and the overall layout of the document. Most of the expliniations are there, but cataloging all the usefull stuff is bogging me down.

Tell ya what, if I email you the basic document, can you look it over, and get back to me? I'd love your input before I get it too far done.

After we finish the write-ups, then we can submit it for the approval of the guys on the review panel.

Sound good?

Oh, and thanks for hurting my feelings...I know I suck ;)

-3DZ

:D

[EricChadwick]

Neat trick with Solidify.

My one beef with it is it doubles the face count post-MeshSmooth. The cage is simpler, but the end result could be unwieldy. If I just detach the faces as an element, then extrude them, then turn on MeshSMooth inside EP, I get the same result without all those extra backfaces. Not following the whole thread here, did I miss something said earlier?



BTW, not sure if people know about these cool tools or not, MJPolytools and Polymagus...

http://www.maya3d.dk/Scripts/MJPolyTools/

http://maxres.cgworks.com/scripts/

[Dave Black]

posm:

Read my little cavoit to working this way. I'd never leave those faces so segmented, but this is a really great way of seeing the final result of about 10 mins of work, in about 3 seconds. It's more of a testing stage than a final output. I mean, in the time it would take to remove the faces, extrude them, find the proper rings to segment, then move the new loop up to the ajoining surface, I'd have spend an awful lot of time messing around on something that may, or maynot be what I wanted. Also, I can always get rid of those bottom faces, but for the purpose of this model, it's a desired side-effect.

This way, it's instant feedback, and it allows for, in my opinion, quicker modeling.

Thanks for the post. I really apprieceate you sharing that link.

Hope you'll stick around, as this is becoming a really great endevor.

-3DZ

:D

[EricChadwick]

... the time it would take to remove the faces, extrude them, find the proper rings to segment, then move the new loop up to the ajoining surface ...

Not sure if I understand the extra steps after extruding. For me its faster to extrude than to use the solidfy method.

Select the cage faces.
Detach as element.
Select all faces.
Extrude, by Local Normal, height 0.2.
NURMS Toggle.

I must be missing something. Or maybe it is easier. Or maybe its just a personal preference thing.

[Dave Black]

It's that the solidify modifier is always on. So if "show end result" is on, then you can see the effect of detaching a face instantly, without extruding it, or doing any other function.

It's just a quick and easy way to do it. Again, it's just a testing phase.

See, the way I'm looking at it, you can just grab a face, detach it, and see what it'l look like once you go through the whole modeling process. That way, all you have to do to get it back to the way it started, is to weld the verts.

Just a trick method...nothing revolutionary. :D

As for the extra steps, that cut look comes from a hard edge. The way to get that hard edge, is to either add segments, or to chamfer the edge. It's all about that "cut" look. If that makes sense?

-3DZ

:D

[EricChadwick]

Ah, OK got it now. Thanks. Makes sense.

[EricChadwick]

Hey, I haven't been reading this whole thread. But once you release the PDF, could you possibly announce it elsewhere as well? I don't think I can reasonably keep up with such a busy thread.

[Dave Black]

posm:

That's the idea. The thread is quite bloated, but it's also full of great info. Noone can be expected to keep up with it all.

As soon as the pdf is finished, I'll be sure to get it out there. One of the mods will no-doubt make an announcement of sorts, as will I.

If you'd like to be alerted when it's done, you can just fire-off an email to:

subscribe@3dzealot.com

Had a look at your site, BTW, and I must say you're work is very impressive. Kudos!

-3DZ

:D

[urgaffel]

Thanks 3dz, and sure, send it my way. I will be leaving on 3 weeks of vacation on tuesday, so I'll be able to help you out a little then if you tell me what to do ;)

About Solidify: Depending on what you want for the end result, it can be a great boone (sp?) For example, if you want to do intricate detail beneath a hood and want the hood to be able to move out of the way (transfomers style!) or something along those lines, it's really helpfull. Of course, this isn't the only use, making clothes is another good thing. Together with Push, I think Solidify is my most common modeling plugin. As 3dz said, it's also a good way to see what it whatever you are working on willl look like later :)

[Dave Black]

Kickass, urgaffel! You lucky dog...3 weeks...wow.

Well, let me know if you want it before you go, or after...

Don't want CG knawing away at your chill-time.

You know, someone has to give you an award for the coolest website front page interface of all time...

Thanks again for your help, man.

-3DZ

:D

[EricChadwick]

Thanks 3DZ. Old stuff... old stuff... gotta update one of these days.

[ToddD]

I second that, I remember when Urg was making that wire thing, turned out fantastic!:beer:

[urgaffel]

Aww... Thanks you guys :blush: :D

Anyway, send it over anytime. I'll probably be sitting in front of a computer at least part of the time while in Vancouver. If what I've heard is correct, it will mostly be raining anyway :)

[Neox]

Originally posted by urgaffel
Together with Push, I think Solidify is my most common modeling pluginlike later :)
agreed :wavey:

[Ulukai]

Hello everybody. Great thead!.

1) Does anyone know if it is any script to see the low model version´s edges proyected in the subdivided version?

2) I has maken a little script. Ploblem? I don´t know how to upload to this treadh (only accepts image files) and I haven´t website. The script it is a Sub-D toggle that helps me to a lot. It converts a faceted and wireframe model to shaded without wireframe and subd iterations in 2 and viceversa.

pd: Sorry for my english :D

[sam]

If it's really a little script you could just post it as text in this thread.

[Neox]

@ulukai, do you mean this?
http://neox.gfx-scene.de/public/advices/cage.jpg

[Ulukai]

-- It is my first script. So, test it and post the bugs :)
--Sub-D_toggle.mcr (copy to UI\macroscripts)




-- SUB-D TOGGLE
-- Aritz Aizpurua (Ulukai) 2003.
-- Azken begiratua: 05-04-2003, 15:16

macroScript SUB_D
category:"Aritz Tools" buttonText:"Sub-D Toggle"
toolTip:"Sub-D Toggle"
(
global balioa

(
if (((getcurrentselection()).count == 1) and ($ != undefined)) and (classof $.baseobject == Editable_Poly) do
(
try
(--try
Max modify mode

if ($.surfSubdivide == off) OR ($.iterations == 0) then
(
balioa = subobjectLevel
subobjectLevel = 0
$.iterations = 2
$.surfSubdivide = on
actionMan.executeAction 0 "369"
)

else
(
$.surfSubdivide = off
actionMan.executeAction 0 "369"
$.iterations = 0
if (subobjectLevel > 0) OR (balioa == undefined) then
(
balioa = subobjectLevel
)
subobjectLevel = balioa
)
)--try
catch(messageBox ":( Sorry")
)
)
)

macroScript SUB_D_CC
category:"Aritz Tools" buttonText:"Sub-D CC Toggle"
toolTip:"Sub-D with Control Cage Toggle"
(
if (((getcurrentselection()).count == 1) and ($ != undefined)) and (classof $.baseobject == Editable_Poly) do
(
try
(--try
Max modify mode

if ($.surfSubdivide == off) OR ($.iterations == 0) then
(
$.iterations = 2
$.surfSubdivide = on
actionMan.executeAction 0 "369"
)

else
(
$.surfSubdivide = off
$.iterations = 0
actionMan.executeAction 0 "369"
)
)--try
catch(messageBox ":( Sorry")
)
)



--------------------------------------------------------------------

And I say something like this (the blue lines):

[urgaffel]

Unfortunately you can't get the Lightwave style subdivision display in max (the light bluelines on your image), at least not as far as I know...

As for toggling meshsmooth on and off, why not just add meshsmooth modifier and bind "show end result" to a shortcut? That's what I've done...


Speaking of "show end result", I've discovered an annoying thing (surprise!) in max. When you don't have any modifers, just the base editable poly level, and turn on "show end result" your vertices dissapear. Turn it off and you can see them again. I mean... That's just fcuking annoying.

So if your verts dissapear for no reason, check "show end result". If that doesn't help, go into Customize->Preferences->Viewports and switch "Show vertices as:" from small to large (or the other way around depending on your settings) and voilá, they are back. Go back in there and switch back to the mode you're most comfrotable with.

[Mariomx]

Originally posted by urgaffel
Unfortunately you can't get the Lightwave style subdivision display in max (the light bluelines on your image), at least not as far as I know...

Noooooo... and we need the lightwave style!!!
It's so cool!
I think it's the only thing max really needs... then it would be the *perfect* modeling package :love:

[sam]

Personally, I don't like working with control cages on or anything else on for the matter that bogs down the modeling workflow. I prefer to work at the lowest level and then when I want to I render off something to the max VFB for me to look at. And then I am back to modeling at the lowest level again. Emphasis here is on viewport speed and interactivity and the working at the lowest level

I came up with a maxscript that makes this a one-key operation

You basically set up the subdivision the way you want it to be when you render it out in the editable poly rollout but keep it turned off. You can also have any modifiers, like the notoriously slow Symmetry modifier on the stack, and the maxscript will toggle Show End Result to on for you, so I can keep the Show End Result off while I work. The script is also set up to use the "draft" renderer, so you can set that renderer up for speed (max scanline) and not have it interfere with your "production" setting you can also be using for slower rendered previews.

This maxscript really helps out my workflow personally. It also keeps me focused on the low level topology, which I think is the key to subdivision modeling.

*************

macroScript ToggleMSRender
category:"MyScripts"
toolTip:"Toggle Meshsmooth and Render"
(
on isEnabled return
(
if (((getcurrentselection()).count == 1) and ($ != undefined)) then
if (classof $.baseobject == Editable_Poly) then true else false
else false
)

on Execute do
(
undo off
(
local tempstate = showEndresult
showEndresult = True
local tempsurf = $.surfSubDivide
$.surfSubDivide = True
local temprender = render renderer:#draft
$.surfSubDivide = tempsurf
showEndresult = tempstate
temprender = undefined
gc light: true
)
)
)


*************

[urgaffel]

You have to admit though that having the subdivision turned on when fine tuning for example; circular holes, beveled edges, subtle loops, it's way faster than testrendering every 5 seconds. Of course, to each their own, but still... ;)

I usually model with the end result off, then toggle it on to see what it's looking like, maybe tweak a little, turn it off and continue.

Another way I use it is to do the basic shape with end result ON, so you get a good feeling for the general shape of what you are working on, then turn it off to add detail etc...

[Dave Black]

"To each his own"

That is one of beauties of Max. I, personally, model with about a 50/50 split between MS, and base level. It's important to be able to see the effect of a tweak on a vert in the high-poly as you work. You can't get past that.

LW's display mathod would be nice, but ithe lack of such a feature is not really hampering the modeling process that much...Unless of course you are comeing from modeling in LW.

One thing I don't get about LW, is that it seems most screen grabs of smoothed models look faceted, as if the smoothing groups don't get unified as you MS...

Kinda wierd to me.

-3DZ

:D

[urgaffel]

Where's that email 3dz?
. :wip: <-urg
.:insane: <-3dz

[Dave Black]

LOL

oh...poop...

right, right..

I'm on it!

-3DZ

:D

[Dave Black]

ARRRRGGGHHH!!!! :argh:

My latest version is at work...

I got real sick last week and left work early...forgot to send it home...

Damnit.

Well, I can get it to you monday morning. (sigh).

Sorry 'bout that.

-3DZ

:D

[sam]

You really have to try my workflow to get a sense of it. The scanline can generally be tuned to give rocket fast rendered views and of course a rendered view will give a much better sense of the end result than a merely a viewport shaded view.
The shaded view can in fact hide problems.

Think of what I do as an active shade view that keeps me unencumbered while modeling and gives me much more accurate feedback when I want it.

For me this gives me speed and accurate views, the best of both worlds. Steven Stahlberg is a big proponent of this approach (he works in Maya and Maya has a similar problem of Subd being very slow). He dislikes control cages and dealing with the subdivision bogging down the viewport. So he models at the low level and has a MEL script , I guess, that adds a smooth and renders previews while he works.

So basically this way of working keeps me at the low level where I like to focus on laying out good topology and once you get an intuitive feel for how Nurms subdivides you dont need to really even check the renders all that much. Definitely try my approach before dismissing it offhand, but in the end a workflow is of course a matter of artist preference, and I present this as an option that will be attractive hopefully to some of you.

[urgaffel]

I didn't dismiss it, just mentioned an alternative way of seeing the end result. Can you grab a video of your workflow? Would be interesting to see how you go about your business :)

[sam]

I should also mention that my workflow suggestion is intended for medium to high poly count modeling where checking on the show end result or the nurms iterations causes the max interactivity to take a huge speed hit or fill up the viewport display with too much detail (like a huge amount of edges or vertices), especially if you have other things on there like the Symmetry modifier. If you were doing low to medium poly count work then this workflow suggestion would have less relevance. Basically, its a way of working around the max speed hit involved with Meshsmoothing objects in the viewport and other modifiers. But, since the max scanline is so fast its actually a workaround that presents itself as a bonus and a great workflow all on its own.

The max scanline when tuned can give you accurate views of your modeling in under a second and at higher subd iterations than you can afford to do in the viewport. It is in effect very similar to setting up maxscripts to toggle on and off the Show End Result and maybe some other settings to take a quick peak in the viewport at what you are modeling. But my suggestion takes it one step further to take advantage of the real nice speed and look the max scanline renderer has to offer. Unless I am missing something, I am not sure what you gain by relying on a viewport shaded view which is less accurate and sends computer into chugg chugg mode until you toggle it back off. Considering the speed hit of toggling meshmooth on and off when dealing with large poly models is actually faster from what I experience to render out a quickie. At the very least my suggestion could fit into the workflow of someone like you who likes to pop the show end result to take a peak in the viewport at the end result and get back to low poly. The maxscript I provided lets you get an even more accurate look by popping up a rendered quick peak and then lets you get back to low poly. They don't necessarily exclude each other as ways of working.

check out the similar topic in Maya
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35277

[urgaffel]

Could you elaborate on how you tune the scanline?

[sam]

I don't mean anyting too special with tuning except that you have your scene set up to render out the model you are working with very fast

no textures (textures hide modeling problems)

a simple lighting scheme that is set up to reveal modeling problems (the default 1 or 2 light setups work well but other variants are possible and some people like Bay Raitt have different lighting variants)

anti-aliasing can be on until you need more speed

image size can be high until you need more speed

Basically, u trim out anything non-essential and knock the image size down if you need to to keep it fast.

[Dave Black]

And so you have render bound to a key?

Does'nt the buffer get in you way? Like, don't you have to close the window? Or do you have it up all the time?

I'm interested in seeing how you manage that...it sounds rather promising. I'm always up for maximizing my VP performance.

I usually like to set a ridiculously shiny material to the object I'm working on, so that I can turn it while meshsmoothed to see errors, or better understand a complex curve...

-3DZ

:D

[Tony Richardson]

Hey guys check out this script donr by Rico Holmes. It has been usefull for me while modeling in low and being able to see the smoothed version at the same time without toggeling or even adding a meshsmooth to the stack until your finished modeling.



SmoothClone 1.2

Installation:

Smoothclone is a macroscript - copy the script to the ui/macroscripts folder in Max. You can now find the script in the [Customise User Interface] menu under the vertex tools category. Just add the script to a keyboard shortcut/menu/whatever.

Usage:

The script automates the setup of the workflow I usually use for modelling organic shapes in polygons. A realtime smooth preview in the right panel while the low res "cage" can be edited in the left. Select a low polygon base object and run the script. While it remembers the layout you were using it splits the screen into a 2-pane side by side view and references the original object into focus in the right view. The level of smoothness is configurable (up to 3; I don't want to be responsible for machine lockups!) and changeable on the fly. The objects are also temporarily renamed, but as with the layout; they're restored when the [clear reference] button is pressed.

Notes:

Any process that involves collapsing the modifier stack will negate the effect (!) This is not a bug, but integral to the way the script works. If you wish to make changes which collapse the stack (such as convert to Polygon/Mesh) it's fine, but you will have press "Clear Reference" and then Smooth clone your object again.

Although I work solely with Polygon objects, it does appear to work fine with Meshes etc..



http://www.ricoholmes.com

go to others and then dowwnloads to get the file

[sam]

I bind the script I have posted above to a key.

It pops up a window that you will have to close.

The idea is that you like working at the lowest polygonal level and only want to take a quick and uncluttered peek at what effect your edits are having on the mesh.

It is different than just binding a hotkey to a toggle the "show end result" or toggle meshsmooth, since those still leave the viewport cluttered up with a lot of vertex dots and/or edged faces and/or control cage (depending on how you are working)

It is similar and complementary in function to the script that Ulukai posted that will toggle SubD on and clean up the display (by turning off edged faces and by taking the object out of sub-object mode) so that you get as clean and uncluttered a view of the SubD surface as you can in the viewport. You then toggle the subD again to bring you back to modeling at the low level.

My script takes it one step further to give you a quick rendered image rather than a viewport display. It is slightly slower than toggle SubD, but not by much, and it gives a fully rendered look at your edits. Its benefit over the Ulukai toggle SubD is that it provides a very accurate view the impact of your edit on your model. Its disadvantages are that it is slightly slower than the Ulukai toggle SubD and it pops open a window that you have to close.

My script and Ulukai toggle SubD script are complementary in the sense that they both support the modeling method of working on the lowest level and taking quick peeks at a clean view of the subdivided mesh and can both be used together to give you either a viewport preview or a rendered view of your mesh.

The suggested workflow is to work at the lowest level of the polygons and then use both of those depending on your need for speed or your need for accurate view. The main idea is to avoid using the control cage, having any unneccessary clutter, or any slowdown from meshmooth.

sam

[Dave Black]

That's an excellently worded and devised technique. Thanks so much for sharing that with us. I'll have to give it a try soon.

Neat stuff.

Again, thanks!

-3DZ

:D

[gaggle]

Hm. Interesting. Using the rendere like that. I'll see if it's something I could get used to.. even if I can't, I think it's really interesting to hear how people organize their workflow. The script Tony mentions sounds pretty interesting as well I thought, again not the way I think I like to work, but interesting nontheless.

Personally I found a script on scriptspot.com I think, that allows me to hit the Plus sign on the keypad to increase the ePoly NURMS (and turn it on if it's not), and the Minus sign to decrease, and turn NURMS off it it hits zero. I love that, it's so easy and natural for me to hit those buttons with my right-hand thumb that it's just a joy to use. Other various buttons (Show End Result) I've bound to Asterix and the likes over there as well.

That workflow seems to rub me the right way :)

[jason-slab]

gaggle:hey, whats the script called, that u using for epoly, sounds like my type of thing

|jason

[EricChadwick]

This might be it.
http://tdp.nu/cgi-bin/plugsearch_r4.pl?search=NURMS_Toggle01.ms

Oops, nope, it's Martin Coven's script instead.
http://www.3dluvr.com/mcoven/

[gaggle]

*nods agreeingly*

[EricChadwick]

It's kinda cool having both tools together. I like how Martin Breidt's tool does both NURMS on and Edged Faces Toggle at the same time, and Martin Coven's tool for +/- subDs.

[EricChadwick]

Hmmm. I was hoping Rico Holmes' script would be more elegant.

All it does is make a reference copy, add MeshSmooth to it, and move it aways away. Well a couple other things too, but having a Reference makes viewport updates pretty slow, on a complex cage that is.

Martin Breidt's macro looks like my best bet so far. Thanks gaggle.

[proteus2002]

i took the script of sam and modified it a little bit.
the script creates a small rollout with a rollover area. when moving with the mouse over the rollover area, it will render the scene. if you click the checkbox next to the rollover area, you can access some render settings:
width (spinner) = render width
height (spinner) = render height
sd (checkbox) = subdivision on or off in render
m (checkbox) = mapping on and off in render
s (checkbox) = shadows on and off in render

while modelling, you just have to rollover the rollover area and wait until the rendering is finished. when leaving the rollover area the rollout will minimize automatically.
hope you like it.

-- start of script

rollout renderpreview "render preview" width:100 height:30
(
spinner spn1 "w" pos:[5,30] width:45 height:16 range:[128,1024,768] type:#integer
spinner spn2 "h" pos:[55,30] width:45 height:16 range:[128,1024,576] type:#integer
imgtag preview "rollover" pos:[0,0] width:80 height:25
groupbox rolloverarea "rollover here" pos:[2,2] width:80 height:25
imgtag rendering "" pos:[0,50] width:1024 height:1024
checkbox subd "SD" checked:true pos:[105,30]
checkbox mapi "M" checked:true pos:[145,30]
checkbox shad "S" checked:true pos:[185,30]
checkbox sett "Min" checked:true pos:[85,10]


fn renderit =
(
previewmap =(render outputwidth:spn1.value outputheight:spn2.value vfb:false mapping:(mapi.state) shadows:(shad.state))
rendering.bitmap = previewmap
rendering.width = spn1.value
rendering.height = spn2.value
rendering.transparent = (color 100000000 100000000 10000000)
renderpreview.height = spn2.value+50
renderpreview.width = spn1.value
gc light: true
)

fn minmax =
(
if sett.state == true then
(
renderpreview.height = 30
renderpreview.width = 100
)
else
(
renderpreview.height = 50
renderpreview.width = 220
)
)

on preview mouseover do
(
setwaitcursor ()
if (((getcurrentselection()).count == 1) and ($ != undefined)) and (classof $.baseobject == Editable_Poly) then
(
if subd.state == true then
(
local tempstate = showEndresult
showEndresult = True
local tempsurf = $.surfSubDivide
$.surfSubDivide = True
renderit ()
$.surfSubDivide = tempsurf
showEndresult = tempstate
)
else
(
renderit ()
)
)
else
(
renderit()

)
)

on preview mouseout do
(
minmax ()
)

on sett changed thestate do
(
minmax ()
)

)
createdialog renderpreview

--- end of script

[sam]

:thumbsup:

looks good proteus, makes the workflow even more convenient

the only thing I would add would be a toggle to choose #draft as render type (as opposed to production) so people can customize their draft settings to accomodate the render preview while leaving their production settings for normal renders

I was also wondering about the possibility of having the maxscript ditch the render completely if the mouse leaves the mouseover area without the render being completed, but it looks to me like it's not possible to take control of the rendering mid-frame and halt the render mid-frame via maxscript. Halting a render mid-frame is restricted to the ESC keyboard key only and there are globals that you can only read from it associated with the state of the ESC key. That's AFAIK, maybe you know a trick or two more, because it woud be real neat and tidy to ditch the render mid-frame if the mouse leaves the mouseover.

cheers,
sam

[jason-slab]

thx for the link posm:thumbsup:

[proteus2002]

hi sam

i am learning maxscript, so my skills are low.
i haven`t found a solution for halting the rendering. like you said it`s restricted to the ESC key.
maybe rendering in tiles could be a solution.

the draft-render checkbox is a good idea.

to speed up rendering, a "render only selected" checkbox could also be nice.

feel free to modify it.

i am currently working on another script to get the lightwave subdivision look. it is in beta state but it works.

[ivo D]

you mean like when modelling..?
that would be awsome..you should make.. a separate topic for it..

caus i would like to try out beta's ,like that one :)

[proteus2002]

i have posted the script in a new thread. all scripters take a look at it and help me to improve it.

thanks

[urgaffel]

What's the url to that thread?

[Dave Black]

http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=55269

:D

-3DZ

:D

[Laa-Yosh]

Wow, such a cool thread and I had to notice it several months late... I agree that it should've been in Modeling.

Regarding Lightwave's subpatch preview, I generally don't like it. It encourages the bad habit of trying to work with too few polygons, and also what's called 'crossover'. See the image of that LW head a few pages back, where polygons are overlapping each other so that the smoothed mesh will get the desired curvature... It'll bite you when you try to animate or texture your model.

Regarding 'old' Bay Raitt... you guys realise that he's probably like, 27-28 years old? :)

What else is there... Hm, two things to keep in mind for non-organic stuff.
- NURBS can help you in some cases, although it doesn't work as well in Max, and renders slower. In Maya, you'd have an easier time with it.
- You don't have to smooth your meshes all the time. I've built a tank recently and it had to be around 40-50.000 polygons without the trecks, because we need to have 5-10 of them in a scene. It looks quite good even in medium close-ups, and we don't have to force a million polys down the renderer's throat. Sometimes its better to have something, that's 2X polys but you don't have to smooth it - instead of something that's X polys but you have to smooth it and thus render 4X polys... And you want to use a lowres proxy replacement for animation that's 200 polys anyway - interactivity all the way :)

Anyway, this thread rules. Thanks for everyone :)

[Dave Black]

Glad to have you aboard, man.

This thread is really a Max specific look at Sub-D theory, and that's why it's here.

It's easier to speak about the techniques when we don't have to bicker about software and tools.

"Well, it works in Maya/LW/XSI/etc, sorry Max does'nt support that feature"

And visa versa.

Not to mention, Max has some specific workarounds needed do to it's lack of proper NURBS implemenation.

And, you are also correct that not everything needs to be smoothed. But this is about Sub-D, not modeling in general. There are methodologies to Sub-d that are local only to it, and therefore, require discussion about how to best implement them.

Thanks for your comments, and I'm really glad you are enjoying this thread.

If you have any more questions or comments on the matter, (even if you are not a Max user) please feel free to jump right in.

-3DZ

:D

[edaddy]

haven't been here (this thread) in awhile so i probably missed something but how's the tutorial videos coming along 3DZealot?

[Dave Black]

Well, due to some serious family/personal/death issues, as of late, I have'nt had much time to work on anything but my day job.

Thanks to urgaffel, I've been able to make some headway with the Sub-d Faq, as he's now co-writing it with me. (Thanks man) ;)

So, to sum up, I'm still planning to do the vid tutorials, as well as deliver alot more content soon. It's hard for me to give a date, as things are hit-or-miss right now. Rest assured I'm trying my hardest to get all these things out to you guys, and I'll have some of it soon.

Thanks for understanding, and again, I'm sorry it's been so long.

-3DZ

:D