PDA

View Full Version : tris, quads or nGons? general mesh topoliogy question, please help!

ford
05-22-2007, 12:53 PM
Hi!

Can anybody explain me in depth when, where
and why to use quads only meshes? Is it at all
possible to model anything with quads only?
when are tris or nGons allowed if at all?
And what makes a topology for any purpose
as clean and perfect as possible?

I started modeling 2 yeras ago and I'm still not
confotable with modeling with quads only.
- as I heard it to be the best way.
As a experienced, my software - maya -
sometimes makes nicer smooth meshes from lowpoly
meshes whit tris or nGons in some parts of the model.
I ususlly find parts when splitting
a tri or nGon and get one more edge loop
to have a quad only mesh makes me more
hard work to get the new edge loop aligned.
especially in smooth curved surfaces e.g.
in cars. Not to mention parts, when a single
more vertice in an edge makes the last tri
quad at the cost of a nonplanar concave polygon.
I spend a lot of work and time to have quad only
meshes, even when I have a non quad,
but otherwise satisfying when smoothed mesh.
So I'm a bit confused which way to choose.

Thanx for any help and direction!
parka81
05-22-2007, 04:09 PM
I've read that there's really no difference if you're not going to animate your models.
Xtrude
05-22-2007, 05:10 PM
Evenly spaced anything with the right ammount of edge support, makes a good looking, and functional mesh... quads are just better looking, and fixing things up so as not to have mega poles causing non planular areas is always a good thing... areas I wouldn't care too much about are the hidden ones, but even then, hey, it just feels good to know you have done it good like eh, keeping it clean...

There are debates going back and forth regarding this subject, do I end on an edge, causing an ngon, bla bla... I say model it, and post it, and you will soon find out from feedback, just what the mass thinks of your worx in progress :)
ford
05-22-2007, 05:11 PM
parka81::

That's propably true.

But I think it's harder to learn
to do something the right way
after you've got used to the
wrong and easy way than to
learn it from sratch.
I'm planning to learn animation
and animate my stuff later
and I don't want to get back
to the basics of modeling
then.

I'm sure there is a balance where it
is not worth it to get the perfect
mesh because of time waste for
a static, lowpoly background
element, but I'm intrested in
all the point of views of this matter
as I'm getting to be able to model
more and more komlex objects.

anyway, thanx for your reply!

Xtrude::

And what about animation?
Do not-only-quad meshes couse
problems? Are not-only-quad meshes
harder to animate, deform, etc...
or are they just the some?
I've heard that it can couse
unpredictable solutions when
deforming or somthing.
Xtrude
05-22-2007, 05:45 PM
I kinda think that proper loop structure, and supporting mesh are more important for animation, than what the face is,tri,quad etc, unless said face is causing glaring error of some sort, such as surface anomoly or what have ya...

I mean, unless your doing the gaming thing, and the game engine supports tri's only or whatever, then all else is up to you...
CGTalk Moderation
05-22-2007, 05:45 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.