modelling: boolean errors

[xynaria]

I have found with R4 that when you create a cylinder with more than one cap segment, at least one of the caps behaves in the manner you show and yup.. it isn't helpful. I've no idea why but I found that converting from the parametric object to Editable Mesh first and then to Editable Poly 'cured it ' though. :)

[jscheel]

:buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock:

YOU ROCK!!!

Nobody else was able to help me. The manuals didn't help, pressing F1 didn't help, and the other members on cgtalk told me to model a cylinder with holes in it from scratch (yeah right). But your technique works perfectly! Thank you!

:thumbsup: :bounce: :thumbsup:

[xynaria]

Well given the state of Max's booleans, making the cylinder with 6 holes in it from scratch isn't a bad idea at all as bevelling a post boolean operation usually means more than slight heartache..an easy way to do that would be to make a relatively lo res cylinder making sure that you had vertices at where the centre of the holes would be and then chamfering those vertices and extruding or deleting the resultant new polys. Adding mesh smooth would then round out the 'holes'.
On a slight side note.. there are a few problems in R4 with editable poly.. another common one to happen is when you do a lot of mesh editing that involves mirroring, welding, deleting, mirroring , welding, etc and suddenly your file size grows exponentially for no apparent reason,...again converting to editable mesh and back again often 'cures' this. :)

[ToddD]

QUOTE:
"Nobody else was able to help me. The manuals didn't help, pressing F1 didn't help, and the other members on cgtalk told me to model a cylinder with holes in it from scratch (yeah right). But your technique works perfectly! Thank you!"

Jscheel I am the guy that offered you that advice. =) In your haste to disregard valid advice, you have shown some inexperience. I don't mean any disrespect. While the boolean solution may have worked, the object is a poly heavy pig. I have just created the same basic idea(in a rough state) you conveyed in a sub 600 polygon object (unsmoothed). I echo my advice, polymodeling would be the cleanest method to achieve what you are trying. I have the max 5 file to share, if someone would like to convert it back to 4 for you. In a minute I will add some screen caps for you. The entire process, took less than 10 minutes, and I am sure use a fraction of the polys of your object. Listen to advice, people here do know what they are talking about.

:thumbsup:

[jscheel]

First off, I had someone suggest that I model it from a box, not the advice you gave me on the other thread. Second, I'm not so worried about poly count as I am time. I'm working in crunch-time right now, and I know booleans are usually the quickest way. Yes, in MAX I am extremely inexperienced, but I was in a bit of a time-constraint situation, and was kind of "freaking out." I'm sorry for that. I look forward to seeing what you are talking about. Thanks.
:bounce:

[xynaria]

LOL The boolean debate rages on.. Tbonz.. the intial problem is actually an editable poly problem and is actually not at all boolean related.. but I do agree with you mostly.. avoid Booleans as much as humanly possible.. however.. the bloody things should work a lot better than they do. :D :)

[ToddD]

Here's a low poly shot, I didn't clean up the outer edge, but you can see what I am talking about, I'll add the smoothed screen cap in a second. LOL My underpowered pc can't run Max and PS at once, so it takes a second for me to switch between apps. Again I wasn't striving for perfection, just trying to illustrate my point.:beer: http://www.vi2.com/getFile/181897.jpg

http://www.vi2.com/getFile/181904.jpg

Smoothed:)

[ToddD]

A little tweeking, and you probably wouldn't even need additional polys to create the outside cylinder's edge. Anyway just wanted to share some knowledge, and prove to myself that it could be done:bounce: :beer:

[Pgraphics]

You could go to the shapes panel and draw a circle the size you want the cylinder. Then make the 6 other holes still using the shapes panel circle tool. Now with the large circle for the cylinder selected attach all the shapes. Now you can boolean the large circle and subtract the smaller circles from the larger one. Now just extrude and mesh smooth if needed. I realize this is a crude explanation but it is an effective method with great control. I use this method for modeling the fancy centers on car and motorcycle rims. Hope it helps.

[ToddD]

PGraphics, Bear with me I don't understand. When you are attaching all of the circles, wouldn't you have to convert them to editable spline? And where exactly would boolean come into this situation? I would like to see a few screen caps, as well as a smoothed mesh if possible, you have got me curious, maybe I am mis-understanding your explanation.:wavey:

[xynaria]

Tbonz... that's standard.. when you attach the smaller circles you effectively boolean the cylinder spline, and no need for conversion, presumably the attaching process takes care of that.. try it.. only takes 2 mins literally. :)

[Joebount]

Just repeat after me guys : BOOLEANS ARE DEVIL, I SHOULD NOT AND WILL NOT USE THEM. :shame:

[xynaria]

LOL Repeat after me.. the best tool for the job is the best tool for the job.. and one of those tools should be working Booleans because in some instances they would be the best and probably quickest tool for job. :)

[ToddD]

Xynaria, I understand the attaching process, but if all that is being done is creating the splines, attaching, and extruding, the mesh will not smooth properly. Pgraphics said it could be smoothed, if the splines are extrududed, there will be 1 polygon on each the top and bottom with a large amount of points, a mess when smoothed. If I am misunderstanding please explain further. Thanx

:beer:

[ToddD]

A word about what I illustrated in my example for those interested. I modeled 1 "hole" area, then arrayed the hole(6 holes). I then bridged the gap between the holes by creating polys, split the newly created polys with connect 1. For the center, I just used "border" to select the middle area, then shift scaled it a couple of times, and used "cap" to cover the center. I then applied a solidify modifier, and moved the edges close to the top, and bottom to maintain a crisp edge. It took me about 10 minutes, but I was thinking about the approach as I modeled, it could probably be done in a couple of minutes.:thumbsup:

[r2d3]

BOOLEANS ARE DEVIL, I SHOULD NOT AND WILL NOT USE THEM:twisted:

[xynaria]

Using the spline attach/boolean method does make for needing to clean up at the bevelling/chamfering stage to be sure and trying to smooth afterwards can cause similar problems to performing a 3D boolean.. pretty unusable..... however in a lot of instances, a bit of judicious forethought would mean not having to use mesh smooth anyway. One of the problems with the rise to prominence of 'Sub D's is that people seem to forget that there are other modelling methods and like sub d's they have their strength and their weaknesses. Patches can be really useful in some contexts but I really wouldn't like to try and do everything with them. One of the things I find trully bizarre in Discreets *cough* 'development' of R5 is that in R4 they introduced the Editable Poly, from which most have never looked back, but instead of then integrating that through the modelling tools and dealing with the well noted problems with it's 'Nurbs' and booleans etc they stick in an inapt renderer when there are more rendering solutions for Max than any other programme. Yes you can model most things with sub d's but then if the booleans were robust and worked well then the ease and speed of producing somethings using them or shape merge greatly justifies prefering that method..try imagining industry without drills. :)

[Pgraphics]

I'm sorry. That was a horrible explanation and added more confusion than help I'm sure. Here is how I do this and I don't claim it to be the best just my way. It took me maybe 10 minutes to model if that. I would spend more time on it though if I was doing it for something other than an explanation.

First off you cannot mesh smooth a boolean and get good results At least I never have in Max.

To start with I use the shape tools to make whatever it is I wish to model. In this case it's a cyl. with 6 holes cut out. I use this method because it works great for modeling complex cutouts like a fancy motorcycle rim. With the shape tools I could instead of just holes I could make bat wings or anything I wish. Nice part about this is I don't need to go to illustrator draw and then set up a ref. pic. I can also scale the final shape so it fits the space exactly so my mesh will be exactly right. Another advantage is if you build everything around the 0,0,0 axis in Max you can simply use the Array and rotate the sections that will be cut from your circle perfectly around the center of the main circle. So now I have the template for my mesh.

I simply make a rectangle using the shapes menu and convert it to mesh. Just grab an edge hold shift and extrude it adjusting verts as needed. Apply the mesh smooth go back in the stack to the edit mesh and turn end result on so you can see how things line up. You only need to model one half. when done just mirror and weld. Now you just select the edges you need to pull. Shift and extrude as needed. Once you have that done mirror and weld the back half..Done...Basic mesh work.

It took me longer to add the text in photoshop than to actually model. Really easy.

http://www.theonlineimage.com/cg/circles.jpg

[xynaria]

Pgraphics... you don't actually need to orientate your objects a 0,0,0, to use array easily... in the case of the cylinder.. choose pick as the co ordinate system rollout and choose the cylinder as the pivot for the circle you are starting the array with, and choose 'use transform co-ordinate centre'. :)

[Pgraphics]

I just thought it would make things simplier to explain and work with.

[rrobert]

You want an advise: DO NOT USE BOOLEAN, AS SAID EARIER, IT IS PURE EVIL! HAHA... no really

Instead try applying editable poly to your (mesh)object and use the parameters prom editable poly to create holes.. Goodluck! :thumbsup:

[RezaMisaghi]

Have you ever used PowerBoleans ?!?!

[ToddD]

Reza, I don't think a plug-in that you have to pay $200 for is a valid answer to the task being presented. As has been shown by the examples posted by myself and others. Demo powerbooleans, you will find that while it works, to have a smoothable, clean mesh, you will have a very high poly count. I don't endorse using a plug-in that probably wouldn't be available to you in a work environment. It will only strengthen the shortcomings in a modelers technique, and that is a bad thing IMO.:thumbsup:

[xynaria]

If a plugin does the job more effectively (quickly) then it pays for itself very quickly....it don't replace bad modelling.. but it does replace poor or non existent development .. and Max' s booleans, like its Nurbs are about the worst available and remain untouched throughout R4 qnd R5...probably R6 and R7 too no doubt. The fact that Power Booleans has already managed to get more than a few people I know who are far from inept, to claim it very worthwhile means its just yet another case of the core Max problems not being dealt with because it's enough for Max to claim its got a tool rather than for it to work in a usable manner. :)

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.