SUB-D control edges - am I correct?

[coffeepenguin]

The thing I learned with using mesh smooth is to ALWAYS keep all your pollys four sided. A few of your pollys are seven sidded and thats why your getting a weird looking mesh.
In frame three, instead of having to four squares in the corners, it may make a better looking mesh if you make them diagnal lines from the corners of the two pollies (if that makes sence). I attached an image to explain better, sorry about the size.

[sledgeweb]

OK, I'll try that. Can you tell me where the 7 sided polys are? I don't see them, or I am not counting sides correctly.

Anyone else have input on this?

[ChaseJase]

you could also try chamfering the edges. :D

[sledgeweb]

Originally posted by coffeepenguin
The thing I learned with using mesh smooth is to ALWAYS keep all your pollys four sided. A few of your pollys are seven sidded and thats why your getting a weird looking mesh.
In frame three, instead of having to four squares in the corners, it may make a better looking mesh if you make them diagnal lines from the corners of the two pollies (if that makes sence). I attached an image to explain better, sorry about the size.

Hey coffee, how do you get the inner polygon that way? Did you cut it like mine, then add the diagonals and then remove the unnecessary edges leaving only the diagonals?

[coffeepenguin]

To count the sides of you pollygons you have to count each individual edge. Also if a vertex is put on an edge and the edge remains perfectly strait it becomes two seperate edges acording to max.
You'll know if everything is four sidded when your mesh is all in straight lines instead of having it condence in a few spots.
I circled an edge thats three sides not one. Sorry about the size again.

[sledgeweb]

Thanks, still confused though. Don't all the polygons have 4 sides, like so:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd3.jpg

I tried adding diagonals like you suggested. BTW, can you explain how you added the interior polygon and then the diagonals? What I did, was cut the inner polygon like above, and then add the diagonals, then remove the extra edges. I still got a funny result, so I added so edges in, like this:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd2.jpg

How does this look? How is it for technique?

Thanks a lot. I'm slowly learning this stuff.

-Sledge

[coffeepenguin]

Now that I look, I miss counted, they're six sided. Anyway your looking at the wrong polly. I labled one the six sided ones, just remeber that you have four of them.
What you may have to do to get all four sidded edges is to cut from the ends that are between side 1 and 2, and between 2 and 3, the long way around to the other side.
For adding the diagnals there are two ways:
1. Cut out a square then remove the extra edges (don't delete them)
2. Extrude that polly to .001 then scale it down.
Give it some time and poly modeling gets to be really quick.

[sledgeweb]

OK, I did see the 6 sided polys after you said there was a 7 sided poly - I just wasn't sure if that's what you are talking about.

Hmmm... so how to get rid of that? I tried cutting all the way around like you suggested, and that yielded good results - except I had to cut through the circular shape on the side, which actually made it a square hole. I'm at work now, so I can't post screen caps. No Max at work.

However, I do have gmax at work, so I tried the chamfer method as suggested above, and got this:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd4.jpg

I can't render, but, is this a good result? I believe the cut all the way around method worked better, except I had to cut through things I didn't want to...

-Sledge

[sledgeweb]

Well, I went ahead and recreated the in gmax the approach with the edges cut all the way around the entire object. There was no detail on the side this time. Again, no renders...

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd5.jpg

Thoughts?

-Sledge

[Ian Jones]

In your last post above this how did you 'split' the edges into two edges?

[sledgeweb]

In gmax, I cut them manually using the cut tool in both ege and vertex mode. I'm hoping there is a way to do this better, and also a way to do it without going all the way around the object. 3DZ has a nice animated gif tutorial in the theoretical sub-d thread... basically using connect and chamfer to create edge loops, but I don't understand how to apply it to other shapes other than his tutorial - and how to apply it without applying it to the whole object. I PM'd him, so hopefully he'll come in and give some advice.

[foreverendering]

sledgeweb,

Hey coffee, how do you get the inner polygon that way? Did you cut it like mine, then add the diagonals and then remove the unnecessary edges leaving only the diagonals?

The easiest way to create this effect is while in poly sub-object mode. Select the polygon, and then pick "inset" (should be right next to extrude etc).

When you start to use inset it will create a second polygon within the original, and will have those diagonal edges coming in from the corners.

Much eaiser than cutting, then removing the extra edges.

[ToddD]

foreverendering
Inset is a good tool for that, but the resulting extrusion would not retain its squareness due to the lack of edges.
Sledge, 3DZ's example with the airplane wing(toward the end of the thread) is the best solution. Keep the edges tight near the box extrusion, then fan them out as you move away from the area of detail. That will give you your crisp extrusion, but not deform the overall shape(as closely spaced edges will do).:beer:

[sledgeweb]

OK... I was looking over that thread again earlier today. That wing shape thing is definitely helpful.

However, it would be great if 3DZ could create an animated GIF or some kind of tutorial on how you create something like that. Do you make the square with control edges first, and then extrude parts of it to make the shape. Or do you make the shape first, and then add the control edges in? I'm starting to get a grasp of control edges now, but I'm just not sure of the best way to add them in to a complex model. A simple square is one thing, but something more complex is, well, more complex. I've seen great images of control edges on complex objects, but I don't know how they were put in there. What's the method for adding the control edges?

Back to my little example. So, you think the last approach is best, but to fan the edges out more as they wrap around the entire object? Do they need to wrap around the entire object? Seems like a lot of extra work for one small area of detail. However, I couldn't find any way out of it without leaving a 6 sided polygon. I imagine this problem is fairly common in this type of modeling... so I would think there might be some definite solutions on this, even if it is, yes the edges have to loop all the way around the model. Otherwise, seems like I create a pole or orphan.

-Sledge

[foreverendering]

tbonz,

no, the extrusion will not be tight without the extra edges, but his question was simply how was that type of geometry achieved. inset is the answer.

sledge,

if you want to have localized detail you don't need to loop all the way around.

http://digitalynt.hypermart.net/pics/subdquad.jpg

Just make one extra cut and you will both simplify and maintain all quads. obviously you would have to use this technique on every side but it requires less geometry than cutting all the way around.

[sledgeweb]

NICE! I knew there would be something out there for a problem like this that must be very prevalent. Hmmm.. I'll go play around with that idea.

Unfortunately, I'm still at work, so stuck messing around with gmax, which doesn't have nearly all the nice tools max5 does (inset, connect, etc.)... but hey, it's awesome for being free. And I do get to brush up on some technique stuff.

Really my only question left is on process. How do you add the control edges? Do you start with a square, sub divide it, chamfer, and then extrude parts out? Or do you model your object, and then cut the edges in? If so, using what methods?

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

-Sledge

[foreverendering]

whats up bro

i just ran a quick test on this and it looks like you're going to want to fan out a little before you simplify otherwise the smoothing is a little ugly. i went out an extra poly before cutting across and this one seems okay.

http://digitalynt.hypermart.net/pics/localize.jpg

hope that helps, i've never tried this technique in a situation like this; only for organic modeling. i picked it up looking at fausto's wires.

[foreverendering]

when adding the control edges i normally select the original edges and connect, then chamfer those new edges so that they are evenly spaced from the original. Then I select the inside 9 polys (if you are extruding a square as in this example) and extrude upward an amount equal to the space between the original and control eges.

Then I extrude up as high as I want to go, followed by another slight extrustion to maintain the form at the top. You're going to want both vertical and horizontal control edges to keep the form tight.

[sledgeweb]

Hmmm, I'm getting close, but not there yet. Can you post your wires with meshsmooth on, well, if you haven't deleted the file.

Anyway, I tried your method, but got this:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd6.jpg

Is it because I go around a corner?

Also - this method leaves orphans. Isn't this bad? Maybe this is causing the distortion? Well, I guess they are three edges poles and not orphans... but the edge you exten out but don't make diagonal, the final vertex only has three edges coming out of it.

-Sledge

[foreverendering]

I think the problem would be leaving the 'hanging vert' on the edge of the cube. Probably only a good idea to leave it on a flat surface. My suggestion would be continuing the edge loops down one more poly and then cutting across in the center poly of the sides of the cube.

When modeling with all quads there will inevitably be some 3-sided verts and some 5 sided verts. But as long as all the verts are between 3 and 5 sides, and all the polys are quads... I've never had smoothing problems. But then again I focus on organic modeling so...

I will run through a quick test again if I get the chance but like you, I am at work right now... and I have things to do :) Deadline this evening!

Peace

[coffeepenguin]

Have you tried going to the polly level of the modifier stack selecting all the pollyies and putting a relax modifier on it? It'll smooth out the entire object and would make the bumps a bit less noticable. It's worth a shot.

[sledgeweb]

Hey forever,

Didn't quite work:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd7.jpg

Any luck?

-Sledge

[foreverendering]

The only way to know if it worked would be to render it out.

The smoothed wire is going to look like that - mine looked the same. I'm only talking about achieving the same rendered effect with localized detail instead of cutting all the way around the mesh.

I will probably not be able to mess with it in max until I'm home but I will post a rendered shot; then we can see if there is any noticeable difference between that and looping all the way around when it comes to the final product.

If it doesn't work, then my only suggestion is to cut all the way around! But it was worth a shot.

[sledgeweb]

OK, thx. Since all I have is gmax here, I can't render either! But, with the wireframes off, it does look like their is some distortion around the poles. Because the mesh gets denser there, it pulls the surface up some, making a little bulge.

I'll play around more when I get home and can use max5.

Coffee, no I haven't tried that. I'll take a look at it, but I'm looking for a way to do it with control edges.

Thanks,
Sledge

[Dave Black]

Not sure I fully understand the problem, but is this what you're trying to do?

[sledgeweb]

Hey 3DZ... yes, more or less that is it. I've gotten good results, I'm just wanting to know the best way to make this... so far, the best results I've achieved are with cutting the edge loops all the way around the object. Forever suggested using a diagonal to keep from going all the way around... see above pics.

Could you post your wire? And explain the method you used to add the edges? I'm assuming that you are making the edges go all the way around the model - is this right?

Thanks,
Sledge

[foreverendering]

yo yo yo

i snuck in a quick test, here's some shots

http://digitalynt.hypermart.net/pics/boxrender.jpg

http://digitalynt.hypermart.net/pics/boxsmoothwire.jpg

http://digitalynt.hypermart.net/pics/boxnosmooth.jpg

Maybe this will help! I don't know.

[Dave Black]

Sorry 'bout that. Yes, that is how I did it. It's not a normal senario, but if I had to tie off the ends into a different loop, I'd just make sure to mold the areas until any artifacts were minimized. You usually can get away with alot on a flat surface. Tries, poles, and even orphans don't seem to have whole lot of effect, though the higher the complexity of the pole, the more shading issues you will have.

-3DZ

:D

[sledgeweb]

Forever & 3DZ:

Forever, looks like you went all the way around on two sides and capped off two sides? What's the reason for doing it two different ways? Just for comparison?

3dZ: When you say mold the surface where you cap the loops off, what do you mean exactly? Something similar to what Forever did above?

Thanks,
Sledge

[foreverendering]

I did it two different ways so you could compare and contrast them in the same shot. As far as I can tell, they render out the same...?

Like 3DZ said, it seems like you can get away with a lot on a flat surface... I just tried to space out the verts (forgot 2 of them pretty close together though)

[sledgeweb]

So... say I wanted detail in that part where you terminate your loops (as in my original posts). Would you move the loops over to different polygons so you can leave the center square on the side intact? Would that work?

[foreverendering]

Well, you are not going to be terminating edges where you have high detail, because that's where you're going to utilize every loop. But when moving toward an area that only requires simple geometry... That's when I would make the necessary cuts to simplify.

So basically, yeah. Look at where your model needs detail, and where it doesn't, and use a section in between to transition. That's my suggestion anyway.

Also, this is my last post in this thread for the day! Good luck.

[sledgeweb]

I understand. Thanks so much for all your time and examples. I think I have a much better grasp on things now. I'll play around for a few hours tonight and post some results up.

Thanks again,
Sledge

[Rivendale]

Hey, I wanna help too:)
As you can see in my picture here you can have the edges go all the way around and still be able to add details on the side, like you had in an earlier pic. Just an example:
http://members.chello.se/mille0/box.jpg

[Ian Jones]

Hey, I'm really liking this thread now. Thx for the reply, some useful info.

[Tony Richardson]

Here is a way that I do boxes with beveled edges.

1. After creating all the three edges needed for a clean smoothed edge I pick the polys as shown

http://users3.ev1.net/~jay77541/1.jpg

2. I extrude 1/8" to form the first edges as shown

http://users3.ev1.net/~jay77541/2.jpg

3. I extrude the height I want for the box minus 1/8" as shown

http://users3.ev1.net/~jay77541/4.jpg

[Tony Richardson]

4. I extrude 1/8" again to form the final edges.

http://users3.ev1.net/~jay77541/5.jpg

5. This shows the finished edges

http://users3.ev1.net/~jay77541/6.jpg

This same method is used if you want a depression in the main box, you just extrude with a negative value.

You can move them around and change their shape also.

This is a very simple way of doing and most may allready know this but I thought I would share it anyway

[sledgeweb]

Thanks all!

I'm getting the hang of it now. I just threw this together in gmax. It has problems with edges being to close together etc... but I was doing it quickly and being lazy due to gmax not having all the nice features max5 has (only have gmax at work, max5 at home).

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/subd8.jpg

If any noobs are having trouble with this concept, I think this should be a helpful thread. A little less over the head "theory" than the great, but very lengthy sub-d thread in the tips and tutorials section.

If anyone has questions, let me know. I'm still figuring this out, but am willing to share what I've learned with others.

-Sledge

[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.