View Full Version : polys, surfaces or subd's?
09-08-2003, 07:52 AM
im new in the 3d world and now im learning the basics of 3d, and have a question.
why do so many people use polys or subd-s for modeling and not surfaces? many tutorials are about polys as well. in some demo reels you can see that they are modeled in polys or subd's as well (hiko_ for example).
so, why should i prefer polys and subd's and not surfaces?
09-08-2003, 11:54 AM
after searching the forums for ~2 hours i still dont have a good answer to that question, but it seems everything can be modeled in the ways, so it comes down to the artist. :shrug:
correct me if im wrong! :)
(and excuse my bad english...)
09-08-2003, 12:31 PM
The major reason ppl don´t make use of
the NURBS modeling is because texturing can gat very fast to an horrific nightmare.
(Depense on how complex is your model)
Image, you have modeled an character (high res) with the patch-modeling methode.Now you want to start texturing, but your model is build with more that 500 or even 600 patches.So give it a try to texture now.
First of all, it will take much longer to model seamlessly in patches rather than model in poly´s or subdee´s.Solid modeling is allways i faster way to produce an output. And it´s not so difficult.
To me, patch modeling is one of my favorite used techniques.(I´m a litte masochist:D )
So choose what´s best for you.!!
09-08-2003, 12:35 PM
i have to polish up my english :surprised
09-08-2003, 01:19 PM
das nächste mal frage ich auf deutsch und englisch :D
oder ich änder einfach meine signatur :)
09-08-2003, 01:41 PM
You see, that´s why it´s important to enter your location in your profile.You never know who you meet.
But it´s easier for all, to exchange in just
one common language.And for me it´s a
good place to improve my english.
kind regards from Köln (Cologne)
In my opinion, NURBS are very good for the very precise modelling of mechanical objects. For example, I wouldn't model a car or a cellphone with subdivisions.
For example, if you have it to make a bevel that has exactly a radius of 0,0458m.
But for everything else, NURBS are a nightmare.
Patch modelling I wouldn't dare to touch! -only for masos like Gani:p
09-08-2003, 03:17 PM
Thank you very much, ray.:D
I´ve got someone behind me with a whip, who forces me to do so.:wip:
I´m not only mod in patches.Lat´s say about 35 percent.
I´m not as crazy as i might sound.
Currently patch-"planings": SR-71 Blackbird.
I wanna create an ultra-ultra high res mod (at least, i wanna attempt to create).
Unfortunately there are only insufficient blueprints from that plane.
All secret NASA stuff and so. buuuhhh!!:annoyed:
Anyway, i found some rough one´s at the NASA site, but they not lining up correctly.
I will use them as a rough reference, to make my own blueprints. So i have to research
by my self all the planes details.This will take a wile.Fortunately i got a friend who
took a couple of hundreds high detail shots from the original, two years ago in his
vacation.Hi is some sort of jets and rockets fan.I´m glad to have him now.
I´ve even found the original user manual of the SR-71.Amazing, isn´t it?!
I planned to comp this plane with live action shots i´ve allready taken in the past.
Doing this all in my rare spare time is difficult.Your girl want´s to share time with u,
your friends too.Maybe you know how it is.I think it will take a long long time until
i accomplish this cg shot.
I might be way off base here, but I was under the impression that NURBS were created back in the time whereby the processors were not too powerful, thus making it extremely difficult to move around high poly models... enter nurbs... easier on the machine eh...
01-16-2006, 03:00 AM
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.