Modo's Sub-d: Questions and Suggestions



I have a interest and expectations for Modo very much.:slight_smile:
So I want to know more that about Sub-d of Modo, and want to suggest my idea more.
However, I don’t have Modo yet, and there is no Demo of Modo now.
Then, how can I make it possible?
So, I posted this article.

Please post a reply to this thread.
I welcome those who do questions and suggestions about Sub-d of Modo, in this thread.
And I welcome very much those who give the reply to them.
It is glad when there are such kind persons.

However, I am worried.
I am not familiar with the rule of this community yet.
Is my proposal suitable?
Is this thread required?
What do you think of this proposal?

Thank you.:slight_smile:





Have you got angry to me?
Is my proposal unsuitable?:sad:


Sure… there has already been quite a bit of discussion on the sub’ds in other forums, but if you have any specific questions, feel free to ask.

We also have a couple of people that work in other languages internally, you might get a better response if you ask in your native language…


I think that he(much like myself) didn’t really understand the question. You say you want to know things about Modo SubD, but you don’t seem to actually ask any specific questions.


Dion Burgoyne & Sbowling, thank you for the replys.

And, I’m sorry. Everybody.
The order of my question was not correct.
However, I need time for the translation.
I was on the way just now of the translation of the reply to Dion
I really have a question about Modo SubD.
Please wait for a moment.


A question & a suggestion, about Modo Sub-d

Can Sub-d-weight of Modo separately control amount the gravitation to the edges(vertices), and
the acute angle of the edges(vertices)?
If it is not so, I want to suggest it.
I think that such a function improves the freedom of Sub-d.


Edge weighting?


Hello, c-g.

Thank you for the reply.
I am glad for you to be interested in my suggestion.:slight_smile:
I answer your question.
However, I need time for the translation.
Please wait for a moment.


To Dion Burgoyne

Does this mean that “If I send Luxology the question and the suggestion directly, the answer might be able to be
received by my mother tongue”?

If it is so, it might be the best method for me. :slight_smile:
I thought that I wrote them here. However, my mind is confused and is tired, so much. It is because of my making a mistake.

I called people first, because I had thought that a lot of people who did not have Modo might need such a thread.
Modo is a new sub-d modeler.
“Where of Modo’s sub-d can able to be more excellent than that of other modelers, and done this? That?”
“If it is not possible to do, I want you to make it do.”
People question on Sub-d of Modo like that. And, people tell Luxology-staff the request. I thought such a place…

And, I thought…
"There are that Related information on same place.
It might be more profitable. "
However, it was not a suitable proposal.

So, I withdraw the first proposal of this thread.
I posted a couple of question and the suggestion here.
However, I think that it sends other them directly to Luxology.

And, I’m sorry. Everybody.
Please forgive my Mistake.

However, I am glad and reply to those who are interested in the couple of my question and the suggestion.:slight_smile:

Thank you.


er_9, those objects were created in Modo. It has edge weighting in it. :slight_smile:


Your thread is better than reading all the other “Modo isn’t Maya” threads.


Hello, c-g.

I’m sorry, too late reply to you.
And thank you for your messages and the picture.
I was so glad.
So, I was relieved in your words.
Thanks a lot.:slight_smile:

Then, about my suggestion…
In a word, my suggestion is to enhance the weight-control of Modo Sub-d.

In the enhanced weights,
Vertices, Edges and Polygons…
Their weights will have two or more parameters, inside all of them.
Those parameters control various amounts.
The amounts that I suggested might be only parts of them.

There are two problems for me in current Sub-division surface.
One is that Sub-d decreases the volume of the object.
One is that the edge of Sub-d becomes an acute angle when Weight is increased.

I suggested another idea[LINK] for this problem before, at the thread of “Feature requests for modo”.
However, I hit on another better idea.

In my conception,
Weight that I suggest has two parameters.
“Gravity-amount”: Strength of power for edge (vertex) to pull Sub-d surface.
“Acuteness-amount”: Strength of power to make edge (vertex) of Sub-d surface become to acute angle.
They can separately have the value.

In the separate control of power to make the edge an acute angle and power to pull the edge,
I think that the variation in the effect becomes abundant more and flexibility becomes more.

Edge-weight, Vertex-weight and Polygon-weight. With Gravity & Acuteness.
If these weights work together,that is infinity!:eek:
I want for Modo to have these functions.

Thank you.:slight_smile:

(Edit: Changed image URL.)


er-9: Your image describes your feature request very well. Modo’s subD weighting functionality would be greatly enhanced by implementing your suggestions. It would be nice to also see an example of edge weighting effects using your enhanced set-up.
Current Modo SubD weighting functionality is a good starting point, and certainly better than anything I’ve seen in other packages, but it can still stand to be improved and refined.

Great suggestions.



Hello, MyCatField.

Thank you for the reply.
I am glad of your understanding of my idea.:slight_smile:

Certainly, Modo is in a good starting point.
Modo is a new tool with a lot of possibilities.
Modo might be able to have the new function that another doesn’t provide.

For example, I suggested enhanced-weight that have two or more parameters.
It might enable the weights to control Filleting of each edge.
And, it might enable the weights to control subdivision level of each polygons locally.

(Edit: Changed image URL, and corrected wrong term.)


Hi there,

er_9 your suggestions are great, but I’m a bit affraid that all those weight controls will make edges hard to manage (it allready takes a lot of time to control them with “only” the tension %).

Here’s my dream about edge weight control, from a “stupid” artist point of view :smiley:

  1. Here’s actually the result with a 100% edge crease … very handy to break continuity, but the edges are very sharp.

  2. Common work around, to keep the surface smooth, we have to add 2 other edge loop, and change the weight to 70-95%, depending how close the loop slices are created.

  3. Something I would really love to have one day :slight_smile: Just crease the edge (even at 100%), and an option to still keep the edge smooth without cuting/slicing the geometry everywhere :slight_smile:

Does it make sence ??? (sorry if it sounds “nooby”)


Hello, PaQ.

Thank you for the reply. :slight_smile:
That is very significant feedback.

Just now, I was on the way of the thought about edge-rounding(filleting).
However, my thought was too complicated.
But, your idea is very simple and practicable.
My idea will be improved by your idea.

And, your picture explained the concept of enhanced-weighting more concretely.
It will make us easily imagine the example of applying various functions.
For example, surface-thickness, smoothing-angle…
You added the “Edge Smooth” parameter to the weight-map.
Exactly, it is a “enhanced-weighting”.

So, your “Dreaming Edge Crease” is very nice. :thumbsup:

(Edit: Changed image URL.)


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.