Tables for 3D production


So Chemits have the Periodic Table, Designers have Font and Color Tables. What do CG Modelers have? (It’s not rhetorical, if you know something, plz tell)

So i have the idea of a Table or Tables, good both for begginers (to get in touch with concepts in 3D) and for the experts (stuff that is handy to know, but not really interesting to have in memory, just a reminder). My concerning is more about Subdivision, but if you have ideas for other stuff, it’s all good.

Questions are:

  • Do you guys think there is such need to a Table? And for what precisely?
  • What could be good for both begginers and pros to have as a sticky?
  • How should it be constructed or presented?
  • Do i need to get out more often so i don’t come out with crazy stuff like this?

My first sketch of its about the Vertex Number around groups of polys and what happens inside of them.
I have too much info for now, it could go only up to 10 Vertex, since 12 doesn’t say much and 16 is a repetion of 8. 3 could be gone too.
The reason i put the extrusion there and repeat it 2 times its because it might be cool to see how the polygroups works in Sub-D, and an extrusion is better than just the polygroup to understand that.

Please correct me for whatever you see wrong there. Wether is terminology(vertex? extrusion?), references, presentation, etc.

If this gives you ideas, feel free to sketch them back here. Wether it’s a table for 3D, a new sign language or a puzzle videogame :smiley:




This time a Elbow Table. In wich one could take in account what kind of geometry he wants to use before it starts to work. And a begginer could understand more about Subpatching from it.

It would be cool to have this kind of Tables if they help you to predict better what you are going to do and wich will fit better your objectives.

This mentality could be applyed for Rigs, Render settings, etc. They could help to structure your workflow. It’s like having an information poster on the studio. Better then video tutorials sometimes. And it could save you time and others, instead of doing everything from memory. “I know i have to turn something off, but what is it?..”. And you might spend more time doing the stuff than remembering stuff.

Oh Well, maybe im just going


Haha, I actually think that’s a neat idea.

A couple things off the top off my head. Here is how I cap 12 sided cylinders, which I use quite often (I always try to maintain all-quad models and to limit poles to 5 edges max). The other image shows how I’ve been doing my bevels lately.


Thanks for the post man.
Your images kept me thinking in a lot of stuff. One of them is of course why do you use a lot of 12 sided cylinders. Why are they of so good use?

Heres an image. TO make a polygon hole in a sphere just go Poligon Vertexs (in this case its 8) x 3 (own edges plus two hold edges for each) = 24 sided Sphere.

Apply this rule to other polycount situations.



Good. I hope this thread keeps going, would be cool to see different solutions for how people model common (or not so common) things. About the 12 sided cylinder… Iately I’ve done a lot of non-organic models with a decent number of cylindrical components. It’s definitly not a hard and fast rule, but 12 sides is a good compromise for terminating detail in a clean fashion (like the pic above), but also having enough polys to merge nicely with other surfaces and maintain good topology.


DaJuice thanks again. Your image of the 12 sided cilinder changed my Table :smiley:
I would like to see tough more complex examples of the use of it, if you may.

Here are my lastest efforts on this matter.
Feel free to criticise and suggest.

Hope there’s some feed back to improve this :smiley:



nerdy, but very interesting. I think beginners should read this stuff, some good advice.


This is awesome :smiley:

this is good easy reference for beginners and others too…
gonna have a closer look :slight_smile:


Thankyou both so much, those are excellent teaching diagrams, I shall pass them onto my students :slight_smile:


Some stepping stuff
When i have time i’ll post some pratical examples.


The time, effort and thought you have put in here is fantastic. Not only have you laid things out and explained them clearly (with the technical aspect, for those interested in the ‘why’) but you’ve laid it out in a professional looking easy to understand cheat sheet. This is downright genius. I, and I’m sure many others will also, thank you for what you’ve done here. Keep up the great work.

From 8 to 24 sides, octagon to circle, that’s so handy to know!


are you planing on doing a PDF sort of manual?
I think this could be useful for school and stuff…


ahhhh, this is great! Thanks for sharing!
Best regards, Selwy


This should be stickied. Thanks for all the work


Hello. I think your analysis are very interesting. The first chart looks interesting for gamedevs I guess.

Some points I find confusing:

-having more than 5-edged pole doesn’t make sense, as you can make 6-edged into 3-edged, unless you make a wheel like in your example, which is rare for subdivision modeling

-in your elbows example you should mention how many edges are needed to avoid texture stretching and why. The logics of elbow subdivision is pretty simple and could use less examples I think. Because all you need to know is how to make a rigid edge and a smooth edge

-in your extrusion of an 9-sided polygon there is a pinchiong problem, a very common in sub-d modeling. This is what would be interesting to hear how to fix

-dividing a straight edge inbetween just to make it quad is not a good idea, because on the next level of subdivision you will have a pretty ugly pinching. Actually, it will be even more ugly than a triangle. The topology will look odd when you extrude the inserted vertex. So “internal point” is a bad idea imo, it’s better to subdivide it with triangles then. If you are really about keeping it all quads you can subdivide it once and get your quads But this brings up the idea that subdividing a triangle is the same as subdividing a 3-sided pole, so having triangles may be not a big problem, at least in such extreme examples as yours, where they have one point elevated (so having controlled triangles is fine imo, but not everywhere without control). N-gon turns a 5-edged pole on the next level, by the way. Though keeping n-gons is ugly, definitely.

-in your example with 12 and 36 vertices, wasn’t it be easier to use hard-surface modeling? It looks really rigid, why to use it?

So I would really like to see:

-how to optimise an extrusion of a box without edges going all way long to the ends of the model
-fixing pinching problems

This would be really useful. :beer:

Here is an example how I make inserting, but I would like to know more ways, if they exist.


keep tweaking it, very awesome :thumbsup:


I’m not even a modeller and this is awesome, thanks for the effort!


Long time no see this post. Good i was notified by email :stuck_out_tongue:
@all: thanks to all for the positive feedback. Sometimes you go so nerdy about something you don’t even know if that has any value at all.

@Azereus: PDF? Usefull for school? Well i could gadly do a PDF for this. Any suggestion on the format? Maybe i should add the examples i did not yet posted :stuck_out_tongue:

@mister3d: You got some nice questions and im willing to answer them all. Unforntunetly i have really little time now and i wouldn’t like like to answer them in a rush, but with time to think in your questions, I’ll probably learn something from them.

So when i finish my evaluations this month i’ll come back to this, post some examples and answer properly.



I would like to see someone upload a QUAD poly mesh of a quad sphere which will turn into a seemingly perfectly rounded sphere. :smiley:

I assume that this poly mesh would have to be somewhat dense. I tried making a basemesh for a perfectly rounded quad polysphere but failed.

An interesting question would be, how dense must a quad basemesh be, for making a smoothed and perfectly rounded polygon sphere. The optimal would be the solution with the most coarse mesh, yet still being seemingly perfecly spherical.


Animatics, thank you for your reply, will be gladly waiting for your input.

And just think: at some point the amount of polygons makes subdivision surface useless. So if you need a perfectly smooth sphere, why not to use nurbs or just a sphere? I think if we could make a perfectly smooth sphere from quads, we would have such a primitive.
And in general, if you want something very smooth with extrusions, inserts and so on, nurbs is a better choice imo. This is a limitation of a subdivision modeling. For organic modeling it’s not as important as characters surface may be not perfect, and so may clothing.
That’s funny how people say subdivision surface is limited by resolution, but why nobody thinks about texture limit, which comes much faster?