I’ve been using the EPoly->HSDS route to generate high-poly versions of models for normal mapping recently, with fairly good results.
You can indeed model at each level of subdivision within the HSDS (although a bit buggy - going back a level occasionally moves a vert or two on the lower level).
RE: Skinning at detail level 0 - Haven’t tested post-Physique HSDSing since I’m only using the high-poly versions for normal map generation, but I would be surprised if it didn’t work
My .02
Sorry to jump in here a bit late.
The n-gon issue:
When modeling vehicles, I use the “solidify” modifier (a dled plugin) to give all my surfaces thickness… I usually apply this after my mesh smooth layer… sometimes 5 sided or other irregular polys create weird artifacts and unsighltly disjoints in the mesh… Also the way the meshsmooth stretches the mesh in those areas can sometimes create lumpy surfaces. I’ve come to the conclusion that you can get away with it most of the time, but there are some times when you really need to add those edge segments to get better smoothing results…
The method fausto was using seems to create very nice meshes… its usually when you have circular objects all coming into a shared point then you get odd results…
Local Sub-D Issue:
I’m not a fan of this since it really seems to be unstable in terms of being able to go up a level… I’ve played with HSDS, but found it frusturating and difficult to use for everyday modeling… I do locally refined surfaces by hand or use the sud-d option in EPOLY to add extra detail…
Finally… here are the two images of creating holes in meshes that I posted eairler in the other thread:
U can see that I had to connect edges to control the curvature at the end of the holes… I’d like to do a quick video tutorial on this subject when I get some time…
Comments and feedback please!
Useful technique-- most of us know this already, but it might help some of the people who’ve been asking questions along the way. I know it helped ME a great deal when I came across it, really got me thinking about how to deal with meshes. If you haven’t already, be sure to check out David K. Komorowski’s website.
This is his way of making creases on an organic model (in this case, a forehead wrinkle). It’s part of his
head tutorial.
Now… the question that’s been REALLY BUGGING ME. Urgaffel reminded me of it just now with those lovely mech-hip pictures, and mentioning the use of reference objects to snap vertexes to.
The reference objects are all well and good, when the surface you’re working on is only curved in one direction-- ie, the curve of the reference object. In the case of Urg’s robot-hip, a cylinder. It’s easy to make the hole in the hip perfectly circular like the middle of the cylinder, by snapping the vertexes to it. However… when you move those vertexes, they move in only 2 axes, with no movement according to the cylinder’s Z-axis, right? So whatever curve the shape of the hip is supposed to have gets destroyed as soon as we move those vertexes. They have to be CUT in if they’re to be in the right spot, and there is no way to MOVE them there. Every time you want to add a detail that involves two curves intersecting, even with reference objects getting the vertexes in the right spot is impossible unless you use booleans, and you can’t move anything afterwards.
That make sense?
Okay… now what the heck do we DO about it?? 
Originally posted by Gnarly Cranium
[B]Now… the question that’s been REALLY BUGGING ME. Urgaffel reminded me of it just now with those lovely mech-hip pictures, and mentioning the use of reference objects to snap vertexes to.The reference objects are all well and good, when the surface you’re working on is only curved in one direction-- ie, the curve of the reference object. In the case of Urg’s robot-hip, a cylinder. It’s easy to make the hole in the hip perfectly circular like the middle of the cylinder, by snapping the vertexes to it. However… when you move those vertexes, they move in only 2 axes, with no movement according to the cylinder’s Z-axis, right? So whatever curve the shape of the hip is supposed to have gets destroyed as soon as we move those vertexes. They have to be CUT in if they’re to be in the right spot, and there is no way to MOVE them there. Every time you want to add a detail that involves two curves intersecting, even with reference objects getting the vertexes in the right spot is impossible unless you use booleans, and you can’t move anything afterwards.
That make sense?
Okay… now what the heck do we DO about it??
[/B]
3d snap… I use spline references and then snap my polys to the verts and edges on the splines… using 3d snap I can build a mesh VERY quickly…
btw err if the 3d snap isn’t working check the snap options and disable the axis constrains… cuz your limiting the movement if that option is on to 2 axis!
Hey guys
Thank you all for the answer much appreciated.
I think i feel more confident modeling the more i read and get a clear understanding of what or what not to do.
Cheers to a great thread.
Originally posted by E.T
Aaron any chance of a quick tut of that splinetechnique?
Sounds interesting.
Trying to get this video recording software to work… the sound keeps going out of sync and dropping out so when i solve that problem… yes i will have a vid-tut
Something you probably noticed when working with subD modeling workflow is that when you add detail to your mesh by adding edges loops (via selecting an edge ring and then connect) is that an edge loop is drawn but it will flatten out the mesh somewhat. See the picture below to see what I mean.
Ring and connect
Now when this happens the usual thing to do is to perturb the edge loop a bit to regain the curvature. Not too bad if you are doing organic modeling where close enough is good enough. But can be a real chore if things need to be really accurate.
There is no easy way to prevent the flattening out that happens when you add detail using the max subD modeling workflow. Take a look at the picture below showing what happens when you tesselate the same polys.
Tesselate
However, it is possible to use HSDS to insert detail that does not flatten out the curvature. The workflow to do this is rather tedious though. Since you can’t easily pass subselections to this modifier and you generally only want to pass it an all quad surface. So it can mean a laborious multi-step procedure involving the detachment of an all-quad surface from a base mesh, an applied hsds modifier, a collapse of the hsds modifier, and a reattachment of the all-quad surface back to the base mesh. But the result is a VERY interesting insertion of detail that accurately retains the curvature.
HSDS
It works, just a real bad workflow, so I don’t wind up doing this unless I really need it. If it were real easy to do that would be damn sweet and make the generally strong subD modeling workflow in max that much stronger.
My wish would be that there were some nice easy way to insert mesh detail in max in such a way that the curvature would be precisely maintained. The ideal would be to select an edge ring and then hit connect to add an edge loop exactly where it should be placed to preserve the curvature.
If I am missing something and there is some better way of getting those edge loops to come up exactly where you want them then please share your knowledge. Right now I am thinking that maybe some fancy scripting might provide the way to a better subD modeling workflow in max on this issue.
sam
Originally posted by Aaron Moore
btw err if the 3d snap isn’t working check the snap options and disable the axis constrains… cuz your limiting the movement if that option is on to 2 axis!
If 3d snap was on, the vertex would leap way up to the top of the cylinder being used for a guide… it would not automatically rise or fall as much as it should to keep the curve it’s lying on consistent. Leaping is bad.
Gnarly, you might be able to do it with constrain to edge/face in the epoly rollout, or change the snap from vertex o face/edge. I’m not sure what you’re getting at though, so I’m just brainstorming.
Sam: scale the loop along the vertex normals to get the curvature. It will never be PERFECT, but it’s a lot faster than detaching and all that.
I’ve found that using push together with softselections really help when you nede to inflate/deflate an area. For example making a bicep bigger, nose smaller etc. Nose example might not be the best, but you get what I mean I hope.
Edit
Gnarly, used a sphere to do the rounded part on your gun. I did use snap to vertex, but could also have checked snap to face I think…
You’ll have to elaborate a little more on the cut/boolean thingy…
Sam: good point… err I had a trick for this… will post tomorrow with my method.
Gnarly: There are tons of options for the 3d snap. What are you trying to snap to?
urg: good point on using the scale tool… though I’d half to say that it isn’t very accurate…
What about the subdivide tool buit into epoly… anyone play with that?
Aaron, I did say scale isn’t perfect 
I was thinking that instead of using hsds to get localized detail, can’t you use the subdivide command? I don’t have max in front of me, but I feel like thinking that it works like a tesselation. Or am I totally lost?
Urgaffel said…
you might be able to do it with constrain to edge/face in the epoly rollout, or change the snap from vertex o face/edge.
Ba who da what?! Is this some of that fancy MAX 5 talk, or am I just… overlooking something incredibly useful again? :curious:
Aaron Moore said…
There are tons of options for the 3d snap. What are you trying to snap to
Look up at Urg’s robot-hip pictures. Think of a sphere that you’re cutting a circular hole into. Say you use the Cut tool or whatever to make a hole in the surface of the sphere. You want to make that hole perfectly circular (from the viewpoint of looking straight down at it). So you make a cylinder and stick it in the middle of the hole, and use Snap to move the vertexes around the edge of the hole to match up with the vertexes around the sides of the cylinder. Now you have a circular hole in the sphere (when looking straight down at it) but the sphere is all lumpy around that hole. That clearer? I can make some pics… maybe I should do that.
Snap options can be found by righclicking snap icon, constrain to edge/face is max5 only sorry :thumbsdow
Hole. Well… You can cut the hole using snap too I guess. But max 5 makes it a lot easier with the constrain to edge/face thingies…
edit
I mean cutting with snap turned on so you’ll cut the perfect cylindrical shape to begin with and won’t have to edit it in one view afterwards.
Okay. Say you have a curved thing. It’s got a hole in it.
Now, you wanna make that hole circular. So you slap a cylinder in there to use as a guide, and move the vertexes to match up. Now the hole is circular, but the edges of it don’t match the curve of the spherical thing anymore. Notice the lumps in the perspective view (that shot is meshsmoothed).
If you wanted to change the size of the hole, or fix it, or anything really, it would take a whole lot of fussing and complaining. This is the problem I speak of.
Ah… That’s when you need to start re-arranging vertices. There’s a few different ways to do it, but they all involve fiddling…
You can base a loop around the hole, or maybe tweak the edges so they flow better, but it will take some work to make it look perfectly round and all that. I’ll take a look at it when I get home unless someone beats me to it 
If you want to move it around afterwards… well… It will probably be a pain :argh:
Edit
For best results in shading, you want your quads to be fairly the same size. You can see that the quads are a little skewed and stretched around the hole. So you’ll have to add edges around it to compensate for it
I’m not concerned about the flow of the mesh right now, I’m worried about the outline of the hole itself… it’d be pretty easy to just Boolean it and forget it, though in places the curve would still not be accurate… but if any detail is added, or if ANYTHING is moved, everything goes to hell, just as you say.
This lands us with problems that make us BACKTRACK like fiends, if something goes wrong. Say you discover the curve to a particular part of your model is off, after you’ve added a lot of other detail to it… you can’t just move things to adjust it, you have to go back and start over with that section if you want to keep things consistent.
