[ 3 / a / adv / an / asp / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / g / gd / int / jp / k / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / o / out / p / po / sci / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wsg / x]

/3/ - 3DCG

<< back to board
[Delete this thread]

File: 01_Color.jpg7abaa2b3-c6fc-4043-9094-4c8a8a8be221Large.jpg-(60 KB, 600x600)
What would a good topology in...
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)05:27 UTC+1 No.411555 Report

What would a good topology in 3d modelling do as far as game assets goes? I have read that it makes it easier to modify but what if I do not have the need to modify it? Does it matter if the topology is shit?
I am trying to trace something and make a signboard of it using solidify.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)09:15 UTC+1 No.411572 Report

If the object isn't going to deform, then topology is a lot less important. But while modeling, keeping good topology allows you modeling tools to work properly. They won't work well when there are random triangles and n-gons everywhere, they need quads so they can intelligently understand how to do their operations, especially when it comes to edge-loops and beveling.

For hard surface objects, create the mesh you need to, to capture the shape you want, in a reasonable amount of polygons. If you need to use triangles here or there, it's not a big deal, the whole mesh becomes triangles in game engines anyways.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)10:20 UTC+1 No.411576 Report

this "topology" shit pisses me off.

I made a fantastic fully textured model in Blender. In rendered mode it looks sublime.

Then I went and exported it and it looked like trash in three game engines I tried (Valve's Source, Unity3D, and Three.js)

When I asked the Blender community why I got this as an excuse

>y-y-your topology is bad!

This forced topology rule following shit needs to go away, it needs to be dynamic. Imagine if all art worked that way. You try painting a portrait with a brush on a canvas and somehow time and space rips itself open destroying your Mona Lisa."LOL YOU SHOULD'VE SCULPTED A STATUE WITH MARBLE AND A CHISEL! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?"
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)10:29 UTC+1 No.411577 Report

bad topology = bad normal maps, bad deformations

don't be like this loser

Only ignore topology if you are sure you don't need to bake maps or deform the object
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)10:30 UTC+1 No.411578 Report

yeah right. Post this "fantastic" model and its topo, then we can speak
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)11:27 UTC+1 No.411581 Report

You forgot subdivision.
It's not a rule, it's logic and your whining about it is equivalent to "m-muh style, non-realistic art means everything I do is okay"
If three different rendering engines say you're wrong, an entire community of people say you're wrong, we say you're wrong, and Blender's rendering engine hides your problems from you, then you should have at least considered once that you might be wrong about this.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)11:40 UTC+1 No.411583 Report


I blame it entirely on Blender's exporting. What you see in Blender should be what I see in anything else.

It needs to be fixed.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)11:58 UTC+1 No.411585 Report

I didn't forget it, I omitted it purposedly, because you don't subdivide models meant to be used in a game engine, unless you're going to bake maps or you need high density for deformations, both of which I already addressed
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)12:00 UTC+1 No.411586 Report

someone doesn't know shit about triangulation and normals

Also, marmoset. and ddo.
go die in a fire
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)13:45 UTC+1 No.411593 Report

OP here. This is what I have done so far. It will not need to be modified or deformed. I plan to have a paint texture on this and may possibly need to put a normal map on it. Will I need to make a neat topology if I wanted to?

I made this basically by tracing and auto filling it with a blender tool so the topology is pretty shit but fuck me I have absolutely no idea how I would go about making the topology neater.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)13:46 UTC+1 No.411594 Report
File: Capture.jpg-(125x83)
>>411593Forget the image
Forget the image
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)14:34 UTC+1 No.411596 Report

is that the entire object? and will it be seen from near or far away? if it's for the background a plane with masked texture would do much better than this.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)14:43 UTC+1 No.411597 Report

also try this, i'm not sure wheter is it made properly or not but it looks less messy
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)14:45 UTC+1 No.411598 Report

The player would be looking at it front view but at an angle of -10 degrees so basically front-top view which would show the the 3d aspect of the model. I am learning to make a game and that applies for 3d modelling too so simply making a textured plane does not really help in learning anything.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)14:49 UTC+1 No.411599 Report
File: Capture2.jpg-(125x91)
Wouldn't the ngons triangulate in the end when I export it to a game engine resulting in the equally messy mesh? If I can just do that, it would be easy but am I supposed to do that?
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)14:59 UTC+1 No.411600 Report


the quasi-loop prevents the thing from going totally shit.

i did some fast per-edge waving at the top to see if it breaks much, but it turned out it doesn't add more triangles to the mesh
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:06 UTC+1 No.411601 Report
File: Capture3.jpg-(125x79)
>>411600How would I even...
How would I even get about getting whatever quasi-loop into the model? This is some messed up curvy shit instead of a circle. I tried extruding into triangulate and it became the land of the rising sun.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:08 UTC+1 No.411602 Report

After doing what you already did, select the big faces and do an Inset (extrude without thickness but with ofsset) then triangulate

voilĂ , good topology. Allows for normal map baking and easy edge loops + smooth mesh
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:13 UTC+1 No.411603 Report

>>411602 's idea is good - inset the faces

or else you could go with picrel
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:22 UTC+1 No.411604 Report
File: Capture4.jpg-(124x82)
I do not think it work for this. This is an inset into a triangulation.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:27 UTC+1 No.411605 Report

i lol'd
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:31 UTC+1 No.411607 Report

I think that topo is OK.
It's ugly to look at, but as long as there are coplanar quads around you can do whatever.
Try to give it a smooth iteration, you should see no artifacts and shape more or less retained (you might add loops to make it harder)
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:34 UTC+1 No.411608 Report

Oh, of course... smooth iteration is not compatible with triangulation. Undo the triangulate first if you wanna make this test
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:42 UTC+1 No.411610 Report


it will most likely look like shit when in game engine - shit triangulation equals shit lighting, especially when smoothing. that's why i recommended doing it like this >>411603
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:44 UTC+1 No.411611 Report
File: Capture5.jpg-(125x67)
By smooth iteration I take it...
By smooth iteration I take it you mean subsurf? This is an inset into a subsurf into a triangulate. I will go study up on how the fuck normal map works because I absolutely no idea how this differs from the previous match other than the topology having a cool shape.
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:47 UTC+1 No.411612 Report

shit triangulation equals shit lighting IF there are angles, curves or stuff like that. Flat surfaces surrounded by proper coplanar geo (that's why the inset) are safe
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)15:57 UTC+1 No.411613 Report
File: zxzxzxzx.jpg-(125x91)
>>411612inset would help...
inset would help (as i agreed with you here >>411603 ) but he didn't manage to inset it after all for whatever was his reason
Anonymous 02/24/14(Mon)23:38 UTC+1 No.411666 Report

It is inset already. The inset isn't noticeable because it is small. Any bigger insets would overlap the faces.
Anonymous 02/25/14(Tue)00:08 UTC+1 No.411669 Report


import it to your game engine then and show us how it looks like
nice get btw
Anonymous 02/25/14(Tue)03:01 UTC+1 No.411683 Report
File: Capture6.jpg-(125x84)
I got it.
I got it.
All the content on this website comes from 4chan.org. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster. 4chanArchive is not affiliated with 4chan.