'In this exercise, the goal is to convert 2 edges into 1';

'>>966563';

'3 edges to 1';

'4 to 2';

'>>966566';

'5 to 3';

'6 to 1';

'Every time we loop around a number of polygons, there are 2 fewer polygons on the other side. That's why we can go from 6 edges to 4, and then to 2, and finally to 1 because, in the last loop, only half is visible.

This way, we can achieve a smooth transition between the area with a lot of geometry to where there is less.';

'In this exercise, we have 4 triangles. When we create an edge in the center, we turn 2 of the triangles into quads. Then, by removing the 2 edges beneath the other triangles, they also become quads.';

'4 to 2
using knife cuts (k) and dissolving edges';

'3 to 7';

'5 to 3';

'5 to 3
another method';

'3 to 1';

'1 to 2';

'2 to 4';

'Super basic low poly hand
From 5 edges to 1
5 fingers to 1';

'hand';

'hand front';

'1 to 4';

'1 to 2 to 4 to 6';

'>>966562
Jesus christ excercises and studies are a meme, drop that shit and make what you want to make or you are ngmi';

'1 to 9';

'https://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv/docs/mod_notes.html
"Used sparsely, non-quads can be very useful to gather 3 or more diverging edge-loops."';

'Is topology a white people equivalent of "learning the anatomy"? I mean, traditional white artists' favourite thing is studying anatomy. They still draw from references all the time and get outclassed by every single jap who barely bothers with it. Is topology same thing, but for 3d?';

'>>966628';

'>>966614
Noob question, but what is the difference between yours and mine ?
A simple loop cut and extrude is not enough ?';

'>>966640
The difference becomes noticeable when applying modifiers or deformers. Objects with good topology exhibit better control and structure. An object with poor topology will show errors in its surface.

Topology is also crucial for texturing and animation. Good topology ensures a smooth and predictable surface, which directly impacts the success of both texturing and animation processes.';

'Can't figure this one out';

'Have good loops where key deformation occurs if your given model deforms at all
That's it. Thread finished.';

'>>966646
OMG suddenly I'm an expert in topology! Thank you anon!';

'>>966668
skill issue';

'>>966646
what's a good loop? what's a key deformation?';

'>>966673
Tacit knowledge, learn yourself';

'>>966675
> Thread finished.
> Tacit knowledge
choose one';

'>>966673
not him but key deforms are important and common deform spots like knee caps, ankles, eyes, mouth for example. a good loop is if it flows cleanly, you can check loop flow in your 3d software and it will show a line
>>966675
nigger jew';

'flow';

'topology';

'yes';

'undefined';

'a loop';

'undefined';

'>>966709';

'>>966710';

'>>966711';

'>>966712';

'>>966713';

'>>966714';

'Another one';

'geometry on a sphere';

'>>966717';

'>>966718';

'>>966719';

'>>966720';

'I don't need to know all this stuff because I use Maya, but I always like to see that topology stuff that all you blender used always are talking about';

'>>966746
>I don't need to know all this stuff because I use Maya
But it's strange that you say it's not used in Maya, because some of these exercises I saw in Maya tutorials.
Blender also provides tools to automate this process, and eventually, algorithms may be able to achieve perfection. Nevertheless, I enjoy the process of thinking and modeling in this way.';

'>>966746
pyw and show us that sweet wireframe of a person who doesn't know anything about topology';

'>>966628
Bait or no, it's a funny comparison, because people will preach topology rules with no understanding of when they should be applied. I've had people jump in with "omg triangles" when it's a game ready model.';

'>>966746
I bet your topology is shit.';

'>>966785
It's the severity of your autism that prevents you from realizing that a wireframe is a mean to an end. As long as the model renders correctly, it's fine.

>>966790
On this board, if you take a real picture of a scenery and you post it saying you modeled it in Blender they'll tell you that it's totally unrealistic and that "it looks like shit". Try it.

>>966797
And so what? Studio Ghibli won't hire me?';

'random experiment to understand';

'>>966804';

'>>966805';

'>>966807';

'>>966808';

'>>966809';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>966668
>>966673
You're welcome';

'>>966801
>As long as the model renders correctly, it's fine.
Lol
I accept your concession';

'https://twitter.com/JanvandenHemel/status/1734316716182679584';

'>>966879
https://twitter.com/fuspgr/status/1574438425838714880';

'These are some videos about topology and modeling from which I have been extracting some of these exercises.

Change Your Understanding of Topology In Six Minutes
https://youtu.be/HGL6QpVRyXk?si=Wzkl0g61GNNO5K_n

How to Master Topology and Edge Flow in 3D Modeling
https://youtu.be/4-mPIVSBt9g?si=YQB2LfekTjojUlVb

How to 3D Model Anything // Understanding Topology
https://youtu.be/Sj2EiQWbtIQ?si=NpgdBOZvelA6SJCx

TopoTalk: Improve your 3D Topology - Part 01
https://youtu.be/B8dfa6awEXk?si=4TD2OP1oYr8R5omU

7 Topology Tips Every 3D Artist Should Know
https://youtu.be/zSLELihVi6I?si=QS0tw4_mX7LcCBPz

Blender Secrets - Copy / Paste Topology for Faster Modeling
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GanAZ-xrOfc&list=PLCydtpLlAHiOcAn0yj4ETjEIIbLTjxq9v&index=88

5 Topology Tips That Will Get You HIRED
https://youtu.be/zV3mhvWpppM?si=BYHdJG1m1EFgveWx

Blender - Topology Fundamentals
https://youtu.be/MD1QmdqXRfc?si=Y-zgPZNG3VL0v0pW

Arrimus 3D - Classic Topo Problem #5 Topology Density Too Low
https://youtu.be/tpjqBS3Y858?si=qKu_aT0L0jlydnQw

8. Subd Modeling in Blender. Changing Flow.
https://youtu.be/W961Bs4YqbA?si=ZeWRAOpjH4lWhs9q';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>966916';

'>>966917';

'>>966919';

'>>966920';

'>>966922';

'using premade topology';

'>>966932';

'>>966933';

'>>966934';

'>>966935';

'>>966936';

'>>966937';

'>>966938';

'>>966939';

'newfag here, shitpill me on topology, why it's important and when it should be used beyond fancy readable rectangles.';

'>>967462
In general, it's tidier and easier to edit. You can add/remove loops or smoothly tweak stuff easier with a mesh like >>966562 as opposed to a generated mess of triangles. Having edges and loops in areas that will deform and fold, means they animate better too.';

'>>967468
sexcellent, thanks!';

'>>967462
Experiment with these exercises to see the impact of topology on your model. Bad topology leads to:
Texture and Shader Errors: Your textures and shaders won't look right.
Modifier Problems: Using modifiers like subdivision surfaces will cause errors and surface artifacts.
Animation Issues: Models with poor topology will animate weirdly.
Good topology is key for clean textures, smooth modifiers, and natural animation.

Look this pic, look how the polygons flow in the surface of this heads.';

'Great topology';

'>>967537';

'>>966562
What are the popular workflows for sculpting?
I'm a newfag here, I see that some prefer modelling from a rather coarse mesh and then slowly add more details and subdivide parts of the mesh, some don't give a fuck and just sculpt and then do a re topology pass.';

'>>967632
You got it, those are the two main ways. Also a newfag but I feel like poly modeling is great when you’re familiar with what you’re trying to make and it’s fairly simple. Imagine trying to poly model this though.';

'>>967680
>poly modeling i
What's that? Taking a route with a coarse mesh first and then subdividing / refining it?';

'>>967680
Is that a hungarian / romanian / bulgarian guy? his headshot looks kind of familiary but I can't recall who's that';

'>>966797
My topology is not shit because I use Maya and we don't need to use topology. What is so difficult to understand? My 3d models don't have topology.
>>966784
Maybe in an old maya version?
>>967537
Is the topology the square things?
I don't see how that's useful at all';

'>>967690
Hi drooling retard! :)';

'>>967690
When you hear "topology" from Blender people, think severe OCD.';

'>>967694
pyw';

'>>967690
>My 3d models don't have topology.
Can you show us one of your models?

> I use Maya and we don't need to use topology.
But why not? I want to know.

> Is the topology the square things?
But if you don't even know what is topology how do you know you don't need it?? or you are not using it?

> I don't see how that's useful at all
Ho do you know if you don't know what topology is?';

'>>967698
Why did you post two examples of bad topology?';

'>>967700
It's barely useable for what I think is an auto retopo, but it doesn't take much effort to box model a hand to get more consistent deformation.';

'>>967701
Topology does not affect deformation. Vertex density does.';

'>>967702
>he doesn't show it deforming
>the chasm that's behind the knuckles even though it's a static pose
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7wUeiKuw9s';

'>>967704
Ok. What about now?';

'Can we go back to serious discussion, instead of feeding the obvious troll?';

'>>967706';

'>>967702
This hurts my soul';

'This felt pretty fitting for the topic. Just pardon the meme game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76Fk-NXX9J4';

'>>967708
I just realized that the Blender logo is an Ok sign';

'>>967750
It's a 666.';

'>>967752
more like ddd';

'I always struggle with topology.

My meshes are all quads with vertices that have no more than 5 poles.
I think I have edge loops around areas that will deform but sometimes, when I select an edge loop, a strip of polygons that trace the whole model become selected.
It's really frustrating to think that I can have a model that shades well but, because some loops flow left instead of right, it won't deform correctly and is therefore wrong.';

'>>967760
That a good idea... You know... If the logo was mirrored they could clam it's a "bbb". "B" for blender.';

'i hate topo i hate topo i hate topo';

'>>967692
Hi blender fag
>>967694
I am glad that I use Maya so I can sleep well every night
>>967698
>But if you don't even know what is topology how do you know you don't need it?? or you are not using it?
I use Maya so I know that I don't need to use any kind of square things to make a 3d model, so everything that puts more work into making a 3d model is useless,
You should try to ask the blender programmers to make blender more like Maya so you don't need to use topology';

'>>967779
Use Maya, no Topo';

'>>967838
> I use Maya so I know that I don't need to use any kind of square things to make a 3d model, so everything that puts more work into making a 3d model is useless, You should try to ask the blender programmers to make blender more like Maya so you don't need to use topology

It's great that you're using Maya, which is a fantastic tool for 3D modeling. However, it's important to remember that the principles of 3D modeling, like topology, are universal. Whether you're using Maya or Blender, good topology is essential. It's the backbone of any model you create.

Topology isn't about making your modeling process harder. In fact, it's there to ensure the quality and functionality of your models. Good topology means better deformation in animations, more efficient rendering, and smoother texturing. It's about making your models work and look their best.

While Maya does offer advanced features that can simplify some tasks, this doesn't mean you can skip good topology. Both Maya and Blender provide tools to help with creating effective topology, but these tools are there to aid your understanding and application of these principles, not replace them.

It's true that Maya and Blender have different interfaces and unique features. However, both require a solid understanding of the fundamentals of 3D modeling. The way Blender handles topology, for instance, aligns with industry standards and is similar to Maya in many respects.

In the world of 3D art, it's important to stay adaptable and open to learning. This includes understanding and applying core principles like topology, regardless of the software you're using. It's a key part of your growth and versatility as a 3D artist.

I understand that some methods might seem quicker or easier. However, they might not always yield the best results in terms of quality, especially for complex models or animation. It's often worth putting in that extra effort for a top-notch final product.';

'>>967690
>>967838';

'>>967873
Anon I'm really sorry but you've just typed out a wall of text for a drooling retard';

'how do I into good topology?';

'>>968348
I think it's a troll, but honestly, I respond because I like there to be good information here, and not just misinformation.';

'more image based tutorials';

'>>968502
Ngons can exist in the shape of a triangle with 4 vertices.';

'N-poles';

'E-poles';

'undefined';

'>>968503
>triangle with 4 vertices
Why is this bad?';

'>>968511
It's not a triangle, it's a quad in the shape of a triangle. It's not a bad thing, you sometimes need them to have good topology.

Here you can see how a quad in the shape of a triangle can be useful.
>>966709';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>968523
Trying a new angle with the trolling?';

'undefined';

'>>968527
Who's the troll? Me or you?';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>968617
keep the poles away from the curvature gat-dang it';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>967873
I understand what you say but using Maya I bypass the necessity to use topology 100%, None of my 3d model uses those squares that you call topology.
I am going to learn how to make the square things just because they look like the Tron film, but using them on my day to day job, never';

'>>968348
You are the retarded for using old technology that uses those squares, I always read that Anons hate topology so you may be a masochist';

'>>968935
Seeing the edgeflow exercises I would like to propose an another challenge.

As it currently stands, if you add a edge loop inside of the detail. The edge will be redirected out of the detail, I would like to see how the topology would be if you were to keep the edge loops inside of the detail. (Following the blue line inside of the detail).

The edgeflow above the detail should keep their natural flow going above the detail instead.';

'>>969202
Use the knife tool to cut the new flow

First this cuts';

'>>969202
then cut here';

'>>969202
>>969206
then here';

'>>969202
>>969207
Now you can add edge loops there';

'bump';

'>>968927
>>968926
>>968925
>>968924
>>968923
I wish maya had this topology thing, it seems fun, maybe a little bit archaic when you work on a real project, but i can aww how is fun to play around with those wire things';

'>>970257
bait';

'>>970269
>bait
Can you explain why? I want to buy Maya because I read that it doesn't use meshes to create a 3d model';

'>>970416
kek';

'bump';

'>>966901
What about John Dickinsons Topotalk series';

'>>970900
Topology is a lie made up by the government, in reality there's no such thing as topology, but sheeple keep promoting that lie';

'>>970990
STFU this is no /b/ go to troll somewhere else';

'>>970990
'Wireframe drawing of a vase as a solid of revolution by Paolo Uccello. 15th century'
This lie goes back further than government, we need to dig deeper o.O ...';

'>>970990
>>971098
oops';

'>>971100
You may not have the mental capacity to understand what you're looking at. Topology is a branch of mathematics but in this thread you're just giving bad advice on subdivision modeling.

Here's the correct advice:
https://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv/docs/mod_notes.html
And that's about it.';

'>>971105
not me, I'm just shitposting';

'>>971109
Sorry. I though you were one of those LGBTJ (J for jannie) who often get money from the government and lure people into their Discord channels with the promise that the secrets of the PUZZLE OF TOPOLOGY will give them employment.

So, you see, it is the government after all.';

'>>971105
In the context of 3D modeling, the term "topology" refers to something slightly different than its meaning in pure mathematics. In 3D modeling, topology refers to the structure and layout of the vertices, edges, and faces in a 3D mesh. It's about how these elements are connected and arranged to form the surface of a 3D object.

While 3D modeling topology is influenced by the principles of mathematical topology, it is more focused on practical considerations for digital art and design. Good topology in 3D modeling ensures that models deform correctly during animation, are efficient in terms of polygon count, and are easy to work with for further modeling, texturing, and rigging.

So, while 3D modeling topology has roots in the mathematical concept of topology, in the context of 3D design, it's more about the practical application of these principles to create usable and efficient digital models.';

'>>971146
Except if you use Maya, gladly we don't have to deal with that bullshit';

'>>971146
Nice words salad but what about the workflow?';

'>>971165
what about it?';

'>>971177
If you don't give us the workflow everything you said is bullshit. Workflow is methodology, and without it your words are meaningless, 3d is not an ideas only thing, we don't deal with abstracts only
So please give us the workflow or you are just speaking nonsense';

'>>971207
workflow about what?';

'>>971331
Workflow of how to differentiate between mathematical topology and 3d model topology.
You can also give us the workflow for both types of topology';

'>>971331
Topology workflow';

'>>971355
To discern between mathematical topology and 3D model topology, one must engage with the nuanced yet fundamentally distinct realms of these disciplines.

Mathematical topology, the erudite and abstract branch of mathematics, concerns itself with the properties of space that are preserved under continuous transformations. This field is preoccupied with concepts like continuity, compactness, and connectedness, and is not sullied by the trivialities of physical dimensions or the constraints of Euclidean space. It studies the qualitative properties of spaces, wherein a doughnut and a coffee cup are considered the same (or homeomorphic) because they both have one hole. The elegance of mathematical topology lies in its disregard for the exact shape or size of objects, focusing instead on their intrinsic topological properties.

On the other hand, 3D model topology, a concept entrenched in the practical and visual realm of computer graphics, deals with the arrangement and structure of vertices, edges, and faces in a 3D model. This topology is concerned with how these elements are connected and arranged to form a 3D shape. It is a domain obsessed with the optimization of models for rendering and animation, where the flow of edges, the distribution of polygons, and the avoidance of non-manifold geometry are of paramount importance. The topology of a 3D model is critical in determining how well it deforms during animation and how efficiently it can be rendered.

While mathematical topology is an elevated study of spaces abstracted from physical constraints, focusing on the unyielding properties under continuous transformations, 3D model topology is a more pedestrian, yet practical, study of the construction and efficiency of shapes within the digital realm, concerned with the aesthetic and functional aspects of 3D models in computer graphics. The two, while sharing a nominal kinship, are as different as chalk and cheese in their objectives, methods, and applications.';

'>>971426
I came. Nice workflow explaination';

'bump';

'>>972285
I love those.
I don't need to know topology because I use Maya's no topology workflow, but it's fun to see the type of workflows that Anons used in the past';

'>>972285';

'>>972312';

'>>972313';

'>>972315';

'bump';

'>>972285
>>972312
You missed image 42. This is one of my favorite tricks. I call it the splitter.';

'>>973365
My favourite trick is that I use Maya's no topology workflow and I don't have to worry about stupid things';

'>>973365
oh yeah here is 42';

'I fucking suck at topo but as long as everything is quads it's fine right?';

'>>973648
You can have good topology with a lot of tris and shit dogshit poop topology with all quads';

'>>973653
Not if you use the non topology workflow from Maya';

'>>973653';

'i feel like this rote memorization is a bad approach to topology. you should think in terms of what kind of shading and deformation you want. for example having weird triangular topology can help ensure specific highlights occur on a model that would otherwise be lost, or helps deform low poly geometry that tries to still keep detail in certain areas.';

'>>975306
Look, for me, this is the equivalent of warming up the hand with a pencil and paper. Understanding how the flows of polygons work in the simplest examples helped me a lot in improving my modeling.
They are just exercises for training and understanding the basics.
For a while, I was looking for super simple exercises on topology that were not in video format. And since I couldn't find them, I started making image sequences for myself. But instead of deleting them, I decided to upload them here in case they could be useful to someone else.';

'>>975374
Cris, your topology lessons are useless, wrong and misleading all at once.
>I decided to upload them
You shouldn't have.';

'>>975382
lol, Cris would never care about proper topology, he refuses to model a face with more than about 16 polygons';

'>>975390
You don't care about "proper topology" either (assuming such a thing exists and it doesn't) or you would learn it instead of making things up and constantly bumping your own thread, Cris.';

'>>975393
You mistook me for both Cris and the OP in the same post, nice work.
>You don't care about "proper topology" either
I'm interested in topology for good deformation, among many other 3d topics

I realize it's your little gimmick, but Cris is actually very identifiable, and there is no need to amplify his board-derailing tendencies by implicating him in normal 3d-related discussions which have nothing to do with him';

'>>975401
>topology for good deformation
Topology does not affect deformation. In fact a topology that renders well and a topology that deforms well are two orthogonal things. All you can have is a compromise between the two and that's why I just told you that no such thing as a "proper topology" exists.
It's also a field that is full of dishonest people with deep rooted wrong beliefs.
That's pretty much all you need to know about topology, Cris.';

'>>975382
>>975393
haha I bet you never do shit
only shitpost';

'>>975405
haha you're wrong. I actually do stuff.';

'>>975403
So topology does not affect deformation, but it can "deform well"? What exactly does this mean?';

'>>975414
Take the case of Maya for example, there you don't have topology so it never deforms badly. But in 3ds max and blender you have to be careful where you put those poles man';

'>>975414
Topology does not affect the quality of deformations nearly as much as resolution does. To the point that topology is not very relevant to deformation at all. That's what I meant to say.
But feel free to obsess over topology as much as you want. I just wanted to let you know that you don't have to and that you shouldn't.';

'>>975431
So I guess you're still quibbling about the distinction between the placement of edges/vertices and the actual topological connectivity of the mesh?
I'm pretty sure that terminological battle was lost a long time ago';

'>>975435
okay, that actually makes sense.';

'>>975438
Let me tell you exactly why you shouldn't obsess over topology.
You've never read the actual Catmull-Clark algorithm or the automatic normals generation algorithm that follows it or any of the research papers involved.
So, you don't know how it works. Let me tell you it's rather complicated. You have no idea how the system actually works so when you obsess over it all you're doing is you're creating unfounded beliefs for yourself.';

'>>975439
When people retopo sculpts to create characters for realtime cgi like games, I think they often don't even use subdivision surfaces, so the details of the catmull-clark algorithm aren't very relevant.
If I regularly worked with subsurf then I would consider reading the paper, I've implemented some computational geometry algorithms in the past, including cubic interpolation of terrain vertices and a few normal generation methods.

Just out of curiosity, is there a fancy normal generation technique for catmull-clark or just the standard averaging of the incident face normals for each vertex? Something analytical from the ideal smooth surface would be pretty cool';

'>>975441
Smooth normals generation in Blender is hard-coded to the inverse of the angle between edges up to version 4.0
In version 4.0 I've spotted a menu option that lets you change it to inverse of the area or to simple average.';

'>>975441
I don't know why Google has stopped working almost entirely for me. Maybe I'm not diverse enough to deserve the privilege?

But anyway, it's this:
https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/modeling/modifiers/modify/weighted_normal.html
The algorithm is the same with or without subdivision surfaces. As I've mentioned the "Corner Angle" method used to be hard-coded up to 4.0 and the weighted average is done on the inverse of the angle, not the angle.

It's counter-intuitive but it generally means that smaller (or narrower) faces have more control over the smooth normal.';

'>>975441
>Something analytical from the ideal smooth surface would be pretty cool
Yes and if you want to have an idea of what that would look like, make some Metaballs in Blender. Metaballs are an exception because the smooth normal is calculated by differentiating the field.

For meshes, it could be done but then you would have to look at the normal of every face for every vertex, not just the neighboring faces. That's why it's usually not done. But it could be done.';

'>>975414
he is a stupid troll shitposting irrelevant ramblings';

'>>975486
Cris, just because you don't understand something, it doesn't mean it's irrelevant.';

'>>975488
who the fuck is cris?
You don't even know what topology is';

'>>975499
I know what topology is unfortunately and I wish I didn't. I wish I had the money to buy proper software such as 3DS MAX and not have to worry about topology, instead I only had Blender.';

'>>975477
That modifier is pretty nice, thanks for linking it.
It actually makes a huge difference in quality for a low-poly beveled object';

'>>975499
Cris is a guy who post here, he has a lot of A-logs sperging about him here';

'I used to have a tumblr blog on 3d topology. It had so many infograph pretty much every fixes. It was incredible. Not sure where it is now, the blog might've been deleted.';

'>>975933
damn I wish I could see that';

'>>975933
>a tumblr blog
Did you discuss how topology is just an invention of the patriarchy?';

'>>975933
>the blog might've been deleted.
By you or tumblr? I had an account I haven't been on for almost a decade and iirc last I checked they just changed my username, the blog is still around.';

'Is there any way to get a 'shrinkwrap' effect but on the editing level? Like, I do okay with just snapping for faces, but if I add or bevel an edge somewhere, I have to manually adjust it to snap back to faces again.

I know there's the modifier, but it's sketchy at times.';

'>>975954
I just press g and move them slightly to get them to snap. Personally I don't mind it because I like seeing where every new vertex is snapping to and making sure it's in the right place, but the whole process is definitely a little janky';

'>>975960
I've been using G and snap, but the way it's view based is really annoying at times. I was hoping there was something like Alt-S, where it moves along the normals to the nearest snap target.';

'>>975948
>>975948
>Did you discuss how topology is just an invention of the patriarchy?
No just posted Infographs of topolgy and other 3d related stuff.

>>975949
>By you or tumblr?
Tumblr. I never deleted it. I think it might've hit with an adult content ban, since there some naked models and shit like that.';

'>>975948
tumblr was a massive boon for artists. If you weren't around at that time, then you missed out.';

'>>976494
If you remember your username try adding a "-blog" at the end of it, mine got hit that way.';

'>>976517
The tag system was really great. Just sucked that it was just as equally abused by people wanting to stir shit and get a mob harassing somebody over nothing.';

'bump';

'>>966562
Good job on figuring out the cheek topology. But is this meshwork necessarily compatible with physically modelling the neck V?';

'i just started learning about retopology because i want to try to make a game ready character. I learned about how to turn 3 quads in to 1 but have no idea when is good time to use it on a character.
Is what i did on this character a good idea or not? Can these low poly thighs be hidden with normal mapping in the game?

Also should i keep it the transition areas (3 to 1) away from joints?';

'>>980354
this will probably shade badly regardless of maps, but depends on the engine. Why do you have such stark difference between torso and legs?

it's for porn, isn't it?';

'>>980355
No it's not for porn

I felt like there were just too many vertices for places that don't bend, like thighs. I do however want to keep high poly count where the joints are for animation though. This is my first time trying to make mesh for real time animation so i'm a bit lost.';

'>>980354
It's generally a good idea to keep the topology as regular as possible around areas that will deform a lot, like joints. This means that transition areas (where you reduce the geometry) should ideally be placed in areas of the mesh that experience minimal deformation. This helps to avoid issues with skinning and rigging later on.

The flow of your topology should support the contours and muscle structure of the character for the best visual and deformation results. Star points or poles can be used strategically to redirect edge flow or reduce geometry, but they should be used sparingly and placed in areas that do not deform excessively.

Looking at the image you provided, if those poles are not in a highly deformable area (which typically would be closer to the hips and knees), then it might be acceptable. However, if these poles are near the buttock area, it might be problematic since this area can deform significantly during leg movement.

Regarding the thighs, if they don't contain much detail and don't contribute to the silhouette significantly, normal mapping can be quite effective. Just ensure that the base geometry follows the major muscle lines to get the best result from the normal map.';

'>>980357
thanks for that insightful post
i reduced the number of poles on the leg
hopefully it won't cause issues down the line.
i'm a bit confused by the buttocks edge flow
is it suppose to be like pic related?';

'>>980371
You are pretty close, good topology it's a craft.
You need to surround some areas

Check this guy
For the head: https://youtu.be/YCX54Nffuys?si=u74pxgApddQWW4QY

For the body:
https://youtu.be/6ztn-S0o1DE?si=VVBLSSJJP9rI_Riv';

'>>966563
rip image';

'>>980421
yeah it was the wrong image
this was the right one >>966564';

'New to 3D and trying to learn to sculpt (owned a tablet and it seemed really cool) is there a general warm up/practice I can do? Or should I just model heads for awhile until I find a project to chip away at? I know learning different discipline is bad for growth, but is there anything like that for hard surface?';

'God, hard surface stuff is so satisfying. I fucking love adding support loops and watching it all come together.';

'>>981024
It's like one big puzzle coming together.';

'>>966562';

'I like how sloppy these wipers look. It just werks and motionblur takes care of everything';

'I'm working on a gun, and the grip part has some curves obviously. Using subdivision modelling. The problem I'm having is that I like to keep things as low poly as possible to keep them manageable, but I just can't realistically tie in the details I need with a low poly version of parts of it.
Would it be bad practice to model the general shape low poly, apply 1 sibdivision to get the nicely smoothed slightly higher poly version, and then tie the smaller details into that? It feels hacky, but I'm not going to be able to hand-place every single one of the vertices just right as compared to the subd.';

'>>981915
That is pretty common workflow. Rough out a shape in sub-D collapse/flatten the stack down to that level and then optimize the sub-d generated mesh to fit your target needs by modifying deleting loops etc.

There's nothing hacky about it, any method you can think of to generate the polygons you need is valid if the end result is something useful that matches your target specs.';