4
$\begingroup$

I would like to know if this is good practice in joining two objects (in my case a sword pommel with a handgrip).

The handgrip has a shade smooth and the pommel has a mirror and subdivision modifier.

Am I doing good to stretch the Pommel's mesh till it joins well with the handgrip (it appears correct when I switch to object mode)?

Is this correct practice, keeping in mind that I want to make all objects forming the sword a single object in the future?

I am asking to avoid possible future errors.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

It's perfectly reasonable, actually, desirable, to model mechanically separate parts of an object as separate parts of your mesh. So the junction between the steel section and the ridged handgrip would be fine as separate mesh sections. Even so, in this case, I would probably duplicate the lower end of the top section and use the duplicate as the upper end of the bottom section, if I wanted a match.

If you're looking to reproduce your reference, though, there will need to be continuity of shading and texture over the junction within the steel section as it shows in your model. In other words, the meshes will need to be merged at some point, or at least have exactly matching normals where the two parts meet.

In order to achieve that, the underlying topology of the two halves must match, vertex-for-vertex, before the effect of any modifiers, unless you want to commit yourself to a ton of work.

Slightly beside this point, it's often possible for subdivision to 'rescue' a mesh. The un-subdivided mesh can be tortured, stretching in a way wildly dissimilar from the final object, and yet produce reasonable-looking curvatures when subdivided. This will almost always cause trouble, and create work. In those cases, there is always a better basic mesh.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It looks as if @Jachym has made a very nice 'continuous' solution. $\endgroup$ – Robin Betts Dec 8 '19 at 21:39
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, both Jachym and Robin. Jachym gave me a good way to know what the best parctice would be depending on the project but you Robin gave me the sure way I want to proceed. That being of first joining the two meshes, vertice by vertice and the apply the modifiers this because I want it to be seamless as the references. The project I am working on is the blade Anduril from the Lord of the Rings trilogy and people will be LOOKING at each minute detail. $\endgroup$ – ronin074 Dec 9 '19 at 14:49
5
$\begingroup$

There isn't one right way of doing this.
Do it whichever way suits your needs best. :)

Theory
There are two basic ways of joining objects in Blender:
Join into one object CTRL+J consisting of multiple meshes (easy to separate).
Join into one mesh, with all vertices manually connected (seamless appearance).

Both ways are correct. It depends on your model.

Two different ways, both are good practice. enter image description here

Example
Let me use your sword here:
- I want to move it easily - It's only one object.
- I want to easily change different parts → There are multiple meshes inside my object.
- I will export to another software → Mirror modifier is applied, and there are no n-gons
- I want it to resemble a real sword structure → It consists of 4 specific parts

enter image description here

Your needs are different, so your model will have a different structure.
But both ways are correct :).

Here is the model I used, based on your original one:

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.