1
$\begingroup$

Lately I've been noticing that when people need to use a spherical object, instead of going Shift A -> Mesh -> Sphere, they advise adding a cube and then applying a Subsurface Modifier to it, without any real explanation as to why. This is an especially prominent technique when the object needs to be low-poly, like for a particle system or something.

So my question is, why do people do this? What advantages does this offer over using a sphere itself? Wouldn't it be more useful to just add a spere? Even if it needs to be low-poly, just adjust the resolution, right?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Catmull-Subdividing a cube does not result in a sphere. You will need to cast to a sphere with ⇧ Shift⎇ AltS To Sphere operation or a Cast modifier. This question covers that.

The sphere and the spherized cube may look similiar, but the topology is different.

comparison

The key advantages of the subdivided, spherized cube are

  • Even Topology The sphere has dense topology at the top and much less dense topology at its equator. If you want to sculpt or otherwise modify the spherical shape, you want to have similiarly sized faces everywhere.
    A 90° rotated sphere would also not give the same results as a sphere with no rotation.
  • Only Quads In organic modeling, which uses subdivision, we strive for topology which main uses quads. The sphere has many triangles at it's poles. Triangles will produce unnatural creases in combination with the subdivision surface modifier.
| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.