1
$\begingroup$

I've tried to search for tutorials on modelling irregular/rounded shapes but they seem to all be for symmetrical shapes.

I've been trying to recreate an object by using a subdivided plane and following the shape of the object by using sizing and movement with proportional editing. I also tried to re-create the object by using a cloth simulator, which obtained the wanted shape but I had the same problem as I am having now.

The object I am trying to re-create:

Shape wantedShape wanted

This method has been a little bit fiddly and I assume there must be a better way to achieve this, if there is any advice that can help with my modelling I would be grateful to hear it.

The problem I am having is bringing in the plane to fit nicely on top of the original object and to have the vertices lined up. When I bring in the plane it crinkles and loses the smoothness of the original object.

It may be possible to continue with this method but I feel I'm on the complete wrong track.

The problem:

ProblemProblem

Thanks

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I would not use this method (unless you have a good reason to do so?), instead, enable the Snap to face option, begin with one vertex only and extrude along the shape, then extrude the edge you've created, then the faces, etc... keep it low poly, give it a Subdivision Surface modifier, see how it follows the original shape, give some corrections, etc... until you're good. Only apply the modifier if necessary. But maybe share your original mesh if you don't see what I mean? blend-exchange.giantcowfilms.com $\endgroup$
    – moonboots
    Dec 1, 2020 at 8:25
  • $\begingroup$ I found the question half clear. I suggest you look at the original mesh and notice the few vertices with have 3 edges and not 4. Highlight them. Skipping details you should start with a well subdivided cube cut in half witch also has corners of 3 edges. You should look at introductory videos on topology to see the terms 3 poles and 5 poles. Also extrude some areas of plane to see how may edges meet in the extruded area. The plane is the difficult starting point. A half cube is a better starting point. $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2020 at 8:31

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

Assuming this is an exercise; that you're not wanting to retopologise the original in some radically different way..

This is a subdiv. model: the topology is a that of a Round Cube.

So, starting with 1/4 of one of those, mirrored left to right, and keeping the poly count at the minimum to capture the curvature:

enter image description here

.. just shovel the vertices around under proportional editing, while looking at the result under Catmull-Clark subdivision, level 2. You could use a more orthogonal reference, for accuracy.

enter image description here

Add a Solidify modifier for thickness, creasing the rim, and, after applying the modifiers, extrude the fillet.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Wow, thank you this explanation is absolutely perfect and clear. You are correct in assuming this is an exercise. Thanks again! $\endgroup$
    – foreff
    Dec 2, 2020 at 8:25
  • $\begingroup$ @foreff Welcome to Subdiv! You'll find lots of other exercises out there, some of them quite challenging.. maintaining good topology can be tricky. Worth learning, still, if you want to model a lot. Some tutorials use Booleans all over the place.. nothing wrong with that.. unless cleaning up after them takes longer than it would have done to use what you've learned, and model by hand in the first place! $\endgroup$
    – Robin Betts
    Dec 2, 2020 at 8:54
-2
$\begingroup$

In the image below is a cube subdivided. The operation [To Sphere] was used to make it round. This can be a better starting point. The 3 edge corners are highlighted in red. Your can discard the top half. I am not showing every step. Consider a [Solidify] modifier which can offer [apply]. Then consider proportional edit.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .