0
$\begingroup$

I'm concerned about my topology decisions and the Subdivision Surface modifier. Similar to Hypernurbs in C4D (back in the good ol' days), I tend to directly design details on my mesh, and when it comes time to apply a bevel for sharp edges in subdivision, my mesh becomes a mess.

I think the solution is to separate the details into another object to avoid adding too much crease everywhere (especially in places that don't need it). Is that the best solution, or have I overlooked a better practice?

Crease complexity

In this instance, I'm working on the roof of a caravan. I've added small decorative elements to it. Should I create these elements as separate objects, or should I incorporate them directly into the roof mesh as I've done here? As you can see, when I crease the edges, it introduces complexity elsewhere. Could it cause issues in further steps?

$\endgroup$
9
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hello, @Keynok .. welcome! This is a very broad question, (which could, btw, apply in any application), SE sites are geared to giving ranked, definite, answers to questions which have definite answers. Your best route on this site is to bring up and preferably illustrate a particular instance of your problem. That can attract specific answers, and guide you to the general approach. Please edit to give us an example of the trouble caused by your bevel. As it stands, this post is vulnerable to closure as 'too broad' ... We do want to help you, in our format. $\endgroup$
    – Robin Betts
    Feb 13 at 11:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer! I've added a more specific exemple to my question. I hope it's a better way to ask the question :) $\endgroup$
    – Keynok
    Feb 13 at 12:20
  • $\begingroup$ In your example, I don't think there are any crease. All I see are support loops. Btw, are you following a reference? $\endgroup$
    – Alex
    Feb 13 at 12:40
  • $\begingroup$ if it's more convenient to create separate meshes, do it, it also depends how these pieces weld with the roof, if it doesn't need to look like a smooth transition, use separate meshes $\endgroup$
    – moonboots
    Feb 13 at 12:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @moonboots Thank you, this is the advice I needed $\endgroup$
    – Keynok
    Feb 13 at 14:24

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

(Just for the sake of closing this out)

The advice gleaned from the commentary seems roughly as follows.

There are a few reasons you might want to model a manifold surface (continuous and watertight). They might include:

  • Accurate representation of continuous surfaces
  • 3D printing
  • Smooth deformation, perhaps in stylized animation
  • Boolean operations in modelling, or in live modifiers

(Folks are welcome to add to the list)

But otherwise the general rule is to model separate parts as separate parts, for ease, better overall topology, and realism.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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