/3/ - 3DCG

[Anonymous No.426145]

Hey 3! i use maya, i'm a beginner and can;t manage to find how to make this shit work, i want this to look smooth but never found nor managed to make it look smooth only polygon clunky, i know that the smoothing exists but the edges that are supposed to be sharp are converted to putty, help pleaseee?!

[Anonymous No.426149]

Smoothing doesn't work well on triangulated meshes. You're going to have to delete all the diagonal edges.

[Anonymous No.426157]

>>426149
i triangulated them because it looked even worse with plane faces, is there a way to make smooth and sharp faces in the me mesh? or i better think of moving to something like zbrush?

[Anonymous No.426160]

>>426157
you can control the sharpness of smoothed angles by adding more edge loops or by manually hardening the normals on certain edges and setting the smooth tool to conserve hard edges.
zBrush and every other 3D package is exactly the same way. There is no smooth tool that can read your mind and just know what edges to keep hard and what to make smooth.

[Anonymous No.426164]

[Anonymous No.426173]

>>426160
yes, i know that no program will ever fulfill your expectations so i'm asking if you can have hard and smooth edges in the same mesh, what you said seems to be what i'm looking for, could you please tell me how i can make the smoothing conserve the hard edges in some parts?

[Anonymous No.426175]

>>426173
select the edges and go to normals>Harden Edge and then in the smooth tool settings check "hard Edges"

[Anonymous No.426177]

>>426175
oh god YES,FINALLY thanks a lot

[Anonymous No.426194]

>>426164
>gif
why would anyone think this is a good idea for a /3/tut

[Anonymous No.426196]

>>426194
because there's a gifcam and no webm cam you idiot

[Anonymous No.426264]

>>426196
>pressing a button on gifcam is harder then pressing a button on obs

[Anonymous No.426309]

Hi 3, not OP, but I did not want to create a new thread for this quick question...

I'm using Maya 2014.

I've created an simple object and check if everything is clear with Cleanup tool. Even apply a Freeze Transform...
Duplicated this clean object... Then moved it or rotated it (taking care of center its pivot)
Now, if i check if the object with Cleanup tool, it says that there is non-planar faces... (If i start over, it's not always the same faces which are considered as non-planar)

Any ideas on what is going on ? Did anyone already had this problem ?

[Anonymous No.426313]

>>426309
delete the history before duplicating the object

[Anonymous No.426314]

>>426313

Oh yeah. I've forgot to say that i deleted the history before duplicating it. (In fact, before freeze the transform)

:(

[Anonymous No.426336]

>>426314
Open it up in the hypergraph and look at its connections. It must be hooked into some weird nodes that aren't duplicating along with the object.
The nuclear option is to export it as an obj and then reimport it.

[Anonymous No.426355]

press 3

[Anonymous No.426386]

>>426355
The object is correct with the smooth preview (3)

>>426336
I checked everything in the node editor compared to the origin object (& objects which don't have this bug).
There is no weird nodes that aren't duplicating along with the object. The duplication is strictly the same.

So I tried the "nuclear option" (:D) which was my last "chance" i my point of view. But same thing happens with the reimported obj...

(If i check the non-planar faces with the option in Display > Polygons, Maya don't highlight them - So.... Those faces seems considered as non-planar only with the CleanUp Tool)

Do you thing it might comes from my Maya version which is cracked ? (I checked the desktop subscription, but it's wayyyy outside my budget for now.)

Thanks a lot for you answers !

[Anonymous No.426748]

>>426386
There are two options.
Either the models are in fact identical and you're misinterpreting the maya cleanup tools

Or you've missed something when checking for bizarre nodes.

Try just selecting the original object and opening the hierarchy veiw. The one with the little icon under the toolbox, not the hypergraph one. A common side effect of working on a model for a long time is that you have lots of empty transform nodes and a few mesh nodes that when hooked together sum up to what you see on the screen. Untangling them can be tricky, but necessary to fix bugs like this.

However, exporting the object as an OBJ shouldn't be affected by this. It takes the verticy data and makes a new model with no nodes and no history. Unless there's some sort of node configration that escapes the exporting process, which I doubt, you must be missing something.

Nevertheless it doesn't matter. Dplicate the model or work from the export. Fix its problems by hand and then delete the original because it's obviously problematic. Then just use the refined duplicate as your new master object to duplicate from

[Anonymous No.426768]

Op here, thanks for the help! i'm trying to get accostumed to the smoothing and all since it shows to be somewhat unstable (something particular of maya) but now i want you guys to please criticize my form of structuring meshes, is it even considered decent? what could i do to improve it?

[Anonymous No.426786]

>>426768
Make the lines follow the shape of human bone and muscle structure as much as possible, right now you basically have a fancy cube. It's not bad, but it's definitely not good.

[Anonymous No.426810]

>>426768
well first of all maya's smoothing tool is not "unstable". this problem doesn't happen randomly.

To critique your topology though we'd have to see it with quads. There's a lot of bizarre n-poles on your mesh but I can't really tell if they're caused by triangulating the mesh or not.

The general shape though is too rigid. Human spines have predictable curves that counter each other.

[Anonymous No.427071]

stick to quads (where each poly has 4 sides) as a good rule of thumb.
Of course depends if youre going to be animating really, but in my opinion i'd use it anyway

there are exeptions to this but its a good rule. google quadmesh and 'poles' to learn more

[Anonymous No.427267]

>>426810
uhh yes i totally agree that this would be a very deformed human, i'm modeling these for reference, a kraftwerk clunky robot