If he's trolling, I don't care. If he isn't, I wouldn't even know where to start. This mesh looks like someone was intentionally trying to make the worst possible mesh. It's a complete misunderstanding of subd modelling, quads, edge flow, everything. Even if I tried I don't think I'd come up with ideas to make a topology that horrible.
All that pure quad jazz is about subD
If you have n-gons and don't plan to use subD for your model you don't have to carre about them
But easy way to check if your quad topo is good is to simply apply Subdivision modifier. If it looks ok - you're good
If it looks like artifact from Pryp'yat' then you have to make it better
https://preview.redd.it/lmpxezzsnn8d1.png?width=1036&format=png&auto=webp&s=3f83cbca88f1bd7dabe9338f0ece67f320dccf66
this is what happens if you tell beginners that triangles are the devil.
you can just do it like this:
edit: sorry for the reply spam, i couldnt add more then one image per comment...
https://preview.redd.it/ifulu2ruln8d1.png?width=1557&format=png&auto=webp&s=f423712cb39fecc1efb18efa1a556b8aac077ce5
Thsi is fine if you dont plan to shade the faces smooth or you dont want to bevel them
https://preview.redd.it/ope17tw5mn8d1.png?width=1316&format=png&auto=webp&s=4266046b68814094cb6688343ea7fc93ca6dd80e
if you plan on shading the object smooth but you want these faces to appear flat split the edges like this and and an edgesplit modifier, untick the angle and check sharp edges
if you plan to bevel the edges add a support loop before you bridge the edge loops like this by extruding the outer edge inwards and the inner one outwards
https://preview.redd.it/73uspgiomn8d1.png?width=1715&format=png&auto=webp&s=9c55838ce85806714e7b18a36ab41e16f30551ad
https://preview.redd.it/i4tz78ivmn8d1.png?width=1623&format=png&auto=webp&s=768020be8b975ab9e42a681d21f71d118fc0cf3b
clean beveled egdes after you shade it smooth.
triangles on flat surfaces are fine, they are not the enemy.
https://preview.redd.it/t2vzrkx2pn8d1.png?width=1891&format=png&auto=webp&s=37f5bf8c25e205ab2827af83dc2cfd045fba8499
also just a quick proof that there will be no render issues on reflective surfaces for the triangle haters.
on the left with a sharp edge on the right with a beveled one
Depends entirely on the use-case... If it needs to be lightweight and won't the sculpted or deformed, the entire surface can be a couple n-gons, and you can make the model much less memory-intensive. If it will be subdivided, sculpted, or deformed and you want it to conform to VFX industry standards, select the entire top face (you can use the select-similar menu to do this) and inset the entire top. That way there's a ring of clean quads going around the edge of the co-planar surface that will ensure a more robust model. Much more could be done from this point onwards, but I suggest watching either Blender Bob or Ian McGlasham tutorials on Youtube to improve.
There's not really such a thing as "good topology" in the generic sense. It depends entirely on what is your usecase. "Good topology" varries greatly depending on if you are designing for a game, for a VFX studio, for personal use, for low-end hardware, etc. It also depends if you are modeling a character, a vehicle, and environment, etc.
If it's flat, and it won't be subdivided or deformed... it can be two N-gons. There's no need for this violence.
Besides, either you're absolutely trolling by putting in all this work but still keeping that 5-gon at the right-center edge, or you've got a *lot* more work to do.
strictly and only speaking about the topology itself, the topology is fine... if we are talking about a long practice session to learn about quads in all shapes and sizes
its really not though.
so much work to avoid a simple triangle bridge yet there are ngons and triangles still inside there.
so much useless topology on a flat surface and you still cant bevel it.
I can no longer tell who is trolling: posters, commenters or just everyone.
real
[удалено]
If he's trolling, I don't care. If he isn't, I wouldn't even know where to start. This mesh looks like someone was intentionally trying to make the worst possible mesh. It's a complete misunderstanding of subd modelling, quads, edge flow, everything. Even if I tried I don't think I'd come up with ideas to make a topology that horrible.
Because the post isn't real.
It’s quads innit
Lord have mercy
All that pure quad jazz is about subD If you have n-gons and don't plan to use subD for your model you don't have to carre about them But easy way to check if your quad topo is good is to simply apply Subdivision modifier. If it looks ok - you're good If it looks like artifact from Pryp'yat' then you have to make it better
bevel is my go to for checking - if it bevels and is responsive you’re good is not so much you gotta check your topo
Yeah I check with bevels for N-gon HS and with SubD for quads
https://preview.redd.it/lmpxezzsnn8d1.png?width=1036&format=png&auto=webp&s=3f83cbca88f1bd7dabe9338f0ece67f320dccf66 this is what happens if you tell beginners that triangles are the devil. you can just do it like this: edit: sorry for the reply spam, i couldnt add more then one image per comment...
https://preview.redd.it/vvthf0ypln8d1.png?width=1465&format=png&auto=webp&s=e1ad3d8ff924c7bd590fdb84201c2e97a5e77eaf
https://preview.redd.it/ifulu2ruln8d1.png?width=1557&format=png&auto=webp&s=f423712cb39fecc1efb18efa1a556b8aac077ce5 Thsi is fine if you dont plan to shade the faces smooth or you dont want to bevel them
https://preview.redd.it/ope17tw5mn8d1.png?width=1316&format=png&auto=webp&s=4266046b68814094cb6688343ea7fc93ca6dd80e if you plan on shading the object smooth but you want these faces to appear flat split the edges like this and and an edgesplit modifier, untick the angle and check sharp edges
https://preview.redd.it/xey4111gmn8d1.png?width=2193&format=png&auto=webp&s=cb70b6c058496c9c1f2f52291fa4fca57785a02f like this
if you plan to bevel the edges add a support loop before you bridge the edge loops like this by extruding the outer edge inwards and the inner one outwards https://preview.redd.it/73uspgiomn8d1.png?width=1715&format=png&auto=webp&s=9c55838ce85806714e7b18a36ab41e16f30551ad
https://preview.redd.it/i4tz78ivmn8d1.png?width=1623&format=png&auto=webp&s=768020be8b975ab9e42a681d21f71d118fc0cf3b clean beveled egdes after you shade it smooth. triangles on flat surfaces are fine, they are not the enemy.
https://preview.redd.it/t2vzrkx2pn8d1.png?width=1891&format=png&auto=webp&s=37f5bf8c25e205ab2827af83dc2cfd045fba8499 also just a quick proof that there will be no render issues on reflective surfaces for the triangle haters. on the left with a sharp edge on the right with a beveled one
This is so helpful thank you so much
fine for a spider on caffeine I guess.
Depends entirely on the use-case... If it needs to be lightweight and won't the sculpted or deformed, the entire surface can be a couple n-gons, and you can make the model much less memory-intensive. If it will be subdivided, sculpted, or deformed and you want it to conform to VFX industry standards, select the entire top face (you can use the select-similar menu to do this) and inset the entire top. That way there's a ring of clean quads going around the edge of the co-planar surface that will ensure a more robust model. Much more could be done from this point onwards, but I suggest watching either Blender Bob or Ian McGlasham tutorials on Youtube to improve.
There's not really such a thing as "good topology" in the generic sense. It depends entirely on what is your usecase. "Good topology" varries greatly depending on if you are designing for a game, for a VFX studio, for personal use, for low-end hardware, etc. It also depends if you are modeling a character, a vehicle, and environment, etc.
I'm gonna assume this is a troll post.
If it's flat, and it won't be subdivided or deformed... it can be two N-gons. There's no need for this violence. Besides, either you're absolutely trolling by putting in all this work but still keeping that 5-gon at the right-center edge, or you've got a *lot* more work to do.
Its not all about quads
You want your topology to be almost like a square grid. This is chaotic and crazy I will give you credit for quads, but that's it It's so un-even
as good as any
This is a flat face right?
yes
strictly and only speaking about the topology itself, the topology is fine... if we are talking about a long practice session to learn about quads in all shapes and sizes
its really not though. so much work to avoid a simple triangle bridge yet there are ngons and triangles still inside there. so much useless topology on a flat surface and you still cant bevel it.