Hi, I got stuck on mesh modelling bootcamp specifically the topology part of the course so I gave myself a little weekend exercise of modelling some chess pieces to take my mind off of it for a bit. Anyway is there a way to close out this open circle with quads?
I could do it like this with triangles and call it a day but, based on my understanding of the course (and I apologize if it's wrong), is to make your mesh with quads as much as possible. Or,
I could do it like this but it feels wrong and looks ugly.
So yeah, any tips or suggestions please so I know how I can approach this if a similar situation occurs in the future. Thanks!!
UPDATE:
Something just hit me while looking at the third picture and so I made it like this.
I think it looks better without the extruded ring of faces on the third pic. Anyway, tips and suggestion to better solve this problem is always welcome.
Edit:
Changed topography to topology. :D
You can select the circle you want to fill and then under face-> Grid fill to fill it with cleaner topology
In the little menu on the bottom left you can make some more adjustments to the grid.
Thank you Sascha, That actually works and looks way better compare to the ones I tried. Thank you! :)
Hi J3D ,
Grid Fill is a great option and used a lot!
Let me give you a 'manual' alternative.
In the situation of your second picture, select all marked Edges:
and then X > Dissolve Edges (or, when you are in Edge Select Mode, simply CTRL+X).
There are situations where this might be preferred. And it's always good to have more than one method available 😊
I'm assuming you meant this but isn't this an n-gon? a face with more than 4 vertices? I tried not going this route because from what I read, they might cause some issues down the line . . .?
HI J3D ,
that would indeed be an N-Gon.
What I meant was, to only Dissolve the red marked Edges. That would result in something like this:
(and to be fair, I would use Grid Fill, at least 9 out of 10 times...)
Oh my. Martin I'm sorry. My eyes are failing me. I thought I saw the red marks on all the edges within the circle. And yes you're right, that is a quad solution indeed. Also you mentioned something about a pole, which I may have never heard of but after a quick search online is referring to the vertex in the middle that is connected to multiple edges in which you said is a 'problem'. I'm assuming it has something to do with having a good topology which is something I am currently stuck with. I have to do the mesh modelling bootcamp again. Anway thank you so much for your help!! :)
Yes indeed, that Vertex in the middle is a so-called Pole.
It doesn't have to be a problem, but it could be, as always, that depends on the exact situation.
But don't worry, Topology is not something you learn overnight; it'll just make more sense the more you practice.
You can mostly break the rules if the surface in your model is going to stay perfectly flat. In your case if that surface is going to stay like that, not going to deform, you can leave it with a messy topology and it would be ok. Of course the point here for you right now is the learn the best practices, so it's better if you do it clean and correct. But if you're against the clock, know that it's ok to leave parts messy as long as they are flat and wont deform.
Technically there is nothing wrong with using triangles as you did originally.
All quads is desirable because some tools behave badly with non quad geometry.
Triangles are not your enemy, they can be used when needed to define a shape for example.
After all, Render Engines convert quads to triangles anyway.
Even Ngons have there uses, but are much less desirable than triangles.
Don't believe the hype, modeling with quads only and anything else unacceptable, is just not true.