Jump to content

First 3d model - feedback?


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Cerbera said:

That's totally understandable. If you're a hobbyist you have time to learn at your own relaxed pace with not much in the way of time pressure. Between all those videos, and the excellently helpful community here on the cafe it may well be all you ever need !

 

CBR

Do you think I should recreate the model properly tomorrow or try to make something else?

Link to post
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I know being a student with a tight budget can suck a bit when it comes to paying for help (I'm a student myself 🙂 ). But if you get the money for a Skype-session with Cerbera, do it :). Had a 2 hour

Well done on your first model created in C4D.   For us to offer some feedback we need to see the wires of the model as to see its construction.  Its also a good idea to post the reference image your w

Yes of course...       CBR Grenade CBR 02.c4d

Posted Images

I found I learned fastest by redoing the same models until they were the best they could be... sometimes even now I model something twice (or more) if I remain unconvinced I found the best way the first time.

 

But yours isn't so much a case of needing to start again, just 'finish modelling' the top section to add the thickness you are missing, and to retopo it into quads.

Why not have a go at that yourself, and post what you get, and we can see how you're getting on, and tell you the right answer if you're struggling to find it...

 

CBR

Link to post

Oh, just another thought - you do need to tell us what would be the final intended use for this model. The rules for modelling change quite a lot based on where the model will end up, and what context it will be used in. For example models for a game usually contain ONLY triangles, and the absolute priority is polygon efficiency, or having topology eminently suitable for rigging, whereas for a high quality promo video you probably want to do it as a med-mid poly SDS model where a whole different set of modelling rules apply...

 

CBR

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Cerbera said:

I found I learned fastest by redoing the same models until they were the best they could be... sometimes even now I model something twice (or more) if I remain unconvinced I found the best way the first time.

 

But yours isn't so much a case of needing to start again, just 'finish modelling' the top section to add the thickness you are missing, and to retopo it into quads.

Why not have a go at that yourself, and post what you get, and we can see how you're getting on, and tell you the right answer if you're struggling to find it...

 

CBR

There is some thickness on this part, I think I am gonna recreate the model anyways just to see if I can get a cleaner result. Ill be sure to ask for help if I get stuck though

image.thumb.png.89c89e47c73f5bee82f100c6d6d92152.png

Link to post
Just now, Cerbera said:

Oh, just another thought - you do need to tell us what would be the final intended use for this model. The rules for modelling change quite a lot based on where the model will end up, and what context it will be used in. For example models for a game usually contain ONLY triangles, and the absolute priority is polygon efficiency, or having topology eminently suitable for rigging, whereas for a high quality promo video you probably want to do it as a med-mid poly SDS model where a whole different set of modelling rules apply...

 

CBR

Very true

I don't really have any intended use for the models at the moment, just experimenting.

I got into modeling since I have a 3d printer and I find it quite boring to only download models. So when I make a model I also look at it from the printers perspective, so to say "Can the printer actually print this" since it won't be able to make 90 degree overhangs for long distances.

 

But then again, I have my solutions for tricky models to print anyways.

 

So I know I need to export files as STL or OBJ for them to be compatible, I do not know whats best for STL or OBJ so any feedback on that would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post

The good news for beginners is that for 3D printing, topology simply doesn't matter, or at least not in the same way it does for pretty much any other context. You can feed those printing apps literally any old sh*t, and it will will deal with it as long as you have a coherent surface of some kind. 3D printing wants high poly triangulated meshes with no holes in them - ie they must have real world thickness, and be a contiguous surface throughout. Aside from that, and planning your support structures, you can do entirely free-form modelling with this, and use sculpting or the Volume Builder to quickly make models you need without really having to worry about quality mesh work at all !

 

CBR

Link to post
1 minute ago, Cerbera said:

The good news for beginners is that for 3D printing, topology simply doesn't matter, or at least not in the same way it does for pretty much any other context. You can feed those printing apps literally any old sh*t, and it will will deal with it as long as you have a coherent surface of some kind. 3D printing wants high poly triangulated meshes with no holes in them - ie they must have real world thickness, and be a contiguous surface throughout. Aside form that, and planning your support structures, you can do entirely free-form modelling with this, and use sculpting or the Volume Builder to quickly make models you need without really having to worry about quality mesh work at all !

 

CBR

Sick!

Link to post
12 hours ago, Cerbera said:

The good news for beginners is that for 3D printing, topology simply doesn't matter, or at least not in the same way it does for pretty much any other context. You can feed those printing apps literally any old sh*t, and it will will deal with it as long as you have a coherent surface of some kind. 3D printing wants high poly triangulated meshes with no holes in them - ie they must have real world thickness, and be a contiguous surface throughout. Aside from that, and planning your support structures, you can do entirely free-form modelling with this, and use sculpting or the Volume Builder to quickly make models you need without really having to worry about quality mesh work at all !

 

CBR

So I am recreating the model now, and I remember you saying that it should be squares and not traingles, how would I achieve this curve without having to use a line cut?

On the previous model I did a line cut, deleted the excess and used a close polygon hole command.

image.png.e2da679220fae8df18ba07acf966045f.png

Link to post
13 minutes ago, Rectro said:

Do you have multiple views for a reference as it will be impossible to determine the correct form from one single view?  This may be a good alternative reference.  https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/tmc-m67-frag-grenade-model-1392422

 

Dan

I have a dummy of the grenade next to me IRL so that is good enough as a reference, I am just wondering if I should aim to maintain only rectangles and no triangles?

 

And I am also wondering how I can cut the part away to create a "slide" like that?

Link to post
7 minutes ago, Bixmox said:

I have a dummy of the grenade next to me IRL so that is good enough as a reference, I am just wondering if I should aim to maintain only rectangles and no triangles?

Good policy is to aim fo all quads, you can add the odd triangle but all quads are nice to have but not essential.  Zero Ngons at all times.  As square as possible but there will be areas where they are more rectangle and cant be helped.  The ideal is if you dont need extra edges dont add them for the sake of it.  Much depends on If your making a model that you intend to apply Sub d smoothing or not.  What your aiming for is well distributed polygons for their shape and size.  No stretched polygons that are kite shaped.  If it looks ugly then it probably is to others.  When you get it nailed the first thing your want to show off is the wires, this is what shows your modeling skills.

 

Dan

Link to post
1 hour ago, Bixmox said:

So I am recreating the model now, and I remember you saying that it should be squares and not traingles, how would I achieve this curve without having to use a line cut?

On the previous model I did a line cut, deleted the excess and used a close polygon hole command.

image.png.e2da679220fae8df18ba07acf966045f.png

 

You can start with simple cube with very low segmentation. Let´s say 1x1x1. this help you model/adjust base cage much faster and you always add cuts/connecting edges to increase segmentation where is needed...

Another helper is Symmetry object. If your object is symmetrical in some plane, simply use this object for automatic generation of opposite side. It always can be converted to polygonal object and adding details where needed...

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...