How useful is it to use this technique in archviz?

[edgaro]

Hello everyone

 

New in this forum, I've been making renders of buildings for the last 6 months, and I'm wondering whether it is a good idea to use this Hard Surface Modelling or SubD technique in architecture. I mean, I've followed some pretty long tutorials about this technique and the only good use I see in this technique is that you can later apply a turboSmooth modifier (in 3ds Max) and that would smooth the corners out properly. I usually fix the sharp edges by chamfering everything that I think it needs it, but someone suggested me to use this technique to get beliebable results in my geometry.

 

This technique, apparently, is about adding support edges in the corners and doing quads as you make your geometry, just to apply a smoothing modifier to your object later on. I'm talking about a lot of support edges and a lot of polygons. For a single wall?

 

Do you guys know about this technique and how it works?

[Justin Hunt]

most of the time you wont need to Sub-D your model of the building, simple chamfering is more than enough. When it comes to soft furnishings or more organic architecture then yes Sub-D's are essential.

 

Even when you are not using Sub-D's it is important to keep your model topology as clean as possible. Detail where detail is needed. This will make it easier to make changes later, keep viewport interaction good and ultimately render times under control.

[Nic H]

id say its very useful for architectural stuff- even without the subd smooth thing

 

it keeps very clean simple models that are easy to cut holes in and refine (mainly using connect edge and bridge)

very fast as well once you get used to it, also makes uv unwrapping easy and means displacement works properly

 

great for grabbing selections from geometry as well.

 

on continuous poly modeled geometry you can very quickly select a continuous edge loop and make a spline from that --> which can then be turned into a floor that is tight with your walls. on a wall with thickness you might do a ring selection and connect edges to make a spline that gets a sweep on it to form a window frame, ditto for the glass.

 

its just general good practice. we remodel all our client assets this way - nice and simple and light because you are making images and not a building.

[edgaro]

Thanks for answering, guys.

Justin: That's exactly what I like to do, I like to keep my models clean... Actually, I had to close some personal projects forever due to a bad topology work. So what you're saying is exactly what I'm starting to do.

 

nicnic: if you point me in the right direction, I googled some tuts already, but none of them involve architecture. Do you know of any source where I can see these advantages you talk about in action? I imagine what you mean, but it's always easier to see and apply after that, rather than all the experimentation. It sounds lazy, I guess. hehehe

[egmehl]

I agree with both nicnic and Justin - keeping to all quads even if you don't use turbosmooth will save you hours when it comes time to make revisions. Enough time that I usually remodel client geometry like nicnic does and I bet I still save time over having less organized geometry.

 

I'd add that one thing I don't like about turbosmooth for arch work is that it adds polys everywhere when you turn up the iterations - so if you are doing a wall and just want a nice chamfer on a corner, it will also subdivide the flat parts which can add up. I've also found the quad chamfer modifier that Marius Silaghi makes has saved me hours and makes changing edge radii in the future super easy.

[edgaro]

Thanks for the suggestions, Eric. I'll take them into account for the next projects. I've also noticed some highlights in the edges when I soften them, which looks very good. So, I suppose I'll look for those plugins to do this part for me, because subdividing "manually" is hard in complex objects making me use a lot of floating geometry. So far, I haven't encountered a problem using this floating geometry, but when I put displacements and these are inside another geometry, they looks bad in the render.

 

Haha. I'm sorry, I'm very new at this, but they wanted me to do this job at the office. And I liked it, so I'll keep getting better. Thanks for the professionalism, guys. Best wishes.

 

I guess this is /thread?

[Nic H]

if you are looking for edge highlights / softness you can always you a 'vrayedgetex' in your bump rather than geometry chamfering - i really only use geometry chamfering on foreground objects tbh.

 

if you need to blend 'edgetext' with a bitmap bump use the 'vraycomptex' and add them together.

 

that quad chamfer modifier looks great! how did i miss it.

ill be buying that 9am monday morning.

[edgaro]

Yes, I actually love this blending method. Saw it on Peter Guthrie's blog and I've been using it in every project. This is actually the reason why I asked the question, if there are so many ways to achieve a certain effect, why do I have to use Sub-D? OK, the question is answered already, but I still find it a little overkill now that I'm using it.

[Nic H]

how else would you model it tho?