How To Model With Terrible Topology

Yes - you CAN model with terrible topology. Here's how.
►► Our Blender courses & resources - www.blenderbro...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCIALS:
💻 Our Blender courses - www.blenderbro...
☎️ Discord - / discord
🖼️ Instagram - / blenderbros3d
CONTACT:
📱 Inquiries/questions - [e-mail]
►► Our Blender courses & resources - www.blenderbro...

[@Musicgun47]

I think you're absolutely right that topology doesn't matter for concept pieces. However the issues come when you don't know how to fix "bad" topology, which you might have to do if you get a job as a 3d artist and your boss says make it quads because they don't know any better. Also, quad topology is almost required for most game assets as most (if not all) engines automatically triangulate meshes which can cause shading issues if your topology isn't clean (their triangulation algorithms generally aren't optimal).

[@troll_kin9456]

"Also, quad topology is almost required for most game assets..." Where do you get that from? If they deform, absolutely, but static game assets are almost always triangulated to save polygons. The only reason I'm aware of that you wouldn't is to preserve your edge loops for easier editing down the road.

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

​@troll_kin9456 - Well, quad topology will be required for pretty much all assets just for UV unwrapping, baking, and texturing alone. As for triangulation, well, nanite in UE5 is great, but it does have limitations.

[@RhoIzquierdoArt]

@@troll_kin9456 besides shading issues crappy topology will sometimes cause lightmaps to behave strangely if you are baking the lighting (for optimization this is quite important) Also using subdiv workflow allows to easily create different level of detail for objects

[@troll_kin9456]

​@@RhoIzquierdoArtI'll take your word for it since I haven't played with light maps before. Fortunately, once you have the shape of your model established, nothing stops you from retopologizing when you run into an issue. It's still the case that if you go on an asset marketplace or read developers' blogs or open meshes on published games, you will find that most of the static meshes used in production are triangulated in areas where quad geometry was deemed a waste of time and polygons.

[@gabrielegagliardi3956]

I don't get the part where you talk about triangulation, you can use the triangulate modifier in blender, once you export the model as a fbx the triangulation will stay the same in blender, substance painter or unreal engine.

[@cglancer]

just to add to this. the importance and practices of topology are dictated by the purpose of the object. what it will be used for and by who. If its just for a quick render you do yourself, it doesn't really matter but for almost anything else, good and evenly distributed topology is important for making iterations, revisions, uvs, deformations, hi/ low workflows, etc. There's fewer situations where clean topo doesn't matter than when it does. and clean doesn't mean only quads. its more about avoiding ngons, pinching, poor edge flow and the like. p.s. there is a constant flow of people fresh to 3D every day. even the basics need to be covered every so often. a bit of patience for them would go a long way. especially since they are part of your market.

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

Absolutely spot on. I could not have worded it better myself. Josh is an absolute tool at the present time. Sorry, but it has to be said.

[@RhoIzquierdoArt]

"...since they are part of your market" Blender bros market is to use booleans for everything, it makes sense for them to lower the value of clean topology, since they don't have a single course on proper quad workflow. To be fair they do videos from time to time using subdiv, but it's within the same argument that quads are only "optional". At my work the creative team use booleans for everything and make beautiful renders, then in UE5 there's a ton of shading issues and can't bake lighting to save my life, I end up using a bunch of time repairing the mess to make things work on an optimized way

[@cglancer]

@@RhoIzquierdoArt that sounds like a nightmare. maybe AI will help converting to usable geo soon

[@LETHALxxTiTAN]

Nice & well explained, I'm a Cad developer, I like how you show every different scenerios of when topology matters and doesn't; even how you can somewhat fix the topology of a cad model if you want to deform the object later on for animation. I also did games design early in my studies so have both knowlede to a degree.

[@najhonbanjon]

Yes, I agree with you. CAD programs do not care about topology at all, but in Blender, when you look carefully at the shape, you see that it is more beautiful than a shape made with a CAD program.

[@marcfuchs6938]

I'm not sure if I get your comment right, but the thing about CAD software is, that every detail is always shown absolutely perfect. And in my eyes, omnipresent perfection also makes things boring. Polygons bring less perfection into the game, which can make things better. Right now I am finishing the model of a character and he's littered with triangles. Especially in the shirt, and that's perfectly fine and desired. Clothing is a very irregular thing, and this topology, that many people would call messy, brings some more natural looking irregularity into this cloth. It doesn't look perfect, like anything in real life doesn't. And it looks great that way.

[@antonioesposito8071]

no, the opposite it's true, as a matter of fact in automotive and design industry CAD systems are used, polygonal modeling it's okj only for 3d printing and rendering

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

'Quad boy'? Josh, I am going to tell you this because I don't think anybody else will. It is obvious that you have come a long way from your humble beginnings as a teacher on Udemy. I remember you made a course on how to make a record player using Boolean and Bevels. It was excellent, and I still utilize those techniques in my workflow to this day. But you were also very approachable and friendly. Going to you with a question was never an issue, and you had good interaction with your followers here on YT back in the day. However, that was before you met and teamed up with Ponte Ryuuri. At the present time, you seem to take on a very standoffish tone where you make divisive comments in both your videos and emails (I receive them from your website). You rarely answer questions, and if you do, the response is often rude, and you push narratives that simply aren't true: 'Ngons are the future.' So here's some advice. Don't let success go to your head, and be careful who you let influence you. Stay humble, and do some reflecting, alright? I wish you all the best going forward bro. - An og follower

[@Starfieldman]

I agree unfortunately, Josh used to be himself, now I think he is trying to emulate his partner. I think Ryuui presents a he-man tough guy macho persona, unafraid of an expletive or two. Josh be yourself, no need to copy anyone.

[@criticalwokeracisttheory4645]

Perhaps but according to one of them, they have 80,000 students worldwide - at say $200.00 a course that's $16,000,000.00 selling videos showing you how to us some add ons and boolean. I have to admit that's damn impressive considering I have not seen any demo reel from either one.

[@doraafelfedezoofisol]

200 a course? A think u overestimated that part, also there are taxes on top of all those, I'd say they are at around 5 mill tho

[@ikonka77]

I also think Ponte Ryuuri has a bad influence on you. This guy is toxic

[@tlilmiztli]

If you are only making model for yourself - as long as it looks good, nothing really matters. As soon as you get a real job and they say specifically that you need to make this model to work with subdiv you are totally screwed. So kids - if you want to keep on making stuff for yourself - listen to this "specialist". If you ever want to get a job (where you will have to do what they tell you to) learn how to make good topology. This dude is making money on you - on your views and course purchases. But if you are not planing to become yet another YT star and thinking about getting job in the industry - learn how to make good topology. Or dont and believe that sort of "guru" - I dont care if you get fired or dont get the job. Just friendly advice.

[@BARCOS_SUBMARINOS_AERONAVES]

Es la mejor respuesta que he leído.

[@gabrielegagliardi3956]

È la migliore risposta che abbia mai letto.

[@tuberbrad]

Another home run! Keep up the great work Bros, you guys are killing it and glad I have the opportunity to learn from you and Ryuu. You guys rock!👍😎

[@Nicaraguall]

„Topology doesn’t exist” actually isn’t true in therms of CAD software. The topology exists but it’s invisible and it’s constantly changing during editing. Remember graphics cards can’t draw anything besides triangles. But I agree that topology is something people focus too much on and forgetting that topology is obstacle not feature in creating 3D work.

[@abobadrm]

Is there a tutorial on how to model this beautiful object inside Blender?

[@criticalwokeracisttheory4645]

The final goal is to have a clean concept design AND clean topology - this is industry standard. Yes concept work is important but that skill set is AFTER you master clean quad sub-d modeling. But you are correct, if your goal is to create some nice static concept art then sure you can use anything but explain how this lands a job for a modeler in the actual real world. I have never once heard of any modeler whose job it was to design their own concepts and get paid. Not a single one. Show us a clean quad production ready Diablo, that's the real world.

[@systematicpsychologic7321]

Nice vid as usual. Hoping you guys do some Plasticity-centric courses someday, I've learned a lot watching Blender Bros stuff.

[@backyy07]

lol Ive actually invested allot of time on learning topology. and when it comes to wire frame renders its really cool. but the most useful thing I've learned about topology is that if you can get away with it, you probably should :P

[@DaCapitalist1]

This is an absolutely fantastic video, and in my humble opinion, not only is the video informative, but it also clarifies many common misunderstandings within this wonderful world that we all share.. 3-D design. Early on in my learning process I also focused on topology as it’s easy to get stuck and frustrated within this portion of 3-D design.. it truly wasn’t until I altered my way of thinking that I began to see legitimate improvement within myself and my own work. Thank you Josh for continuing to educate this community and to a large extent. Thank you for just being a great human being.

[@bernhard.design]

@Josh: What you say is spot on. However, the obsession about great topology is driven by the game industry. Which makes a huge chunk of the market. For games, especially mobile games, it’s all about low-poly optimized topology. I tested also Plasticity and Shapr3d (which is even easier and faster to learn). But at the end, unfortunately, I also need low-poly optimized models for mobile games. So using Plasticity will add in this particular case extra work, because I have to clean up the topology, re-topo anyways. Which is possible but also time consuming. So I guess for certain game engines, there is no other way at this point to use classic Polygon-Modeling. The only engine that will work with CAD Meshes is the Unreal Engine when using Nanite. Plus, when using CAD mesehs: UV Layout and optimized PBR Texture maps will give you a slight headache! 😃 So yes, chose wisely your workflow to safe time and think about for what purpose you are going to model your piece. Concept Design and mainly focusing on the design work is quite a different discipline in the filed of 3D. And perhaps, for Design-Work, you might even prefer Zbrush, which I like as well when it comes to hard surface concept modeling/sculpting. Cheers 🍻

[@GuestUser-jf8uj]

Lol I like how someone got triggered over being called "Quad boy". I actually prefer your workflow over the boring, tedious, and traditional workflow. If I'm going to make my own game in UE5, there's no way in hell I'll be able to do it with the traditional modelling workflow. Hopscutter with your workflow actually makes it a real possibility.

[@AndreeMarkefors]

There's a Blender Bridge plugin for Plasticity. It will let you connect Blender with your "live" geometry in Plasticity. Might be an interesting workflow for certain shapes-especially for those of us who have Quad Remesher. Might make for a nice tutorial.

[@najhonbanjon]

Yes, it depends on what you do with that piece of art

[@aleksivanska2475]

How can I enable tab to give me the same pie menu as you? I'm trying to activate the pie menus add on but it does not have that kind of similar option... I think...

[@marcfuchs6938]

In hard surface modeling, topology is a way easier topic to handle than for example with character animation. But even there, the kind of topology depends on more factors than just the topology itself. Just today I am working on an NPR character. He's supposed to look drawn and uses a toon shader with 2 crisp shadow layers. That means, you basically only have 3 colors to determine a surface, you simply can't see any details in a realistic shading, that messy topology would create when deforming. So while I try to go with quads where feasible, I will also use many triangles. Like in his shirt for example. I painstakingly modelled in folds and creases, and those would not only be painful to try to make in a very clean quad way, it would also be wasted time. Any quad lover would probably get a heart attack from this topology, buit for my purpose, it doesn't just work, but it may even look better than quad topology. Because a shirt has a very irregular surface, and the topology brings some irregularity to the table, which makes it look more natural. The general rule is: Topology doesn't matter. The final look matters, and whatever topology makes your result look good (still or in animation) is the right topology.

[@Even-Steven]

It's weird that there even needs to be a video to point out the distinctions. I guess I take it for granted because it seemed obvious to me. 🤷‍♂ Give topology a thought when it actually matters.

[@farhadkhosravi4630]

Hey Josh, an irrelevant question here, ever tried the Fluent Power Trip? Can it be a replacement for HardOps and Boxcutter?

[@enviz]

Great aspect to topology.

[@zozoolaroxmusic]

Do you work in CAD now? For modeling i mean

[@MikiyasGebi]

imma make it big with 3D some day.

[@propiro]

Even you yourself stopped at the result before saying "ok", because you knew it was not ok. Why do you even push such incorrect beliefs to people, all it creates is bunch of people who cant model, cant detect issues, cant fix them, and worst of things, think they are somewhat hireable in the industry

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

Exactly.

[@julio_lyn]

You are completely wrong, if you model in blender to render and animate in blender, ok, topology is not importante, but when you send it to others 3D softwares, like an engine, topology is very very important, because performance, no bugs, etc... You blender bros are kings of bevels, lol, 😂😂😂

[@bifrostbeberast3246]

Kings of still frames :D

[@troll_kin9456]

I didn't know there was such thing as a "Quad Boy" until I read the comments. You're completely correct. Design an attractive shape, retopologize later if the model application requires it. This is conventional wisdom for sculpting and should be for hard ops as well.

[@de5iner]

JL Mussy diss

[@ErikMKeller]

Sometimes it seems people want to make sure that everything they ever created will be game engine ready, deformable, etc. If that's the goal, people should go for it. Although, I doubt that's their reasoning; they just heard "QUADS YOU MUST USE, YOUNG BLENDER USER" (imagine the sound of a swamp in the background).and they stick with it. That's not a problem, unless someone is waiting for the design to be finished. Then "you'll have to wait, I'm still in the retopology phase" simply doesn't fly. 😎 Great video 👍

[@alexanderleljak3507]

Your explanation of a CAD modeling is wrong. There is topology and topology in NURBS Modeling is extremely important as soon as you leave the world of basic CAD modeling. It is utterly precise, where the surface connection is mathematically described in space. Having bad topology will render your progress nearly impossible forcing you to rebuild previously made surfaces. Plasticity due to its great parasolid kernel sorts a lot of things for you, but also not forever. Try modeling in Alias and you’ll get what i mean. Having basic understanding of something isn’t enough to present is as truth for the others.

[@de5iner]

I am an ex Maya user and the quad boys were crazy there

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

Why did you stop using Maya?

[@de5iner]

@@Inconvenient_NPC the main reason is because I can’t afford it, later on after learning blender, I love it way more than Maya, it has so much more to offer.

[@frugu]

I did not even finished watching the video, "there is no topology in CAD"? WTF!? there is topology and it's much more complicated than polygon modeling. Ever heard how a NURBS surface works? poles? degrees? spans? knots? reparametrization? Take a look at people modeling Class A surfaces with software like Alias, they take hours just to model a surface

[@kenw8875]

josh - run the bridge to seamlessly rip from plasticity to blender. in ngons with refaceted function. the mesh will be based. apex-level workflow. and yes, the quad boys are crying 😭

[@marcfuchs6938]

The title doesn't really fit this video. =) It implies actual modeling work, and there was none. I think a more fitting title would be something like "don't waste your time on perfect topology" or "when messy topology is totally fine"

[@bifrostbeberast3246]

Paid addons and bad techniques. Stop calling these 'tutorials'

[@original_M_A_K]

This isn't a tutorial

[@Inconvenient_NPC]

@bitfrost agreed

[@gabrielegagliardi3956]

What's wrong with paid add-ons ? If you prefer modelling 650 trees instead of using botanik, go ahead. If you want to rotate for hours uv island instead of using UV Packmaster, go ahead. This adversity towards Paid add on doesn't make any sense, add-ons are simply tools, nothing wrong using them if you drastically increase your proficiency.

[@bifrostbeberast3246]

@@gabrielegagliardi3956 I watch tutorials to LEARN how to DO things, not how to use paid addons - I can figure that out myself... Imagine a cooking show: "And now you pour the instant noodles into the water, boil it and voila! You got a dish! Isn't cooking easy?"

[@abdualwhaballam5440]

First yay

[@prettypenny112]

Yeah it looks pretty bad, congrats