Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

3 Dimensional Chat / Quads and triangles question

Author
Message
Alive
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2004
Location:
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 03:59
Link
I've just recently started using Wings 3d and so far I like it. One thing that concerns me is most tutorials I have been following use quad shaped polygons for modelling opposed to triangle shaped polygons. My question is will this effect performace in Dark Basic Pro? That is the quad method. Also on a side note, in LithUnwrap it forces you to convert to triangles upon exporting, is there a way around that or does anyone have suggestions for other UV mapping programs?
Thanks for your time and any information you can provide.
Back to top
Profile PM
zircher
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 05:16 Edited at: 11th Feb 2004 20:07
Link
Quads take up less file space and are more natural for some types of models, but everything gets converted to triangles eventually. Given the killer bug for .X quads in patch 5.2, triangulate your exports if you plan to use that patch.
--
TAZ

Game Beavers
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
AlecM
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 07:39
Link
I think worry about quads for realtime is silly. As Zircher said everything gets converted to triangles and defining a shape in quads isn't always the most efficient way to model something.

[P4 2.8C @ 3.03 with an 866mhz FSB:: MSI Neo-2LS running PAT:: 1gb Mushkin PC-3500 DDR High Perf level 2@ 2,2,2 :: ATI Radeon9800ProAIW :: 120Gb SeagateBarracuda 7,200RPM SATA HD :: Antec Plus1080AMG]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Alive
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2004
Location:
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 13:02
Link
Ok, thanks a lot for the advice.
Back to top
Profile PM
sybixsus
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jul 2003
Location:
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 14:23
Link
As long as you remember to double your polycount mentally whenever you check it, there's no drawbacks. I do all my modelling in 3dsMax with quads, and just double the polycount it reports to give me the real polycount. The only other thing you should note is that you may want to choose how your model triangulates. Which way across your quad the triangles go can make a big difference to the resulting model, so it's worth taking the time to go over your model when it's finished and retriangulate the quads that don't look right.
Back to top
Profile PM
zircher
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 17:34 Edited at: 11th Feb 2004 20:06
Link
sybixsus has a good point. I think quads are better for the mechanical objects I like to make. But when there is a crease, you are better off to manually split the quad the way you want rather than how the program decides to do it.
--
TAZ

Game Beavers
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
AlecM
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 20th Jan 2004 21:04
Link
yes. I wish edge turning or re-traingulating was faster in editable poly mode. The thing I like about editable mesh is that you can turn any edge, not just those that triangulate a quad. I used to model all in triangles and sometime is still do. Often times editable mesh is faster for that. Little things like dividing edges and turning edges can be an effective way to model.

[P4 2.8C @ 3.03 with an 866mhz FSB:: MSI Neo-2LS running PAT:: 1gb Mushkin PC-3500 DDR High Perf level 2@ 2,2,2 :: ATI Radeon9800ProAIW :: 120Gb SeagateBarracuda 7,200RPM SATA HD :: Antec Plus1080AMG]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Alive
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2004
Location:
Posted: 21st Jan 2004 06:49 Edited at: 21st Jan 2004 06:49
Link
Thanks for the tips sybixsus, I've found modelling in quads to be rather effective compared to some other tutorials I've read. When I get to the point of actually wanting to use one of my models I will have to spend more time with triangles in the editor.
Back to top
Profile PM
zao420
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Aug 2003
Location: Canada
Posted: 11th Feb 2004 01:36
Link
sorry to bring an old post back from last month. but don't quads render faster the triangle poly's. i been looking at psx deving and from what i seed they use quads where ever possible and triangle's where they can't.. can't this kinda modeling be done to to work for DBP???

http://cavesoft.no-ip.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
zircher
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 11th Feb 2004 20:06 Edited at: 11th Feb 2004 20:08
Link
They make no difference once they get into the render engine. The power it takes to process a single pixel is the same.
--
TAZ

Game Beavers
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
sybixsus
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jul 2003
Location:
Posted: 12th Feb 2004 03:09
Link
Quote: "sorry to bring an old post back from last month. but don't quads render faster the triangle poly's. i been looking at psx deving and from what i seed they use quads where ever possible and triangle's where they can't.. can't this kinda modeling be done to to work for DBP???"


No. I don't know how PSX hardware works, but PC videocards render triangles. They cannot render quads, so the API has to feed them triangles from whatever you feed the API. It won't make the least bit of difference.
Back to top
Profile PM
guru of boredom
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Oct 2003
Location: middle of no where
Posted: 12th Feb 2004 03:15
Link
you could just use the wings uv system. it not that bad once u get used to it

we are not outnumbered! we are just in a target rich enviroment!
P4 2.4 ghz 120 GB 256 mb GeForce4
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-06-28 02:52:51
Your offset time is: 2025-06-28 02:52:51