[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: otGw0.png (165 KB, 1920x1080)
165 KB
165 KB PNG
>Quands vs triangles for Archiviz

>Quads vs triangles for video game - real time 3d
>>
>>702618

This is a quad board. Keep moving.
>>
Why quads are better, please enlight me, no joke.
>>
You shouldn't give a fuck about triangles for archviz as long as they're on a flat surface.
>>
>>702621
>Why quads are better, please enlight me, no joke.
1 quad = 2 tris. QOD.
>>
>>702623
Quads are deformed better than triangles
>Subdividing
>Bones, and other mesh deforms

If you do low poly, or meshes that you won't subdivide or smooth whatever, you can use triangles
>>
Okay thanks, I will stick with quads.
>>
>>702622
This is wrong, you need to pay attention especially for very large areas which can happen in archvis. You certainly don't need to be autistic about it but just be aware.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.