Tris vs Quads

[Rob Oplawar]

Hey guys (didn't know which forum this belongs in, so hello off-topic. =P )

WoL expressed dismay at the fact that by reducing the poly count of my helmet I replaced many quads with single triangles:
http://www.spacebrick.net/pictures/gallery/helmet_render_07.jpg
e: wshot is gone? travesty!
http://www.spacebrick.net/pictures/gallery/helmet_render_07.jpg

That got me and him started on the subject of exactly why it is preferable to use quads rather than tris.

I understand that using quads generally makes the mesh easier to look at, but beyond that I can't really see the benefit.

Now, I do intend to research around some real modeling tutorials to see if I can get an industry standard answer, and I do agree that when possible quads are preferable, but I'm still interested to hear what you, dear modelers of H2V Modacity, have to say about it.

My opinion is quads when it's easy, but it's not worth the effort to force everything to be in quads when tris fill the space better. And in the end, it's all a bunch of tris anyway (well, depending on the type of mesh you're creating), and mathematically, in theory, you can make a smoother, more complex curve with the same amount of information when using tris instead of limiting yourself to quads.

So, what'll it be, quads or tris?


e: you guys, I have an announcement to make: I am a dinosaur. Yes, I live in the Cretaceous. For, you see, I use Editable Mesh rather than Editable Poly. :O
ee: Yes, I fully understand that Poly is better in every way. It just so happened that I learned Mesh when I started, and now I feel too secure in my current methods to try serious modeling with a new technique.
Alright alright, fine, I'll learn Poly. Gosh.

[rossmum]

I generally try and avoid the fiddly stuff. I just work in polygons, and stuff around with the triangulation only when I have to. :|

[SnaFuBAR]

make a 4x4 plane in editable poly. use vertex cut to make a diamond in the middle. hit meshsmooth and watch what happens to geometry. that's one reason.

[Corndogman]

I generally use quads, but i use tri's when i need to. such as when i have to make a basic ramp going up, then theres no point for it to be four sided. thats for structures though.When doing terrain i use both.

[Rob Oplawar]

make a 4x4 plane in editable poly. use vertex cut to make a diamond in the middle. hit meshsmooth and watch what happens to geometry. that's one reason.

*does that*
idgi. what's wrong? What happened that's bad?

[Corndogman]

Why would we want use mesh smooth anyways?

[Donut]

make a 4x4 plane in editable poly. use vertex cut to make a diamond in the middle. hit meshsmooth and watch what happens to geometry. that's one reason.
interesting
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s277/TheKillerDonut/wow.jpg
What is the point of meshsmooth?

[Gwunty]

interesting
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s277/TheKillerDonut/wow.jpg
What is the point of meshsmooth?
Making boxy things round, this tool can be quite helpful when used right.

[Disaster]

I don't use meshsmooth. I use turbo but its basically the same thing. Meshsmooth/turbosmooth helps me alot when I model environments.

[Con]

e: wshot is gone? travesty!
We have a better standard shot tag now, as demonstrated by my edit.

[SnaFuBAR]

interesting
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s277/TheKillerDonut/wow.jpg
What is the point of meshsmooth?

the point is that you don't use it on triangles. turbosmoothing will produce the same result.

[Rob Oplawar]

Oh, shot tags just do width now, cool.

But, so let me get this straight- you're saying I should model in low poly and spend extra time making sure I get it exactly right so I can use built in tools to automatically clean up my geometry without screwing it up?
I mean, the only reason I'm hearing to do this is that it's faster and easier, but I mean, as far as I can tell it's faster and easier not to mess with it and just put the triangles where I damn please.
:-3
But that's still the mesh talking. I'll learn poly sooner or later, and then we'll see.

[Disaster]

Yeah. I start with quads because I drag edges. Then I edit the shape and turbosmooth and then use soft selection to get desired results. Anyways, I like using quads to model with, but I later change them to triangles for a smoother result.

[Rob Oplawar]

^ yeah, I modeled the helmet with quads, and then lowered the poly count and used triangles to make it smoother.

[rossmum]

Oh, shot tags just do width now, cool.

But, so let me get this straight- you're saying I should model in low poly and spend extra time making sure I get it exactly right so I can use built in tools to automatically clean up my geometry without screwing it up?
I mean, the only reason I'm hearing to do this is that it's faster and easier, but I mean, as far as I can tell it's faster and easier not to mess with it and just put the triangles where I damn please.
:-3
But that's still the mesh talking. I'll learn poly sooner or later, and then we'll see.
Poly is far faster to use. I used to hate drawing in every triangle when it came to manual face creation; in poly, you just play connect-the-dots and it does all the hard work for you. It will occasionally stuff the triangulation, but that's quick and easy to fix yourself and still beats the hell out of drawing triangles.

[Rob Oplawar]

^ I agree with that, I remember trying poly once and I loved drawing faces rather than triangles, but on average it's a difference of 3 or 4 mouse clicks per face. I don't think it's that huge a deal, especially since I avoid drawing faces at all.

[rossmum]

I've often found myself needing to draw faces with a LOT of triangles. D:

[Tweek]

listen people, havign triangles doesnt matter SHIT AT ALL.
the ONLY time when you want to force yourself to have only quads is when you're gong to res something up to highpoly mesh, and even then you can still get away with triangles if you use them on a curvature-continuous surface.

i often end up making triangles on purpose, so i can direct the triangulation of a mesh myself, so i can make the light fall around the mesh nicely.

in a perfect world, every artist manually triangulates his work before exporting.
with today's polycount nobody does that, nor is it needed. however as artists you should be able to see where you've got a bad case of non planar quads, you'll want to triangulate those. because they can be triangulated in 2 ways, and there's actually alot of difference.

also when you're iptimising a mesh, you're definately going to end up making triangles.
that's fine, because all engines reduce all geometry to triangles anyway.

when you're BUILDING a mesh however, quads is just a bit more neat, and less messy.
it's easier to keep track of your mesh in quads.

tl;dr:
IT DOESNT MATTER SHIT!
only force quads if you're building a high res cage.
the rest is personal preference.

[Zeph]

Quads should be used on parts of the mesh that will be deformed in animation. Static elements of the mesh dont really matter. Your helmet is fine to use non-quad polygons. Whenever you get to the neck though, you'll want everything to be quads there.
</college edumacating you guys>

edit: ^That right there is with the assumption you're going to use it only for a game. If you're working on making a high-quality rendering of it, you'll want to keep the quads because there are soo many tools to make your scene look better that make use of quads.

[Rob Oplawar]

Hm, you all make some valid points. In this scenario, given that it's a solid object that won't deform, and since I already modeled it in quads and then reduced it to tris, I think tris are the way to go.

Now, Zeph, when you say use quads for a surface that will deform, I'm a little curious.
How can that possibly affect it? If you're using nonplanar quads, there's absolutely no difference than using tris when it deforms, and if you use planar quads, well, unless you have some mathematically genius mesh layout, the moment it deforms some of the quads will become nonplanar anyway.

At the edit: now in this case, I totally agree- if poly count is not an issue, then by all means just model in quads and don't worry about triangulation at all.

[Zeph]

It has something to do with the way the mesh is being scaled when animated. Animation isn't my concentration, so I cant give the the exact reason with examples behind it. I just know what I've been told by people who are more experienced with the tools than me.

[Rob Oplawar]

hm. Interesting. So then, it has something to do with the process of animating it and/or the process of importing the animation into the game? Wait, no, that can't be it, cause it's the bones that are animated, not the mesh. But, game engines use triangles. I'm puzzled now.

[Llama Juice]

The bones are animated, the mesh deforms.

I just think of it as a cleaner mesh will deform nicer. I don't really care about the mathematical reason because chances are, it'll say what I said but with fancy words that make things more complicated than what you or I need to know.

[Monopoly]

listen people, havign triangles doesnt matter SHIT AT ALL.
the ONLY time when you want to force yourself to have only quads is when you're gong to res something up to highpoly mesh, and even then you can still get away with triangles if you use them on a curvature-continuous surface.

i often end up making triangles on purpose, so i can direct the triangulation of a mesh myself, so i can make the light fall around the mesh nicely.

in a perfect world, every artist manually triangulates his work before exporting.
with today's polycount nobody does that, nor is it needed. however as artists you should be able to see where you've got a bad case of non planar quads, you'll want to triangulate those. because they can be triangulated in 2 ways, and there's actually alot of difference.

also when you're iptimising a mesh, you're definately going to end up making triangles.
that's fine, because all engines reduce all geometry to triangles anyway.

when you're BUILDING a mesh however, quads is just a bit more neat, and less messy.
it's easier to keep track of your mesh in quads.

tl;dr:
IT DOESNT MATTER SHIT!
only force quads if you're building a high res cage.
the rest is personal preference.

This man speaks the truth.

[DaneO'Roo]

i often end up making triangles on purpose, so i can direct the triangulation of a mesh myself, so i can make the light fall around the mesh nicely.


This.

[Mass]

I use poly to draw things but I don't go intentionally for quads, just the easiest and quickest thing to draw.

I often end up doing manual triangulation with the cut too anyway.