I once again tried Hamapatch and ended up with this monstrosity.  I've read
several tutorials on making heads but just don't seem to get it: the heads
end up with seems and creases.

One thing I'm doing is starting with a profile and then doing extrusions
over to the ear.  Then  I tweak and tweak and tweak and tweak.   Could this
be the problem: does one inherently lose smoothness with this method?   Do
the pros just do it in one sweep and live with it??

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'hamaface01.JPG' (28 KB)

Preview of image 'hamaface01.JPG'

Greg M. Johnson wrote:
>I once again tried Hamapatch and ended up with this monstrosity.  I've read
>several tutorials on making heads but just don't seem to get it: the heads
>end up with seems and creases.
>
>One thing I'm doing is starting with a profile and then doing extrusions
>over to the ear.  Then  I tweak and tweak and tweak and tweak.   Could this
>be the problem: does one inherently lose smoothness with this method?   Do
>the pros just do it in one sweep and live with it??
>


I have only once gotten a decent head out of spatch, and I lost it when my
harddrive died three days after I finished it :-(   But I remember that I
had a lot of trouble with creases around eyes, ears & mouth, and that in
the end I started with the mouth and worked out from there.  I also
remember that I did the whole thing in two parts; the basic head shape, and
the more detailed face, and welded the two together once I had what I
wanted.

Extruding from a profile seems like you will end up with a lot of extra
points by the time you get to the ear, and welding those points will only
get more creases.

I've just recently started working with Wings3d, but it is showing some
promise for modelling heads. It is much easier to use when it comes to
detailing a small part of the model than spatch or hamapatch.

RG

Post a reply to this message

I use Wings3d for all advanced modelling now. Never got to understand
Hamapatch. I know Txemi will sue me for this, but ... you should try Wings
and see what you like best.  :o)  I suppose both programs are good but it
depends who uses them. I've found that I only like Wings3d, of all the
modellers I've tried.

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Hugo Asm wrote:
> I use Wings3d for all advanced modelling now. Never got to understand
> Hamapatch. I know Txemi will sue me for this, but ... you should try Wings
> and see what you like best.  :o)  I suppose both programs are good but it
> depends who uses them. I've found that I only like Wings3d, of all the
> modellers I've tried.
> 
> Regards,
> Hugo
> 
> 
I think it must be mentioned that while there is considerable overlap in 
their applications, they are separate tools with separate strengths. 
While either Hamapatches splines or Wings' mesh might have be applied 
with equal effect to achieve the smooth regularity of say bathroom 
fixtures, mesh comes into its own when achieving the smooth but 
irregular surface needed for organic effects.

-Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

>I think it must be mentioned that while there is considerable overlap in
>their applications, they are separate tools with separate strengths.
>While either Hamapatches splines or Wings' mesh might have be applied
>with equal effect to achieve the smooth regularity of say bathroom
>fixtures, mesh comes into its own when achieving the smooth but
>irregular surface needed for organic effects.
>


Yes, Hamapatch splines definitely have advantages for certain things, and I
can get basic shapes very quickly. It is when I need more detail, such as
in a face, that it becomes unwieldy.

As you say,Wings is good for irregular shapes, and easier to work with to
get fine detail in something.

I've also found Wings to be a handy tool for editing Poser figures since
Poser has an annoying tendency to do very unnatural things to knees, elbows
& wrists.

RG

Post a reply to this message