Using Wings3D to Fix Topology

The Solution

On four shows now, I have continuously found the best tool to fix this issue not to be a commercial, several thousand dollar worth, “does everything” 3D application like Maya, XSI or Houdini.

But rather a small, free, open source, specialized modeling application called Wings 3D.

Wings calls itself a “subdivision surface modeler”. This is arguable in the same way I touched on at the start of this article: namely that the subdivison modeling tool sets of most 3D applications don’t actually edit the subdivision (limit) surface at all, but rather the control polyhedron (or cage). I shall write an essay about this marketing-department born misconception another time. What matters in the context at hand is that Wings actually guarantess the surface to stay manifold regardless of what crazy editing operation the user performs.

How does this help us with the problem of models created in other applications? Simple: Wings ‘fixes’ any model on import to be manifold automagically. Non-manifold parts of the geometry get either thrown away or marked as ‘holes’, i.e. faces that are invisible.

Thus, the only step one has to take to fix a model with Wings is commonly importing and straight exporting it again. ‘Hole’ geometry gets omitted from export. The least common demoninator for may applications is the Wavefront Object format.

Wings’ Supported Formats

Wings supports importing:

  • 3D Studio (.3ds)
  • Lightwave (.lwo),
  • Nendo (.ndo)
  • Modo (.lwx)
  • Sterelotigraphy (.stl)
  • Wavefront Object (.obj)

Data can be exported as:

  • 3D Studio (.3ds)
  • DirectX (.x)
  • Lightwave (.lwo),
  • Nendo (.ndo)
  • Modo (.lwx)
  • RendeMan (.rib)
  • Renderware (.rwx)
  • Sterelotigraphy (.stl)
  • VRML 2.0 (.wrl)
  • Wavefront Object (.obj)

I can only suggest introducing this as a quality assurance step to anyone working with 3D models that are later to be rendered as subdivison surfaces.

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply

The Power of Interdisciplinary Teams

Before I talk about the subject itself, let me start with a story.

Many people have commented on the ‘Liquid’ shelf system my very good friend Sascha Ulber designed, in spring 2003. As trivial as it looks, the way it was conceptualized and most things about it were about five years ahead of the curve then.

Continue »

A Comment on the iPhone 4’s “Retina Display” Debate

Several blogs and mailing lists I frequent linked to an article investigating the validity of Apple’s claims that the iPhone 4′s display has a ‘terminal’ resolution for the application at hand: namely a human reading its display at an ‘average’ distance (which, being unspecified in Apple’s press release, offers quite a bit of latitude for interpretation).

The article ignores several important facts.

Continue »

On Plagiarism & Creativity in the Digital Age

A while ago there was a thread on the 3D-Pro mailing list that diverged from its original subject and took a turn towards a debate about copyright.

The debate resulted when someone discovered that part of an image was being used as a backdrop for another image without giving proper credit. It is noteworthy that the latter work was not of commercial nature. The poster got very upset about this nevertheless. I think what upset them most was the fact that the creator of the derived work claimed copyright. The poster called that person an “artist” (they used quotes to express their disagreement with the use of that term) who had “the filthy guts to rip of another (real) artist’s hard work”.

Continue »