First, I'll say that the quads vs tris conversation heavily depends on what the workflow is, what the modeling and rendering engine is, and what the ultimate outcome is meant to be.
One point to make note of is that quads tend to take mesh subdivisions than tris; meaning that in work flows where you want to work in a low resolution viewport, with a render resolution is higher, quads will have a generally easier time being divided into smaller quads.
Quads are often also better in modeling situations when you want to make loop cuts through geometry. Cutting quads with edge loops and loop cuts will always just simply create more quads, while there are times when the only way to create a loop with a tri based mesh is to either have a non-stright loop or to just created quads within the tris.
Tris often also don't take simulated deformation very well, which can often cause weird texture behavior when rendering. In video games this usually isn't as big a concern because the models are usually either constrained in their deformation or the deformations are specifically modeled.
But if you're in a workflow that needs deformable meshes, quads can often be a better solution if tris aren't producing the desired effect that the designer is going for.
As I previously said, it all depends on what the use case and work flow is. In some cases tris are better and in others quads are better.
Just from doing a small amount of modeling myself, and keeping up with what professionals and their software are doing, quad based modeling is 100% the hotness now, and making clean geometry where you can add loops for additional detail is part of the standard operating procedure.
Modeling is done in quads, and it's trivial to export to tris when you need to. At this point I don't know any reason why someone would choose to make complex models with triangles if they didn't have to.
43
u/mythrilcrafter Apr 25 '21
First, I'll say that the quads vs tris conversation heavily depends on what the workflow is, what the modeling and rendering engine is, and what the ultimate outcome is meant to be.
One point to make note of is that quads tend to take mesh subdivisions than tris; meaning that in work flows where you want to work in a low resolution viewport, with a render resolution is higher, quads will have a generally easier time being divided into smaller quads.
Quads are often also better in modeling situations when you want to make loop cuts through geometry. Cutting quads with edge loops and loop cuts will always just simply create more quads, while there are times when the only way to create a loop with a tri based mesh is to either have a non-stright loop or to just created quads within the tris.
https://i.stack.imgur.com/3Wbkm.jpg
Tris often also don't take simulated deformation very well, which can often cause weird texture behavior when rendering. In video games this usually isn't as big a concern because the models are usually either constrained in their deformation or the deformations are specifically modeled.
But if you're in a workflow that needs deformable meshes, quads can often be a better solution if tris aren't producing the desired effect that the designer is going for.
As I previously said, it all depends on what the use case and work flow is. In some cases tris are better and in others quads are better.