Surface continuity (evaluate) vs algin tool for good flowing surfaces?

[pvandeloo.ipod]

I have a question regarding what is best practices when one want to have nice flowing surfaces (something between g2 and g3). 

Do you use the surface continuity tool (with comb on) in combination with curve curvature (comb) tool and then manually create g3. 

Or do you use the align tool and then play with the master and slave until you get a nice look. 

I have found that especially if you have 4 surfaces touching each other and you add more and more align relationships between them with the algin tool, it gets kind of tricky to control (over-constrained/difficulty editing/loss of flexibility). This is why the first workflow with the surface continuity evaluation and achieving continuity by hand seems easier. Especially for very organic forms. 

Are both workflows legitimate?

Any help in this regard from would be helpful.

@Fausto_Brevi 🙂

[wallacewebster_60]

---

@pvandeloo.ipod wrote:

I have a question regarding what is best practices when one want to have nice flowing surfaces (something between g2 and g3). 

Do you use the surface continuity tool (with comb on) in combination with curve curvature (comb) tool and then manually create g3. 

Or do you use the align tool and then play with the master and slave until you get a nice look. LaSRS Login

I have found that especially if you have 4 surfaces touching each other and you add more and more align relationships between them with the algin tool, it gets kind of tricky to control (over-constrained/difficulty editing/loss of flexibility). This is why the first workflow with the surface continuity evaluation and achieving continuity by hand seems easier. Especially for very organic forms. 

Are both workflows legitimate?

Any help in this regard from would be helpful.

@Fausto_Brevi 🙂

---

Both workflows you described are legitimate approaches to achieving good flowing surfaces with G2 or G3 continuity. The best choice depends on the specific situation and your modeling preferences. Here's a breakdown of each method:

Surface Continuity Evaluation and Manual G3 Creation:

• Pros:
  • Offers more control over the final curvature.
  • Can be more efficient for simple surfaces with clear curvature goals.
  • Might be easier to maintain flexibility, especially with organic shapes.
• Cons:
  • Requires a good understanding of surface continuity and curvature analysis.
  • Can be more time-consuming for complex surfaces.
  • Manually creating G3 continuity can be challenging.