If I remove the bevel modifier, the ugliness disappears. Should this be called a bug in the Bevel modifier, or am I doing something wrong? I was under the impression that double geometry is always bad. Do I have to re-think? One way around it would be splitting the planks into separate objects, but it would quickly become a unwieldy if I need to split everything down to its smallest parts whenever I want to use the Bevel modifier.
Top: you’ve removed doubles which connects the top vertices but there’s nothing to connect the vertices below that
Bottom: and if you add them and remove doubles, it then connects the vertices but still leave a interior face which you have to remove
If you want to make bevels going vertically all the way on top like in your first screenshot, you would have to keep them separate to continue using the modifier. In a real door those would probably be separate parts so it’s not wrong to use separate mesh parts for them, but if you want to connect the geometry and still have the bevel, will have to apply the modifier and clean it afterwards.
Thank you both. So my geometry was responsible after all.
I’m going for the look in my first picture, where each part of the door is beveled on all sides, so I suppose dividing the five parts in the door into separate objects is the way to go. I take it I should get used to hiearchies like this in my outliner?
Are Empty objects the way to group objects, like I’ve done? I also find something called a Group Instance on my Add menu, but it’s not adding anything.
Yes you could organize multiple objects by parenting them to an empty. But you can keep separate mesh parts in one object. Having one object doesn’t mean that you have to connect the geometry in it.
Groups in Blender are more abstract term than in other packages, hierarchy is done with parent-child relationship. Group instance is like the name says, an instance of a group of objects. You could select objects, create a group (ctrl+G), and add another set of them as a instance. What it’s actually doing is using one of the procedural duplication options, dupligroups, but the add menu entry is there for a convenience so that you don’t have to build the dupligroup yourself.
Let’s see if I understand this correctly. Separate meshes means there are no verts overlapping each other, right? For instance, I could make an object with the vertical parts of the door, and another object with the horizontal parts, like so:
No. It’s not just about this model but in general. You have three options: separate objects, one object with separate mesh parts, or one object with connected geometry. Choose or mix however you like.
Double vertices don’t kill. Those are even done deliberately with edge split modifier to fix sharp edges with smooth shading. Overlapping visible polygons can create artifacts in rendering so can’t have those. If they’re overlapping but not visible, then those add to geometry and can take unnecessary space on a UV map but no other problems since they’re not visible.
Removing doubles works on selected. If you want to remove doubles only on some mesh part, you can do that. Could also work with separate objects and join afterwards. It’s not a black & white issue.
