In summary, the fix is "adjust the positions of the meshes beforehand to align the vertices as much as possible"

You made a 30 seconds video into 8 minutes one, great job

Not really sure about this one - What if you are working to exact measurements where you can't rotate or move each cylinder?

It’s not really a solution, more of a workaround. Won’t work for precise geometry where every milliner counts, also only works in a perfect environment like this.

Ok, but what if you can't just move the cylinder around freely and it has to be placed in a specific position, regardless of how the vertices align?

add edge loop before to merge all vertices to isolate and keep other vertex in the same position

"... apply your boolean and move on with live ..." thank you very much, your tutorials are very helpful, as always!

I'm glad this video was made. Wouldn't have known all the other tricks without the comments

My God! You can stretch a video unnecessarily wayy tooo muucchh!

You can also party automate this with a weld modifier. It allows you to still move around to find a good spot with verts merged and subdiv.

Thanks, Gambrell you're doing a great job.

I love this guy. Thanks for your work.

Good idea. When you have a project with a specific dimension, just rotate it until it fits xD, omg.

Great video. big difference when the verts are close. Another possible approach when the verts don't line up might be a "data transfer" of normals from an unedited version.

Thank you Sir - for very good technique! i will use with other 3D applications as well.

GREAT video, been wondering during my workflow how to solve these issues working with cylinders/circles.

Very situational. This is an ideal practice but not always the solution.

the problem with this method is that in machine shopping for example people will want specific dimensions specific angles where there is no room for "mitigation of topology issues". So the solution is to subdivide prior to boolean bring your quads to the size of the smallest difference between vertices (using smooth helps sometimes others it doesn't) then you go for boolean, then you deconstruct some ( and then you save your 1 micron and your 1mm copy of the thing you made so that you don't ever have to do go through it again) .you want loop cuts near the intersections on both sides on both pipes and you want their distance to the contact points to be about the length of what your "weld bevel" is going to be. this gives it a very natural smooth intersect with decent shading at low poly counts and smooth shading at high counts. As always i am just a lousy blender part timer so I may have just said a bunch of nonsense that there might be a much better way around.

Perfect as always 😉

This was very helpful... Thanks for sharing...

An old 90s LightWave trick to deal with this issue was to: 1) Have two copies of the boolean meshes 2) Cut one set - using this example cut the bottom tube with the top tube 3) With the second set, reverse the cut - cut the top tube with the bottom tube 4) Take the two tubes that were just cut and merge points (should merge perfectly), delete the other "cutter" tubes. 5) Delete the unwanted geometry - the "holes" as it were Voila! Perfect intersection without messing with the cross sections of any geometry...

Really intresting, bro! More Videos like this one!

I just add more divisions to the objects, then merge and use Meshmachine offset with triangulation and merge, then click Clear Mesh, and apply Quad Remesher. This is much faster and gives better results, because I don't have to play around with the positioning of objects, connect vertices, and I can position objects exactly the way I want. Take advantage of it.

With a zebra matcap the explanation of curvature would've been a bit more obvious, this works maybe in this case, for hard surface functional modelling the rotation could throw stuff out of whack, having more loops from the start would half the distance for merging and disturb even less

This is a good general rule of thumb, but I wouldn't call it a full solution. In many many cases it's better to get it aligned however you need to and then just do retopo.

the absolute VERY FIRST thing i pretty much always do on such junctures is - Ctrl+B with 2 segments and curvature of 1. Then cleanup keeping the original curvature on the border edges of the bevel, dissolve the middle loop, add a new one, Alt+S to your liking. I never align anything.

Thanks for the video Would you please explain that both side age loop

you really made an 8min video to tell people they can aproximate their vertices

Hi! what is your custom menu with quick commands?

This unlocked a PTSD memory that I never knew I had lol

love your vidoes

Though I understand the criticism in the comments, it seems to be a bit harsh. Everyone in this industry knows that you are never done learning no matter how much experience you get. Not enough people are thanking you for making resources that help. Keep the content coming!

hello sir, in 6:31 How do I set Bevel profile to 1and get result like you did?

I should use Quad Remesher to remesh the boolean object. maybe the wire layout isn't that good,but it's quickly.

Wouldn't It be better to make 2 edge loops on each, AND THEN!!! Line those up to best of ability?

I face weird shading on a higher topology where it is kind of hard to align the vertices before merging them together. And shading gets a mess where it is extremely pain to deal with. I ended up using z brush dynamesh to merge the two but the process took me awhile. Could you guide me or give us more video on this topic where you start off with a complex shape?

I can't believe I waited till the end of this video

Please, put on the screen the buttons you press to do what you do

so there is no easy way around rather than fixing>merging with boolean> apply and stitching , good video thanks!

This is fun and all, but it's not always the case where can move the positions of the cylinders due to context.

How are the vertices so large?

If your "solution" is to change the design because of topology issues then it's not a solution, not even a workaround, it's just bad advice. Instead, do THIS before you boolean: Increase the sides of the cylinder and after boolean place edge loops near the intersections to protect the shape and finally make topology compromises with triangles and n-gons as best as you can.

What's with the mumbling at 6:57? the most important part

hi what's that short cut to quickly add cut at 2:22?

But to have this in consideration makes the artistic freedom a slave of clean topology… Is there no easy method instead?

in 5:45 mins, how did you put vertices that cross to other side?

What if you have a plane and then an object with thousands of verts you want to union

So you let the vertices dictate your final shape?

time saver

I really thought I was going to learn something cool here..

it works but It take a lot of time and maybe you need to change meshs positions, it's not the perfect solution for me, i remember years ago these kind of operations were quickly and perfectly done in 3 ds max, is there an addon that could help? ..thanks anyway for your effort

Can't you do all of this in 1 click using Mesh Maschine add on?

With all due respect, I appreciate your videos, but you didn't need 8 minutes to explain something so obvious.

at the 00:11 mark you call up a viewport shading menu. What's the key for that?

my disappointment is I already knew this recently before this video recommended this to me by youtube lol... also it only works 10% chance you'll do this but good to have it in mind

how about, when you make the duplicate, rotate it 90 deg on Z and 30 on X and move it up, you don't actually do that just leave the duplicate where it is, and therefore, after emerging all the vertexes together, everything stays perfectly as it was? :D That way you can even skip the duplicating and merging steps!

An alternative solution, which may be more precise and result in lighter topology, makes use of the shrinkwrap modifier to move vertices exactly where they are needed without disturbing the underlying shape at all: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/f7lif7OHs9aag3k.html In some cases you might need to make a duplicate of the object as a shrink-wrap target and then create your proper topology in a separate object in preparation of joining the meshes.

hi! how do you do that in 7:03?

The triangulate modifier fixes all this after you boolean union

now its made automaticly in new blender 3.5

where do I get that Quad Sphere object?

A good video once again. I assume you are using version 2.9x by now? I see you are using a matcap here - could you tell me where to find matcaps in 2.9? The internet could not help me at all with this, every video and thread talks about, where to find them in 2.8 - in 2.9 they got moved somewhere else, and nobody seems to know where. You seem to know, please let me know where to find matcaps in 2.9x (and hopefully they won't hide them again in 3.0)

Trick about spherical cow. In reality you bool box with 1 polygon on side with 3000 poly shape, and it does't work

Wow, we just need to align the vertices? Insane... 8minutes...

I thought you said this wasgoing to be a quick video?? To make a short story long!

Just apply boolean union and subdivide.

9 minute video that explains more than years of tutorials. NICE and thanks!

So.. "Line up your objects" essentially, lmao

Exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks.

superclean

2 buttons in fusion 360 or solidwork

this whole idea is another way of saying plan your geometry well before merging which is not a new concept it would be nice though if we get a program in the future that cleans topology and keeps the shape without us needing to solve puzzles XD seriously fixing topology could be such a turn off and a pain sometimes

You did a 8 minute longass video just to explain this ????? lmao Im pass out [D

Edit: That feel when a YT comment mentioning the Weld modifier... Why did this have to be 8 min video long?

Works if you want to compromise your design and the cylinders at similar sizes. But if the cylinders were very different sizes and at acute angles this wouldn’t work.

👍👍👍

Great tut! Can we get keyboard/mouse use displayed please?

At what point do you start worrying about non-planar faces?

why you hide your key information, I don't know how to do that specific boolean, please.

06:08 This is rape of topology without consent.

How to fix a hard topology? Don't make it hard from the start by creating something completely different

uh...

its not a solution

Come on people, this guy is nice enough to take time out of his day to show a technique that can be used in certain circumstances. It's not a fix all for everything. No reason for the negative comments if it doesn't fit your particular scenario. Lighten up. Thanks for the awesome content!

Sorry man, i thought you were gonna propose a procedural solution, maybe a remesh techbique or something, but this is not viable for a lot of things and is only a step for a normal workflow :/

Starts at 5:08...

Ty for big video! Jesus is coming back, God bless all!!! :D

The problem is that your geometry is dictating how your end result looks. Not very accurate.

Hmmmm. This is not how it is done.

My topology is really, really bad

I must admit being disappointed but Josh is not asking us any money nor are we forced to watch! So… nasty comments are out of line. Tons of good content on his Channel let’s focus on these…

ayy im early

you could just use edge crease instead of creating those bevels

quick vid 8 min ...

Sorry, but you don't show a solution for a problem, you show a problem for a solution.

Captain Obvious strikes again

You went too fast!!! So annoying! at 6 minutes 55 seconds, I wanted to see how you ran a "Subsurf" which I was guessing was a Subdivision Surface modifier. I have no idea how you got that result. My cylinder looks completely different - doesn't look smooth around the sides like yours. Can you please explain how you did that? Add Object>Mesh>Cylinder>Add Modifier>Subdivision Surface, Levels Viewport: 4>Apply, am I missing something? And how did you make it look shiny and metallic? Please help!

So you've changed the design of something so that your boolean operation can be cleaner????? Great, that's what product design is all about, nothing to do with form, more about clean geometry....... got it.....

So a video needed to be made I guess...

That's bull shit. It's like changing the shape of our models if we want the best topology. Never😢