Mechadelphia
-
Posts
272 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mechadelphia
-
-
Thanks markw.
I'm hoping to have something out for this by mid-January. I'm just trying to decide which rig to setup with this first. I might do a mixture of a few different rigs for the first rig or the A:M 2008 rig.
I've even studied the Squetch rig and have a tenative strategy on how to set that up (I need to study it more though) but if I do that that will be a little later on.
Once I finish some of the rigging for Shelton's coffee shop project I'll be a bit more focused on it.
Fuchur,
Thank you.
It is very easy compared to building the same rig from scratch.
Keith,
The most that you'll need to know using this install method is how to assign control points to a bone. Knowing how to use control point weighting along with setting up smartskins is also very beneficial. I will include instructions once I have a rig to release.
Rodney,
When I rig models that I have made I always end up adjusting the mesh to accomedate better deformations. Sometimes I also have to adjust things like the lengths of my model's arms because I did not get the proportion right while modeling it (you can see me run into that same scenario in the rigging Ian video).
"Another is to better understand how a model needs to be built to take advantage of a rig that is installed. (i.e. when is it ideal to modify a model's mesh because it isn't going to be able to take advantage of the rig that will be installed)"In general you don't have to do anything much beyond laying out the mesh properly at the joints. The only situation where I might adjust a model to take advantage of a partcular rig would be if I were installing the Squetch rig or a rig that aims to achieve the same kind of functionality.
-
(Edit: December 26th, 2014. The forum post for the finished version of this rig is at this link.)
I’m posting this thread to bring attention to something rigging related that I’ve been working on for awhile.
Please have a look at these two posts at my web site:
“Drop-In” Rigging method for Animation Master
Video runtime 27 minutes 10 seconds
and alternately
Rigging Ian with the Poker Rig
Video runtime 33 minutes 43 seconds
Basically what the posts and videos describe there is an automated way to install a complex rig into your models by positioning only the model’s geometry bones and the assigning the CP bones to them. This provides a very flexible rigging process which eliminates the need to use “Install Bones” to maneuver the complex underlying rig.
It is a little reminiscent of Anzovin's Setup Machine.
It works well and I am currently in the process of using it in Steve Shelton’s “Buying a Coffee Shop” project.
I’m in the process of tweaking a few things based on some valuable feedback from “mouseman” (Chris Dailey) and I hope to release this to the A:M community once I finish tweaking a few details.
In the meantime I’d appreciate any questions or suggestions that you may have about this.
Thanks. -
I'm staring at the code now to see what might have changed or what can be tweaked.
I'll have to borrow my daughters iPad to test on that screen.
I'm not seeing anything amiss on a PC using Chrome and IE.
Edit: I did tweak a few settings that didn't make sense to me that could be responsible for creating extra space on screen.
We'll have to see if that breaks anything.
Hmmmm... please pardon any dust as I try to adjust.
Hi Rodney,
Here is the problem:
This is the cause of it (look at the code at the bottom of the picture):
The 1500 pixel width for the banner is causing the problem.
This is only this bad on the home page of the forums.
The code of the other pages seem to use the code on the right side of the second image that I attached. They use a 999 pixel width.
There is one other thing that I see at a glance (in the code) but it's a bit late in the day for me to go into right now.
I'll look at this more closely later to see if there is anything else that I can point out to you.
-
I was trying an idea with render as lines and had 2 groups each rendering as line but was getting strange results
So I made the 2 groups as 2 models
Depending on which model was in the chor first you get different results
Face (eyes and mouth) in first in chor you get
delete first model then readd to chor
can some one try this using 17g on PC
I have not looked at your file yet but I previously reported a similar issue in the v18 beta.
This weekend I will download your file and report the problem under v18 if it occurs there too and is not related to my already exsiting report.
-
Perhaps someone can get you (or other Maverick user) onto the v18 Alpha list so you can install that and see if the latest works in Maverick.
It's a long shot but -might- resolve the problem.
Whether the fix is incorporated yet or not... v18 will likely be the fix.
I am one of the users actively participating in the v18 beta testing.
I have a Mac which is running Maverick but I use my A:M licence on my PC (since I prefer the way A:M's perfoms on a Windows PC).
I have also been wondering about the status of the Mac version because I have considered switching to the Mac for my A:M work.
(I run Windows just for A:M)
I will contact Hash to see if I can get a temporary licence to also run to run the beta on my Mac so that I can try to help resolve any problems that may be present in it now.
I will keep you posted...
-
Have you tried insalling and using v16? just reuse your master0.lic file from v17 to run v16
TommyDAQ2,
You should try that first before taking your computer to the Apple store. Unless there are other problems that you are experiencing on your computer Apple can't do much besides refer you back to Hash Inc for your A:M problems.
Installing v16 to see if it works will help narrow down where the problem could be.
If v16 runs on your computer then we can assume that there may be something specific about your v17 install that needs to be looked at closer. You can run v16 until the issue of v17 on your system gets sorted out.
Also Time Machine won't help you unless you roll your entire disk back to the date it (A:M) was working properly. That would be overkill for just A:M since you have not tried running v16 yet. Even if you did get it working after a reinstall from Time Machine you can't be sure that v17 won't stop working again for the same unknown reason it is not working now.
You could also try running A:M v17 from a different user account on your computer to see if it works there. If it does work then the problem is somewhere in your current home folder.
So I would say try v16 and let us know if that runs then we'll have a better idea of what needs to be done at that point.
-
I received a email / blog from Martin. Very interesting as he was thinking about the software and all the folks he met.
I found that the Renaissance Myn concept that he wrote about to be very interesting (It has nothing to do with A:M or animation).
-
Uses for this would be rare but I can imagine situations where the fingertips.toetips needed to be stuck somewhere and the hand/foot somewhat flexible above them.
Thanks Robcat.
It's there. You should have a look at the Squetchy Sam example model when you have a chance.
What you wrote there is along the lines of what I was thinking. As soon as I posted my question though I continued to experiment with this.
I just thought of a scenario were I would want this to animate a shot more efficiently:
Think of Spiderman climbing vertically up the side of a building. It could be done with regular IK but it would be much easier with Toe IK.
Instead of the the IK foot control null being the fulcrum of the the whole foot setup at the rear of the foot, the IK toe control is the fulcrum (at the front) and you still retain the controls that you get with the regular IK leg set up (minus the regular IK foot control null).
That is interesting...
Thanks.
EDIT:
There is no finger IK that I can see. The hand set up is from Steve's Hand Gizmo.
-
So I'm finally settling in and taking a very close look at the Squetch rig.
I have a question and I'm not sure if it has been addressed before.
There is a switch to set the legs to use Toe IK. I tried it out some and I think it is kind of neat... but I'm not entirely sure why I have that feeling.
In what situations might an animator opt to switch a leg or legs to Toe IK control with the Squetch rig?
I'm not much of an animator yet but I've found that I liked switching to it to quickly point the the leg from the toe when the actual position of the tip of the toe is important (conveniently bypassing the foot control altogether). After positioning the foot/ leg that way, I felt more comfortable switching it back to regular leg IK.
Is that one of the intended uses of Toe IK?
Also, are there situations where some animators might want to leave Toe IK switched on for certain types shots rather than use regular leg IK?
Thanks in advance.
-
Thank you (again)
-
Hi Malo,
That refinement is in v18 now.
It's in beta testing now so I am not sure when it will be released.
-
Here is a video reference site that might be useful.
Hmmmm.... Very useful. Thanks.
I bet it won't remain free for very long though.
-
Wow! Thank you Xtaz!
When I saw that image during the contest I was admiring it a lot. Then I thought that it would be great to be able to have a look at that model file to see how it was all accomplished. Now I can
.Thank you again.
-
I did try that, and it is a great find, but it looks exactly the same as porcelain at 50%. However with porcelain You don't need to create any groups, just covers the whole model.
Of course if the effect is to be more local than the other way is better. The main difference is that spline crosses create a visible cross on the surface from V13 on, while in V12 and earlier these crosses are still there but just less so. I will try to upload two pictures for comparison. The difference is subtle but clearly visible at the shoulders, just enough to prefer V12 for meV12.bmpV17.bmp
I submitted a bug report for that exact issue.
Hopefully it will be investigated.
-
I tried the mirror mode tolerance but i still get only partial or no mirror with the smartskins.
For which bones exactly?
All four of the bones with smartskin on them. They seem to get smartskin info written into them but it's not doing the deformations.
I had more success than you did on this model but you are right about the partial successes.
I looked closer and the problem is the mesh itself.
The mesh looks like it was imported from a polygon format and that is tripping A:M a bit. While it looks symmetrical it is not (not to A:M at least).
I copied and mirrored the left forearms and hands within A:M (then mirror bones for the rig) and when I did that I was able to get a perfectly mirrored smartskin for the hands (those bones are hidden).
Can you confirm that?
(Edited to add: Heiner you will need to clean up the mesh some by mirroring the left half of the body within A:M for this to work the way you are expecting. Also you should detach the sling from the body's mesh before you start to mirror the model)
-
I tried the mirror mode tolerance but i still get only partial or no mirror with the smartskins.
For which bones exactly?
-
MakeHuman is pretty good.
I've imported a few meshes into A:M but I find that they are way too dense to be useful in A:M and the time necessary to clean them up and fix spline continuity issues is not worth the effort to me.
Rather than convincing someone to program a way to import and export to and from A:M I personally would go about it a little differently.
Here's an idea:
MakeHuman uses the same base mesh for both male and female characters. You could export the base mesh then import into A:M. Then, the model could be cleaned up and optimized once for the way A:M works.
Then, create a set of pose sliders for that model that emulate the functionality of MakeHuman for generating characters. (You could even set up some presets with a few extra sliders.) Export the mesh from an action window when you are happy with the results.
I suppose that rigging could be factored into a setup like that but that would take a little more work.
What do you think about an approach like that?
-
Hi there,
the bones are flipped using the TSM flipper, so they should be fine.
I just checked a random cp for the position, its on both sides the same (flipped of course).
However, there is some inconsistecies with the weighting ... will that affect the mirror SSkin too?
When using the command, it generates a new SSkin on the other side, but that new one is empty.
I uploaded the modell in question, if you like to check it out.
Best regards,
Heiner
Hi Heiner,
I ran into this problem when I first started to learn how rigging works in A:M.
I downloaded your model and you'll be fine once you adjust your Mirror Mode Tolerance in the "Options" dialogue.
When I checked with your model I set mine to .25' and once I did that the Smartskins mirrored just fine.
After you change your Mirror Mode Tolerance, delete the already existing (non-working) Smartskin drivers for the right side of your model. Mirror the Smartskins again and the newly mirrored Smartskins should work for you.
If you don't delete the drivers on the target side first then the Mirror All Smartskin function won't overwrite the already existing (but non-working) mirrored ones.
-
Must there be only one?
The participation for this contest is the highest that I can recall in a very long time here.
Not only that but I think that most of the entries in this year's mascot contest are really very good. I counted ten entries that I think could easily be justified as the splash screen for A:M v18.
So why use just one this year?
Why not change it where the new A:M uses a random (or cycled) splash screen at each start-up?
I'd like to see this because I enjoyed so many of the entries. I can't say that only one should be the "winner".
I'm not suggesting handing out 1st place to everyone but if the top 5 placing entries this year could have a chance to be be rotated in as a splash screen at start up then I think that would be a good thing. Alternatively, Hash Inc. could decide which ones could be included along with the 1st place winner.
I also think that this would keep the participation for this particular contest high (and competitive).
Also moving forward (maybe from v19 on out) why not consider rotating in some of the older splash screens from the previous versions of A:M with the newer ones? I think that interchanging past and present splash screens would really be a nice touch. It would show that there is some sort of legacy to all this and not just a spot light for this year's winner.
What do you all think of this?
I'll put in a feature request for this if a lot of you feel this is a good idea. Sure I could submit it now but I'd rather know what you think about it first.
Thanks.
-
You can see if the ones at the Draw Angry web site will work for you:
-
Somebody please tell me there is a simpler way to rig. I tried holmes' tut but it get jacked up in the second vid when I try to make the null for the neck.
Hi Douglas,
Telling us that things are "jacked up" does not put us in a better position to help you.
I'd like to try and help you get this right but can you be more specific about which problems you are running into right now?
I don't know anything about the Lite Rig so I'm guessing that I may be able to help you at a more fundamental level when it comes to rigging.
If you are comfortable with uploading the model file with the rig here then I can look at it and see what you have done so far.
-
Hi Mark,
I like the look of that.
How long did that take to render?
-
Well I see these are not all in place yet but that's okay. The third video--Modeling 1--could have been a whole lot better. I hate to say this but it was a little too difficult to understand due to the person's accent. Also more planning would have helped as the person was lost for words at times, backed himself into corners and stumbled and, did a few things that were not explained and quite likely would have lost a beginner...IMHO. But all and all it was okay.
But, if your going to take the time to do something, especially something like this, you should take the time to do it better then just 'okay'. And you definitely should have someone that does not have an accent that is hard to understand (I would feel bad and quite possibly angry if I had made this tut and someone said those things to me...so let me humbly apologize but...what I'm saying is true).
Let me add that these things are not easy to do. A:M is complex and knowing where to draw the spline (pun intended) can be rough. For myself, it would take a lot of thought and planning to do one of these.
Still, an awesome idea and effort!!
Rusty
I guess that you meant well with your assessment Rusty but that was rude.
I have not seen the videos that you are referring to but I do not have to in order to know that there are more polite and constructive ways to criticize a person's efforts to teach others.
You should be particularly mindful of the way you criticize a person's accent if you really feel that you must criticize it at all.
If you got anything out of the video(s) then a simple "Thank you" would have been sufficient.
-
I would ascribe the difference to the fact that 3DCoat is a polygon tool that doesn't understand the smooth spline interpolation between CPs in A:M models. It presumes the edges of the patches were straight lines but they really weren't.
Hi ToreB,
I think that what robcat2075 said there is pretty much the basis of the problem that you are running into.
The workflow that you are describing (exporting models out of A:M, adding uv coordinates in a polygon application, and then importing them back into A:M ) does not seem like an optimal workflow when working with A:M. I don't think that A:M was designed with the level of interoperabilty that you are expecting in mind.
Yes, I know this is a very common or even standard practice when working with strictly polygon based applications but A:M is not one of those programs. Also, UV mapping in A:M is usually not as cut and dry in a way that you might be used to with other polygon based applications.
If you have not already, you should look into some of the UV mapping tutorials that were done in A:M. That might serve you better than trying to incorprate A:M into this particular pipeline that is better suited for other programs.
I don't want to seem dismissive to you since I really do understand what you trying to do but I think you should try to map your UVs within A:M or try A:M Paint if your final output will be coming from A:M.
The Cinematography of The Incredibles
in Open Forum
Posted
Thank You!
This is a very good article.