rusty

Hi, I'm using the system I put together for easing the 'compensates' right now and as I'm using it I'm realizing that with a few changes in the order of the instructions this would be 100 times slicker. It is working better in V14 and, I think changes could be made to make it work better in V13. Additionally, if tags could be placed on the names of the constraints it would work even ten times better. The draw back to my kludgey system is the number of times the batch file has to open and close AM; LOTS!. The above changes might reduce this but basically for each relationship that must be edited to adjust the constraints within it, I close/save/reopen the project file. I tried editing multiple relationships and it did not work but this was more because of the way I constructed the project file. Right now, as is, it is actually dangerous because each filter exposes all of the constraints that have the same name and mistakes are easy to make. I think ALL of these constraints are adjusted anyway but I strictly follow the order of the instructions as published so these same-name constraints are offered up to different times, all of them showing making mistakes easy, when a change in the order things are done would likely offer all of them once to all be changed! I should ask: is there someone working on some program to automate this right now (or planning to). This would of course be far far better, if it is possible. I think I have enough room to upload the thing to my site now if anyone is interested in looking at the monster -- and it is a MONSTER! Basically it uses a huge amount of resources to save a little time. To give you some idea here is the batch file that drives it. Again, it does this; AM opens with a bite size group of instructions displayed and filters that are matched to the instructions which 'get you closer to' the constraint you need to change (sometimes you get just the constraint you need and if tags were added to the constraint names, that's what you'd always get). Cheers, Rusty

Eyes on the bottom of the feet? So much comes to mind I become speechless! Despite that, nice little thing. r

I have and use an elaborate system that reduces the pain of the compensating. But it is not something anyone else could use... I'm using AM and AM features in ways they were not meant to be used and the system is falling apart at the seams. Knowing the internals I can still use it but no one else could without some study. Also you need a fast PC to use it or it would only slow the process down. r

Sigh... it is true that I could have rigged an army of characters using TSM2 in the time I've devoted so far to the Squetch rig and, I have yet to completely rig a single character model. It is true that the TSM2 or other far simplier rigs will work just fine -- have worked just fine for years. Will the Squetch rig be faster to animate or animate better? The face yes! But I'm not even using the face yet. The body? Yes, I think a tiny bit. The hands if nothing else. Is the Squetch rig over-engineered? God yes... completely over the top LOL! Just the way I like it! Why then? This feels like the future. Anzovin has dropped support for the TSM2. Its working for TWO. And, I made a decision. The Squetch is killing my current project right now... months and not a single model rigged yet. That's the horrible truth. But I'm like a dog with a bone... I've decided and I won't let go. Rusty

David, I can see what you did... I can picture every step. I just don't see how any of it applies. Lets say you have Squetchy Sam-A all rigged and working. Now a new version of the rig comes out. I guess you have to take a copy of the model, strip out the poses and bones (all the CPs become unassigned) and do whatever to reduce it to just mesh. Then you import the new version of the rig, import the action to scale the bones, export the model from it, delete the install poses and reset the compensates and so on to create Squetchy Sam-B which now has the new version of the rig but all of the CPs are unassigned, right? So you have two models with two rigs: 1. the old Squetchy Sam-A with the CP assignments and the old rig 2. the new Squetchy Sam-B with the new rig, no assignments You need to move the assignments in the old rig in the old Squetchy Sam-A model to the new rig in the new Squetchy Sam-B model. How do you proceed? If you import one model into the other right now you wind up with two meshes but also two rigs in the same model -- one set of bones becomes renamed. You can probably transfer the assignments but they are to the bones in the old rig. If, before you combine them you strip the rig from Squetchy Sam-A you lose the assignments. If you strip out the rig from Squetchy Sam-B you lose the new rig. What am I missing? Cheers, Rusty

David, Hey, I can put a Rubik's Cube together in under 60 seconds (great party trick) but right now I'm feeling a bit stupid here. I've read all the documentation on Transfer_AW and WeightMover and... I do not see how this can be done. You must see some creative avenue or approach that I don't. I see a plug-in that uses 2 sets of mesh overlaid in one model with one rig and it transfers the assignments of one mesh to the rig to the other mesh. How would you use this to transfer old model (the mesh, rig and assignments) to a new new model (the mesh and a new rig)? Hey, I'm hoping to hear myself say "Wow! I didn't think of that!". Cheers, Rusty

Oh yeah, that was it. :-)

Nope. I forgot to delete the install poses. That it? r

Hi, I thought that after you went through all the steps of the posable install, exported the model from the action and ran the install plug-in on it, if you put the model into an action you'd see the control bones. I'm not seeing any bones in an action. Is something wrong or does some other step cause the control bones to appear (and if so, what step?)? Thanks, Rusty

Hi, On the SIG 2005 Training Video (worth the cost) William Sutton takes the Dex model from the Hash CD and weights the CPs and uses smart skin to make the model move realistically. It is very long and very good and facing this task again I've been watching it the last few days while on the tread mill. I myself can not finish a model with just fan bones and weighted CPs. I always need a little smart skin to polish off the motion. Weighed CPs tend to shrink a joint for one thing. But don't try to apply massive layers of Smart Skin (SS)! Its hard to get it right and there are many pit falls. All that said, in my experience you can in most cases use control bones for SS just fine... and, you simply apply it to the bone whose motion causes the gunk you wish to fix. Rusty

Remember that David? Well instead of a new version of the rig, my circumstance now... would seem to fit. I'll reapply the action to the 'mesh only' model (and then make my shoulder changes and re-save the action) and carry forward (export, install plug-in, reset compensates) then... not wanting to redo the CP assignments (no weighting done yet) use Transfer_AW to do this! However, I've read over the Transfer_AW documentation and right now I have no idea how this will be done... and perhaps it might be more trouble than its worth unless all the special groups were already setup. Its late and I will need to re-read the doc and also read the WeightMover documentation which it refers to when I'm more awake (I bought WeightMover... damn so many tools I've bought that I never got around to using!!!). Anyway, you seemed to click right on to this idea of using Transfer_AW. If you could sketch out what your thoughts were I'd appreciate it -- just the broad strokes. My brain says something like one skeleton with 2 mesh models (one hires, one lowres) all in one model window -- WeightMover transfered the lowres model's CP assignments to the hires model... but... how will this serve for the application we envision? Cheers, Rusty

David, I had exported the model, ran the install plug-in, reset the compensates and assigned the CPs. Then I decided I didn't like the placement of the shoulder and arm geometry bones... so I moved them all around. Now I wonder if maybe it is not that simple. I have backups ever way from Tuesday and can fall back to any point. Do I need to go back to the action poses (Posable install) and correct it there and then carry forward again? Thanks, Rusty

My heads are rigged with an older version of the rig used in the Squetch rig... I did them mostly from scratch. They were based on Shawn Freeman's bone based facial rig and on the 3D controls introduced in the 'Stop Starring' book converted to AM. So... I don't know what's been done in the Squetch rig. However, I created a pose to do each 'thing' then created the proper translation relationship on the nulls to drive the pose or poses that were needed (i.e. if the eye opened when the null moved horizontally an X-translation relationship on that null would drive the 'eye open' pose). Open the null's properties, expand the translation until you see the X translation, right click on it and select create relationship. I'm fairly sure that's what's done in Squetch rig as well... how far the mechanics were taken for you in the rig I don't know. Rusty

What I do is: 1. click on the layer (selects all pixels on layer) 2. Do Selection->Save Selection name it 'alpha' 3. Save as 32 bit targa (tga) Looking closer, I think you've already been whittled down to this with some extra safety stuff and 'looking'. Rusty

Fantastic. Thanks! Mirror_bones is not listed under V14 however I'm going to assume that you think it will work on V14. Thanks, Rusty Edit: Yes it seems to be working now (on V14). Thanks again!

Afraid so on the trial and error. Mark starts off exactly the way I've always started... not sure why starting there is so common... I think we are just working outward from the lowest level bone (or highest parent bone). Basically you just move the rig around and see where you need adjusting. The shoulders, arms, hands and legs are the hardest (well, LOL, not counting the face!). I usually I try to get it as close as I can by adjusting bone locations and adding fan bones (this step doesn't seem to be part of the process in this rig) then, I try to ace it or get it as close to perfect as I can using CPU weighting. Finally I use smart skin where needed for the final tweaks. Since I need to rig 8 characters, some male, some female, all with slightly different body's, I've saved one copy with just the CP assignments to use on all of the rest (these won't change I hope) but I'll also try to use a copy of the rig with the CP weighting done to see how close it is hoping to reduce the amount of work needed. I do not know how to add to the wiki new features site but all of these Q&As should go into a FAQ for others. Anyone? Cheers, Rusty Edit: There is a very good example of this entire process using the Dix model... somewhere... done by someone. Most likely it is on one of the AM SIG video sets.

Fantastic. Thanks! Mirror_bones is not listed under V14 however I'm going to assume that you think it will work on V14. Thanks, Rusty

Awesome! Thanks for jumping on this so quickly! I'll be watching for progress! Cheers, Rusty

Hi, I've been trying to mirror cp assignments using mirror_bones with limited success. Portions work but most fails: no cps assigned; endless loop of missing string and real time renderer errors. Is mirror_bones compatible with V14? Do you need to have weights on some of the CPs? I don't -- just trying to mirror CP assignments. Thanks for any help! Rusty

Ken, I've just finished assigning CPs -- right side anyway (I'll focus on just one side, perfect it then mirror it all). The process is fairly clear. But I told David I'd attempt to assemble an FAQ on the process -- however, the only entries that I have so far are about the existing examples and two bones that don't exist in the other rigs that I've worked with; stomach_IO_geom and chest_IO_geom. The answer from the horse's mouth is here. With only a couple of FAQ entries I've not taken any action but there'll be more. I've been trying to think of where such a thing should go and the AM Features wiki seems the logical place. Then hopefully people can add as things come up. As you move forward, if you can, keep track of any questions you come upon. Rusty

That is very good! That would definetly make an outstanding rubber mask too. Rusty

Ken, I asked the same question not long ago here. Rusty

'1' on the numeric pad. r

Very nice! Nice walk cycle too. If it were me I'd add more arm muscles and more brow ridge (a lot more) *but* that's just me... he has a cool look just the way he is. Rusty

Mike, I should probably stay out of this, I don't consider myself an expert although I've fought with this stuff for enough years. However if I stumble forward perhaps someone can straighten us both out! What you have are cowboys and Indians and if you try to simply put them together (with out a 'peace treaty') you get undesirable results. Cowboys -- the video you're probably rendering from AM is: 1. A progressive scan 2. Square pixies 3. Aspect ratio 1.0 4. 30 fps (or at least some even number) 5. Resolution... whatever -- probably 640x480 Indians -- video created by your video camera is: 1. 'Interlaced' with either the Upper or Lower field first (which I won't try to explain except to say its the method used to paint a TV screen), 2. Non-square pixels 3. Aspect ratio 0.9 4. Probably 29.97 fps, drop frame 5. Resolution probably 720x480 You can see the problem -- their different and just enough to make people just starting out crazy. I'm not even getting into the audio part. But don't fear... Peace treaty -- what you need to do is: 1. De-interlace or 'interpret' the camera video or Render with the settings of an Indian. As for all the rest... I think it takes care of itself! I de-interlace my video in Adobe Premiere because I capture my video using that program. I'm not sure what you can use but someone will chime in and tell you or maybe you know. I'm not sure how to handle this in AM alone and I'd like to know. Cheers, Rusty